of mexico: a biological and economic appraisalmorasc.nmsu.edu/docs/pinyon-juniper woodlands...
TRANSCRIPT
37
r Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands
of New Mexico
A Biological and Economic Appraisal
Agricultural Experiment Station bull Special Report 73
College of Agriculture and Home Econamlcs
bull bull
SR 73
middotPinyon-Juniper Woodlands of New Mexico A Biological
and Economic Appraisal
Prepared By
Pinyon-Juniper Resource committee
James T Fisher John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
Technical Coordinators
College of Agriculture and Home Economics
New Mexico state University
Las CrucesNM
bullP1nyon 1S the accepted English spelling for the Spanish pinon
Ref USDA Forest Service
CONTENTS
Page
FORWARD i
ECOLOGY OF PINYON-JUNIPER VEGETATION IN NEW MEXICO 1
Rex D Pieper M Karl Wood and Bruce B Buchanan
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES I CROP IMPROVEMENT THROUGH WOODLAND STAND MANAGEMENT 13
James T Fisher John G Mexal and Gregory C Phillips
GRO~TH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYON 25
John Fowler arid Charles Oliver
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGY 39
Gregory C Phillips James T Fisher and John G Mexal
IMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE 45
Volney W Howard Jr
SUMMARY 48
APPENDIX A - PINYON JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS BY THE AUTHORS 50
bullbull APPENDIX B - GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT FACULTY 53
bull
FOREWARD
The Pinyon Act of 1987 provides a welcome opportunity for the College of Agriculture and Home Economics of New
Mexico State University to draw together wide-ranging expertise in research related tomiddot New Mexicos state trmiddotee Scientists from the New Mexico Agricultural Experimentbull Station have been conducting studies related to pinyon since 1904 The fruits of these labors are summarized by faculty actively involved in pinyon research The author~ also ad~ress research needed to fill serious information voids and identify opportunites to adapt new technologies to specific problems More extensive information can be found in the publications cited at the en~ of this work Indeed many may be surprised ~t the broad range of pinyon work already done by the scientists of the Agricultural Experiment Station
The Pinyon Act of 1987 specifically addressed public concerns about New Mexicos pinyon nut crops Papers found in this publication address the value of nut crops and identify research strategies best suited to improve nut quality and yiela~ Strategies to protect existing markets also are discussed
As articles were being written faculty met periodically to exchange views on product values and research prioritmiddoties This encour~ged the integration of ideas shaped by fac~lty interactions with consumers and research advisory groups experience and academic disciplines Most notable perhaps is that knowledge gaps were identified that must be bridged before some research can be applied to specific situations The publication summary identifies these problems as well as issues not likely to be investigated with existing research resources
The College of Agriculture and Home Ecomo_ics is indebted to Dr James T Fisher for organizing the effort to ~roduce this report In addition his scientific contributions are substantial Serving with Dr Fisher on the report coordinating committee were Dr John G Mexal Department of Agronomy and Horticulture and Dr Rex Pieper Department of Animal and Range Sciences and their efforts are greatly appreciated~ The following scientists
i
contributed to the effort through their committee participitation or papers or both
~
pre Bruce Buchanan Department of Agronomy and Horticulture Dr John Fowler Department of Agricultural Economics and Agricultural Business bull
bull Dr VW Howard Jr Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences
Dr Greg Phillip Department of Agronomy and Horticulture Dr Emroy Shannon Cooperative Extension Service Dr Karl Wood Department of Animal and Range Sciences
Thanks are due these faculty members for having undertaken the preparation of this report in addition to their many other teaching research and Extension duties
Finally the intended purpose of this document is to report th~ status of the pinyon resource in New Mexico so our legislators can accomplish their objectives more effectively We hope our purpose has been accomplished
John C Owens Dean and Chief Administrat1v~ Officer College of Agriculture and Home Economics New Mexico State University
II
lECOLOGY OF PINYON-JUNIPER VEGETATION IN NEW MEXICO
2Rex D Pieper M Karl Wood and Bruce B Buchanan
bull
Abstract Ecologically pinyon-juniper woodlands are extremely varied in New Mexico bull They occupy nearly all topographical positions in mid-elevational mountain ranges throughout the western two-thirds of the state Three species dominate the tree overstory layer -Juniperus monosperma Pinus edulis and Juniperus deppeana Understory shrubs and grasses vary considerably with site and geographic location Successional patterns follow those described for other locations but soil types may influence the development of seral stages
INew Mexico State University Agricultural Exper~ent Station SR 73-1
Professor and Associate Professor Department of Animal and Range Sciences Associate Professor Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las
Cruces NM 88003
1
INTRODUCTION
Pinyon-juniper vegetation in New Mexico is extremely variable because of climate soils topography and understory vegetation (Pieper 1977 Springfield 196) Pinyon-juniper vegetation generally occupies foothills and lower mountain slopes below 7500 ft in elevation (Springfield 1976) This vegetadon type occurs occasionally in valley bottoms on nearly Jevel terrain
Pinyon-junipervegetatiol1 occurred throughout the Intermountain Region and the Southwest as far back as the Last Great Ice Age and possibly earlier (Quarternary period) (Wells 1987) Although many shifts have apparently occurred in the distribution of individual species over the pait 2 million years recent increases in woody plant distribution and density is traced by many workers to mans disturbances Betancourt 1987)
Native American Indians have occupi4itd pinyon-juniper wood+ands in the western United States for centuries (Wasson 1987) and have utilized plants from these areas for many purposes including food
Much has been learned abOut ecology of pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico and the Southwest but IllUch remains to be learned This paper will summarize some of this knowledge
ECOLOGICAL FACTORSCONTROLLING DISTRIBUTION
Climate
Climatic patterns within the pinyon-juniper woodlampnd in the Southwest vary considerably in response to geographic variation and eleVation (Springfield 1977)
Precipitation
Inthesouthern portions of the pinyon-juniper woodland precipi~ation peaks occur during the summer from storms originating from the Gulf of Mexico (Springfield 1977) Winter storms from the Pacific Coast provide moisture for cool-season understory species in northern areas which are largely absent from southern areas
Table 1 shows the contrasting precipitstion pattern for Carlsbad in southeastern New Mexico and Fort Wingate in the northwestern part of the state By the end of May more than 35 of the total annual precipitation has been received at Fort Wingate compared to only 23 at Carlsbad The spring months tend to be much drier in southern portions of the woodland than in the north Both northern and southern portions exhibit summer peaks but it is somewhat delayed in the north (Table 1) More than 45 inches- pf precipitation occurs on the average in Carlsbad
during May June and July compared to only about 3~5 inches for Fort Wingate
Elevation also influences annual precipitation but not distribution Near Carlsbad Caverns in southeastern New Mexico annual precipitation averaged 13 in compared to 145 in at 4500 ft (Geh1bach 1967)
Temperature
Temperatures also vary geographically middotand with elevation Mean July temperatures were 70middot at ort Wingate and 80middot at Carlsbad while
mean JanuarY temperatures were 32degF at Fort Wingate and 44degF at Carlsbad (USDA 1941) Some of these differences may also be related to elevational differences For example maximum June temperatures were 4middoto F lower at Carlsbad New Mexico at 3120 ft elevation than at Carlsbad Caverns at 4435 ft Februaryminimums were 7degF warmsr at Carlsbad compared to those at the caverns (Gehtbach 1967)
So11s
Soils of the pinyon-juniper type are extremely variable bull Many authors assoctatethe woodland to be on coarse texture soils low in organic matter and alkaline (Barrett 1962) There are virtually no published works on the soil characteristics of the ecosystem but what appearsmiddot in the literature are scant descri~tions of specific study sites
rn New Mexico the USDA-Forest Service have identified three categories of the woodland ecosystem in their Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey of the Soutbwest region The so11s of these categories are dOm1nate1y Alfisols (primarily Hap1ustalfs) meSic (a-15middotmiddotC) temperature regime andustic moisture regime Ustic suggests primarily summer precipitation or a uniform distribution of precipitation The concept of the moisture regime is one of limited moisture but the soil moisture is present at a time wheo conditions are suitable for plant growth The definition of ustic is a rooting zone that is moist for either 180 cumulative days or 90 consecutive days iu most years (Barrett J W 1962) There are stands of pinyon-juniper in New Mexico that occur on cooler soils than mesic which are identified as frigid (O_8degC) but few that are found on warmer sites Other than Alfisols the major soils that support the woodland are Inceptisols (usually ustochrepts) Mollisols (usually calciustol1s Argicestolls and Haplustolls) Entisols (usually ustorthents) and to a limited extent Aridisols (usually Bap1argtds) bull
The three categories of the woodland recognized by the USDA-Forest are
1) Juniper composed of ~ monosperma (d osteosperma) This classifmiddotication is found at
2
Table 1--Monthly precipitation for Carlsbad and Fort Wingate New Mexico (From USDA 1941)
Fort Winsate Carlsbad -
Monthly Cumulative Monthly Cumulative Month Total Cumulative (Inches) Total Cumulative (Inches)
January 081 081 55 033 033middotbull 25
February 101 182 126 043 076 58
March 116 298 206 054 130 99
April 151 449 310 086 216 164
May 071 520 359 091 307 234
June 070 590 407 149 456 347
July 206 796 550 223 679 515
August 279 1075 742 1 70 849 647
September 143 1218 841 203 1052 801
October 076 1294 894 144 1196 908
Novembemiddotr 074 1368 945 060 1256 957
December 081 1449 1000 056 1312 1000
Total 1449 1312
middotbull
the lower elevat~ons and tends to bemiddotthe warmest and driest of the three Itmiddotis the least productive in total biomass production and in terms of wood averages about five cords of wood per hectare (2cordsAC)~
2) Pinyon-ju~iper composed of ~~ and a mix of monosperma and limited amounts of osteosperlila~ This classifieation has a shrub understory and has a higher biomass produetion than eategory 1 The cord-wood available is estimated to be from 10-20 cords per hectare (4-8 cordsAC)
middot3) Pinyonjuniper composed of edul1smiddot and a mix of monosperma and deppeana with a significant understory of Gambel Oak Thiamp category has the highest biomas production and cord-wood available is estimated to be nearly 35 cords per hectare (14 cordsAC)
The soils are widely distributed over all three categories of the woodland ecosystem and are not easily stratified to any one group It is common for the soils to have accumulations of carbcinatfils middotand frequently have calcic horizons These carbonate accumulations are mo~e frequent in oldermiddot soils on stable landscapes There seems to be no generalization with soil texture Almost any soil texture will support the ecosystem as will most ~y middotsoil depth Onemiddot common characteristic is the low amount of accumulated organic matter The upper 18 cm (Fincher or plow-layer) has less than 1 organic matter When organic matter does accumulate above this level it seems to be in soils with some combination of high clay content wettest end of the ustic moisture regimes or coolr than mesic temperature regimes Little is known about the influencemiddotof soil on the distribution and growth of the pinyon-juniperwoodlampnd
Site Index
Site index is an expressionmiddot of the tree growth potential of a site or a sites productive capacity Stocking expresses the density of trees on the land and spacing refers to its spatial distribution Standardpractice is to define site in terms of the total height of trees that have consistently been in a dominant position in well-stocked stands at specified key ages bull
A1thou~h tree height growth h4s been the most practical consistent and generally useful indicator of forest-site quality other features may be more mean~ngfulfor pinyon pine and junipers of New MexiCO These could include stem diameter volume or number Of stems per tree or some combination of these variables
Site indeX is used in land management to determine a forestis rotation A forest rotation is defined as the period of years required for treestobecome established and
grOW to a specified condition of maturity
Determining themiddotlengthof the rotation is one of the key d~cisions a manager of pinYon-juniper must make There are two basic groups of physical and financial factors that influence the length of the rotation (1) des1red products (largely a matter of markets or of a demand in a general economic sense) and (2) forest productivity or what Can be grown (supply) bull
The praetical importance of site index often is notgiven inadequate attention in the buying and selling of forest lands and in forest management The report by Fowler (1984) indicates there is presently a little infcirmstiondealingwith the production of fiber on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico They
constructed volume tables based on tree diameter and height for a so11 site near Taos andmiddot another near Cloudcroft More than 600 observations were used at each site and they concluded that the tables were not int~rchangeable these authors suggested a rotation of greater than 200 years
A comparison of photographs taken upto 100 years ago and recent photographs of the s~e areas indicate that many soils in New Mexico have pinyon-juniper growth rates that are much more rapid than the sites near Cloudcroft and Taos Some sites probably could be managed for fence posts and fuel wood on a 50-year rotationmiddot or less This would change manag~nt schemes tremendously and be much more useful than a rotation of more than 200 years for the entire state Obviously site indices need to be established for at least the major so11 types associated with pinyon~juniper stands in New Mexico
Topography
Pinyon-juniper woodlands occmiddotur on a wide variety of topographical positions (Lymbery and Pieper 1983) S~dies in theSacramento Mountains of southcentral New Mexico showed that
aspect (exposure) slope steepness and slope position did not have major impacts on tree characteristics (Lymbery and Pieper 1983 Pieper and Lymbery 1987) Only general patterns were
apparent Rocky Mountain pinYon density was higher in relation to that of singleseed juniper
on steeper slopes and possibly on northern middotaspects Tree density appeared to be more sensitive to topographic variables than tree size or canopy cover
Shrubby species showed a response to topographic position (Lymbery and Pieper 1983)bull Walkingstick Cholla (Opuntia imbricata) was more abundant on xeric sputh-faeing slopes while skunkbush (Rhus trilobata) and wavy-leaf oak (Quercus undUlata) were more abundant on nortb-facing slopes Gehlbach (1967) fout)d similar relationships on the Gusdalupe Mountains in southeastern NewMexico
4
Rocky MoUntain pinyon generally increasesin abundance with elevation as abundance of juniper decreases (Pieper and Lymbery an4 Woodin and Lindsey 1954) Similar patterns are also apparent in the Great Basin (Tueller at ale 1979)
Hydrology
A diverse range of vegetatie species climatic factors and soil parent materials govern the water in pinyon-juniper ecosystems Unfortunately little hydrologic-related researchbullbull has been accomplished This is shocking in light of the importance on water to New Mexico and its neighbors Schmidt (1987) claims a gap exists between the available scientific knowledge base and application by land managers This results at l~ast in part from apast tendency to accept hydrologiC information supporting eradication of pinyon-juniper and to disregard findings tbat questioned the watershed benefit of these practices Changes in public demands haw resulted in a reassesaent of management goals for pinyonjuniper Managers lackadequate knowledge of inventory methods si1vicu1tura1systemsand productivity in relation to runoff processes Schmidt also
stated that fuxther long-termaall-watershed studies are needed to fill knowledge gaps and provide a framework for plot ~tudies
Because of its topographic position pinyon-juniper woodl~nds greatly influence runoff generated from higher elevation ecosystems It is often the last ecosystem that water passes through before being diverted for use Most water yield studies for pinyon-juniper have been conducted at Corduroy Creek and Beaver Creek in Arizona with a few 881411 plot studies in Nevada and Utah These studies centered on potentials for increasing water yields and effects of various type conversion strategies Pinyon-juniper was considetedundesirable and merely represented a barrier to increasing grassland cover The energy crisis and environmental movements ofthe 1970s curtailed major type-converSion efforts Fuel wood demand changed the emphasis to sustain yield Maintaining pinyon-juniper stands on soils that have been invaded by these plants because of cessation of fire may prove to be ecologically disastrous because of hydrologiC tmpacts especially erosion
Highlights of Current Knowledge
Climate Few studies ~ist on the climate of pinyon-juniper stands A Nevada study showed pinyon-juniper to be confined to a thermal belt above the valley inversions and below the colder upslope elevations This may also be true in much of New Mexico
Precipitation Total daily monthly and annual precipitation patterns for the
pinyon-juniper type are well known but storm characteristics are not These are needed to identify runoff-producing storms and predict erosion Some 5-minute intensities have approached 8 inches per hour in Arizona A study of maximum 2-m1nute intensities found 42 inches per hour at Alamogordo Cteek New Mexico A Utah study shows the greatest intensities to occur at elevations between 6s0Q and 8000 feet which coincides with the pinyon-juniper ecosystlim
Interception This variable is usually insignificant in most eoosystems However in a pinyon-juniper stand an interception capacity of 02 inch would reduce the effective 5-minute intensity by 24 inches per hour Interception values have been found to range from 013 to 094 inch per hour in Arizona The 094 inch would reduce the effective s-minute intensity by 1128 inches per hour Blue grams has been found to retain about 015 inch of precipitation which reduces the effective S-m1nute intensity by only 18 inches per hour No pinyon-juniper litter studies are known
Infiltration Studies of infiltration have received the greatest amount of attention from watershed scientists from other states Generally where pinyon-juniper trees are not part ofmiddot the climax vegetationbullinflltratt-0n rates between trees are much lower than underneath trees This is especially true where the understory is sparce because of competition forllght soil water and nutrients by the more dominant pinyon-juniper trees Where pinyon-juniper are climal ie rocky hillsides infiltration rates were similar Management and miaanagement can greatly alter the infiltration rates
Runoff Pinyon-juniper often produces surface-runoff in response to high-intensity short-duration storms which are the most frequent storms in New Mexico The Saliz watershed near Reserve New Mexico once reported a peak flow rate of 1380 cubic feet per second per square mile Schmidt (1987) reports that currently information on frequency and magnitude of precipitation-runoff related to site conditions is inadequate for design of facilities in this ecosystem
Sedfment production This is the major water quality concern from the pinyon-juniper ecosystem Some stands ID Arizona produced more than a ton of sedfment from each acre each year Impacts of new uses of the pinyon-juniper type are not known and need investigation
HydrologiC Impacts from Increasing Mu1t1pie Use Demands
Uses of pinyon-juniper ecosystems are rapidly expanding in New Mexico New and innovative land management schemes are needed to respond to these demands while maintaining and
5
improving the productive potential Many roads Ue in the bottoms of drainage ways Which concentrates diffuse runoff into damaging flows arid serious erosion Road systems continue to expand in many pinyon-juniper stanels as a result of off-road vehicle recreation hunting arid wood gathedng Many livestock anel wilellife grazing msnagement strategies are geareel to proviele for plant health but fail to conaieler adequately the impacts of use that affect infiltration flow concentrations ariel erosion It is not known hoW much plant material should be left on-site to protect most rangelands including pinyon-junper ecosystems in New Mexico
A significant amount of the existing unsatisfactory watersheelconclitionsare associateel with the pinyon-juniper ecosystem The hydrologic variables associated with pinyon-juniper are highly sensitive to use
Opt~um watershed treatment strategies to restore iong-term productivity and reduce flood and sediment risks need to be identified
PINYON-JUNIPER VEGETATION
Overstory tree Species
The threemaj)r tree species found in New Mexico within the pinyon-juniper woodland are Rocky Mountain pinyon Singleseed juniper ancl Alligatorjuniper (LaDner 1975 1981 Little 1950 Pieper 1977 anel Sprlngfield) Rocky Mountain pinyon and Singleseed juniper are founel throughout the pinyor-juniper wooellanel in the Southwest but Alligator juniper is more abunclant in western New Mexico anel Arizona Utah juniper also occurs in some pinyon-juniper woodlands in northwestern New Mexico while Rocky Mountain juniper (Juniperus scopulorum) occurs in northern New Mexico
Unclerstory Vegetation
Big sagebrush (Artelisia tridentata) is a common understory shrubby species in northern and northwestern New Mexico (Pieper 1977 Springfield 1976) Several oak species (Quercus arizonica 51 grisea 9 emoryi anel 9 oblongifolia) are ilIiportant understory shrubs in western and southwestern New Mexico Mountain
mshogany (Cercocarpus montana) and Wrights silk tassel (Garrya wrightii) are also important browse species in this area (Boeker et al 1972shyand Short et al 1977) Blue gra- (BouteloUa gracilis) occurs as an understory grass species throughout the wooellancl vegetation in thestate In northern areas cool season species of such genera as 2Festuca anel Agropyron occur ONest et al 1975) In central ancl southeastern New Mexico warm season species of the general Muhlenbergia Hilaria Lycurus anel Bouteloua occur
Habitat Types
Kennedy (1983) identified six relatively undisturbed habitatmiddot types in the Sacramento Mountains of southcentralNewMexicQ (Table 2) These habitat types ranged from about 6200ft to 7000 ft in average elevation and from 33 to 47 understory cover (Kennedy 1983 Table 2) The ~ ecluUs-Juniperus monospermal
Muhlenbergia pauc1flora habitat type was perhaps themost common type in this area Francis and Aldon (1983) also identified three pinyonshyjuniper habitat typu innortbwestern New Mexico
Uriderstory Patterns
Pinyon-juniper vegetation forma a mosaic pattern with trees interspersed with open grassland areas between the trees Armentrout and Pieper (1988) have described three understory zones associated with singleseed juniper and Rocky Mountain pinyon The first zone is that surrounding the trunk of the tree and is characterized by shrubs such as skunkbrush ancl algerita (Berberis haematocarpa) The seconcl zone is largely beneath the tree canopy Several grass species such as sideoats grams (Boute1oua curtipendula) wolftal (Lycurus phleoides) and blUe grams were abundant in the seconcl zone Several species inclUding blue grama wolf tail ancl creeping muhly (Muhlenbergia repeus) were more abundant under tree canopy ori the north side rather than on the southmiddot side (Schott and Pieper 1985) Pinyon ricegrass (Piptochaetium fimbriatum) appears to be favored by conditions under canopies of singleseed juniper Grass species of the open grassland zone included blue grama wolftaU gal~eta sanddrapseed and mat muhly~
