Regeneration Responses in Partially-Harvested Riparian Management Zones in Northern Minnesota


Trees serve important functions in riparian areas. Guidelines often suggest how riparian forests should be managed to sustain functions, including tree retention and increasing the component of conifers and later-successional species. While regeneration of early successional species is not discouraged, there is uncertainty about the ability to regenerate the latter along with more desirable species. We investigated the regeneration of species differing in successional status and growth forms under different amounts of residual basal area. The study was conducted in riparian sites in northern Minnesota USA. At each site, one portion of the riparian area was uncut, while a downstream area was harvested to 16 or 8 m2·ha-1. Woody vegetation was sampled before and five-years after harvesting and summarized as early, mid-, and late successional hardwoods, as well as conifers and shrubs. After five years, the density of early successional trees was lower at 16 m2·ha-1 compared to 8 m2·ha-1; densities in both treatments were lower than in clearcuts. Densities of mid- and late successional hardwoods and conifers did not increase in either treatment. The higher basal area treatment resulted in a lower density of shrubs, which might be important for establishing more desirable tree species, although this may require additional activities to promote establishment.

Share and Cite:

Kastendick, D. , Palik, B. , Zenner, E. , Kolka, R. , Blinn, C. and Kragthorpe, J. (2014) Regeneration Responses in Partially-Harvested Riparian Management Zones in Northern Minnesota. Journal of Water Resource and Protection, 6, 556-564. doi: 10.4236/jwarp.2014.66054.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] Kreutzweiser, D.P. and Capell, S.S. (2001) Fine Sediment Deposition in Streams after Selective Forest Harvesting without Riparian Buffers. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 31, 2134-2142.
[2] Broadmeadow, S. and Nisbet, T.R. (2004) The Effects of Riparian Forest Management on the Freshwater Environment: A Literature Review of Best Management Practices. Hydrology and Earth System Science, 8, 286-305.
[3] Hazlett, P.W., Gordon, A.M., Voroney, R.P. and Sibley, P.K. (2007) Impact of Harvesting and Logging Slash on Nitrogen and Carbon Dynamics in Soils from Upland Spruce Forests in Northeastern Ontario. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 39, 43-57.
[4] Kastendick, D.N., Zenner, E.K., Palik, B.J., Kolka, R.K. and Blinn, C.R. (2012) Effects of Harvesting on Nitrogen and Phosphorus Availability in Riparian Management Zone Soils in Minnesota, USA. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 42, 1784-1791.
[5] Naiman, R.J., Bilby, R.E. and Bisson, P.A. (2000) Riparian Ecology and Management in Pacific Coastal Rain Forest. BioScience, 50, 996-1011.[0996:REAMIT]2.0.CO;2
[6] Palik, B.J., Golladay, S.W., Goebel, P.C. and Taylor, B.W. (1998) Geomorphic Variation in Riparian Tree Mortality and Stream Coarse Woody Debris Recruitment from Record Flooding in a Coastal Plain Stream. Ecoscience, 5, 551-560.
[7] Hannon, S.J., Paszkowski, C.A., Boutin, S., DeGroot, J., Macdonald, S.E., Wheatley, M. and Eaton, B.R. (2002) Abundance and Species Composition of Amphibians, Small Mammals, and Songbirds in Riparian Forest Buffer Strips of Varying Widths in the Boreal Mixedwood of Alberta. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 32, 1784-1800.
[8] Goebel, C.P., Palik, B.J. and Pregitzer, K.S. (2003) Plant Diversity Contributions of Riparian Areas in Watersheds of the Northern Lake States, USA. Ecological Applications, 13, 1595-1609.
[9] Blinn, C.R. and Kilgore, M.A. (2001) Riparian Management Practices: A Summary of State Guidelines. Journal of Forestry, 99, 11-17.
[10] Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (2011) Chapter 5: Riparian Areas and Wetlands. Pub-FR-226, Madison.
[11] Palik, B.J., Zasada, J.C. and Hedman, C.W. (2000) Ecological Principles for Riparian Silviculture. In: Verry, E.S., Hornbeck, J.W. and Dolloff, C.A., Eds., Riparian Management in Forests of the Continental Eastern United States, Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, 233-254.
