ABSTRACT

As requested by the Arkansas Forestry Commission,

this report is a very brief and generalized overview of
the depletion of the states number one resource,
timber. Resource management strategies during the
period of 1991-2007 have proven to be ineffective at
replacing the harvested stands. Analysis using satellite
images indicate that there twice as many acres
harvested as there were replanted.

FOREST INVENTORY
MANAGEMENT
Replenishment Needed Near Grapevine, Arkansas

Ryan Rittenhouse
December 6, 2014

Table of Contents
Table of Figures .............................................................................................................................. 1
Purpose............................................................................................................................................ 2
Data & Methods .............................................................................................................................. 2
Results ............................................................................................................................................. 4
Discussion ....................................................................................................................................... 5
Figures............................................................................................................................................. 6
References ....................................................................................................................................... 9
Tables ............................................................................................................................................ 10

Table of Figures
Figure 3 Landsat Digital Elevation Model near Grapevine, AR .................................................... 3
Figure 4 Hillshade topographic relief model generated from the Landsat DEM data. ................... 3
Figure 6 A slope map overlaid with the forest cover change. ........................................................ 4
Figure 1 A comparison of Landsat Near Infrared images taken in 1991 and 2007. ....................... 6
Figure 2 The image displayed is from 2007. The outlines represent areas of changed forest
density since 1991. The color has also been enhanced for legibility. ............................................ 7
Figure 7 This map displays addresses, roads, and forest cover changes for visual analysis of the
effects of road type on the forest cover. .......................................................................................... 8
Table 1 An Area Analysis of the First 50 Digitized Parcels ......................................................... 10
Table 2 Elevation by Forest Cover Change Type ......................................................................... 10
Table 3 Slope in Degrees By Forest Cover Change Type ............................................................ 10
Table 4 Contact List of Property Owners in an Area of Decreasing Forest Cover ...................... 10
Table 5 Contact of Property Owners within 200 feet of Decreasing Forest Cover ...................... 11

1|Page

Purpose
This report examines the inventory of harvestable stands near Grapevine, Arkansas. In
the late 1980s, there was much controversy about the environmental impacts and efficacy of
clear-cutting as a sustainable method of timber harvest. Supporters of this method won in the
end, companies and landowners - began to implement the technique. However, there were a
few crucial caveats that were to be adhered to. The scope and methods of this paper are only
conducive to examining two of them. Specifically, the stands must not be adjacent to each other,
and the trees must be replaced after harvest. (Mendell and Consulting 2013) This paper will also
investigate whether elevation, or type of roadway access, has any effect on the logging practices
of the area. We will see in the attached maps that the rules were not adhered to with due
diligence, furthermore, that elevation and access to the stands may have an impact as well.

Data & Methods

Imaging gathered from the Landsat satellites was downloaded from the Global Land
Cover Facility at the University of Maryland. Landsat has the ability to do near-infrared (NIR)
imaging at a 30 meter resolution. Basically, the satellite images portray the relative health of
terrestrial vegetation by capturing the amount of near-infrared radiation the area reflects back.
Of course, we cannot simply look at the images since that spectrum is not within the human
visual range. Using ArcGIS, the different wavelengths of radiation can be assigned to a visible
color spectrum. In this report, high levels of near-infrared radiation are represented with red.
Areas that are not reflecting NIR, are depicted in blue. (See Figure 1) Then the images are
overlaid on top of each other to determine which areas are: deforested, declining, increasing, or
reforested. As each area is discovered it is digitized by tracing the contours of the stand. This
will allow officials the ability to locate each parcel and estimate its area. Originally, I digitized
50 different parcels while attempting to select the largest or most obvious - of each
representative type. (See Figure 2) After generating the initial data, I digitized an additional 10
areas to expand the sample as requested. The data and conclusions hereafter are based on the
revised sample.

2|Page

Landsat Digital Elevation Model

images (DEM) were also used to investigate
influences the topography of the area may
have had. DEM images are a gray scale
image that has elevation data associated with
that was captured via onboard radar. (See
Figure 3) In this image low areas are dark,
and high areas are light. The image was also
clipped to the extent of the Area of Interest
for increased processing performance and
improved contrast between elevations in the
final product. This image is then used to
generate data for use visualization and
analysis.

Figure 3 Landsat Digital Elevation Model near Grapevine, AR

First, a spatial analysis was run on the

DEM image (Figure 3) to generate a three
dimensional model of the area called a
hillshade. The Z-axis, or elevation axis, has
been exaggerated to aid in visualization of the
relative heights of the area. A value of 1
generates an image with little relief texture,
conversely, a value of 100 created a landscape
that looked like a mountain range. For the
purposes of this inquiry, a Z-axis value of 5
was used as a compromise between little
effect and misrepresenting the area. It is
important to note that this model is intended
to be used for visualization purposes only. Its Figure 4 Hillshade topographic relief model generated from the
Landsat DEM data.
accuracy is compromised as a result of the
feature exaggeration. Therefore, different
methods of processing are required to generate data for analysis.
Next, the process to generate the forest cover change by elevation was executed. The
revised forest cover change layer was overlaid on the clipped DEM layer. Then the Zonal
Statistics as a Table tool was used to compare them. This tool calculates the minimum,
maximum, and average elevation of each type of forest cover change from that comparison.
Additionally, we calculated the range of elevations found within each of the different type of
forest cover change. The range data could be instrumental in determining if there is a trend with
regard to elevation during the analysis.