Age and Size Class Structure
Many pi~yon-juniper stands h~vebeen disturbeel during the past 100 years by fuel or fence post harvesting bUrDing or mechanical control treatments Consequently many trees are relatively young bull Age class distributions consequently do not followmiddot the typical inverted J-shaped curve for ma~ure stanels Figure 1 shows age-class distribution for 202 Rocky Mountain pinyon trees from five study sites in the Sacramento Mountains This distribution appears to be nearly normal with most trees falling in the 70 to 130 yearmiddotage class However the specific distribution at each site depended on time since last disturbance and type of disturbance (Plumb-Mentjes anel Pieper 1983) Pinyon age is relatedto basal diameter but only 38 of the variation in age can be explained by basal diameter (Figure 2) Apparently~stand density (competition) influences siz~ of trees sUbstantially
6
0
Table 2 - Pinyon-Juniper Habitat Types of the Lincoln National Forest (From Kennedy 1983)
Tree Density
Average Understory Avg Stems Habitat Type Elev Ft Cover Plot
bull PINYON-JUNIPER SERIES
1 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Cercocarpus montanusAndropogon gerardi HT 6178 42 36
2 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Muhlenbergia pauciflora HT 6470 33 63
3 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Stipa columbiana HT 6678 36 123
4 Pinus edulis-Junil rus monosperma Bouteloua gracilis HT 6977 37 163
5 Punis edulis-Juniperus deppeana Bouteloua gracilis HT 6739 46 65
6 Pinus edulis-Juniperus deppeana Muhlenbergia dubia HT 6920 47 105
22 I
20
11
I
I
20 110 611 1110012011101611130 middotIY_I
Figure 1 Age class distribution of aU pinyon pines on study areas
- 1511r bull 100
1 bull 05 ~ 11amp50 2 r bull 031 n bull zaz
22 11 111 _ 1HIICMIl
Figure 2bull Relationship betweenDBB and age of pinyon pine for all trees bull
RESPONSE TO DISTURBANCE (SECONDARY SUCCESSION)
Several successional models have been proposed for secondary succession followingmiddot disturbance that removes most of the trees (Arnold et a1 1964 Barney and Frischknecht 1974 and Erdman 1976) These general patterns alsomiddotapply to conditions in middotpinyon-juniper woodlands in central New Mexico (Dwyer and Pieper 1967 Rippel et al 1980 1983 Schott and Pieper 1986 1987a 1987b 1987C) Bowever specific patterns are influenced by the type of soils supporting the woodland vegetation (Schott arid Pieper 1986 1987a) Generally- soils that are fairly shallow and rocky have some seral stages poorly represented (Table 3) When sitesmiddot with these soils are treated mechanically shrubs such as wavy-leaf oak do not increase (Rippel et al 1983) On similar soils with few roek outarops grassforb and shrubgrass stages are common Response of Rocky Hountainpinyon
and singleseed juniper appear to be dependent on density and size of trees before treatment If
the stanpmiddot was near climax before cabling pinypnsrapidly become dominant on the site If the stand was in someseral stage there would be more junipers but theimiddotr relatively slow growth and time for uturation require more time before middotthey would dominate the site
RESEARCH NEEDS
Only limited research on pinyon-juniper ecology in northern and westernmiddot New Mexico has been conducted Informst~on is lacking on basic ecological relationship at both plant communitymiddot and individual species level lactors influencing distribution of these woodlands are poorly understood lor example in many situations pinyon-juniper appears to be moving uphill in elevation and encroaching on ponderosa pine forests Such situation have not been analyzed Success~onal patterns where alligator juniper is a major potenUal component of the vegetation have not been determined Analyses of these woodlands for several uses and products are needed for laUd unagament purposes
4 bull ~
Table 3 -- General pattern of succession on cabled pinyon-juniper wood1anda on two soil types (From Schott and Pieper 1986)
Sera1 Stages Climax 1 2 3
Original Conditions
General successional Annual forb Grassforb Shrubgrass Pinyon-juniper model
Lithic hapustoll Annuals and Perennial Shrubs dominant Pinyon and juniper perennials from grasses and shade conducive dominating Pinyon seeds which disshy forbs with to tree establishshy eventually dominant perse readily establishment ment surviving perenshy and spread of nials shrubs (esp
0 wavy-leaf oak)
Lithic hapusto11- Annuals and These stages absent or poorly represhy Pinyon dominating Rock outcrop complex perennials from sented Rock outcropsmiddotrestrict vegshy Climax with juniper bull
seed which disshy etative reproduction perse readily surviving perenshynials
fI
LITERATURE CITED
Armentrout S M and R D Pieper 1988 Plant distribution surrounding Rocky Mountain Pinyon and one seed juniper in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range Management 41 (In press) bull
Arnold J F bullbull D A Jameson and E H Reid 1964bull The pinyon~jun1per type of Arizona Effects of grazing fire and tree control US Department of Agriculture Production Research Report 84~
Barney MA and N C Frischknechtmiddot 1974 Vegetation change follOwing fire in the
pinyon-juniper type of west-central Utah Journal of Range Management 279~-96
Barrett J W 1962 Regional Silviculture of the United States The Ronald Press Co bullbull NY 610p
BetancourtJ L 1987 Paleoecology of pinyon-juniper woodlands summary In Everett R L (compiler) proceedings~ pinyon-juniper conference USDA For SerGen Techbull Rep INT-215~
Boeker E Lbullbull V E Scott H G Reynolds and B A Donaldson 1972~ Seasonal food habits of mule deer in southWestern Ne Mexicobull Journal of Wildlife Management 3656-63 bull
Erdman Jbull A 1970 Pinyon-juniper succession after natural fires in residual soils of MesaVerde Colorado Brigham Young University Science Bulletin Series 11 ~rovo Utah
Fowler J M R D Bowe BE Peacock KC McDanielT Garner-Hurt J R Gray and
M Cardenas 1974 Wood fiber production in pinyon-juniper woodlands on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico New MeXico State University Agricultural Experiment~tation Research Report NO~ 519
Francis R E and E bull F Alden 1983 Preliminary habitat types of a semiarid grassland In MOir W H and L Hendzel (Tech COQrdinatora) Proceeding of the workshop pn southwestern habitat types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Gehlbach F R 1967 Vegetation of the Guadalupe escarpment New Mexico-Texas Ecology 48404-419
Kennedy K L 1983 A habitat type classification of the p~yon-juniper woodlands of the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico In Moir W H and Leonard Hendzel (Tech-Coordinators) Proceedings of the workshop on southwestern habitat
types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Lanner bull R M 1975 Pinyon pines and junipers of the southwestern woodlandsmiddot In Gifford G F and 1 E Buspy The pinyonjunipr ecosystem a symposium Utah State Univ bullbull Logan
Lanner R Mmiddot1981 The pinyon pine a natural and cultural history Univ Nevada Press
Reno
Little E L bull 1950 Southwestern trees Amiddot guide to the native species of middotNew Mexico and Arizona US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Agricultural Handbook 9
Lymbery bull G A and R D Pieper 1983 Ecology of pinyon-juniper vegetation in the northern Sacramento Mountains New Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 698
Pieper R D 1~77 The southwestern pinyon-juniper ecosystem In Aldon Earl F and T J~ Loring (Tech Coord) US Departmentmiddot Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report RM-31
Pieper R D and G A Lymbery 1987 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegettion in south-central New Mexico In~ Everett Richard L (compiler) proceedings - pinyon-juniper conference US Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT-21S
Plumh-Mentjes M L and R D Pieper 1983 Diameter distribution and age class structure of pinyon pine (Pinus eduiis Engelm) in south-central~Mexico Abstract 36th annual meeting Society for Range Management Denver CO bull
Schmidt L j 1987 Present and future themes in ptnyon-juniper hydrology In ~verett R L (compiler) U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report 1NT-215
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1985 Influence of canoP1 characteristics of one-seed juniper on understory grasses Journal of Range Management 38328-331
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1986 Succession in pinyon-juniper vegetation in New Mexico Rangelands 8126-128
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987a Succession of pinyon-juniper communities a~ter mechanical disturbance in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range ~anagement 4088-94
1Q
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987bbull Water relationships of Quercus undulata ~ edulis and Juniperus monosperma in seral pinyon-juniper communities of south-central New Mexico In Everett R L (compiler) us Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT~215 bull
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987cbull bull Succession in tree pits following cabliD8
in pinyon-juniper c01lllllUt1ities Southwestern Naturalist 32399-402
~ Short H L t W Evans and E L Boeker 1977 The use of natural and modified pinyon pine-juniper wOodlands by deer and elk Journal of Wildlife Management 41543-559
Springfield H W 1976 Characteristics and management of southwestern pinyon-juniper ranges the status of our knowledge US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Res Pap RM-160
Tueller P T C D Beeson R J Tausch N E West and K HRea 1979 Pinyon-juniper woodlands of themiddotGreat Basin distribution flora vegetal cover U SbullDepartment of Agriculture Forest Service Research Paper INT~229
USDA 1941 Cltmate and man Yearbook of Agriculture U S Govt Printing Office Washington DC
Wasson G E 1987 The American Indian response to the pinyon-juniper conference In Everett R L(compller) USDA For Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Wells P V 1987 Systematics and distribution of pinyons in the late quarternary In Everett R Lbull (compiler) Proc - Pinyon-juniper Conference USDA For Sere Gen Tech Rep INT-215
West N E K H Rea and R J Tausch 1975 Basic Synecological relationahips in pinyon-juniper woodlands In Gifford G E and F E Busby (eds) ~e pinyon-juniper ecosystem A symposium Utah State University Logan
Woodin H E and A A Lindsey 1954 Juniper-pinyon east of the Continental Divide as analyzed by the line-strip metWod Ecology 35473-489
11
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES I CROP
bullJ
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH WOODLAND STA~D MANAGEMENT l
James T Fisher John G Me~al and Gregory C Phillips
Abstract-- New Mexicos native pinyon pines produce high-value crops including nuts Christmas trees and nursery or~amentals Crop values can be increased through more intensive stand management and more innovative marketing of such products as pinyon nuts and Christmas trees to compete with imported products Research needs pertaining to these crops are discussed
1 Ne~ Mexico State University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-II
2 Authors are re~pectively
Professor and Associate Professors Dept of Agronomy and Horticulture New
Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
13
INTRODUCTlON
Pinyons (pinon p~nes) ield diverse productsranging frolll valuable nuts ~nd landscape sp~cll11ens to fuelwood
Rowever littleforethought is give~ to crop illlprovelllentbeforecropsare ha~vested This paper addresses high-value pinyon products ~hat appear to justify at least modest levels omiddotf lIIanacelllent inputs to improve product quality quantity or avail- abilty Greater elllphasis on ~ntensive lIIanagelllentmiddot recognizes the nee~ for deriving economic benefits as well as the need for cu~todiai lIIanagelllent to pre~erve the
woodland type (Lanner 1977)
Pinyon and pinyon-juniper woodlands hav~ be~n the su~lect of severai symposia The reader iamp directed to proceedings of these lIIeetings providing several papers on the subject [~ee Gifford and Busby (19-75) Aldon and Loring (1977) Evrett (1987) and a fbrthcoming volume reporting a n~~ional lIIeeting held in Mexico in 1987]
This paper specifi~ally exalllines pinyon nut production including lIIarket developlllents that potentially threaten regional markets and the selective harvest of Christlllas trees and nursery or~alllentals Methods available t~ illlprove crop profitability will be discussed in addition to cuirent and future research
NUT BEARING PINES
Plant taxonomists recognize about 100 species in the falllily Pinaceae Alllongthese 12 to 26 species produce quality edible nuts (Rosengarten 1984 Lanner 1981) An edible nut is large middot(generallly les8 than 2200 seedkg) and has a thin shell that can be cracked with the teeth Pines producing edible nuts are found mostly in Europe Asia and western North middotAmerica Large ~dlblen~ts are found ~ostiyalllong the ~tone pines ~Sub8ection Celllbraa) nat~ve to Europe and ASia and the pinyon pines (Subsection Celllbroides) native to North Alllerica
Pinyons are dwarf trees nd shrubS 9f sellliarid regions of the southwestern Uni ted Sta tes and Mexico Because pinyons grow slowly it ismiddot difficult to lustify th~ cost of establishing and cultivatin~ p~aniations for nut production IncreaSingly nuts gathered
from the stone pines are imported f~om Asia and marketed at a lIIuch lower cost According to D~nielFox (pers C~IIII11) about 1000 ~tric tons of ~helled Asian pine nuts are imported each year Re also reports that abou~ 100 ton~ of ~ pinea nuts are illlported from Portugal and Spain
To protect pinyonnut m~rkets it lIIay becollle necessary to develop criteria that effectively distinguish pinyon nuts frolll illlported pine ~uts~ To exallline the feasibility of developing these criteria we will examine t~egeographic ranges and speclal characteristics of nut-producing pines under their respective subsections of the family Pinaceae proposed by Critchfield and Little (1966)
lli Subsec tiOn Celllbroides (Pinyons)
Pines classified und~i the subse~tion Ce~bi~ides (pinyons) have 1-5 needles in a fascicle Seeds are large wingl~ss a~d sOlllewhat oval in shape Lanner (1981) reported 11 species but a more recent treatlllent ofmiddot the alliance r~cognizes 15ta~a (Bailey and Ha~ksworth 1988) Eight species occur in the United States 12 in Mexico and 3 in New Mexico (P edulis I lIIonophylla and I~di-cOlor) The pinyon species discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988)include
Uni ted States
(l) Pinus edulis (pinyon) t 4200 seedkg
The predominant pinyon species of New Mexico Widespread in the southwestern United States lust
entering Wyollling and extending south through Utah Colorado and ~ew ~~xico to the western ~nd of Oklahollla~ west Texas and the northern border of Chihuahua extending west throughout lIIuch of Arizona to an outlier in eastern California Range ov~rlaps ~ith P celllbroides in south~rn New Mexico and Arizona and with P monophylla at the westerD edge of its range (southw~stern Utah northwestern Arizona and the New York Mountains o~ sOuthern California (Fig 1) Kay occa~ionally intergrade with P lIIonophylla
(2) monophylla lsingleleaf plny~n)
[ 2400 seed kg ] The pinyon pine ~fthe Great
14
bull P SAalNIANA bull P aMIIilOIOEl III Po OUAOIIIIOUA bull P MONOPttYLLA bull P eDULIS
Figure 1 Diatrlbution of pinyon pines in lJOuthwestern United States and northern Mexieo
Basin and Mohave Desert Com~onin Nevada and in parts of southern California and western Utah but also ex~ends acr~ss Arizona and southwestern Ke~ Mexico (ig~ 1)
United States and Mexico
(3) Pinus middotcellbroides (Mexican pinyon)
[ 2400 seedkg J Range widespread at low
elevations in the mountains bordering the arid plate~u of northern Mexico Ranges from southeastern Arizona southwestern Arizona southwestern New Mexico and western Texas through northern Mexico and south to Puebla and Mexico City (Fig 1) Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) middotrecognize three subspecies cembroides (northern Mexi~o) lagunae (Baja California) and orizabensis (Central Mexico) (Fig 1)
(4) P californiarum-
Subspecies californiarum
occurs in southern Californ~a and northern Baja California I californiarum subsp fallax (formerly P edulis var fallax) is-found in Arizona
(5) Pinus discolor (border pinyon)
Formerly P cembroides var bicolor~ Principal range lies along both sides of the intershynational boundary between Mexico and the United States extending about 120 miles into eac~ country Sp-ecifically occurs in southeast Arizona extreme southwest New Mexico northeas~ ~onora and northwest Chihuahua
( 6) quad r ifo11a (Parry pinyon) [ 2100 seedkg J
Confined to 10 elevations in the dry mountains of southern California from the San Jacinto Mountains south to the S~erra San Ped~o Martir Its range overlaps that of I monOphylla but no intermediates have been reported (Fig 1)middot
(7) Pinus remo ta (paper-shell pinyon also called
Texas pinyon) Formerly P cembroides var
remota Main range in Coahuila but reaches parts of adjacent Nuevo Leon southeastern Chihuahua and rexas (Bailey and Wendt 1979) Has thinnest shell among pinyons~
Local Endemics Found Exclusively in Mexico
(8) Pinus culminicola (Potosi pinyon)
Documented occurrence Cerro PotOSi Nuevo Leon Mexico
(9) johannis Li~ited r4nge in Mexico
(west of Concepcion del Oro Zacatecas
(10) Pin~s maximartinezii (Martinez pinyon)
Documented Occurrence Zacatecas Mexico
(11 ) Pinus nelsonii (Nelson pinyon)
Documented ocaurrence north- eastern Mexicobull
(12) ~pinceana (Pinca pinyon)
15
Documented occurrence northshy Grows at high elevations inth~ eastern and eastern Mexco Alps and the Carpathian ~ountains
(3) bullbull koraiensis S~eb amp Zucco ~ SUDsect PINEAE Shaw (Korean pine)
[ 1800 seedkg](n Pinuspinea L Rngebull through Korea and (Italian stone pine) eastern Manchuria into southeastern [ 1300 seedkg ] Siberia with outlirs ~ri t~e
Wide_pread in Spain and Japalliue islands of Honshu and Portugal and aiong the northern and Shikoku (Fig 2) eastern shores ~f the Mediterranean Sea including minor occurrences (4) P sibirica near the north coast of Turkey rSibe~ian ston~ pine(Fig 2) [ 4000 seedkg
Ranges from the Ural Mountains Pinus Subsect CEMBRAE through western and central ~iberia---(Stone Pines) to northern Mongolia with outliers
in northern Russia (Fig ~)(1) Pinus albicaulis Engelm~
(whitebark pine) Pinus Subsect GERARDIANAE [ 5700 seedk ] -- shy
Occurs at high eleyations fro~ (1) gerardian Wall~ central British Columbia sout~ to (Chilgoza pine)s~uthern Sierra Nevada of [ 400 seedkg J California the Ruby Mountain of Noted for large edible seed Nevada and the mOuntains of Confined to mountainous regions of northwestern Wyoming eastern Asia principally in
eastern Afgha~itan~ parts of (2) Pin~s cembra L Pakistan ~nd ~catt~red localities
(Swiss stone pine) in the dry inner valleys of the [ 4400 seedkg 1 north~rn Himalayas (Fig 2)
eocIIn_a _shyFigure 2 Distribution of edible pine nuts in Europe and
Asia
16
bull
Pinus Subsect SABINIANAE Loud Opportumiddotnities aay exist to separate pinyOn nuts other froa pine nuts Most
(I) Pinu~ ~abiniana Dougl pine nuts have a ridge where the (Digger pine) membranous wing is attached Also [ 1300 seed kg criteria based upon seed content could
Confined to California Found be applied when large vol~aes of in dry foothills of ihe Sierra imported pine nuts are suspected to be Nevada and the Coast Rangemiddot Ras aislabeled Tests aight exaine levels large edible but rather hard-shelled of starch fat or piotein or even seeds (Fig bull1) smiddotpecific enzyaes (Table 1)
(2) Pinus coulteri D Don (Coulter pine) New Mexico Pinyon Nut Crops ( 3100 seedkg]
Restr~cted to the coastal mountains of cen~ral and southern Pinyon nuts have been harvested California and northern Baja commercially for about 50 years California (Little 1938a) The nut crop averages
045 to 09 million kg (I to 2 million The preceding list makes clear that pounds) annually for New Mexico Arizona
many pinyon species are found in North and Colorado but one year exceeded 36 America with the greatest number found million kg (Little 1942) The more in Mexico Further it seems neither productive stands may yield 330 kglha practical nor necessary to develop (300 lbsac) during a good year market criteria to separate nut products (Springfield 1976) At a cur~ent found among these species Morphological retail value of $883 I kg value on a differences among pinyon nuts are per hectare basis would be $297000 generally so slight as ~o pre~lude (120000 lac) Fowler and Oliver (this practical field identification publication) provide additional Also most Mexican species occur as information on nut values rather isolated populations with local value but low export potential For New Mexico species criteria would have to recognize as genuinely natibullbull those Pinyon Reproductive Biology nuts produced by at least three pinyon species edulis monophylla and P di$color Again nut morphological Pinyons begin bearing nuts at about criteria would not separate these 25 years but crops do not reach pinyons from other species of the same commercial size until about 75 years subsection (Little 1941) Cones are borne
Table 1-- Composition of pine nuts and true nuts (Lanner 1981 Woodroof 1979) All values are expressed as percentages
Kernal H2O Protein Fat Carboshyhydrates
Ash
Pinyon nuts P edulisP monophIllaImiddot cembroides
58 31 14 10 19
60 23 60
18 54 14
3
Pine nuts P sabinianaP pineaImiddot sibirica P lerardiana
49 30 34 19 14
60 48 63 51
9 7
12 23
4
True nuts
Almond Pecan Pistacio Walnut Peanut
51 52
shy45
47 30
33
19 9
20 15 26
54 73 53 64 39
20 15 19 16 24
3 2 3 2
laterally ~n the a~il of a scale leaf near branch tips (jhaw~ 1914) although a r~re observation 01 termin~l cones b~s been reported (Lanner 1969) Developing cones can be ~een in the e~rliest stages as ovulate primordia in longitudinal sections of bu4s Within buds ovulate cone primordia are only at the tip of the bud an~have larger and broader bases than spur shoots (Little 1938-b)
ovuiate primordia are formed in buds in August and September and cones mature by October of the third year Because 3 years are required for seeds to mature treatments applied to stimulate nut quantity~il~ require 3 years before evaluation The first year must be especially suited to production of ovulate primordia and the second and third seaasons favorable to growth and maturation of cones and nuts(Li~tle 1938b)
The Periodicity of Bumper Crops
Pinyon ~ut crops are prodUCed at intervals of 3 to 7 years The periodicity of above-average cropshas been related to the dtain of nutrients required to produce the crop an~ the time required for nutrients to be replenished Developing cones act as food sinks for carbohydrate and nitrogen (N) reserves at the expense of vegetative structures (Pickmann and Kozlowski 1969 1970 ~ook and S~et 1971) Consequently large cone crops adversely affect vegetative tree growth
Forcella (1981) found cone production was inversely relate~ to temperatures during late-August to early September Maximum production in northern New Mexeio occurred when the mean maximum weekly temperature was below 24 degrees C Temperatures above 24 degrees C resulted in virtually no cone crops
However other environmental factors~ acting independently or inte~actinl with temperature caa be involved Rainfall is positively correia ted with the flowering of pines This is because photosynthat~ 9roduction is needed to develop carbohydrate reserves and this process is limited by ~lant water stres~ Also tree growth is determined by photosynthetic gain and the onset of abundant flowering is more directly rela~ed to tree siZe than
age (Schmidtling 1969) More speci1icallj nut ~roduction is e~osely
related to crown surface area
An exception to the adverse influen~e of wa~er ~tress is the positive roie stress plays in the initiat~on of ovula~e primordia Studies have shown that summer moisture
stress results in an above-average flower crop the following spring This suggests moisture stress at the time of ovulate primordia formation promotes reproductive rather than vegetative bull growth This view is supported by studies shOwing that branches exposed to full sun bore more female cones and had lower tissue moisture levels than partially shaded branches (Wareing~ 1958)