[12] Palik, B., Martin, M., Zenner, E., Blinn, C. and Kolka, R. (2012) Overstory and Regeneration Dynamics in Riparian Management Zones of Northern Minnesota Forested Watersheds. Forest Ecology and Management, 271, 1-9.
[13] Zenner, E.K., Olszewski, S.L., Palik, B.J., Kastendick, D.N., Peck, J.E. and Blinn, C.R. (2012) Riparian Vegetation Response to Gradients in Residual Basal Area with Harvesting Treatment and Distance to Stream. Forest Ecology and Management, 283, 66-76.
[14] Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (2003) Field Guide to the Native Plant Communities of Minnesota: The Laurentian Mixed Forest Province. Ecological Land Classification Program, Minnesota County Biological Survey, and Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program, St. Paul.
[15] Keys Jr., J.E., Carpenter, C.A., Hooks, S.L., Koeneg, F.G., McNab, W.H., Russell, W.E. and Smith, M.L. (1995) Ecological Units of the Eastern United States—First Approximation. USDA Forest Service Technical Publication, R8-TP 21.
[16] Minnesota Forest Resources Council (1999) Sustaining Minnesota Forest Resources: Voluntary Site-Level Management Guidelines for Landowners, Loggers and Resource Managers. Minnesota Forest Resources Council, St. Paul.
[17] SAS (Statistical Analysis Systems Institute) (2002) SAS Ver. 8.02. SAS Institute, Cary.
[18] Hanowski, J., Danz, N., Lind, J., Niemi, G. and Wolter, P. (2001) Wildlife Species: Responses to Forest Harvesting and Management in Riparian Stands and Landscapes. Final Report to the Minnesota Forest Resources Council, St. Paul.
[19] Perala, D.A. (1979) Regeneration and Productivity of Aspen Grown on Repeated Short Rotations. USDA Forest Service Research Paper NC-176.
[20] Stone, D.M. and Elioff, J.D. (1998) Soil Properties and Aspen Development Five Years after Compaction and Forest Floor Removal. Canadian Journal of Soil Science, 78, 51-58.
[21] Huffman, R.D., Fajvan, M.A. and Wood, P.B. (1999) Effects of Residual Overstory on Aspen Development in Minnesota. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 29, 284-289.
[22] Stone, D.M., Elioff, J.D., Potter, D.V., Peterson, D.B. and Wagner, R. (2001) Restoration of Aspen-Dominated Ecosystems in the Lake States. In: Shepperd, W.D., Ed., Sustaining Aspen in Western Landscapes, USDA Forest Service General Technical Report RMRS-P-18, USDA, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, 137-143.
[23] Palik, B.J., Cease, C. and Egeland, L. (2003) Aspen Regeneration in Riparian Management Zones in Northern Minnesota: Effects of Residual Overstory and Harvest Method. Northern Journal of Applied Forestry, 20, 79-84.
[24] Young, A. and Mitchell, N. (1994) Microclimate and Vegetation Edge Effects in a Fragmented Podocarp-Broadleaf Forest in New Zealand. Biological Conservation, 67, 63-72.
[25] Chen, J., Franklin, J.F. and Spies, T.A. (1995) Growing-Season Microclimatic Gradients from Clearcut Edges into Old-Growth Douglas-Fir Forests. Ecological Applications, 5, 74-86.
[26] Thomas, P.A. and Wein, R.W. (1985) Water Availability and the Comparative Emergence of Four Conifer Species. Canadian Journal of Botany, 63, 1740-1746.
[27] Burns, R.M. and Honkala, B.H. (1990) Silvics of North America: 1. Conifers; 2. Hardwoods. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Agriculture Handbook 654, Washington DC.
[28] Lorimer, C.G. Chapman, J.W. and Lambert, W.D. (1994) Tall Understory Vegetation as a Factor in the Poor Development of Oak Seedlings beneath Mature Stands. Journal of Ecology, 82, 227-237.
[29] Dovciak, M., Frelich, P.B. and Reich, L.E. (2003) Seed Rain, Safe Sites, Competing Vegetation and Soil Resources Spatially Structure White Pine Regeneration and Recruitment. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 33, 1892-1904.
[30] Weyenberg, S., Frelich, P.B. and Reich, L.E. (2004) Logging Versus Fire: How Does Disturbance Type Influence the Abundance of Pinus strobus Regeneration. Silva Fennica, 38, 79-194.
[31] Kuuseoks, E., Dong, J. and Reed, D. (2001) Shrub Age Structure in Northern Minnesota Aspen Stands. Forest Ecology and Management, 149, 265-274.

Copyright © 2022 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.