3|Page

As requested, we also generated a

slope analysis of the area. (Figure 6) First, we
processed a slope analysis of the clipped DEM
layer to generate a slope map of the Area of
Interest. Then we did another Zonal
Statistics as a Table operation on the
resulting slope map layer together with the
forest cover change layer, to calculate the
average slopes and standard deviations of
each forest cover change type. This will allow
us to compare the average steepness of each
forest cover change type, followed by how
much they differ from the overall average
slope.

Figure 6 A slope map overlaid with the forest cover change.

And finally, we created a map showing addresses relative to the different types of forest
cover change with relevant roads. (Figure 7) We took landowner information from the county
assessors office and overlaid it with the forest cover change layer. Then we ran queries to
identify which properties were inside increasing and decreasing forest stands. Once complete,
we ran a proximity analysis which creates a 200 foot buffer around each of the addresses. With
the buffers created, we ran another query to see which of the buffered addresses intersected
increasing and decreasing forest stands. Roads were included in this map upon request to
provide a visual tool to see if there is a relationship between the type of road in an area, and the
type of forest cover change.

Results
Clearly, 50 parcels of land is not a very large sample size to draw any concrete
conclusions. Furthermore, these results do not specify stands removed due to development,
instead of forestry. Be that as it may, it certainly does reveal a trend worth further inquiry. As
seen in Table 1 the number of remediated acres is roughly half that of the number being
harvested. Additionally, the largest stands being removed are almost four times as big as those
being replaced. By the numbers, it is evident that a 1:1 ratio of acres harvested vs. acres
replanted is not being maintained.
Despite the relatively low elevation of the area, it appears that this aspect may have a
minor impact on forest management practices. As seen in Table 2, the highest areas seem to be
on the rebound, while the lowest areas are still dwindled away. This would lead us to believe
that the higher elevation forest changes are probably due to industry following proper forest
management practices. Conversely, low elevation losses are probably a result of development.
Of the four types, the reforested areas have the smallest variance in elevations found, further
supporting the assumption that those areas are harvested for commercial purposes. Furthermore,
the relatively low average elevation, and range, found in the reduced areas indicate that the areas
are probably in plains or valleys. This fact also reaffirms that the reduced forests are due to
development.

4|Page

The slopes of the area seem to determine land use as well. (See Table 3) For example, the
areas that are completely deforested, or reforested, tend to have the highest average slope.
However, their slopes are closer to the average than the decreasing and increasing areas. This
indicates the areas that are being cut and replanted most aggressively are found in hilly areas
which comprises less of the area that was digitized. Those areas are probably managed forest
lands, but its possible that some of it can be attributed to community development in
commercial logging areas. The areas that are simply decreasing or increasing are a bit flatter,
and closer to the average than the prior two categories. Those areas are either new development
around a city, or tree plantations.
The final map in this paper includes addresses, roads, and the forest cover change data
overlaid on a photographic base map. All of the addresses are clustered around county roads,
which tended to be areas that were not digitized in the initial phases of this project. As a result,
only 6 addresses were found to be in, or within 200 feet of, a decreasing forest cover change
parcel. (Table 4 and Table 5) Furthermore, they are the same 6 addresses for both distances.
Unfortunately, no addresses were found in or near increasing stands of forest. This is due to the
60 parcel sample size of this project, and the method used to decide which parcels to digitize.

Discussion
Forestry is a crucial part of Grant Countys economy and culture. In fact, they host
lumberjack competitions, and hold seasonal festivals celebrating the industry. (Grant County
Chamber of Commerce n.d.) Unfortunately, if current trends continue, this may not last for
much longer. The area of interest spans approximately 36,312 acres. Even with the original
sample size of 50, the number of acres of forest in decline equates to roughly 9% of the total
acreage in the AoI. As mentioned previously, we were not able to measure the number of acres
lost due to development, because of the relatively small sample size. This also means that
assigning culpability for the remediation of the areas forests is not possible with the data
available at this time.
Recommendations are as follows:

Completely digitize land ownership records from the County Assessors office
Compare Landsat images with aerial photography of the AoI to differentiate between
developmental loss and resource use
Completely digitize the land cover images within the AoI
Create a Cooperative to purchase saplings at a group rate
Modify current festivals, or create new ones, that incorporate replanting
Increase enforcement of current forestry and logging regulations

5|Page

Figures

Figure 1 A comparison of Landsat Near Infrared images taken in 1991 and 2007.

6|Page

Figure 2 The image displayed is from 2007. The outlines represent areas of changed forest density since 1991. The color has also been enhanced for legibility.

7|Page

Figure 7 This map displays addresses, roads, and forest cover changes for visual analysis of the effects of road type on the forest cover.

8|Page

References
n.d. Grant County Chamber of Commerce. Accessed November 18, 2014.
http://www.grantcountychamber.com/index.html.
Mendell, Brooks Ph.D., and Amanda Hamsley Lang Forisk Consulting. 2013. Comparing Forest
Certification Standards in the U.S.: Economic Analysis and Practical Considerations.
Technical, George Mason University, Fairfax: EconoSTATS, 1-31. Accessed November
18, 2014. http://econostats.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/EconoSTATSComparing-Forest-Certification-Standards-in-the-U-S-Final.pdf.

9|Page

Tables
Table 1 An Area Analysis of the First 50 Digitized Parcels

Table 2 Elevation by Forest Cover Change Type

Table 3 Slope in Degrees By Forest Cover Change Type

Table 4 Contact List of Property Owners in an Area of Decreasing Forest Cover

10 | P a g e

Table 5 Contact of Property Owners within 200 feet of Decreasing Forest Cover

11 | P a g e