Water ~tress also can indirectly affect flowering thro~gh its interaction with tree nutrient status E~ell (1970) showd that nitrate fertili~ation or exposure to moisture stress caused similar tiowe~ing responses in Dougl~s-firaccompaniedby increases in total foliage N content and free amino
acids especially ~rgini~e Similarly Schmidtling (1974) suggested that water stress or N fertilization can increase flowering through the same metabolic intermediary namely arginine or some related N-containing substance~
Manipulation of Native Nut Crops
pespite the importance of coniferous nuts in many parts of th~
world only two pine species appear to be cultivated for their seed crops P
pinea in the Medi terranean and - sibirica in the Urals (Pravdin 1963) The pinyons of estern North America and Meiico ar mos~ly ignored in terma of cultiv~tion or domestication
Little (1140) was among the first to suggest that pinyon nu~ prQduction could be augme~ted tbtough the USe of simple cultutal practices However these received little attention and we have no grea~er und~rstanding of the effi~lcy or econoic feasibility of these treatments now than we did more than 40 ~ears ago Nev~rtheles~ with the present emphasis on wocidland management ~uch treatmenta seem worthy of serious attention
Ca) selective thinning
Some pibyonsapear to be
18
Nut sizes from pruned and unpruned Pinus edulis trees
19
consistently good nut producers (Little 1940) Heavy producers usually show immature and old cones on branches and cones are conspicuous b~neath them Selective thinning of unpr04uctive trees should increase flowering of those left standing (Little 1940)
(b) basal pruning
Theoretically low branches receiving partial sun light do not photosynthesize enough energy to offset energy losses to respiration It follows that low branches are energy sinks that potentially r~b nutrients from seed crops To test this relationship Montano et al (1980) pruned baial branches of 70 to 80-year old pinyons (8 to 10 m tall) to a height of 15 m and SUbsequently determined effects of this treatment on seed development They reported av~rage nut volumes from gruned and ungruned trees were 040 cm and 032 cm and the average nut weights were 033 g and 020 g respectively (see Fig3) Also pruned trees produced a greater percentage of filled nuts 99 as opposed to 84 The effects observed were related to the growth of nuts already developing in cones when the treatment was applied
Basal pruning reduced disease and insect injury of southern pnes (Wilson and Rudolph 1970) Also pruned wood could b sold for ~uelwood potentially offsetting the cost of the benefits anticipated Owing to its simplicity and overall benefits basal pruning appears to merit greater attention
(c) fertilization
Fertilization usually stimulates female cone production (Puritch 1972) More specifically the following trends become apparent when studies are reviewed collectively
(1) N stimulates cone production even when N is applied with other nutrients (Morris and Beers 1969) Also trees producing greater cone yields generally have higher levels of tisue N than low producers
(2) The presence of specific amino acids (especially arginine) is a more reliable predictor of fruitfulness than tissue N content per se For example nitrat N ana ammcinium N increased Douglasshyfir foliar N content and shoot growth similarly However only nitrate N significantly increased arginine content which was positively and quantitatively related to female flower proshyduction (Ebell and McMullin 1970) Following ichmidtlings (1974) explanation of fruit shyfulness fertilization shyespecially with nitrate N - could increase tis~ue organip Nand consequently flowering
(d) cultivation and irrigation
Supplemental water could increase growth reSUlting in greater crown density and iurface area In times of drought additional water could prevent premature abortion of immature cones Drip irrigaeion technology may be feaible for som~ sites However it seems more likely that less intensive ~ethods will prove to be practical Among these are land treatments that direct precipitation run-off to trees improve infiltration or remove weed competition
CHRISTMAS TREES
Pinyons are harvested from natural stands and comprise about 25 of all
Christmas trees sold in New Mexico Arizona Colorado Wyoming Utah and Nevada (Sowder 1965) Trimmed branches also are used for wreath manufacture In spite of their slow growth in native stands pinyons have many desirable Christmas tree attributes including dense foliage symmetrical shape green color natural fragrance good branch angle and limb strength and good needle retention Plantation trees can reach marketable size in about 11 years (Fisher and Fa~cher 1987)
Stand Thinning
Several techniques can be used to improve tree quality Stand thinning allows remaining trees to receive sufficient sunlight for limbs to develop uniformly on all sides During the thinning operation handles can be made on main stems by removing branches at the trees base to a height of 30 em
Removal of branches below a full whorl of branches will allow another tree to be culturedmiddotfrom the stump after harvest A year after the first tree is cut the remaining low branches will begin to turn up and all but one of these can be pruned to promote the growth of a new central leader
Pruning and Shearing
~he ideal pin~on Christmas tree resembles an inverted cone wide at the base and tapered uniformly tg the tip Accemiddotptable crown taper for pines is 40 to 90 but for spr~ces and firs is 40 to 70 Pruning and shearing will make native pinyons conform more closely to the ideal which improve marke tabi Ii ty
Pruning removes dead or unattractive branches Shearing is used to co~troi leader growth so the distance between whorls is not excessive increase the number of branches arising from branch buds and promote the pyramidal crown f~Im Because pinyon leader growth rarely exceeds 20 cm excessive distance between whorls is rarely a problem Pruning and shearing most often will be used to correct uneven o~oid and thia crowns
In pines eac~ needle bun~le ~ontains a dormant or axillary bud Removal of a branch terminal at the proper time promotes development of these dormant buds into short shoots improving crown density In singleshyneedled conifers such as spruces firs and Douglas-fir intermediate buds are produced along the terminal branch stem between each whorl For this reason they can be sheared during any season of the year and produce about the same number of branch buds However with pines the number and size of branch buds developed after shearing depends upon the physiological state of the tree when sheared
Pines respond best when sheared shortly after height growth is complete but before tissues in the new shoot becom~ woody S~oots prun~d at this time produce two to four times the number of buds found on unpruned trees Pinyon shoots elongata during late June but needles continue to elongatemiddotduring July and August after branches are fully elongated Buds are formed in late August
From studies conducted with other pine Christmas tree species the following course of treatments can be recommended for pinyons
1 Before spring growth begins prune all double and multiple leaders (eg bullbull April)
~ She~r when needles on new candles are 13 as long as last yeara needles (usually from June 15 to July 1)
3 Shape the tre~ from the top down by shearing the tips of lateral branches Pzomote a conical crown so thebase is no more than 90 as wide as the tree is tall Ideally taper should be 40-90 Avoid shearing back to woody tissue because this encourages multiple leaders
4 If the tree is oblong rather than tapered shear the top in June or eirly July and the sides in late summer fall or winter Growt~ of laterals will be reduced Repeat steps 2-4 yearly as needed
5 Avoid shearing the year the tree is ~o be marke~ed
20
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
bull bull
SR 73
middotPinyon-Juniper Woodlands of New Mexico A Biological
and Economic Appraisal
Prepared By
Pinyon-Juniper Resource committee
James T Fisher John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
Technical Coordinators
College of Agriculture and Home Economics
New Mexico state University
Las CrucesNM
bullP1nyon 1S the accepted English spelling for the Spanish pinon
Ref USDA Forest Service
CONTENTS
Page
FORWARD i
ECOLOGY OF PINYON-JUNIPER VEGETATION IN NEW MEXICO 1
Rex D Pieper M Karl Wood and Bruce B Buchanan
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES I CROP IMPROVEMENT THROUGH WOODLAND STAND MANAGEMENT 13
James T Fisher John G Mexal and Gregory C Phillips
GRO~TH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYON 25
John Fowler arid Charles Oliver
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGY 39
Gregory C Phillips James T Fisher and John G Mexal
IMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE 45
Volney W Howard Jr
SUMMARY 48
APPENDIX A - PINYON JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS BY THE AUTHORS 50
bullbull APPENDIX B - GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT FACULTY 53
bull
FOREWARD
The Pinyon Act of 1987 provides a welcome opportunity for the College of Agriculture and Home Economics of New
Mexico State University to draw together wide-ranging expertise in research related tomiddot New Mexicos state trmiddotee Scientists from the New Mexico Agricultural Experimentbull Station have been conducting studies related to pinyon since 1904 The fruits of these labors are summarized by faculty actively involved in pinyon research The author~ also ad~ress research needed to fill serious information voids and identify opportunites to adapt new technologies to specific problems More extensive information can be found in the publications cited at the en~ of this work Indeed many may be surprised ~t the broad range of pinyon work already done by the scientists of the Agricultural Experiment Station
The Pinyon Act of 1987 specifically addressed public concerns about New Mexicos pinyon nut crops Papers found in this publication address the value of nut crops and identify research strategies best suited to improve nut quality and yiela~ Strategies to protect existing markets also are discussed
As articles were being written faculty met periodically to exchange views on product values and research prioritmiddoties This encour~ged the integration of ideas shaped by fac~lty interactions with consumers and research advisory groups experience and academic disciplines Most notable perhaps is that knowledge gaps were identified that must be bridged before some research can be applied to specific situations The publication summary identifies these problems as well as issues not likely to be investigated with existing research resources
The College of Agriculture and Home Ecomo_ics is indebted to Dr James T Fisher for organizing the effort to ~roduce this report In addition his scientific contributions are substantial Serving with Dr Fisher on the report coordinating committee were Dr John G Mexal Department of Agronomy and Horticulture and Dr Rex Pieper Department of Animal and Range Sciences and their efforts are greatly appreciated~ The following scientists
i
contributed to the effort through their committee participitation or papers or both
~
pre Bruce Buchanan Department of Agronomy and Horticulture Dr John Fowler Department of Agricultural Economics and Agricultural Business bull
bull Dr VW Howard Jr Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences
Dr Greg Phillip Department of Agronomy and Horticulture Dr Emroy Shannon Cooperative Extension Service Dr Karl Wood Department of Animal and Range Sciences
Thanks are due these faculty members for having undertaken the preparation of this report in addition to their many other teaching research and Extension duties
Finally the intended purpose of this document is to report th~ status of the pinyon resource in New Mexico so our legislators can accomplish their objectives more effectively We hope our purpose has been accomplished
John C Owens Dean and Chief Administrat1v~ Officer College of Agriculture and Home Economics New Mexico State University
II
lECOLOGY OF PINYON-JUNIPER VEGETATION IN NEW MEXICO
2Rex D Pieper M Karl Wood and Bruce B Buchanan
bull
Abstract Ecologically pinyon-juniper woodlands are extremely varied in New Mexico bull They occupy nearly all topographical positions in mid-elevational mountain ranges throughout the western two-thirds of the state Three species dominate the tree overstory layer -Juniperus monosperma Pinus edulis and Juniperus deppeana Understory shrubs and grasses vary considerably with site and geographic location Successional patterns follow those described for other locations but soil types may influence the development of seral stages
INew Mexico State University Agricultural Exper~ent Station SR 73-1
Professor and Associate Professor Department of Animal and Range Sciences Associate Professor Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las
Cruces NM 88003
1
INTRODUCTION
Pinyon-juniper vegetation in New Mexico is extremely variable because of climate soils topography and understory vegetation (Pieper 1977 Springfield 196) Pinyon-juniper vegetation generally occupies foothills and lower mountain slopes below 7500 ft in elevation (Springfield 1976) This vegetadon type occurs occasionally in valley bottoms on nearly Jevel terrain
Pinyon-junipervegetatiol1 occurred throughout the Intermountain Region and the Southwest as far back as the Last Great Ice Age and possibly earlier (Quarternary period) (Wells 1987) Although many shifts have apparently occurred in the distribution of individual species over the pait 2 million years recent increases in woody plant distribution and density is traced by many workers to mans disturbances Betancourt 1987)
Native American Indians have occupi4itd pinyon-juniper wood+ands in the western United States for centuries (Wasson 1987) and have utilized plants from these areas for many purposes including food
Much has been learned abOut ecology of pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico and the Southwest but IllUch remains to be learned This paper will summarize some of this knowledge
ECOLOGICAL FACTORSCONTROLLING DISTRIBUTION
Climate
Climatic patterns within the pinyon-juniper woodlampnd in the Southwest vary considerably in response to geographic variation and eleVation (Springfield 1977)
Precipitation
Inthesouthern portions of the pinyon-juniper woodland precipi~ation peaks occur during the summer from storms originating from the Gulf of Mexico (Springfield 1977) Winter storms from the Pacific Coast provide moisture for cool-season understory species in northern areas which are largely absent from southern areas
Table 1 shows the contrasting precipitstion pattern for Carlsbad in southeastern New Mexico and Fort Wingate in the northwestern part of the state By the end of May more than 35 of the total annual precipitation has been received at Fort Wingate compared to only 23 at Carlsbad The spring months tend to be much drier in southern portions of the woodland than in the north Both northern and southern portions exhibit summer peaks but it is somewhat delayed in the north (Table 1) More than 45 inches- pf precipitation occurs on the average in Carlsbad
during May June and July compared to only about 3~5 inches for Fort Wingate
Elevation also influences annual precipitation but not distribution Near Carlsbad Caverns in southeastern New Mexico annual precipitation averaged 13 in compared to 145 in at 4500 ft (Geh1bach 1967)
Temperature
Temperatures also vary geographically middotand with elevation Mean July temperatures were 70middot at ort Wingate and 80middot at Carlsbad while
mean JanuarY temperatures were 32degF at Fort Wingate and 44degF at Carlsbad (USDA 1941) Some of these differences may also be related to elevational differences For example maximum June temperatures were 4middoto F lower at Carlsbad New Mexico at 3120 ft elevation than at Carlsbad Caverns at 4435 ft Februaryminimums were 7degF warmsr at Carlsbad compared to those at the caverns (Gehtbach 1967)
So11s
Soils of the pinyon-juniper type are extremely variable bull Many authors assoctatethe woodland to be on coarse texture soils low in organic matter and alkaline (Barrett 1962) There are virtually no published works on the soil characteristics of the ecosystem but what appearsmiddot in the literature are scant descri~tions of specific study sites
rn New Mexico the USDA-Forest Service have identified three categories of the woodland ecosystem in their Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey of the Soutbwest region The so11s of these categories are dOm1nate1y Alfisols (primarily Hap1ustalfs) meSic (a-15middotmiddotC) temperature regime andustic moisture regime Ustic suggests primarily summer precipitation or a uniform distribution of precipitation The concept of the moisture regime is one of limited moisture but the soil moisture is present at a time wheo conditions are suitable for plant growth The definition of ustic is a rooting zone that is moist for either 180 cumulative days or 90 consecutive days iu most years (Barrett J W 1962) There are stands of pinyon-juniper in New Mexico that occur on cooler soils than mesic which are identified as frigid (O_8degC) but few that are found on warmer sites Other than Alfisols the major soils that support the woodland are Inceptisols (usually ustochrepts) Mollisols (usually calciustol1s Argicestolls and Haplustolls) Entisols (usually ustorthents) and to a limited extent Aridisols (usually Bap1argtds) bull
The three categories of the woodland recognized by the USDA-Forest are
1) Juniper composed of ~ monosperma (d osteosperma) This classifmiddotication is found at
2
Table 1--Monthly precipitation for Carlsbad and Fort Wingate New Mexico (From USDA 1941)
Fort Winsate Carlsbad -
Monthly Cumulative Monthly Cumulative Month Total Cumulative (Inches) Total Cumulative (Inches)
January 081 081 55 033 033middotbull 25
February 101 182 126 043 076 58
March 116 298 206 054 130 99
April 151 449 310 086 216 164
May 071 520 359 091 307 234
June 070 590 407 149 456 347
July 206 796 550 223 679 515
August 279 1075 742 1 70 849 647
September 143 1218 841 203 1052 801
October 076 1294 894 144 1196 908
Novembemiddotr 074 1368 945 060 1256 957
December 081 1449 1000 056 1312 1000
Total 1449 1312
middotbull
the lower elevat~ons and tends to bemiddotthe warmest and driest of the three Itmiddotis the least productive in total biomass production and in terms of wood averages about five cords of wood per hectare (2cordsAC)~
2) Pinyon-ju~iper composed of ~~ and a mix of monosperma and limited amounts of osteosperlila~ This classifieation has a shrub understory and has a higher biomass produetion than eategory 1 The cord-wood available is estimated to be from 10-20 cords per hectare (4-8 cordsAC)
middot3) Pinyonjuniper composed of edul1smiddot and a mix of monosperma and deppeana with a significant understory of Gambel Oak Thiamp category has the highest biomas production and cord-wood available is estimated to be nearly 35 cords per hectare (14 cordsAC)
The soils are widely distributed over all three categories of the woodland ecosystem and are not easily stratified to any one group It is common for the soils to have accumulations of carbcinatfils middotand frequently have calcic horizons These carbonate accumulations are mo~e frequent in oldermiddot soils on stable landscapes There seems to be no generalization with soil texture Almost any soil texture will support the ecosystem as will most ~y middotsoil depth Onemiddot common characteristic is the low amount of accumulated organic matter The upper 18 cm (Fincher or plow-layer) has less than 1 organic matter When organic matter does accumulate above this level it seems to be in soils with some combination of high clay content wettest end of the ustic moisture regimes or coolr than mesic temperature regimes Little is known about the influencemiddotof soil on the distribution and growth of the pinyon-juniperwoodlampnd
Site Index
Site index is an expressionmiddot of the tree growth potential of a site or a sites productive capacity Stocking expresses the density of trees on the land and spacing refers to its spatial distribution Standardpractice is to define site in terms of the total height of trees that have consistently been in a dominant position in well-stocked stands at specified key ages bull
A1thou~h tree height growth h4s been the most practical consistent and generally useful indicator of forest-site quality other features may be more mean~ngfulfor pinyon pine and junipers of New MexiCO These could include stem diameter volume or number Of stems per tree or some combination of these variables
Site indeX is used in land management to determine a forestis rotation A forest rotation is defined as the period of years required for treestobecome established and
grOW to a specified condition of maturity
Determining themiddotlengthof the rotation is one of the key d~cisions a manager of pinYon-juniper must make There are two basic groups of physical and financial factors that influence the length of the rotation (1) des1red products (largely a matter of markets or of a demand in a general economic sense) and (2) forest productivity or what Can be grown (supply) bull
The praetical importance of site index often is notgiven inadequate attention in the buying and selling of forest lands and in forest management The report by Fowler (1984) indicates there is presently a little infcirmstiondealingwith the production of fiber on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico They
constructed volume tables based on tree diameter and height for a so11 site near Taos andmiddot another near Cloudcroft More than 600 observations were used at each site and they concluded that the tables were not int~rchangeable these authors suggested a rotation of greater than 200 years
A comparison of photographs taken upto 100 years ago and recent photographs of the s~e areas indicate that many soils in New Mexico have pinyon-juniper growth rates that are much more rapid than the sites near Cloudcroft and Taos Some sites probably could be managed for fence posts and fuel wood on a 50-year rotationmiddot or less This would change manag~nt schemes tremendously and be much more useful than a rotation of more than 200 years for the entire state Obviously site indices need to be established for at least the major so11 types associated with pinyon~juniper stands in New Mexico
Topography
Pinyon-juniper woodlands occmiddotur on a wide variety of topographical positions (Lymbery and Pieper 1983) S~dies in theSacramento Mountains of southcentral New Mexico showed that
aspect (exposure) slope steepness and slope position did not have major impacts on tree characteristics (Lymbery and Pieper 1983 Pieper and Lymbery 1987) Only general patterns were
apparent Rocky Mountain pinYon density was higher in relation to that of singleseed juniper
on steeper slopes and possibly on northern middotaspects Tree density appeared to be more sensitive to topographic variables than tree size or canopy cover
Shrubby species showed a response to topographic position (Lymbery and Pieper 1983)bull Walkingstick Cholla (Opuntia imbricata) was more abundant on xeric sputh-faeing slopes while skunkbush (Rhus trilobata) and wavy-leaf oak (Quercus undUlata) were more abundant on nortb-facing slopes Gehlbach (1967) fout)d similar relationships on the Gusdalupe Mountains in southeastern NewMexico
4
Rocky MoUntain pinyon generally increasesin abundance with elevation as abundance of juniper decreases (Pieper and Lymbery an4 Woodin and Lindsey 1954) Similar patterns are also apparent in the Great Basin (Tueller at ale 1979)
Hydrology
A diverse range of vegetatie species climatic factors and soil parent materials govern the water in pinyon-juniper ecosystems Unfortunately little hydrologic-related researchbullbull has been accomplished This is shocking in light of the importance on water to New Mexico and its neighbors Schmidt (1987) claims a gap exists between the available scientific knowledge base and application by land managers This results at l~ast in part from apast tendency to accept hydrologiC information supporting eradication of pinyon-juniper and to disregard findings tbat questioned the watershed benefit of these practices Changes in public demands haw resulted in a reassesaent of management goals for pinyonjuniper Managers lackadequate knowledge of inventory methods si1vicu1tura1systemsand productivity in relation to runoff processes Schmidt also
stated that fuxther long-termaall-watershed studies are needed to fill knowledge gaps and provide a framework for plot ~tudies
Because of its topographic position pinyon-juniper woodl~nds greatly influence runoff generated from higher elevation ecosystems It is often the last ecosystem that water passes through before being diverted for use Most water yield studies for pinyon-juniper have been conducted at Corduroy Creek and Beaver Creek in Arizona with a few 881411 plot studies in Nevada and Utah These studies centered on potentials for increasing water yields and effects of various type conversion strategies Pinyon-juniper was considetedundesirable and merely represented a barrier to increasing grassland cover The energy crisis and environmental movements ofthe 1970s curtailed major type-converSion efforts Fuel wood demand changed the emphasis to sustain yield Maintaining pinyon-juniper stands on soils that have been invaded by these plants because of cessation of fire may prove to be ecologically disastrous because of hydrologiC tmpacts especially erosion
Highlights of Current Knowledge
Climate Few studies ~ist on the climate of pinyon-juniper stands A Nevada study showed pinyon-juniper to be confined to a thermal belt above the valley inversions and below the colder upslope elevations This may also be true in much of New Mexico
Precipitation Total daily monthly and annual precipitation patterns for the
pinyon-juniper type are well known but storm characteristics are not These are needed to identify runoff-producing storms and predict erosion Some 5-minute intensities have approached 8 inches per hour in Arizona A study of maximum 2-m1nute intensities found 42 inches per hour at Alamogordo Cteek New Mexico A Utah study shows the greatest intensities to occur at elevations between 6s0Q and 8000 feet which coincides with the pinyon-juniper ecosystlim
Interception This variable is usually insignificant in most eoosystems However in a pinyon-juniper stand an interception capacity of 02 inch would reduce the effective 5-minute intensity by 24 inches per hour Interception values have been found to range from 013 to 094 inch per hour in Arizona The 094 inch would reduce the effective s-minute intensity by 1128 inches per hour Blue grams has been found to retain about 015 inch of precipitation which reduces the effective S-m1nute intensity by only 18 inches per hour No pinyon-juniper litter studies are known
Infiltration Studies of infiltration have received the greatest amount of attention from watershed scientists from other states Generally where pinyon-juniper trees are not part ofmiddot the climax vegetationbullinflltratt-0n rates between trees are much lower than underneath trees This is especially true where the understory is sparce because of competition forllght soil water and nutrients by the more dominant pinyon-juniper trees Where pinyon-juniper are climal ie rocky hillsides infiltration rates were similar Management and miaanagement can greatly alter the infiltration rates
Runoff Pinyon-juniper often produces surface-runoff in response to high-intensity short-duration storms which are the most frequent storms in New Mexico The Saliz watershed near Reserve New Mexico once reported a peak flow rate of 1380 cubic feet per second per square mile Schmidt (1987) reports that currently information on frequency and magnitude of precipitation-runoff related to site conditions is inadequate for design of facilities in this ecosystem
Sedfment production This is the major water quality concern from the pinyon-juniper ecosystem Some stands ID Arizona produced more than a ton of sedfment from each acre each year Impacts of new uses of the pinyon-juniper type are not known and need investigation
HydrologiC Impacts from Increasing Mu1t1pie Use Demands
Uses of pinyon-juniper ecosystems are rapidly expanding in New Mexico New and innovative land management schemes are needed to respond to these demands while maintaining and
5
improving the productive potential Many roads Ue in the bottoms of drainage ways Which concentrates diffuse runoff into damaging flows arid serious erosion Road systems continue to expand in many pinyon-juniper stanels as a result of off-road vehicle recreation hunting arid wood gathedng Many livestock anel wilellife grazing msnagement strategies are geareel to proviele for plant health but fail to conaieler adequately the impacts of use that affect infiltration flow concentrations ariel erosion It is not known hoW much plant material should be left on-site to protect most rangelands including pinyon-junper ecosystems in New Mexico
A significant amount of the existing unsatisfactory watersheelconclitionsare associateel with the pinyon-juniper ecosystem The hydrologic variables associated with pinyon-juniper are highly sensitive to use
Opt~um watershed treatment strategies to restore iong-term productivity and reduce flood and sediment risks need to be identified
PINYON-JUNIPER VEGETATION
Overstory tree Species
The threemaj)r tree species found in New Mexico within the pinyon-juniper woodland are Rocky Mountain pinyon Singleseed juniper ancl Alligatorjuniper (LaDner 1975 1981 Little 1950 Pieper 1977 anel Sprlngfield) Rocky Mountain pinyon and Singleseed juniper are founel throughout the pinyor-juniper wooellanel in the Southwest but Alligator juniper is more abunclant in western New Mexico anel Arizona Utah juniper also occurs in some pinyon-juniper woodlands in northwestern New Mexico while Rocky Mountain juniper (Juniperus scopulorum) occurs in northern New Mexico
Unclerstory Vegetation
Big sagebrush (Artelisia tridentata) is a common understory shrubby species in northern and northwestern New Mexico (Pieper 1977 Springfield 1976) Several oak species (Quercus arizonica 51 grisea 9 emoryi anel 9 oblongifolia) are ilIiportant understory shrubs in western and southwestern New Mexico Mountain
mshogany (Cercocarpus montana) and Wrights silk tassel (Garrya wrightii) are also important browse species in this area (Boeker et al 1972shyand Short et al 1977) Blue gra- (BouteloUa gracilis) occurs as an understory grass species throughout the wooellancl vegetation in thestate In northern areas cool season species of such genera as 2Festuca anel Agropyron occur ONest et al 1975) In central ancl southeastern New Mexico warm season species of the general Muhlenbergia Hilaria Lycurus anel Bouteloua occur
Habitat Types
Kennedy (1983) identified six relatively undisturbed habitatmiddot types in the Sacramento Mountains of southcentralNewMexicQ (Table 2) These habitat types ranged from about 6200ft to 7000 ft in average elevation and from 33 to 47 understory cover (Kennedy 1983 Table 2) The ~ ecluUs-Juniperus monospermal
Muhlenbergia pauc1flora habitat type was perhaps themost common type in this area Francis and Aldon (1983) also identified three pinyonshyjuniper habitat typu innortbwestern New Mexico
Uriderstory Patterns
Pinyon-juniper vegetation forma a mosaic pattern with trees interspersed with open grassland areas between the trees Armentrout and Pieper (1988) have described three understory zones associated with singleseed juniper and Rocky Mountain pinyon The first zone is that surrounding the trunk of the tree and is characterized by shrubs such as skunkbrush ancl algerita (Berberis haematocarpa) The seconcl zone is largely beneath the tree canopy Several grass species such as sideoats grams (Boute1oua curtipendula) wolftal (Lycurus phleoides) and blUe grams were abundant in the seconcl zone Several species inclUding blue grama wolf tail ancl creeping muhly (Muhlenbergia repeus) were more abundant under tree canopy ori the north side rather than on the southmiddot side (Schott and Pieper 1985) Pinyon ricegrass (Piptochaetium fimbriatum) appears to be favored by conditions under canopies of singleseed juniper Grass species of the open grassland zone included blue grama wolftaU gal~eta sanddrapseed and mat muhly~
Age and Size Class Structure
Many pi~yon-juniper stands h~vebeen disturbeel during the past 100 years by fuel or fence post harvesting bUrDing or mechanical control treatments Consequently many trees are relatively young bull Age class distributions consequently do not followmiddot the typical inverted J-shaped curve for ma~ure stanels Figure 1 shows age-class distribution for 202 Rocky Mountain pinyon trees from five study sites in the Sacramento Mountains This distribution appears to be nearly normal with most trees falling in the 70 to 130 yearmiddotage class However the specific distribution at each site depended on time since last disturbance and type of disturbance (Plumb-Mentjes anel Pieper 1983) Pinyon age is relatedto basal diameter but only 38 of the variation in age can be explained by basal diameter (Figure 2) Apparently~stand density (competition) influences siz~ of trees sUbstantially
6
0
Table 2 - Pinyon-Juniper Habitat Types of the Lincoln National Forest (From Kennedy 1983)
Tree Density
Average Understory Avg Stems Habitat Type Elev Ft Cover Plot
bull PINYON-JUNIPER SERIES
1 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Cercocarpus montanusAndropogon gerardi HT 6178 42 36
2 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Muhlenbergia pauciflora HT 6470 33 63
3 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Stipa columbiana HT 6678 36 123
4 Pinus edulis-Junil rus monosperma Bouteloua gracilis HT 6977 37 163
5 Punis edulis-Juniperus deppeana Bouteloua gracilis HT 6739 46 65
6 Pinus edulis-Juniperus deppeana Muhlenbergia dubia HT 6920 47 105
22 I
20
11
I
I
20 110 611 1110012011101611130 middotIY_I
Figure 1 Age class distribution of aU pinyon pines on study areas
- 1511r bull 100
1 bull 05 ~ 11amp50 2 r bull 031 n bull zaz
22 11 111 _ 1HIICMIl
Figure 2bull Relationship betweenDBB and age of pinyon pine for all trees bull
RESPONSE TO DISTURBANCE (SECONDARY SUCCESSION)
Several successional models have been proposed for secondary succession followingmiddot disturbance that removes most of the trees (Arnold et a1 1964 Barney and Frischknecht 1974 and Erdman 1976) These general patterns alsomiddotapply to conditions in middotpinyon-juniper woodlands in central New Mexico (Dwyer and Pieper 1967 Rippel et al 1980 1983 Schott and Pieper 1986 1987a 1987b 1987C) Bowever specific patterns are influenced by the type of soils supporting the woodland vegetation (Schott arid Pieper 1986 1987a) Generally- soils that are fairly shallow and rocky have some seral stages poorly represented (Table 3) When sitesmiddot with these soils are treated mechanically shrubs such as wavy-leaf oak do not increase (Rippel et al 1983) On similar soils with few roek outarops grassforb and shrubgrass stages are common Response of Rocky Hountainpinyon
and singleseed juniper appear to be dependent on density and size of trees before treatment If
the stanpmiddot was near climax before cabling pinypnsrapidly become dominant on the site If the stand was in someseral stage there would be more junipers but theimiddotr relatively slow growth and time for uturation require more time before middotthey would dominate the site
RESEARCH NEEDS
Only limited research on pinyon-juniper ecology in northern and westernmiddot New Mexico has been conducted Informst~on is lacking on basic ecological relationship at both plant communitymiddot and individual species level lactors influencing distribution of these woodlands are poorly understood lor example in many situations pinyon-juniper appears to be moving uphill in elevation and encroaching on ponderosa pine forests Such situation have not been analyzed Success~onal patterns where alligator juniper is a major potenUal component of the vegetation have not been determined Analyses of these woodlands for several uses and products are needed for laUd unagament purposes
4 bull ~
Table 3 -- General pattern of succession on cabled pinyon-juniper wood1anda on two soil types (From Schott and Pieper 1986)
Sera1 Stages Climax 1 2 3
Original Conditions
General successional Annual forb Grassforb Shrubgrass Pinyon-juniper model
Lithic hapustoll Annuals and Perennial Shrubs dominant Pinyon and juniper perennials from grasses and shade conducive dominating Pinyon seeds which disshy forbs with to tree establishshy eventually dominant perse readily establishment ment surviving perenshy and spread of nials shrubs (esp
0 wavy-leaf oak)
Lithic hapusto11- Annuals and These stages absent or poorly represhy Pinyon dominating Rock outcrop complex perennials from sented Rock outcropsmiddotrestrict vegshy Climax with juniper bull
seed which disshy etative reproduction perse readily surviving perenshynials
fI
LITERATURE CITED
Armentrout S M and R D Pieper 1988 Plant distribution surrounding Rocky Mountain Pinyon and one seed juniper in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range Management 41 (In press) bull
Arnold J F bullbull D A Jameson and E H Reid 1964bull The pinyon~jun1per type of Arizona Effects of grazing fire and tree control US Department of Agriculture Production Research Report 84~
Barney MA and N C Frischknechtmiddot 1974 Vegetation change follOwing fire in the
pinyon-juniper type of west-central Utah Journal of Range Management 279~-96
Barrett J W 1962 Regional Silviculture of the United States The Ronald Press Co bullbull NY 610p
BetancourtJ L 1987 Paleoecology of pinyon-juniper woodlands summary In Everett R L (compiler) proceedings~ pinyon-juniper conference USDA For SerGen Techbull Rep INT-215~
Boeker E Lbullbull V E Scott H G Reynolds and B A Donaldson 1972~ Seasonal food habits of mule deer in southWestern Ne Mexicobull Journal of Wildlife Management 3656-63 bull
Erdman Jbull A 1970 Pinyon-juniper succession after natural fires in residual soils of MesaVerde Colorado Brigham Young University Science Bulletin Series 11 ~rovo Utah
Fowler J M R D Bowe BE Peacock KC McDanielT Garner-Hurt J R Gray and
M Cardenas 1974 Wood fiber production in pinyon-juniper woodlands on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico New MeXico State University Agricultural Experiment~tation Research Report NO~ 519
Francis R E and E bull F Alden 1983 Preliminary habitat types of a semiarid grassland In MOir W H and L Hendzel (Tech COQrdinatora) Proceeding of the workshop pn southwestern habitat types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Gehlbach F R 1967 Vegetation of the Guadalupe escarpment New Mexico-Texas Ecology 48404-419
Kennedy K L 1983 A habitat type classification of the p~yon-juniper woodlands of the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico In Moir W H and Leonard Hendzel (Tech-Coordinators) Proceedings of the workshop on southwestern habitat
types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Lanner bull R M 1975 Pinyon pines and junipers of the southwestern woodlandsmiddot In Gifford G F and 1 E Buspy The pinyonjunipr ecosystem a symposium Utah State Univ bullbull Logan
Lanner R Mmiddot1981 The pinyon pine a natural and cultural history Univ Nevada Press
Reno
Little E L bull 1950 Southwestern trees Amiddot guide to the native species of middotNew Mexico and Arizona US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Agricultural Handbook 9
Lymbery bull G A and R D Pieper 1983 Ecology of pinyon-juniper vegetation in the northern Sacramento Mountains New Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 698
Pieper R D 1~77 The southwestern pinyon-juniper ecosystem In Aldon Earl F and T J~ Loring (Tech Coord) US Departmentmiddot Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report RM-31
Pieper R D and G A Lymbery 1987 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegettion in south-central New Mexico In~ Everett Richard L (compiler) proceedings - pinyon-juniper conference US Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT-21S
Plumh-Mentjes M L and R D Pieper 1983 Diameter distribution and age class structure of pinyon pine (Pinus eduiis Engelm) in south-central~Mexico Abstract 36th annual meeting Society for Range Management Denver CO bull
Schmidt L j 1987 Present and future themes in ptnyon-juniper hydrology In ~verett R L (compiler) U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report 1NT-215
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1985 Influence of canoP1 characteristics of one-seed juniper on understory grasses Journal of Range Management 38328-331
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1986 Succession in pinyon-juniper vegetation in New Mexico Rangelands 8126-128
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987a Succession of pinyon-juniper communities a~ter mechanical disturbance in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range ~anagement 4088-94
1Q
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987bbull Water relationships of Quercus undulata ~ edulis and Juniperus monosperma in seral pinyon-juniper communities of south-central New Mexico In Everett R L (compiler) us Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT~215 bull
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987cbull bull Succession in tree pits following cabliD8
in pinyon-juniper c01lllllUt1ities Southwestern Naturalist 32399-402
~ Short H L t W Evans and E L Boeker 1977 The use of natural and modified pinyon pine-juniper wOodlands by deer and elk Journal of Wildlife Management 41543-559
Springfield H W 1976 Characteristics and management of southwestern pinyon-juniper ranges the status of our knowledge US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Res Pap RM-160
Tueller P T C D Beeson R J Tausch N E West and K HRea 1979 Pinyon-juniper woodlands of themiddotGreat Basin distribution flora vegetal cover U SbullDepartment of Agriculture Forest Service Research Paper INT~229
USDA 1941 Cltmate and man Yearbook of Agriculture U S Govt Printing Office Washington DC
Wasson G E 1987 The American Indian response to the pinyon-juniper conference In Everett R L(compller) USDA For Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Wells P V 1987 Systematics and distribution of pinyons in the late quarternary In Everett R Lbull (compiler) Proc - Pinyon-juniper Conference USDA For Sere Gen Tech Rep INT-215
West N E K H Rea and R J Tausch 1975 Basic Synecological relationahips in pinyon-juniper woodlands In Gifford G E and F E Busby (eds) ~e pinyon-juniper ecosystem A symposium Utah State University Logan
Woodin H E and A A Lindsey 1954 Juniper-pinyon east of the Continental Divide as analyzed by the line-strip metWod Ecology 35473-489
11
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES I CROP
bullJ
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH WOODLAND STA~D MANAGEMENT l
James T Fisher John G Me~al and Gregory C Phillips
Abstract-- New Mexicos native pinyon pines produce high-value crops including nuts Christmas trees and nursery or~amentals Crop values can be increased through more intensive stand management and more innovative marketing of such products as pinyon nuts and Christmas trees to compete with imported products Research needs pertaining to these crops are discussed
1 Ne~ Mexico State University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-II
2 Authors are re~pectively
Professor and Associate Professors Dept of Agronomy and Horticulture New
Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
13
INTRODUCTlON
Pinyons (pinon p~nes) ield diverse productsranging frolll valuable nuts ~nd landscape sp~cll11ens to fuelwood
Rowever littleforethought is give~ to crop illlprovelllentbeforecropsare ha~vested This paper addresses high-value pinyon products ~hat appear to justify at least modest levels omiddotf lIIanacelllent inputs to improve product quality quantity or avail- abilty Greater elllphasis on ~ntensive lIIanagelllentmiddot recognizes the nee~ for deriving economic benefits as well as the need for cu~todiai lIIanagelllent to pre~erve the
woodland type (Lanner 1977)
Pinyon and pinyon-juniper woodlands hav~ be~n the su~lect of severai symposia The reader iamp directed to proceedings of these lIIeetings providing several papers on the subject [~ee Gifford and Busby (19-75) Aldon and Loring (1977) Evrett (1987) and a fbrthcoming volume reporting a n~~ional lIIeeting held in Mexico in 1987]
This paper specifi~ally exalllines pinyon nut production including lIIarket developlllents that potentially threaten regional markets and the selective harvest of Christlllas trees and nursery or~alllentals Methods available t~ illlprove crop profitability will be discussed in addition to cuirent and future research
NUT BEARING PINES
Plant taxonomists recognize about 100 species in the falllily Pinaceae Alllongthese 12 to 26 species produce quality edible nuts (Rosengarten 1984 Lanner 1981) An edible nut is large middot(generallly les8 than 2200 seedkg) and has a thin shell that can be cracked with the teeth Pines producing edible nuts are found mostly in Europe Asia and western North middotAmerica Large ~dlblen~ts are found ~ostiyalllong the ~tone pines ~Sub8ection Celllbraa) nat~ve to Europe and ASia and the pinyon pines (Subsection Celllbroides) native to North Alllerica
Pinyons are dwarf trees nd shrubS 9f sellliarid regions of the southwestern Uni ted Sta tes and Mexico Because pinyons grow slowly it ismiddot difficult to lustify th~ cost of establishing and cultivatin~ p~aniations for nut production IncreaSingly nuts gathered
from the stone pines are imported f~om Asia and marketed at a lIIuch lower cost According to D~nielFox (pers C~IIII11) about 1000 ~tric tons of ~helled Asian pine nuts are imported each year Re also reports that abou~ 100 ton~ of ~ pinea nuts are illlported from Portugal and Spain
To protect pinyonnut m~rkets it lIIay becollle necessary to develop criteria that effectively distinguish pinyon nuts frolll illlported pine ~uts~ To exallline the feasibility of developing these criteria we will examine t~egeographic ranges and speclal characteristics of nut-producing pines under their respective subsections of the family Pinaceae proposed by Critchfield and Little (1966)
lli Subsec tiOn Celllbroides (Pinyons)
Pines classified und~i the subse~tion Ce~bi~ides (pinyons) have 1-5 needles in a fascicle Seeds are large wingl~ss a~d sOlllewhat oval in shape Lanner (1981) reported 11 species but a more recent treatlllent ofmiddot the alliance r~cognizes 15ta~a (Bailey and Ha~ksworth 1988) Eight species occur in the United States 12 in Mexico and 3 in New Mexico (P edulis I lIIonophylla and I~di-cOlor) The pinyon species discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988)include
Uni ted States
(l) Pinus edulis (pinyon) t 4200 seedkg
The predominant pinyon species of New Mexico Widespread in the southwestern United States lust
entering Wyollling and extending south through Utah Colorado and ~ew ~~xico to the western ~nd of Oklahollla~ west Texas and the northern border of Chihuahua extending west throughout lIIuch of Arizona to an outlier in eastern California Range ov~rlaps ~ith P celllbroides in south~rn New Mexico and Arizona and with P monophylla at the westerD edge of its range (southw~stern Utah northwestern Arizona and the New York Mountains o~ sOuthern California (Fig 1) Kay occa~ionally intergrade with P lIIonophylla
(2) monophylla lsingleleaf plny~n)
[ 2400 seed kg ] The pinyon pine ~fthe Great
14
bull P SAalNIANA bull P aMIIilOIOEl III Po OUAOIIIIOUA bull P MONOPttYLLA bull P eDULIS
Figure 1 Diatrlbution of pinyon pines in lJOuthwestern United States and northern Mexieo
Basin and Mohave Desert Com~onin Nevada and in parts of southern California and western Utah but also ex~ends acr~ss Arizona and southwestern Ke~ Mexico (ig~ 1)
United States and Mexico
(3) Pinus middotcellbroides (Mexican pinyon)
[ 2400 seedkg J Range widespread at low
elevations in the mountains bordering the arid plate~u of northern Mexico Ranges from southeastern Arizona southwestern Arizona southwestern New Mexico and western Texas through northern Mexico and south to Puebla and Mexico City (Fig 1) Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) middotrecognize three subspecies cembroides (northern Mexi~o) lagunae (Baja California) and orizabensis (Central Mexico) (Fig 1)
(4) P californiarum-
Subspecies californiarum
occurs in southern Californ~a and northern Baja California I californiarum subsp fallax (formerly P edulis var fallax) is-found in Arizona
(5) Pinus discolor (border pinyon)
Formerly P cembroides var bicolor~ Principal range lies along both sides of the intershynational boundary between Mexico and the United States extending about 120 miles into eac~ country Sp-ecifically occurs in southeast Arizona extreme southwest New Mexico northeas~ ~onora and northwest Chihuahua
( 6) quad r ifo11a (Parry pinyon) [ 2100 seedkg J
Confined to 10 elevations in the dry mountains of southern California from the San Jacinto Mountains south to the S~erra San Ped~o Martir Its range overlaps that of I monOphylla but no intermediates have been reported (Fig 1)middot
(7) Pinus remo ta (paper-shell pinyon also called
Texas pinyon) Formerly P cembroides var
remota Main range in Coahuila but reaches parts of adjacent Nuevo Leon southeastern Chihuahua and rexas (Bailey and Wendt 1979) Has thinnest shell among pinyons~
Local Endemics Found Exclusively in Mexico
(8) Pinus culminicola (Potosi pinyon)
Documented occurrence Cerro PotOSi Nuevo Leon Mexico
(9) johannis Li~ited r4nge in Mexico
(west of Concepcion del Oro Zacatecas
(10) Pin~s maximartinezii (Martinez pinyon)
Documented Occurrence Zacatecas Mexico
(11 ) Pinus nelsonii (Nelson pinyon)
Documented ocaurrence north- eastern Mexicobull
(12) ~pinceana (Pinca pinyon)
15
Documented occurrence northshy Grows at high elevations inth~ eastern and eastern Mexco Alps and the Carpathian ~ountains
(3) bullbull koraiensis S~eb amp Zucco ~ SUDsect PINEAE Shaw (Korean pine)
[ 1800 seedkg](n Pinuspinea L Rngebull through Korea and (Italian stone pine) eastern Manchuria into southeastern [ 1300 seedkg ] Siberia with outlirs ~ri t~e
Wide_pread in Spain and Japalliue islands of Honshu and Portugal and aiong the northern and Shikoku (Fig 2) eastern shores ~f the Mediterranean Sea including minor occurrences (4) P sibirica near the north coast of Turkey rSibe~ian ston~ pine(Fig 2) [ 4000 seedkg
Ranges from the Ural Mountains Pinus Subsect CEMBRAE through western and central ~iberia---(Stone Pines) to northern Mongolia with outliers
in northern Russia (Fig ~)(1) Pinus albicaulis Engelm~
(whitebark pine) Pinus Subsect GERARDIANAE [ 5700 seedk ] -- shy
Occurs at high eleyations fro~ (1) gerardian Wall~ central British Columbia sout~ to (Chilgoza pine)s~uthern Sierra Nevada of [ 400 seedkg J California the Ruby Mountain of Noted for large edible seed Nevada and the mOuntains of Confined to mountainous regions of northwestern Wyoming eastern Asia principally in
eastern Afgha~itan~ parts of (2) Pin~s cembra L Pakistan ~nd ~catt~red localities
(Swiss stone pine) in the dry inner valleys of the [ 4400 seedkg 1 north~rn Himalayas (Fig 2)
eocIIn_a _shyFigure 2 Distribution of edible pine nuts in Europe and
Asia
16
bull
Pinus Subsect SABINIANAE Loud Opportumiddotnities aay exist to separate pinyOn nuts other froa pine nuts Most
(I) Pinu~ ~abiniana Dougl pine nuts have a ridge where the (Digger pine) membranous wing is attached Also [ 1300 seed kg criteria based upon seed content could
Confined to California Found be applied when large vol~aes of in dry foothills of ihe Sierra imported pine nuts are suspected to be Nevada and the Coast Rangemiddot Ras aislabeled Tests aight exaine levels large edible but rather hard-shelled of starch fat or piotein or even seeds (Fig bull1) smiddotpecific enzyaes (Table 1)
(2) Pinus coulteri D Don (Coulter pine) New Mexico Pinyon Nut Crops ( 3100 seedkg]
Restr~cted to the coastal mountains of cen~ral and southern Pinyon nuts have been harvested California and northern Baja commercially for about 50 years California (Little 1938a) The nut crop averages
045 to 09 million kg (I to 2 million The preceding list makes clear that pounds) annually for New Mexico Arizona
many pinyon species are found in North and Colorado but one year exceeded 36 America with the greatest number found million kg (Little 1942) The more in Mexico Further it seems neither productive stands may yield 330 kglha practical nor necessary to develop (300 lbsac) during a good year market criteria to separate nut products (Springfield 1976) At a cur~ent found among these species Morphological retail value of $883 I kg value on a differences among pinyon nuts are per hectare basis would be $297000 generally so slight as ~o pre~lude (120000 lac) Fowler and Oliver (this practical field identification publication) provide additional Also most Mexican species occur as information on nut values rather isolated populations with local value but low export potential For New Mexico species criteria would have to recognize as genuinely natibullbull those Pinyon Reproductive Biology nuts produced by at least three pinyon species edulis monophylla and P di$color Again nut morphological Pinyons begin bearing nuts at about criteria would not separate these 25 years but crops do not reach pinyons from other species of the same commercial size until about 75 years subsection (Little 1941) Cones are borne
Table 1-- Composition of pine nuts and true nuts (Lanner 1981 Woodroof 1979) All values are expressed as percentages
Kernal H2O Protein Fat Carboshyhydrates
Ash
Pinyon nuts P edulisP monophIllaImiddot cembroides
58 31 14 10 19
60 23 60
18 54 14
3
Pine nuts P sabinianaP pineaImiddot sibirica P lerardiana
49 30 34 19 14
60 48 63 51
9 7
12 23
4
True nuts
Almond Pecan Pistacio Walnut Peanut
51 52
shy45
47 30
33
19 9
20 15 26
54 73 53 64 39
20 15 19 16 24
3 2 3 2
laterally ~n the a~il of a scale leaf near branch tips (jhaw~ 1914) although a r~re observation 01 termin~l cones b~s been reported (Lanner 1969) Developing cones can be ~een in the e~rliest stages as ovulate primordia in longitudinal sections of bu4s Within buds ovulate cone primordia are only at the tip of the bud an~have larger and broader bases than spur shoots (Little 1938-b)
ovuiate primordia are formed in buds in August and September and cones mature by October of the third year Because 3 years are required for seeds to mature treatments applied to stimulate nut quantity~il~ require 3 years before evaluation The first year must be especially suited to production of ovulate primordia and the second and third seaasons favorable to growth and maturation of cones and nuts(Li~tle 1938b)
The Periodicity of Bumper Crops
Pinyon ~ut crops are prodUCed at intervals of 3 to 7 years The periodicity of above-average cropshas been related to the dtain of nutrients required to produce the crop an~ the time required for nutrients to be replenished Developing cones act as food sinks for carbohydrate and nitrogen (N) reserves at the expense of vegetative structures (Pickmann and Kozlowski 1969 1970 ~ook and S~et 1971) Consequently large cone crops adversely affect vegetative tree growth
Forcella (1981) found cone production was inversely relate~ to temperatures during late-August to early September Maximum production in northern New Mexeio occurred when the mean maximum weekly temperature was below 24 degrees C Temperatures above 24 degrees C resulted in virtually no cone crops
However other environmental factors~ acting independently or inte~actinl with temperature caa be involved Rainfall is positively correia ted with the flowering of pines This is because photosynthat~ 9roduction is needed to develop carbohydrate reserves and this process is limited by ~lant water stres~ Also tree growth is determined by photosynthetic gain and the onset of abundant flowering is more directly rela~ed to tree siZe than
age (Schmidtling 1969) More speci1icallj nut ~roduction is e~osely
related to crown surface area
An exception to the adverse influen~e of wa~er ~tress is the positive roie stress plays in the initiat~on of ovula~e primordia Studies have shown that summer moisture
stress results in an above-average flower crop the following spring This suggests moisture stress at the time of ovulate primordia formation promotes reproductive rather than vegetative bull growth This view is supported by studies shOwing that branches exposed to full sun bore more female cones and had lower tissue moisture levels than partially shaded branches (Wareing~ 1958)
Water ~tress also can indirectly affect flowering thro~gh its interaction with tree nutrient status E~ell (1970) showd that nitrate fertili~ation or exposure to moisture stress caused similar tiowe~ing responses in Dougl~s-firaccompaniedby increases in total foliage N content and free amino
acids especially ~rgini~e Similarly Schmidtling (1974) suggested that water stress or N fertilization can increase flowering through the same metabolic intermediary namely arginine or some related N-containing substance~
Manipulation of Native Nut Crops
pespite the importance of coniferous nuts in many parts of th~
world only two pine species appear to be cultivated for their seed crops P
pinea in the Medi terranean and - sibirica in the Urals (Pravdin 1963) The pinyons of estern North America and Meiico ar mos~ly ignored in terma of cultiv~tion or domestication
Little (1140) was among the first to suggest that pinyon nu~ prQduction could be augme~ted tbtough the USe of simple cultutal practices However these received little attention and we have no grea~er und~rstanding of the effi~lcy or econoic feasibility of these treatments now than we did more than 40 ~ears ago Nev~rtheles~ with the present emphasis on wocidland management ~uch treatmenta seem worthy of serious attention
Ca) selective thinning
Some pibyonsapear to be
18
Nut sizes from pruned and unpruned Pinus edulis trees
19
consistently good nut producers (Little 1940) Heavy producers usually show immature and old cones on branches and cones are conspicuous b~neath them Selective thinning of unpr04uctive trees should increase flowering of those left standing (Little 1940)
(b) basal pruning
Theoretically low branches receiving partial sun light do not photosynthesize enough energy to offset energy losses to respiration It follows that low branches are energy sinks that potentially r~b nutrients from seed crops To test this relationship Montano et al (1980) pruned baial branches of 70 to 80-year old pinyons (8 to 10 m tall) to a height of 15 m and SUbsequently determined effects of this treatment on seed development They reported av~rage nut volumes from gruned and ungruned trees were 040 cm and 032 cm and the average nut weights were 033 g and 020 g respectively (see Fig3) Also pruned trees produced a greater percentage of filled nuts 99 as opposed to 84 The effects observed were related to the growth of nuts already developing in cones when the treatment was applied
Basal pruning reduced disease and insect injury of southern pnes (Wilson and Rudolph 1970) Also pruned wood could b sold for ~uelwood potentially offsetting the cost of the benefits anticipated Owing to its simplicity and overall benefits basal pruning appears to merit greater attention
(c) fertilization
Fertilization usually stimulates female cone production (Puritch 1972) More specifically the following trends become apparent when studies are reviewed collectively
(1) N stimulates cone production even when N is applied with other nutrients (Morris and Beers 1969) Also trees producing greater cone yields generally have higher levels of tisue N than low producers
(2) The presence of specific amino acids (especially arginine) is a more reliable predictor of fruitfulness than tissue N content per se For example nitrat N ana ammcinium N increased Douglasshyfir foliar N content and shoot growth similarly However only nitrate N significantly increased arginine content which was positively and quantitatively related to female flower proshyduction (Ebell and McMullin 1970) Following ichmidtlings (1974) explanation of fruit shyfulness fertilization shyespecially with nitrate N - could increase tis~ue organip Nand consequently flowering
(d) cultivation and irrigation
Supplemental water could increase growth reSUlting in greater crown density and iurface area In times of drought additional water could prevent premature abortion of immature cones Drip irrigaeion technology may be feaible for som~ sites However it seems more likely that less intensive ~ethods will prove to be practical Among these are land treatments that direct precipitation run-off to trees improve infiltration or remove weed competition
CHRISTMAS TREES
Pinyons are harvested from natural stands and comprise about 25 of all
Christmas trees sold in New Mexico Arizona Colorado Wyoming Utah and Nevada (Sowder 1965) Trimmed branches also are used for wreath manufacture In spite of their slow growth in native stands pinyons have many desirable Christmas tree attributes including dense foliage symmetrical shape green color natural fragrance good branch angle and limb strength and good needle retention Plantation trees can reach marketable size in about 11 years (Fisher and Fa~cher 1987)
Stand Thinning
Several techniques can be used to improve tree quality Stand thinning allows remaining trees to receive sufficient sunlight for limbs to develop uniformly on all sides During the thinning operation handles can be made on main stems by removing branches at the trees base to a height of 30 em
Removal of branches below a full whorl of branches will allow another tree to be culturedmiddotfrom the stump after harvest A year after the first tree is cut the remaining low branches will begin to turn up and all but one of these can be pruned to promote the growth of a new central leader
Pruning and Shearing
~he ideal pin~on Christmas tree resembles an inverted cone wide at the base and tapered uniformly tg the tip Accemiddotptable crown taper for pines is 40 to 90 but for spr~ces and firs is 40 to 70 Pruning and shearing will make native pinyons conform more closely to the ideal which improve marke tabi Ii ty
Pruning removes dead or unattractive branches Shearing is used to co~troi leader growth so the distance between whorls is not excessive increase the number of branches arising from branch buds and promote the pyramidal crown f~Im Because pinyon leader growth rarely exceeds 20 cm excessive distance between whorls is rarely a problem Pruning and shearing most often will be used to correct uneven o~oid and thia crowns
In pines eac~ needle bun~le ~ontains a dormant or axillary bud Removal of a branch terminal at the proper time promotes development of these dormant buds into short shoots improving crown density In singleshyneedled conifers such as spruces firs and Douglas-fir intermediate buds are produced along the terminal branch stem between each whorl For this reason they can be sheared during any season of the year and produce about the same number of branch buds However with pines the number and size of branch buds developed after shearing depends upon the physiological state of the tree when sheared
Pines respond best when sheared shortly after height growth is complete but before tissues in the new shoot becom~ woody S~oots prun~d at this time produce two to four times the number of buds found on unpruned trees Pinyon shoots elongata during late June but needles continue to elongatemiddotduring July and August after branches are fully elongated Buds are formed in late August
From studies conducted with other pine Christmas tree species the following course of treatments can be recommended for pinyons
1 Before spring growth begins prune all double and multiple leaders (eg bullbull April)
~ She~r when needles on new candles are 13 as long as last yeara needles (usually from June 15 to July 1)
3 Shape the tre~ from the top down by shearing the tips of lateral branches Pzomote a conical crown so thebase is no more than 90 as wide as the tree is tall Ideally taper should be 40-90 Avoid shearing back to woody tissue because this encourages multiple leaders
4 If the tree is oblong rather than tapered shear the top in June or eirly July and the sides in late summer fall or winter Growt~ of laterals will be reduced Repeat steps 2-4 yearly as needed
5 Avoid shearing the year the tree is ~o be marke~ed
20
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
CONTENTS
Page
FORWARD i
ECOLOGY OF PINYON-JUNIPER VEGETATION IN NEW MEXICO 1
Rex D Pieper M Karl Wood and Bruce B Buchanan
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES I CROP IMPROVEMENT THROUGH WOODLAND STAND MANAGEMENT 13
James T Fisher John G Mexal and Gregory C Phillips
GRO~TH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYON 25
John Fowler arid Charles Oliver
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGY 39
Gregory C Phillips James T Fisher and John G Mexal
IMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE 45
Volney W Howard Jr
SUMMARY 48
APPENDIX A - PINYON JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS BY THE AUTHORS 50
bullbull APPENDIX B - GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT FACULTY 53
bull
FOREWARD
The Pinyon Act of 1987 provides a welcome opportunity for the College of Agriculture and Home Economics of New
Mexico State University to draw together wide-ranging expertise in research related tomiddot New Mexicos state trmiddotee Scientists from the New Mexico Agricultural Experimentbull Station have been conducting studies related to pinyon since 1904 The fruits of these labors are summarized by faculty actively involved in pinyon research The author~ also ad~ress research needed to fill serious information voids and identify opportunites to adapt new technologies to specific problems More extensive information can be found in the publications cited at the en~ of this work Indeed many may be surprised ~t the broad range of pinyon work already done by the scientists of the Agricultural Experiment Station
The Pinyon Act of 1987 specifically addressed public concerns about New Mexicos pinyon nut crops Papers found in this publication address the value of nut crops and identify research strategies best suited to improve nut quality and yiela~ Strategies to protect existing markets also are discussed
As articles were being written faculty met periodically to exchange views on product values and research prioritmiddoties This encour~ged the integration of ideas shaped by fac~lty interactions with consumers and research advisory groups experience and academic disciplines Most notable perhaps is that knowledge gaps were identified that must be bridged before some research can be applied to specific situations The publication summary identifies these problems as well as issues not likely to be investigated with existing research resources
The College of Agriculture and Home Ecomo_ics is indebted to Dr James T Fisher for organizing the effort to ~roduce this report In addition his scientific contributions are substantial Serving with Dr Fisher on the report coordinating committee were Dr John G Mexal Department of Agronomy and Horticulture and Dr Rex Pieper Department of Animal and Range Sciences and their efforts are greatly appreciated~ The following scientists
i
contributed to the effort through their committee participitation or papers or both
~
pre Bruce Buchanan Department of Agronomy and Horticulture Dr John Fowler Department of Agricultural Economics and Agricultural Business bull
bull Dr VW Howard Jr Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences
Dr Greg Phillip Department of Agronomy and Horticulture Dr Emroy Shannon Cooperative Extension Service Dr Karl Wood Department of Animal and Range Sciences
Thanks are due these faculty members for having undertaken the preparation of this report in addition to their many other teaching research and Extension duties
Finally the intended purpose of this document is to report th~ status of the pinyon resource in New Mexico so our legislators can accomplish their objectives more effectively We hope our purpose has been accomplished
John C Owens Dean and Chief Administrat1v~ Officer College of Agriculture and Home Economics New Mexico State University
II
lECOLOGY OF PINYON-JUNIPER VEGETATION IN NEW MEXICO
2Rex D Pieper M Karl Wood and Bruce B Buchanan
bull
Abstract Ecologically pinyon-juniper woodlands are extremely varied in New Mexico bull They occupy nearly all topographical positions in mid-elevational mountain ranges throughout the western two-thirds of the state Three species dominate the tree overstory layer -Juniperus monosperma Pinus edulis and Juniperus deppeana Understory shrubs and grasses vary considerably with site and geographic location Successional patterns follow those described for other locations but soil types may influence the development of seral stages
INew Mexico State University Agricultural Exper~ent Station SR 73-1
Professor and Associate Professor Department of Animal and Range Sciences Associate Professor Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las
Cruces NM 88003
1
INTRODUCTION
Pinyon-juniper vegetation in New Mexico is extremely variable because of climate soils topography and understory vegetation (Pieper 1977 Springfield 196) Pinyon-juniper vegetation generally occupies foothills and lower mountain slopes below 7500 ft in elevation (Springfield 1976) This vegetadon type occurs occasionally in valley bottoms on nearly Jevel terrain
Pinyon-junipervegetatiol1 occurred throughout the Intermountain Region and the Southwest as far back as the Last Great Ice Age and possibly earlier (Quarternary period) (Wells 1987) Although many shifts have apparently occurred in the distribution of individual species over the pait 2 million years recent increases in woody plant distribution and density is traced by many workers to mans disturbances Betancourt 1987)
Native American Indians have occupi4itd pinyon-juniper wood+ands in the western United States for centuries (Wasson 1987) and have utilized plants from these areas for many purposes including food
Much has been learned abOut ecology of pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico and the Southwest but IllUch remains to be learned This paper will summarize some of this knowledge
ECOLOGICAL FACTORSCONTROLLING DISTRIBUTION
Climate
Climatic patterns within the pinyon-juniper woodlampnd in the Southwest vary considerably in response to geographic variation and eleVation (Springfield 1977)
Precipitation
Inthesouthern portions of the pinyon-juniper woodland precipi~ation peaks occur during the summer from storms originating from the Gulf of Mexico (Springfield 1977) Winter storms from the Pacific Coast provide moisture for cool-season understory species in northern areas which are largely absent from southern areas
Table 1 shows the contrasting precipitstion pattern for Carlsbad in southeastern New Mexico and Fort Wingate in the northwestern part of the state By the end of May more than 35 of the total annual precipitation has been received at Fort Wingate compared to only 23 at Carlsbad The spring months tend to be much drier in southern portions of the woodland than in the north Both northern and southern portions exhibit summer peaks but it is somewhat delayed in the north (Table 1) More than 45 inches- pf precipitation occurs on the average in Carlsbad
during May June and July compared to only about 3~5 inches for Fort Wingate
Elevation also influences annual precipitation but not distribution Near Carlsbad Caverns in southeastern New Mexico annual precipitation averaged 13 in compared to 145 in at 4500 ft (Geh1bach 1967)
Temperature
Temperatures also vary geographically middotand with elevation Mean July temperatures were 70middot at ort Wingate and 80middot at Carlsbad while
mean JanuarY temperatures were 32degF at Fort Wingate and 44degF at Carlsbad (USDA 1941) Some of these differences may also be related to elevational differences For example maximum June temperatures were 4middoto F lower at Carlsbad New Mexico at 3120 ft elevation than at Carlsbad Caverns at 4435 ft Februaryminimums were 7degF warmsr at Carlsbad compared to those at the caverns (Gehtbach 1967)
So11s
Soils of the pinyon-juniper type are extremely variable bull Many authors assoctatethe woodland to be on coarse texture soils low in organic matter and alkaline (Barrett 1962) There are virtually no published works on the soil characteristics of the ecosystem but what appearsmiddot in the literature are scant descri~tions of specific study sites
rn New Mexico the USDA-Forest Service have identified three categories of the woodland ecosystem in their Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey of the Soutbwest region The so11s of these categories are dOm1nate1y Alfisols (primarily Hap1ustalfs) meSic (a-15middotmiddotC) temperature regime andustic moisture regime Ustic suggests primarily summer precipitation or a uniform distribution of precipitation The concept of the moisture regime is one of limited moisture but the soil moisture is present at a time wheo conditions are suitable for plant growth The definition of ustic is a rooting zone that is moist for either 180 cumulative days or 90 consecutive days iu most years (Barrett J W 1962) There are stands of pinyon-juniper in New Mexico that occur on cooler soils than mesic which are identified as frigid (O_8degC) but few that are found on warmer sites Other than Alfisols the major soils that support the woodland are Inceptisols (usually ustochrepts) Mollisols (usually calciustol1s Argicestolls and Haplustolls) Entisols (usually ustorthents) and to a limited extent Aridisols (usually Bap1argtds) bull
The three categories of the woodland recognized by the USDA-Forest are
1) Juniper composed of ~ monosperma (d osteosperma) This classifmiddotication is found at
2
Table 1--Monthly precipitation for Carlsbad and Fort Wingate New Mexico (From USDA 1941)
Fort Winsate Carlsbad -
Monthly Cumulative Monthly Cumulative Month Total Cumulative (Inches) Total Cumulative (Inches)
January 081 081 55 033 033middotbull 25
February 101 182 126 043 076 58
March 116 298 206 054 130 99
April 151 449 310 086 216 164
May 071 520 359 091 307 234
June 070 590 407 149 456 347
July 206 796 550 223 679 515
August 279 1075 742 1 70 849 647
September 143 1218 841 203 1052 801
October 076 1294 894 144 1196 908
Novembemiddotr 074 1368 945 060 1256 957
December 081 1449 1000 056 1312 1000
Total 1449 1312
middotbull
the lower elevat~ons and tends to bemiddotthe warmest and driest of the three Itmiddotis the least productive in total biomass production and in terms of wood averages about five cords of wood per hectare (2cordsAC)~
2) Pinyon-ju~iper composed of ~~ and a mix of monosperma and limited amounts of osteosperlila~ This classifieation has a shrub understory and has a higher biomass produetion than eategory 1 The cord-wood available is estimated to be from 10-20 cords per hectare (4-8 cordsAC)
middot3) Pinyonjuniper composed of edul1smiddot and a mix of monosperma and deppeana with a significant understory of Gambel Oak Thiamp category has the highest biomas production and cord-wood available is estimated to be nearly 35 cords per hectare (14 cordsAC)
The soils are widely distributed over all three categories of the woodland ecosystem and are not easily stratified to any one group It is common for the soils to have accumulations of carbcinatfils middotand frequently have calcic horizons These carbonate accumulations are mo~e frequent in oldermiddot soils on stable landscapes There seems to be no generalization with soil texture Almost any soil texture will support the ecosystem as will most ~y middotsoil depth Onemiddot common characteristic is the low amount of accumulated organic matter The upper 18 cm (Fincher or plow-layer) has less than 1 organic matter When organic matter does accumulate above this level it seems to be in soils with some combination of high clay content wettest end of the ustic moisture regimes or coolr than mesic temperature regimes Little is known about the influencemiddotof soil on the distribution and growth of the pinyon-juniperwoodlampnd
Site Index
Site index is an expressionmiddot of the tree growth potential of a site or a sites productive capacity Stocking expresses the density of trees on the land and spacing refers to its spatial distribution Standardpractice is to define site in terms of the total height of trees that have consistently been in a dominant position in well-stocked stands at specified key ages bull
A1thou~h tree height growth h4s been the most practical consistent and generally useful indicator of forest-site quality other features may be more mean~ngfulfor pinyon pine and junipers of New MexiCO These could include stem diameter volume or number Of stems per tree or some combination of these variables
Site indeX is used in land management to determine a forestis rotation A forest rotation is defined as the period of years required for treestobecome established and
grOW to a specified condition of maturity
Determining themiddotlengthof the rotation is one of the key d~cisions a manager of pinYon-juniper must make There are two basic groups of physical and financial factors that influence the length of the rotation (1) des1red products (largely a matter of markets or of a demand in a general economic sense) and (2) forest productivity or what Can be grown (supply) bull
The praetical importance of site index often is notgiven inadequate attention in the buying and selling of forest lands and in forest management The report by Fowler (1984) indicates there is presently a little infcirmstiondealingwith the production of fiber on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico They
constructed volume tables based on tree diameter and height for a so11 site near Taos andmiddot another near Cloudcroft More than 600 observations were used at each site and they concluded that the tables were not int~rchangeable these authors suggested a rotation of greater than 200 years
A comparison of photographs taken upto 100 years ago and recent photographs of the s~e areas indicate that many soils in New Mexico have pinyon-juniper growth rates that are much more rapid than the sites near Cloudcroft and Taos Some sites probably could be managed for fence posts and fuel wood on a 50-year rotationmiddot or less This would change manag~nt schemes tremendously and be much more useful than a rotation of more than 200 years for the entire state Obviously site indices need to be established for at least the major so11 types associated with pinyon~juniper stands in New Mexico
Topography
Pinyon-juniper woodlands occmiddotur on a wide variety of topographical positions (Lymbery and Pieper 1983) S~dies in theSacramento Mountains of southcentral New Mexico showed that
aspect (exposure) slope steepness and slope position did not have major impacts on tree characteristics (Lymbery and Pieper 1983 Pieper and Lymbery 1987) Only general patterns were
apparent Rocky Mountain pinYon density was higher in relation to that of singleseed juniper
on steeper slopes and possibly on northern middotaspects Tree density appeared to be more sensitive to topographic variables than tree size or canopy cover
Shrubby species showed a response to topographic position (Lymbery and Pieper 1983)bull Walkingstick Cholla (Opuntia imbricata) was more abundant on xeric sputh-faeing slopes while skunkbush (Rhus trilobata) and wavy-leaf oak (Quercus undUlata) were more abundant on nortb-facing slopes Gehlbach (1967) fout)d similar relationships on the Gusdalupe Mountains in southeastern NewMexico
4
Rocky MoUntain pinyon generally increasesin abundance with elevation as abundance of juniper decreases (Pieper and Lymbery an4 Woodin and Lindsey 1954) Similar patterns are also apparent in the Great Basin (Tueller at ale 1979)
Hydrology
A diverse range of vegetatie species climatic factors and soil parent materials govern the water in pinyon-juniper ecosystems Unfortunately little hydrologic-related researchbullbull has been accomplished This is shocking in light of the importance on water to New Mexico and its neighbors Schmidt (1987) claims a gap exists between the available scientific knowledge base and application by land managers This results at l~ast in part from apast tendency to accept hydrologiC information supporting eradication of pinyon-juniper and to disregard findings tbat questioned the watershed benefit of these practices Changes in public demands haw resulted in a reassesaent of management goals for pinyonjuniper Managers lackadequate knowledge of inventory methods si1vicu1tura1systemsand productivity in relation to runoff processes Schmidt also
stated that fuxther long-termaall-watershed studies are needed to fill knowledge gaps and provide a framework for plot ~tudies
Because of its topographic position pinyon-juniper woodl~nds greatly influence runoff generated from higher elevation ecosystems It is often the last ecosystem that water passes through before being diverted for use Most water yield studies for pinyon-juniper have been conducted at Corduroy Creek and Beaver Creek in Arizona with a few 881411 plot studies in Nevada and Utah These studies centered on potentials for increasing water yields and effects of various type conversion strategies Pinyon-juniper was considetedundesirable and merely represented a barrier to increasing grassland cover The energy crisis and environmental movements ofthe 1970s curtailed major type-converSion efforts Fuel wood demand changed the emphasis to sustain yield Maintaining pinyon-juniper stands on soils that have been invaded by these plants because of cessation of fire may prove to be ecologically disastrous because of hydrologiC tmpacts especially erosion
Highlights of Current Knowledge
Climate Few studies ~ist on the climate of pinyon-juniper stands A Nevada study showed pinyon-juniper to be confined to a thermal belt above the valley inversions and below the colder upslope elevations This may also be true in much of New Mexico
Precipitation Total daily monthly and annual precipitation patterns for the
pinyon-juniper type are well known but storm characteristics are not These are needed to identify runoff-producing storms and predict erosion Some 5-minute intensities have approached 8 inches per hour in Arizona A study of maximum 2-m1nute intensities found 42 inches per hour at Alamogordo Cteek New Mexico A Utah study shows the greatest intensities to occur at elevations between 6s0Q and 8000 feet which coincides with the pinyon-juniper ecosystlim
Interception This variable is usually insignificant in most eoosystems However in a pinyon-juniper stand an interception capacity of 02 inch would reduce the effective 5-minute intensity by 24 inches per hour Interception values have been found to range from 013 to 094 inch per hour in Arizona The 094 inch would reduce the effective s-minute intensity by 1128 inches per hour Blue grams has been found to retain about 015 inch of precipitation which reduces the effective S-m1nute intensity by only 18 inches per hour No pinyon-juniper litter studies are known
Infiltration Studies of infiltration have received the greatest amount of attention from watershed scientists from other states Generally where pinyon-juniper trees are not part ofmiddot the climax vegetationbullinflltratt-0n rates between trees are much lower than underneath trees This is especially true where the understory is sparce because of competition forllght soil water and nutrients by the more dominant pinyon-juniper trees Where pinyon-juniper are climal ie rocky hillsides infiltration rates were similar Management and miaanagement can greatly alter the infiltration rates
Runoff Pinyon-juniper often produces surface-runoff in response to high-intensity short-duration storms which are the most frequent storms in New Mexico The Saliz watershed near Reserve New Mexico once reported a peak flow rate of 1380 cubic feet per second per square mile Schmidt (1987) reports that currently information on frequency and magnitude of precipitation-runoff related to site conditions is inadequate for design of facilities in this ecosystem
Sedfment production This is the major water quality concern from the pinyon-juniper ecosystem Some stands ID Arizona produced more than a ton of sedfment from each acre each year Impacts of new uses of the pinyon-juniper type are not known and need investigation
HydrologiC Impacts from Increasing Mu1t1pie Use Demands
Uses of pinyon-juniper ecosystems are rapidly expanding in New Mexico New and innovative land management schemes are needed to respond to these demands while maintaining and
5
improving the productive potential Many roads Ue in the bottoms of drainage ways Which concentrates diffuse runoff into damaging flows arid serious erosion Road systems continue to expand in many pinyon-juniper stanels as a result of off-road vehicle recreation hunting arid wood gathedng Many livestock anel wilellife grazing msnagement strategies are geareel to proviele for plant health but fail to conaieler adequately the impacts of use that affect infiltration flow concentrations ariel erosion It is not known hoW much plant material should be left on-site to protect most rangelands including pinyon-junper ecosystems in New Mexico
A significant amount of the existing unsatisfactory watersheelconclitionsare associateel with the pinyon-juniper ecosystem The hydrologic variables associated with pinyon-juniper are highly sensitive to use
Opt~um watershed treatment strategies to restore iong-term productivity and reduce flood and sediment risks need to be identified
PINYON-JUNIPER VEGETATION
Overstory tree Species
The threemaj)r tree species found in New Mexico within the pinyon-juniper woodland are Rocky Mountain pinyon Singleseed juniper ancl Alligatorjuniper (LaDner 1975 1981 Little 1950 Pieper 1977 anel Sprlngfield) Rocky Mountain pinyon and Singleseed juniper are founel throughout the pinyor-juniper wooellanel in the Southwest but Alligator juniper is more abunclant in western New Mexico anel Arizona Utah juniper also occurs in some pinyon-juniper woodlands in northwestern New Mexico while Rocky Mountain juniper (Juniperus scopulorum) occurs in northern New Mexico
Unclerstory Vegetation
Big sagebrush (Artelisia tridentata) is a common understory shrubby species in northern and northwestern New Mexico (Pieper 1977 Springfield 1976) Several oak species (Quercus arizonica 51 grisea 9 emoryi anel 9 oblongifolia) are ilIiportant understory shrubs in western and southwestern New Mexico Mountain
mshogany (Cercocarpus montana) and Wrights silk tassel (Garrya wrightii) are also important browse species in this area (Boeker et al 1972shyand Short et al 1977) Blue gra- (BouteloUa gracilis) occurs as an understory grass species throughout the wooellancl vegetation in thestate In northern areas cool season species of such genera as 2Festuca anel Agropyron occur ONest et al 1975) In central ancl southeastern New Mexico warm season species of the general Muhlenbergia Hilaria Lycurus anel Bouteloua occur
Habitat Types
Kennedy (1983) identified six relatively undisturbed habitatmiddot types in the Sacramento Mountains of southcentralNewMexicQ (Table 2) These habitat types ranged from about 6200ft to 7000 ft in average elevation and from 33 to 47 understory cover (Kennedy 1983 Table 2) The ~ ecluUs-Juniperus monospermal
Muhlenbergia pauc1flora habitat type was perhaps themost common type in this area Francis and Aldon (1983) also identified three pinyonshyjuniper habitat typu innortbwestern New Mexico
Uriderstory Patterns
Pinyon-juniper vegetation forma a mosaic pattern with trees interspersed with open grassland areas between the trees Armentrout and Pieper (1988) have described three understory zones associated with singleseed juniper and Rocky Mountain pinyon The first zone is that surrounding the trunk of the tree and is characterized by shrubs such as skunkbrush ancl algerita (Berberis haematocarpa) The seconcl zone is largely beneath the tree canopy Several grass species such as sideoats grams (Boute1oua curtipendula) wolftal (Lycurus phleoides) and blUe grams were abundant in the seconcl zone Several species inclUding blue grama wolf tail ancl creeping muhly (Muhlenbergia repeus) were more abundant under tree canopy ori the north side rather than on the southmiddot side (Schott and Pieper 1985) Pinyon ricegrass (Piptochaetium fimbriatum) appears to be favored by conditions under canopies of singleseed juniper Grass species of the open grassland zone included blue grama wolftaU gal~eta sanddrapseed and mat muhly~
Age and Size Class Structure
Many pi~yon-juniper stands h~vebeen disturbeel during the past 100 years by fuel or fence post harvesting bUrDing or mechanical control treatments Consequently many trees are relatively young bull Age class distributions consequently do not followmiddot the typical inverted J-shaped curve for ma~ure stanels Figure 1 shows age-class distribution for 202 Rocky Mountain pinyon trees from five study sites in the Sacramento Mountains This distribution appears to be nearly normal with most trees falling in the 70 to 130 yearmiddotage class However the specific distribution at each site depended on time since last disturbance and type of disturbance (Plumb-Mentjes anel Pieper 1983) Pinyon age is relatedto basal diameter but only 38 of the variation in age can be explained by basal diameter (Figure 2) Apparently~stand density (competition) influences siz~ of trees sUbstantially
6
0
Table 2 - Pinyon-Juniper Habitat Types of the Lincoln National Forest (From Kennedy 1983)
Tree Density
Average Understory Avg Stems Habitat Type Elev Ft Cover Plot
bull PINYON-JUNIPER SERIES
1 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Cercocarpus montanusAndropogon gerardi HT 6178 42 36
2 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Muhlenbergia pauciflora HT 6470 33 63
3 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Stipa columbiana HT 6678 36 123
4 Pinus edulis-Junil rus monosperma Bouteloua gracilis HT 6977 37 163
5 Punis edulis-Juniperus deppeana Bouteloua gracilis HT 6739 46 65
6 Pinus edulis-Juniperus deppeana Muhlenbergia dubia HT 6920 47 105
22 I
20
11
I
I
20 110 611 1110012011101611130 middotIY_I
Figure 1 Age class distribution of aU pinyon pines on study areas
- 1511r bull 100
1 bull 05 ~ 11amp50 2 r bull 031 n bull zaz
22 11 111 _ 1HIICMIl
Figure 2bull Relationship betweenDBB and age of pinyon pine for all trees bull
RESPONSE TO DISTURBANCE (SECONDARY SUCCESSION)
Several successional models have been proposed for secondary succession followingmiddot disturbance that removes most of the trees (Arnold et a1 1964 Barney and Frischknecht 1974 and Erdman 1976) These general patterns alsomiddotapply to conditions in middotpinyon-juniper woodlands in central New Mexico (Dwyer and Pieper 1967 Rippel et al 1980 1983 Schott and Pieper 1986 1987a 1987b 1987C) Bowever specific patterns are influenced by the type of soils supporting the woodland vegetation (Schott arid Pieper 1986 1987a) Generally- soils that are fairly shallow and rocky have some seral stages poorly represented (Table 3) When sitesmiddot with these soils are treated mechanically shrubs such as wavy-leaf oak do not increase (Rippel et al 1983) On similar soils with few roek outarops grassforb and shrubgrass stages are common Response of Rocky Hountainpinyon
and singleseed juniper appear to be dependent on density and size of trees before treatment If
the stanpmiddot was near climax before cabling pinypnsrapidly become dominant on the site If the stand was in someseral stage there would be more junipers but theimiddotr relatively slow growth and time for uturation require more time before middotthey would dominate the site
RESEARCH NEEDS
Only limited research on pinyon-juniper ecology in northern and westernmiddot New Mexico has been conducted Informst~on is lacking on basic ecological relationship at both plant communitymiddot and individual species level lactors influencing distribution of these woodlands are poorly understood lor example in many situations pinyon-juniper appears to be moving uphill in elevation and encroaching on ponderosa pine forests Such situation have not been analyzed Success~onal patterns where alligator juniper is a major potenUal component of the vegetation have not been determined Analyses of these woodlands for several uses and products are needed for laUd unagament purposes
4 bull ~
Table 3 -- General pattern of succession on cabled pinyon-juniper wood1anda on two soil types (From Schott and Pieper 1986)
Sera1 Stages Climax 1 2 3
Original Conditions
General successional Annual forb Grassforb Shrubgrass Pinyon-juniper model
Lithic hapustoll Annuals and Perennial Shrubs dominant Pinyon and juniper perennials from grasses and shade conducive dominating Pinyon seeds which disshy forbs with to tree establishshy eventually dominant perse readily establishment ment surviving perenshy and spread of nials shrubs (esp
0 wavy-leaf oak)
Lithic hapusto11- Annuals and These stages absent or poorly represhy Pinyon dominating Rock outcrop complex perennials from sented Rock outcropsmiddotrestrict vegshy Climax with juniper bull
seed which disshy etative reproduction perse readily surviving perenshynials
fI
LITERATURE CITED
Armentrout S M and R D Pieper 1988 Plant distribution surrounding Rocky Mountain Pinyon and one seed juniper in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range Management 41 (In press) bull
Arnold J F bullbull D A Jameson and E H Reid 1964bull The pinyon~jun1per type of Arizona Effects of grazing fire and tree control US Department of Agriculture Production Research Report 84~
Barney MA and N C Frischknechtmiddot 1974 Vegetation change follOwing fire in the
pinyon-juniper type of west-central Utah Journal of Range Management 279~-96
Barrett J W 1962 Regional Silviculture of the United States The Ronald Press Co bullbull NY 610p
BetancourtJ L 1987 Paleoecology of pinyon-juniper woodlands summary In Everett R L (compiler) proceedings~ pinyon-juniper conference USDA For SerGen Techbull Rep INT-215~
Boeker E Lbullbull V E Scott H G Reynolds and B A Donaldson 1972~ Seasonal food habits of mule deer in southWestern Ne Mexicobull Journal of Wildlife Management 3656-63 bull
Erdman Jbull A 1970 Pinyon-juniper succession after natural fires in residual soils of MesaVerde Colorado Brigham Young University Science Bulletin Series 11 ~rovo Utah
Fowler J M R D Bowe BE Peacock KC McDanielT Garner-Hurt J R Gray and
M Cardenas 1974 Wood fiber production in pinyon-juniper woodlands on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico New MeXico State University Agricultural Experiment~tation Research Report NO~ 519
Francis R E and E bull F Alden 1983 Preliminary habitat types of a semiarid grassland In MOir W H and L Hendzel (Tech COQrdinatora) Proceeding of the workshop pn southwestern habitat types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Gehlbach F R 1967 Vegetation of the Guadalupe escarpment New Mexico-Texas Ecology 48404-419
Kennedy K L 1983 A habitat type classification of the p~yon-juniper woodlands of the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico In Moir W H and Leonard Hendzel (Tech-Coordinators) Proceedings of the workshop on southwestern habitat
types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Lanner bull R M 1975 Pinyon pines and junipers of the southwestern woodlandsmiddot In Gifford G F and 1 E Buspy The pinyonjunipr ecosystem a symposium Utah State Univ bullbull Logan
Lanner R Mmiddot1981 The pinyon pine a natural and cultural history Univ Nevada Press
Reno
Little E L bull 1950 Southwestern trees Amiddot guide to the native species of middotNew Mexico and Arizona US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Agricultural Handbook 9
Lymbery bull G A and R D Pieper 1983 Ecology of pinyon-juniper vegetation in the northern Sacramento Mountains New Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 698
Pieper R D 1~77 The southwestern pinyon-juniper ecosystem In Aldon Earl F and T J~ Loring (Tech Coord) US Departmentmiddot Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report RM-31
Pieper R D and G A Lymbery 1987 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegettion in south-central New Mexico In~ Everett Richard L (compiler) proceedings - pinyon-juniper conference US Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT-21S
Plumh-Mentjes M L and R D Pieper 1983 Diameter distribution and age class structure of pinyon pine (Pinus eduiis Engelm) in south-central~Mexico Abstract 36th annual meeting Society for Range Management Denver CO bull
Schmidt L j 1987 Present and future themes in ptnyon-juniper hydrology In ~verett R L (compiler) U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report 1NT-215
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1985 Influence of canoP1 characteristics of one-seed juniper on understory grasses Journal of Range Management 38328-331
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1986 Succession in pinyon-juniper vegetation in New Mexico Rangelands 8126-128
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987a Succession of pinyon-juniper communities a~ter mechanical disturbance in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range ~anagement 4088-94
1Q
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987bbull Water relationships of Quercus undulata ~ edulis and Juniperus monosperma in seral pinyon-juniper communities of south-central New Mexico In Everett R L (compiler) us Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT~215 bull
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987cbull bull Succession in tree pits following cabliD8
in pinyon-juniper c01lllllUt1ities Southwestern Naturalist 32399-402
~ Short H L t W Evans and E L Boeker 1977 The use of natural and modified pinyon pine-juniper wOodlands by deer and elk Journal of Wildlife Management 41543-559
Springfield H W 1976 Characteristics and management of southwestern pinyon-juniper ranges the status of our knowledge US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Res Pap RM-160
Tueller P T C D Beeson R J Tausch N E West and K HRea 1979 Pinyon-juniper woodlands of themiddotGreat Basin distribution flora vegetal cover U SbullDepartment of Agriculture Forest Service Research Paper INT~229
USDA 1941 Cltmate and man Yearbook of Agriculture U S Govt Printing Office Washington DC
Wasson G E 1987 The American Indian response to the pinyon-juniper conference In Everett R L(compller) USDA For Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Wells P V 1987 Systematics and distribution of pinyons in the late quarternary In Everett R Lbull (compiler) Proc - Pinyon-juniper Conference USDA For Sere Gen Tech Rep INT-215
West N E K H Rea and R J Tausch 1975 Basic Synecological relationahips in pinyon-juniper woodlands In Gifford G E and F E Busby (eds) ~e pinyon-juniper ecosystem A symposium Utah State University Logan
Woodin H E and A A Lindsey 1954 Juniper-pinyon east of the Continental Divide as analyzed by the line-strip metWod Ecology 35473-489
11
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES I CROP
bullJ
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH WOODLAND STA~D MANAGEMENT l
James T Fisher John G Me~al and Gregory C Phillips
Abstract-- New Mexicos native pinyon pines produce high-value crops including nuts Christmas trees and nursery or~amentals Crop values can be increased through more intensive stand management and more innovative marketing of such products as pinyon nuts and Christmas trees to compete with imported products Research needs pertaining to these crops are discussed
1 Ne~ Mexico State University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-II
2 Authors are re~pectively
Professor and Associate Professors Dept of Agronomy and Horticulture New
Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
13
INTRODUCTlON
Pinyons (pinon p~nes) ield diverse productsranging frolll valuable nuts ~nd landscape sp~cll11ens to fuelwood
Rowever littleforethought is give~ to crop illlprovelllentbeforecropsare ha~vested This paper addresses high-value pinyon products ~hat appear to justify at least modest levels omiddotf lIIanacelllent inputs to improve product quality quantity or avail- abilty Greater elllphasis on ~ntensive lIIanagelllentmiddot recognizes the nee~ for deriving economic benefits as well as the need for cu~todiai lIIanagelllent to pre~erve the
woodland type (Lanner 1977)
Pinyon and pinyon-juniper woodlands hav~ be~n the su~lect of severai symposia The reader iamp directed to proceedings of these lIIeetings providing several papers on the subject [~ee Gifford and Busby (19-75) Aldon and Loring (1977) Evrett (1987) and a fbrthcoming volume reporting a n~~ional lIIeeting held in Mexico in 1987]
This paper specifi~ally exalllines pinyon nut production including lIIarket developlllents that potentially threaten regional markets and the selective harvest of Christlllas trees and nursery or~alllentals Methods available t~ illlprove crop profitability will be discussed in addition to cuirent and future research
NUT BEARING PINES
Plant taxonomists recognize about 100 species in the falllily Pinaceae Alllongthese 12 to 26 species produce quality edible nuts (Rosengarten 1984 Lanner 1981) An edible nut is large middot(generallly les8 than 2200 seedkg) and has a thin shell that can be cracked with the teeth Pines producing edible nuts are found mostly in Europe Asia and western North middotAmerica Large ~dlblen~ts are found ~ostiyalllong the ~tone pines ~Sub8ection Celllbraa) nat~ve to Europe and ASia and the pinyon pines (Subsection Celllbroides) native to North Alllerica
Pinyons are dwarf trees nd shrubS 9f sellliarid regions of the southwestern Uni ted Sta tes and Mexico Because pinyons grow slowly it ismiddot difficult to lustify th~ cost of establishing and cultivatin~ p~aniations for nut production IncreaSingly nuts gathered
from the stone pines are imported f~om Asia and marketed at a lIIuch lower cost According to D~nielFox (pers C~IIII11) about 1000 ~tric tons of ~helled Asian pine nuts are imported each year Re also reports that abou~ 100 ton~ of ~ pinea nuts are illlported from Portugal and Spain
To protect pinyonnut m~rkets it lIIay becollle necessary to develop criteria that effectively distinguish pinyon nuts frolll illlported pine ~uts~ To exallline the feasibility of developing these criteria we will examine t~egeographic ranges and speclal characteristics of nut-producing pines under their respective subsections of the family Pinaceae proposed by Critchfield and Little (1966)
lli Subsec tiOn Celllbroides (Pinyons)
Pines classified und~i the subse~tion Ce~bi~ides (pinyons) have 1-5 needles in a fascicle Seeds are large wingl~ss a~d sOlllewhat oval in shape Lanner (1981) reported 11 species but a more recent treatlllent ofmiddot the alliance r~cognizes 15ta~a (Bailey and Ha~ksworth 1988) Eight species occur in the United States 12 in Mexico and 3 in New Mexico (P edulis I lIIonophylla and I~di-cOlor) The pinyon species discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988)include
Uni ted States
(l) Pinus edulis (pinyon) t 4200 seedkg
The predominant pinyon species of New Mexico Widespread in the southwestern United States lust
entering Wyollling and extending south through Utah Colorado and ~ew ~~xico to the western ~nd of Oklahollla~ west Texas and the northern border of Chihuahua extending west throughout lIIuch of Arizona to an outlier in eastern California Range ov~rlaps ~ith P celllbroides in south~rn New Mexico and Arizona and with P monophylla at the westerD edge of its range (southw~stern Utah northwestern Arizona and the New York Mountains o~ sOuthern California (Fig 1) Kay occa~ionally intergrade with P lIIonophylla
(2) monophylla lsingleleaf plny~n)
[ 2400 seed kg ] The pinyon pine ~fthe Great
14
bull P SAalNIANA bull P aMIIilOIOEl III Po OUAOIIIIOUA bull P MONOPttYLLA bull P eDULIS
Figure 1 Diatrlbution of pinyon pines in lJOuthwestern United States and northern Mexieo
Basin and Mohave Desert Com~onin Nevada and in parts of southern California and western Utah but also ex~ends acr~ss Arizona and southwestern Ke~ Mexico (ig~ 1)
United States and Mexico
(3) Pinus middotcellbroides (Mexican pinyon)
[ 2400 seedkg J Range widespread at low
elevations in the mountains bordering the arid plate~u of northern Mexico Ranges from southeastern Arizona southwestern Arizona southwestern New Mexico and western Texas through northern Mexico and south to Puebla and Mexico City (Fig 1) Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) middotrecognize three subspecies cembroides (northern Mexi~o) lagunae (Baja California) and orizabensis (Central Mexico) (Fig 1)
(4) P californiarum-
Subspecies californiarum
occurs in southern Californ~a and northern Baja California I californiarum subsp fallax (formerly P edulis var fallax) is-found in Arizona
(5) Pinus discolor (border pinyon)
Formerly P cembroides var bicolor~ Principal range lies along both sides of the intershynational boundary between Mexico and the United States extending about 120 miles into eac~ country Sp-ecifically occurs in southeast Arizona extreme southwest New Mexico northeas~ ~onora and northwest Chihuahua
( 6) quad r ifo11a (Parry pinyon) [ 2100 seedkg J
Confined to 10 elevations in the dry mountains of southern California from the San Jacinto Mountains south to the S~erra San Ped~o Martir Its range overlaps that of I monOphylla but no intermediates have been reported (Fig 1)middot
(7) Pinus remo ta (paper-shell pinyon also called
Texas pinyon) Formerly P cembroides var
remota Main range in Coahuila but reaches parts of adjacent Nuevo Leon southeastern Chihuahua and rexas (Bailey and Wendt 1979) Has thinnest shell among pinyons~
Local Endemics Found Exclusively in Mexico
(8) Pinus culminicola (Potosi pinyon)
Documented occurrence Cerro PotOSi Nuevo Leon Mexico
(9) johannis Li~ited r4nge in Mexico
(west of Concepcion del Oro Zacatecas
(10) Pin~s maximartinezii (Martinez pinyon)
Documented Occurrence Zacatecas Mexico
(11 ) Pinus nelsonii (Nelson pinyon)
Documented ocaurrence north- eastern Mexicobull
(12) ~pinceana (Pinca pinyon)
15
Documented occurrence northshy Grows at high elevations inth~ eastern and eastern Mexco Alps and the Carpathian ~ountains
(3) bullbull koraiensis S~eb amp Zucco ~ SUDsect PINEAE Shaw (Korean pine)
[ 1800 seedkg](n Pinuspinea L Rngebull through Korea and (Italian stone pine) eastern Manchuria into southeastern [ 1300 seedkg ] Siberia with outlirs ~ri t~e
Wide_pread in Spain and Japalliue islands of Honshu and Portugal and aiong the northern and Shikoku (Fig 2) eastern shores ~f the Mediterranean Sea including minor occurrences (4) P sibirica near the north coast of Turkey rSibe~ian ston~ pine(Fig 2) [ 4000 seedkg
Ranges from the Ural Mountains Pinus Subsect CEMBRAE through western and central ~iberia---(Stone Pines) to northern Mongolia with outliers
in northern Russia (Fig ~)(1) Pinus albicaulis Engelm~
(whitebark pine) Pinus Subsect GERARDIANAE [ 5700 seedk ] -- shy
Occurs at high eleyations fro~ (1) gerardian Wall~ central British Columbia sout~ to (Chilgoza pine)s~uthern Sierra Nevada of [ 400 seedkg J California the Ruby Mountain of Noted for large edible seed Nevada and the mOuntains of Confined to mountainous regions of northwestern Wyoming eastern Asia principally in
eastern Afgha~itan~ parts of (2) Pin~s cembra L Pakistan ~nd ~catt~red localities
(Swiss stone pine) in the dry inner valleys of the [ 4400 seedkg 1 north~rn Himalayas (Fig 2)
eocIIn_a _shyFigure 2 Distribution of edible pine nuts in Europe and
Asia
16
bull
Pinus Subsect SABINIANAE Loud Opportumiddotnities aay exist to separate pinyOn nuts other froa pine nuts Most
(I) Pinu~ ~abiniana Dougl pine nuts have a ridge where the (Digger pine) membranous wing is attached Also [ 1300 seed kg criteria based upon seed content could
Confined to California Found be applied when large vol~aes of in dry foothills of ihe Sierra imported pine nuts are suspected to be Nevada and the Coast Rangemiddot Ras aislabeled Tests aight exaine levels large edible but rather hard-shelled of starch fat or piotein or even seeds (Fig bull1) smiddotpecific enzyaes (Table 1)
(2) Pinus coulteri D Don (Coulter pine) New Mexico Pinyon Nut Crops ( 3100 seedkg]
Restr~cted to the coastal mountains of cen~ral and southern Pinyon nuts have been harvested California and northern Baja commercially for about 50 years California (Little 1938a) The nut crop averages
045 to 09 million kg (I to 2 million The preceding list makes clear that pounds) annually for New Mexico Arizona
many pinyon species are found in North and Colorado but one year exceeded 36 America with the greatest number found million kg (Little 1942) The more in Mexico Further it seems neither productive stands may yield 330 kglha practical nor necessary to develop (300 lbsac) during a good year market criteria to separate nut products (Springfield 1976) At a cur~ent found among these species Morphological retail value of $883 I kg value on a differences among pinyon nuts are per hectare basis would be $297000 generally so slight as ~o pre~lude (120000 lac) Fowler and Oliver (this practical field identification publication) provide additional Also most Mexican species occur as information on nut values rather isolated populations with local value but low export potential For New Mexico species criteria would have to recognize as genuinely natibullbull those Pinyon Reproductive Biology nuts produced by at least three pinyon species edulis monophylla and P di$color Again nut morphological Pinyons begin bearing nuts at about criteria would not separate these 25 years but crops do not reach pinyons from other species of the same commercial size until about 75 years subsection (Little 1941) Cones are borne
Table 1-- Composition of pine nuts and true nuts (Lanner 1981 Woodroof 1979) All values are expressed as percentages
Kernal H2O Protein Fat Carboshyhydrates
Ash
Pinyon nuts P edulisP monophIllaImiddot cembroides
58 31 14 10 19
60 23 60
18 54 14
3
Pine nuts P sabinianaP pineaImiddot sibirica P lerardiana
49 30 34 19 14
60 48 63 51
9 7
12 23
4
True nuts
Almond Pecan Pistacio Walnut Peanut
51 52
shy45
47 30
33
19 9
20 15 26
54 73 53 64 39
20 15 19 16 24
3 2 3 2
laterally ~n the a~il of a scale leaf near branch tips (jhaw~ 1914) although a r~re observation 01 termin~l cones b~s been reported (Lanner 1969) Developing cones can be ~een in the e~rliest stages as ovulate primordia in longitudinal sections of bu4s Within buds ovulate cone primordia are only at the tip of the bud an~have larger and broader bases than spur shoots (Little 1938-b)
ovuiate primordia are formed in buds in August and September and cones mature by October of the third year Because 3 years are required for seeds to mature treatments applied to stimulate nut quantity~il~ require 3 years before evaluation The first year must be especially suited to production of ovulate primordia and the second and third seaasons favorable to growth and maturation of cones and nuts(Li~tle 1938b)
The Periodicity of Bumper Crops
Pinyon ~ut crops are prodUCed at intervals of 3 to 7 years The periodicity of above-average cropshas been related to the dtain of nutrients required to produce the crop an~ the time required for nutrients to be replenished Developing cones act as food sinks for carbohydrate and nitrogen (N) reserves at the expense of vegetative structures (Pickmann and Kozlowski 1969 1970 ~ook and S~et 1971) Consequently large cone crops adversely affect vegetative tree growth
Forcella (1981) found cone production was inversely relate~ to temperatures during late-August to early September Maximum production in northern New Mexeio occurred when the mean maximum weekly temperature was below 24 degrees C Temperatures above 24 degrees C resulted in virtually no cone crops
However other environmental factors~ acting independently or inte~actinl with temperature caa be involved Rainfall is positively correia ted with the flowering of pines This is because photosynthat~ 9roduction is needed to develop carbohydrate reserves and this process is limited by ~lant water stres~ Also tree growth is determined by photosynthetic gain and the onset of abundant flowering is more directly rela~ed to tree siZe than
age (Schmidtling 1969) More speci1icallj nut ~roduction is e~osely
related to crown surface area
An exception to the adverse influen~e of wa~er ~tress is the positive roie stress plays in the initiat~on of ovula~e primordia Studies have shown that summer moisture
stress results in an above-average flower crop the following spring This suggests moisture stress at the time of ovulate primordia formation promotes reproductive rather than vegetative bull growth This view is supported by studies shOwing that branches exposed to full sun bore more female cones and had lower tissue moisture levels than partially shaded branches (Wareing~ 1958)
Water ~tress also can indirectly affect flowering thro~gh its interaction with tree nutrient status E~ell (1970) showd that nitrate fertili~ation or exposure to moisture stress caused similar tiowe~ing responses in Dougl~s-firaccompaniedby increases in total foliage N content and free amino
acids especially ~rgini~e Similarly Schmidtling (1974) suggested that water stress or N fertilization can increase flowering through the same metabolic intermediary namely arginine or some related N-containing substance~
Manipulation of Native Nut Crops
pespite the importance of coniferous nuts in many parts of th~
world only two pine species appear to be cultivated for their seed crops P
pinea in the Medi terranean and - sibirica in the Urals (Pravdin 1963) The pinyons of estern North America and Meiico ar mos~ly ignored in terma of cultiv~tion or domestication
Little (1140) was among the first to suggest that pinyon nu~ prQduction could be augme~ted tbtough the USe of simple cultutal practices However these received little attention and we have no grea~er und~rstanding of the effi~lcy or econoic feasibility of these treatments now than we did more than 40 ~ears ago Nev~rtheles~ with the present emphasis on wocidland management ~uch treatmenta seem worthy of serious attention
Ca) selective thinning
Some pibyonsapear to be
18
Nut sizes from pruned and unpruned Pinus edulis trees
19
consistently good nut producers (Little 1940) Heavy producers usually show immature and old cones on branches and cones are conspicuous b~neath them Selective thinning of unpr04uctive trees should increase flowering of those left standing (Little 1940)
(b) basal pruning
Theoretically low branches receiving partial sun light do not photosynthesize enough energy to offset energy losses to respiration It follows that low branches are energy sinks that potentially r~b nutrients from seed crops To test this relationship Montano et al (1980) pruned baial branches of 70 to 80-year old pinyons (8 to 10 m tall) to a height of 15 m and SUbsequently determined effects of this treatment on seed development They reported av~rage nut volumes from gruned and ungruned trees were 040 cm and 032 cm and the average nut weights were 033 g and 020 g respectively (see Fig3) Also pruned trees produced a greater percentage of filled nuts 99 as opposed to 84 The effects observed were related to the growth of nuts already developing in cones when the treatment was applied
Basal pruning reduced disease and insect injury of southern pnes (Wilson and Rudolph 1970) Also pruned wood could b sold for ~uelwood potentially offsetting the cost of the benefits anticipated Owing to its simplicity and overall benefits basal pruning appears to merit greater attention
(c) fertilization
Fertilization usually stimulates female cone production (Puritch 1972) More specifically the following trends become apparent when studies are reviewed collectively
(1) N stimulates cone production even when N is applied with other nutrients (Morris and Beers 1969) Also trees producing greater cone yields generally have higher levels of tisue N than low producers
(2) The presence of specific amino acids (especially arginine) is a more reliable predictor of fruitfulness than tissue N content per se For example nitrat N ana ammcinium N increased Douglasshyfir foliar N content and shoot growth similarly However only nitrate N significantly increased arginine content which was positively and quantitatively related to female flower proshyduction (Ebell and McMullin 1970) Following ichmidtlings (1974) explanation of fruit shyfulness fertilization shyespecially with nitrate N - could increase tis~ue organip Nand consequently flowering
(d) cultivation and irrigation
Supplemental water could increase growth reSUlting in greater crown density and iurface area In times of drought additional water could prevent premature abortion of immature cones Drip irrigaeion technology may be feaible for som~ sites However it seems more likely that less intensive ~ethods will prove to be practical Among these are land treatments that direct precipitation run-off to trees improve infiltration or remove weed competition
CHRISTMAS TREES
Pinyons are harvested from natural stands and comprise about 25 of all
Christmas trees sold in New Mexico Arizona Colorado Wyoming Utah and Nevada (Sowder 1965) Trimmed branches also are used for wreath manufacture In spite of their slow growth in native stands pinyons have many desirable Christmas tree attributes including dense foliage symmetrical shape green color natural fragrance good branch angle and limb strength and good needle retention Plantation trees can reach marketable size in about 11 years (Fisher and Fa~cher 1987)
Stand Thinning
Several techniques can be used to improve tree quality Stand thinning allows remaining trees to receive sufficient sunlight for limbs to develop uniformly on all sides During the thinning operation handles can be made on main stems by removing branches at the trees base to a height of 30 em
Removal of branches below a full whorl of branches will allow another tree to be culturedmiddotfrom the stump after harvest A year after the first tree is cut the remaining low branches will begin to turn up and all but one of these can be pruned to promote the growth of a new central leader
Pruning and Shearing
~he ideal pin~on Christmas tree resembles an inverted cone wide at the base and tapered uniformly tg the tip Accemiddotptable crown taper for pines is 40 to 90 but for spr~ces and firs is 40 to 70 Pruning and shearing will make native pinyons conform more closely to the ideal which improve marke tabi Ii ty
Pruning removes dead or unattractive branches Shearing is used to co~troi leader growth so the distance between whorls is not excessive increase the number of branches arising from branch buds and promote the pyramidal crown f~Im Because pinyon leader growth rarely exceeds 20 cm excessive distance between whorls is rarely a problem Pruning and shearing most often will be used to correct uneven o~oid and thia crowns
In pines eac~ needle bun~le ~ontains a dormant or axillary bud Removal of a branch terminal at the proper time promotes development of these dormant buds into short shoots improving crown density In singleshyneedled conifers such as spruces firs and Douglas-fir intermediate buds are produced along the terminal branch stem between each whorl For this reason they can be sheared during any season of the year and produce about the same number of branch buds However with pines the number and size of branch buds developed after shearing depends upon the physiological state of the tree when sheared
Pines respond best when sheared shortly after height growth is complete but before tissues in the new shoot becom~ woody S~oots prun~d at this time produce two to four times the number of buds found on unpruned trees Pinyon shoots elongata during late June but needles continue to elongatemiddotduring July and August after branches are fully elongated Buds are formed in late August
From studies conducted with other pine Christmas tree species the following course of treatments can be recommended for pinyons
1 Before spring growth begins prune all double and multiple leaders (eg bullbull April)
~ She~r when needles on new candles are 13 as long as last yeara needles (usually from June 15 to July 1)
3 Shape the tre~ from the top down by shearing the tips of lateral branches Pzomote a conical crown so thebase is no more than 90 as wide as the tree is tall Ideally taper should be 40-90 Avoid shearing back to woody tissue because this encourages multiple leaders
4 If the tree is oblong rather than tapered shear the top in June or eirly July and the sides in late summer fall or winter Growt~ of laterals will be reduced Repeat steps 2-4 yearly as needed
5 Avoid shearing the year the tree is ~o be marke~ed
20
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
FOREWARD
The Pinyon Act of 1987 provides a welcome opportunity for the College of Agriculture and Home Economics of New
Mexico State University to draw together wide-ranging expertise in research related tomiddot New Mexicos state trmiddotee Scientists from the New Mexico Agricultural Experimentbull Station have been conducting studies related to pinyon since 1904 The fruits of these labors are summarized by faculty actively involved in pinyon research The author~ also ad~ress research needed to fill serious information voids and identify opportunites to adapt new technologies to specific problems More extensive information can be found in the publications cited at the en~ of this work Indeed many may be surprised ~t the broad range of pinyon work already done by the scientists of the Agricultural Experiment Station
The Pinyon Act of 1987 specifically addressed public concerns about New Mexicos pinyon nut crops Papers found in this publication address the value of nut crops and identify research strategies best suited to improve nut quality and yiela~ Strategies to protect existing markets also are discussed
As articles were being written faculty met periodically to exchange views on product values and research prioritmiddoties This encour~ged the integration of ideas shaped by fac~lty interactions with consumers and research advisory groups experience and academic disciplines Most notable perhaps is that knowledge gaps were identified that must be bridged before some research can be applied to specific situations The publication summary identifies these problems as well as issues not likely to be investigated with existing research resources
The College of Agriculture and Home Ecomo_ics is indebted to Dr James T Fisher for organizing the effort to ~roduce this report In addition his scientific contributions are substantial Serving with Dr Fisher on the report coordinating committee were Dr John G Mexal Department of Agronomy and Horticulture and Dr Rex Pieper Department of Animal and Range Sciences and their efforts are greatly appreciated~ The following scientists
i
contributed to the effort through their committee participitation or papers or both
~
pre Bruce Buchanan Department of Agronomy and Horticulture Dr John Fowler Department of Agricultural Economics and Agricultural Business bull
bull Dr VW Howard Jr Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences
Dr Greg Phillip Department of Agronomy and Horticulture Dr Emroy Shannon Cooperative Extension Service Dr Karl Wood Department of Animal and Range Sciences
Thanks are due these faculty members for having undertaken the preparation of this report in addition to their many other teaching research and Extension duties
Finally the intended purpose of this document is to report th~ status of the pinyon resource in New Mexico so our legislators can accomplish their objectives more effectively We hope our purpose has been accomplished
John C Owens Dean and Chief Administrat1v~ Officer College of Agriculture and Home Economics New Mexico State University
II
lECOLOGY OF PINYON-JUNIPER VEGETATION IN NEW MEXICO
2Rex D Pieper M Karl Wood and Bruce B Buchanan
bull
Abstract Ecologically pinyon-juniper woodlands are extremely varied in New Mexico bull They occupy nearly all topographical positions in mid-elevational mountain ranges throughout the western two-thirds of the state Three species dominate the tree overstory layer -Juniperus monosperma Pinus edulis and Juniperus deppeana Understory shrubs and grasses vary considerably with site and geographic location Successional patterns follow those described for other locations but soil types may influence the development of seral stages
INew Mexico State University Agricultural Exper~ent Station SR 73-1
Professor and Associate Professor Department of Animal and Range Sciences Associate Professor Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las
Cruces NM 88003
1
INTRODUCTION
Pinyon-juniper vegetation in New Mexico is extremely variable because of climate soils topography and understory vegetation (Pieper 1977 Springfield 196) Pinyon-juniper vegetation generally occupies foothills and lower mountain slopes below 7500 ft in elevation (Springfield 1976) This vegetadon type occurs occasionally in valley bottoms on nearly Jevel terrain
Pinyon-junipervegetatiol1 occurred throughout the Intermountain Region and the Southwest as far back as the Last Great Ice Age and possibly earlier (Quarternary period) (Wells 1987) Although many shifts have apparently occurred in the distribution of individual species over the pait 2 million years recent increases in woody plant distribution and density is traced by many workers to mans disturbances Betancourt 1987)
Native American Indians have occupi4itd pinyon-juniper wood+ands in the western United States for centuries (Wasson 1987) and have utilized plants from these areas for many purposes including food
Much has been learned abOut ecology of pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico and the Southwest but IllUch remains to be learned This paper will summarize some of this knowledge
ECOLOGICAL FACTORSCONTROLLING DISTRIBUTION
Climate
Climatic patterns within the pinyon-juniper woodlampnd in the Southwest vary considerably in response to geographic variation and eleVation (Springfield 1977)
Precipitation
Inthesouthern portions of the pinyon-juniper woodland precipi~ation peaks occur during the summer from storms originating from the Gulf of Mexico (Springfield 1977) Winter storms from the Pacific Coast provide moisture for cool-season understory species in northern areas which are largely absent from southern areas
Table 1 shows the contrasting precipitstion pattern for Carlsbad in southeastern New Mexico and Fort Wingate in the northwestern part of the state By the end of May more than 35 of the total annual precipitation has been received at Fort Wingate compared to only 23 at Carlsbad The spring months tend to be much drier in southern portions of the woodland than in the north Both northern and southern portions exhibit summer peaks but it is somewhat delayed in the north (Table 1) More than 45 inches- pf precipitation occurs on the average in Carlsbad
during May June and July compared to only about 3~5 inches for Fort Wingate
Elevation also influences annual precipitation but not distribution Near Carlsbad Caverns in southeastern New Mexico annual precipitation averaged 13 in compared to 145 in at 4500 ft (Geh1bach 1967)
Temperature
Temperatures also vary geographically middotand with elevation Mean July temperatures were 70middot at ort Wingate and 80middot at Carlsbad while
mean JanuarY temperatures were 32degF at Fort Wingate and 44degF at Carlsbad (USDA 1941) Some of these differences may also be related to elevational differences For example maximum June temperatures were 4middoto F lower at Carlsbad New Mexico at 3120 ft elevation than at Carlsbad Caverns at 4435 ft Februaryminimums were 7degF warmsr at Carlsbad compared to those at the caverns (Gehtbach 1967)
So11s
Soils of the pinyon-juniper type are extremely variable bull Many authors assoctatethe woodland to be on coarse texture soils low in organic matter and alkaline (Barrett 1962) There are virtually no published works on the soil characteristics of the ecosystem but what appearsmiddot in the literature are scant descri~tions of specific study sites
rn New Mexico the USDA-Forest Service have identified three categories of the woodland ecosystem in their Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey of the Soutbwest region The so11s of these categories are dOm1nate1y Alfisols (primarily Hap1ustalfs) meSic (a-15middotmiddotC) temperature regime andustic moisture regime Ustic suggests primarily summer precipitation or a uniform distribution of precipitation The concept of the moisture regime is one of limited moisture but the soil moisture is present at a time wheo conditions are suitable for plant growth The definition of ustic is a rooting zone that is moist for either 180 cumulative days or 90 consecutive days iu most years (Barrett J W 1962) There are stands of pinyon-juniper in New Mexico that occur on cooler soils than mesic which are identified as frigid (O_8degC) but few that are found on warmer sites Other than Alfisols the major soils that support the woodland are Inceptisols (usually ustochrepts) Mollisols (usually calciustol1s Argicestolls and Haplustolls) Entisols (usually ustorthents) and to a limited extent Aridisols (usually Bap1argtds) bull
The three categories of the woodland recognized by the USDA-Forest are
1) Juniper composed of ~ monosperma (d osteosperma) This classifmiddotication is found at
2
Table 1--Monthly precipitation for Carlsbad and Fort Wingate New Mexico (From USDA 1941)
Fort Winsate Carlsbad -
Monthly Cumulative Monthly Cumulative Month Total Cumulative (Inches) Total Cumulative (Inches)
January 081 081 55 033 033middotbull 25
February 101 182 126 043 076 58
March 116 298 206 054 130 99
April 151 449 310 086 216 164
May 071 520 359 091 307 234
June 070 590 407 149 456 347
July 206 796 550 223 679 515
August 279 1075 742 1 70 849 647
September 143 1218 841 203 1052 801
October 076 1294 894 144 1196 908
Novembemiddotr 074 1368 945 060 1256 957
December 081 1449 1000 056 1312 1000
Total 1449 1312
middotbull
the lower elevat~ons and tends to bemiddotthe warmest and driest of the three Itmiddotis the least productive in total biomass production and in terms of wood averages about five cords of wood per hectare (2cordsAC)~
2) Pinyon-ju~iper composed of ~~ and a mix of monosperma and limited amounts of osteosperlila~ This classifieation has a shrub understory and has a higher biomass produetion than eategory 1 The cord-wood available is estimated to be from 10-20 cords per hectare (4-8 cordsAC)
middot3) Pinyonjuniper composed of edul1smiddot and a mix of monosperma and deppeana with a significant understory of Gambel Oak Thiamp category has the highest biomas production and cord-wood available is estimated to be nearly 35 cords per hectare (14 cordsAC)
The soils are widely distributed over all three categories of the woodland ecosystem and are not easily stratified to any one group It is common for the soils to have accumulations of carbcinatfils middotand frequently have calcic horizons These carbonate accumulations are mo~e frequent in oldermiddot soils on stable landscapes There seems to be no generalization with soil texture Almost any soil texture will support the ecosystem as will most ~y middotsoil depth Onemiddot common characteristic is the low amount of accumulated organic matter The upper 18 cm (Fincher or plow-layer) has less than 1 organic matter When organic matter does accumulate above this level it seems to be in soils with some combination of high clay content wettest end of the ustic moisture regimes or coolr than mesic temperature regimes Little is known about the influencemiddotof soil on the distribution and growth of the pinyon-juniperwoodlampnd
Site Index
Site index is an expressionmiddot of the tree growth potential of a site or a sites productive capacity Stocking expresses the density of trees on the land and spacing refers to its spatial distribution Standardpractice is to define site in terms of the total height of trees that have consistently been in a dominant position in well-stocked stands at specified key ages bull
A1thou~h tree height growth h4s been the most practical consistent and generally useful indicator of forest-site quality other features may be more mean~ngfulfor pinyon pine and junipers of New MexiCO These could include stem diameter volume or number Of stems per tree or some combination of these variables
Site indeX is used in land management to determine a forestis rotation A forest rotation is defined as the period of years required for treestobecome established and
grOW to a specified condition of maturity
Determining themiddotlengthof the rotation is one of the key d~cisions a manager of pinYon-juniper must make There are two basic groups of physical and financial factors that influence the length of the rotation (1) des1red products (largely a matter of markets or of a demand in a general economic sense) and (2) forest productivity or what Can be grown (supply) bull
The praetical importance of site index often is notgiven inadequate attention in the buying and selling of forest lands and in forest management The report by Fowler (1984) indicates there is presently a little infcirmstiondealingwith the production of fiber on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico They
constructed volume tables based on tree diameter and height for a so11 site near Taos andmiddot another near Cloudcroft More than 600 observations were used at each site and they concluded that the tables were not int~rchangeable these authors suggested a rotation of greater than 200 years
A comparison of photographs taken upto 100 years ago and recent photographs of the s~e areas indicate that many soils in New Mexico have pinyon-juniper growth rates that are much more rapid than the sites near Cloudcroft and Taos Some sites probably could be managed for fence posts and fuel wood on a 50-year rotationmiddot or less This would change manag~nt schemes tremendously and be much more useful than a rotation of more than 200 years for the entire state Obviously site indices need to be established for at least the major so11 types associated with pinyon~juniper stands in New Mexico
Topography
Pinyon-juniper woodlands occmiddotur on a wide variety of topographical positions (Lymbery and Pieper 1983) S~dies in theSacramento Mountains of southcentral New Mexico showed that
aspect (exposure) slope steepness and slope position did not have major impacts on tree characteristics (Lymbery and Pieper 1983 Pieper and Lymbery 1987) Only general patterns were
apparent Rocky Mountain pinYon density was higher in relation to that of singleseed juniper
on steeper slopes and possibly on northern middotaspects Tree density appeared to be more sensitive to topographic variables than tree size or canopy cover
Shrubby species showed a response to topographic position (Lymbery and Pieper 1983)bull Walkingstick Cholla (Opuntia imbricata) was more abundant on xeric sputh-faeing slopes while skunkbush (Rhus trilobata) and wavy-leaf oak (Quercus undUlata) were more abundant on nortb-facing slopes Gehlbach (1967) fout)d similar relationships on the Gusdalupe Mountains in southeastern NewMexico
4
Rocky MoUntain pinyon generally increasesin abundance with elevation as abundance of juniper decreases (Pieper and Lymbery an4 Woodin and Lindsey 1954) Similar patterns are also apparent in the Great Basin (Tueller at ale 1979)
Hydrology
A diverse range of vegetatie species climatic factors and soil parent materials govern the water in pinyon-juniper ecosystems Unfortunately little hydrologic-related researchbullbull has been accomplished This is shocking in light of the importance on water to New Mexico and its neighbors Schmidt (1987) claims a gap exists between the available scientific knowledge base and application by land managers This results at l~ast in part from apast tendency to accept hydrologiC information supporting eradication of pinyon-juniper and to disregard findings tbat questioned the watershed benefit of these practices Changes in public demands haw resulted in a reassesaent of management goals for pinyonjuniper Managers lackadequate knowledge of inventory methods si1vicu1tura1systemsand productivity in relation to runoff processes Schmidt also
stated that fuxther long-termaall-watershed studies are needed to fill knowledge gaps and provide a framework for plot ~tudies
Because of its topographic position pinyon-juniper woodl~nds greatly influence runoff generated from higher elevation ecosystems It is often the last ecosystem that water passes through before being diverted for use Most water yield studies for pinyon-juniper have been conducted at Corduroy Creek and Beaver Creek in Arizona with a few 881411 plot studies in Nevada and Utah These studies centered on potentials for increasing water yields and effects of various type conversion strategies Pinyon-juniper was considetedundesirable and merely represented a barrier to increasing grassland cover The energy crisis and environmental movements ofthe 1970s curtailed major type-converSion efforts Fuel wood demand changed the emphasis to sustain yield Maintaining pinyon-juniper stands on soils that have been invaded by these plants because of cessation of fire may prove to be ecologically disastrous because of hydrologiC tmpacts especially erosion
Highlights of Current Knowledge
Climate Few studies ~ist on the climate of pinyon-juniper stands A Nevada study showed pinyon-juniper to be confined to a thermal belt above the valley inversions and below the colder upslope elevations This may also be true in much of New Mexico
Precipitation Total daily monthly and annual precipitation patterns for the
pinyon-juniper type are well known but storm characteristics are not These are needed to identify runoff-producing storms and predict erosion Some 5-minute intensities have approached 8 inches per hour in Arizona A study of maximum 2-m1nute intensities found 42 inches per hour at Alamogordo Cteek New Mexico A Utah study shows the greatest intensities to occur at elevations between 6s0Q and 8000 feet which coincides with the pinyon-juniper ecosystlim
Interception This variable is usually insignificant in most eoosystems However in a pinyon-juniper stand an interception capacity of 02 inch would reduce the effective 5-minute intensity by 24 inches per hour Interception values have been found to range from 013 to 094 inch per hour in Arizona The 094 inch would reduce the effective s-minute intensity by 1128 inches per hour Blue grams has been found to retain about 015 inch of precipitation which reduces the effective S-m1nute intensity by only 18 inches per hour No pinyon-juniper litter studies are known
Infiltration Studies of infiltration have received the greatest amount of attention from watershed scientists from other states Generally where pinyon-juniper trees are not part ofmiddot the climax vegetationbullinflltratt-0n rates between trees are much lower than underneath trees This is especially true where the understory is sparce because of competition forllght soil water and nutrients by the more dominant pinyon-juniper trees Where pinyon-juniper are climal ie rocky hillsides infiltration rates were similar Management and miaanagement can greatly alter the infiltration rates
Runoff Pinyon-juniper often produces surface-runoff in response to high-intensity short-duration storms which are the most frequent storms in New Mexico The Saliz watershed near Reserve New Mexico once reported a peak flow rate of 1380 cubic feet per second per square mile Schmidt (1987) reports that currently information on frequency and magnitude of precipitation-runoff related to site conditions is inadequate for design of facilities in this ecosystem
Sedfment production This is the major water quality concern from the pinyon-juniper ecosystem Some stands ID Arizona produced more than a ton of sedfment from each acre each year Impacts of new uses of the pinyon-juniper type are not known and need investigation
HydrologiC Impacts from Increasing Mu1t1pie Use Demands
Uses of pinyon-juniper ecosystems are rapidly expanding in New Mexico New and innovative land management schemes are needed to respond to these demands while maintaining and
5
improving the productive potential Many roads Ue in the bottoms of drainage ways Which concentrates diffuse runoff into damaging flows arid serious erosion Road systems continue to expand in many pinyon-juniper stanels as a result of off-road vehicle recreation hunting arid wood gathedng Many livestock anel wilellife grazing msnagement strategies are geareel to proviele for plant health but fail to conaieler adequately the impacts of use that affect infiltration flow concentrations ariel erosion It is not known hoW much plant material should be left on-site to protect most rangelands including pinyon-junper ecosystems in New Mexico
A significant amount of the existing unsatisfactory watersheelconclitionsare associateel with the pinyon-juniper ecosystem The hydrologic variables associated with pinyon-juniper are highly sensitive to use
Opt~um watershed treatment strategies to restore iong-term productivity and reduce flood and sediment risks need to be identified
PINYON-JUNIPER VEGETATION
Overstory tree Species
The threemaj)r tree species found in New Mexico within the pinyon-juniper woodland are Rocky Mountain pinyon Singleseed juniper ancl Alligatorjuniper (LaDner 1975 1981 Little 1950 Pieper 1977 anel Sprlngfield) Rocky Mountain pinyon and Singleseed juniper are founel throughout the pinyor-juniper wooellanel in the Southwest but Alligator juniper is more abunclant in western New Mexico anel Arizona Utah juniper also occurs in some pinyon-juniper woodlands in northwestern New Mexico while Rocky Mountain juniper (Juniperus scopulorum) occurs in northern New Mexico
Unclerstory Vegetation
Big sagebrush (Artelisia tridentata) is a common understory shrubby species in northern and northwestern New Mexico (Pieper 1977 Springfield 1976) Several oak species (Quercus arizonica 51 grisea 9 emoryi anel 9 oblongifolia) are ilIiportant understory shrubs in western and southwestern New Mexico Mountain
mshogany (Cercocarpus montana) and Wrights silk tassel (Garrya wrightii) are also important browse species in this area (Boeker et al 1972shyand Short et al 1977) Blue gra- (BouteloUa gracilis) occurs as an understory grass species throughout the wooellancl vegetation in thestate In northern areas cool season species of such genera as 2Festuca anel Agropyron occur ONest et al 1975) In central ancl southeastern New Mexico warm season species of the general Muhlenbergia Hilaria Lycurus anel Bouteloua occur
Habitat Types
Kennedy (1983) identified six relatively undisturbed habitatmiddot types in the Sacramento Mountains of southcentralNewMexicQ (Table 2) These habitat types ranged from about 6200ft to 7000 ft in average elevation and from 33 to 47 understory cover (Kennedy 1983 Table 2) The ~ ecluUs-Juniperus monospermal
Muhlenbergia pauc1flora habitat type was perhaps themost common type in this area Francis and Aldon (1983) also identified three pinyonshyjuniper habitat typu innortbwestern New Mexico
Uriderstory Patterns
Pinyon-juniper vegetation forma a mosaic pattern with trees interspersed with open grassland areas between the trees Armentrout and Pieper (1988) have described three understory zones associated with singleseed juniper and Rocky Mountain pinyon The first zone is that surrounding the trunk of the tree and is characterized by shrubs such as skunkbrush ancl algerita (Berberis haematocarpa) The seconcl zone is largely beneath the tree canopy Several grass species such as sideoats grams (Boute1oua curtipendula) wolftal (Lycurus phleoides) and blUe grams were abundant in the seconcl zone Several species inclUding blue grama wolf tail ancl creeping muhly (Muhlenbergia repeus) were more abundant under tree canopy ori the north side rather than on the southmiddot side (Schott and Pieper 1985) Pinyon ricegrass (Piptochaetium fimbriatum) appears to be favored by conditions under canopies of singleseed juniper Grass species of the open grassland zone included blue grama wolftaU gal~eta sanddrapseed and mat muhly~
Age and Size Class Structure
Many pi~yon-juniper stands h~vebeen disturbeel during the past 100 years by fuel or fence post harvesting bUrDing or mechanical control treatments Consequently many trees are relatively young bull Age class distributions consequently do not followmiddot the typical inverted J-shaped curve for ma~ure stanels Figure 1 shows age-class distribution for 202 Rocky Mountain pinyon trees from five study sites in the Sacramento Mountains This distribution appears to be nearly normal with most trees falling in the 70 to 130 yearmiddotage class However the specific distribution at each site depended on time since last disturbance and type of disturbance (Plumb-Mentjes anel Pieper 1983) Pinyon age is relatedto basal diameter but only 38 of the variation in age can be explained by basal diameter (Figure 2) Apparently~stand density (competition) influences siz~ of trees sUbstantially
6
0
Table 2 - Pinyon-Juniper Habitat Types of the Lincoln National Forest (From Kennedy 1983)
Tree Density
Average Understory Avg Stems Habitat Type Elev Ft Cover Plot
bull PINYON-JUNIPER SERIES
1 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Cercocarpus montanusAndropogon gerardi HT 6178 42 36
2 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Muhlenbergia pauciflora HT 6470 33 63
3 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Stipa columbiana HT 6678 36 123
4 Pinus edulis-Junil rus monosperma Bouteloua gracilis HT 6977 37 163
5 Punis edulis-Juniperus deppeana Bouteloua gracilis HT 6739 46 65
6 Pinus edulis-Juniperus deppeana Muhlenbergia dubia HT 6920 47 105
22 I
20
11
I
I
20 110 611 1110012011101611130 middotIY_I
Figure 1 Age class distribution of aU pinyon pines on study areas
- 1511r bull 100
1 bull 05 ~ 11amp50 2 r bull 031 n bull zaz
22 11 111 _ 1HIICMIl
Figure 2bull Relationship betweenDBB and age of pinyon pine for all trees bull
RESPONSE TO DISTURBANCE (SECONDARY SUCCESSION)
Several successional models have been proposed for secondary succession followingmiddot disturbance that removes most of the trees (Arnold et a1 1964 Barney and Frischknecht 1974 and Erdman 1976) These general patterns alsomiddotapply to conditions in middotpinyon-juniper woodlands in central New Mexico (Dwyer and Pieper 1967 Rippel et al 1980 1983 Schott and Pieper 1986 1987a 1987b 1987C) Bowever specific patterns are influenced by the type of soils supporting the woodland vegetation (Schott arid Pieper 1986 1987a) Generally- soils that are fairly shallow and rocky have some seral stages poorly represented (Table 3) When sitesmiddot with these soils are treated mechanically shrubs such as wavy-leaf oak do not increase (Rippel et al 1983) On similar soils with few roek outarops grassforb and shrubgrass stages are common Response of Rocky Hountainpinyon
and singleseed juniper appear to be dependent on density and size of trees before treatment If
the stanpmiddot was near climax before cabling pinypnsrapidly become dominant on the site If the stand was in someseral stage there would be more junipers but theimiddotr relatively slow growth and time for uturation require more time before middotthey would dominate the site
RESEARCH NEEDS
Only limited research on pinyon-juniper ecology in northern and westernmiddot New Mexico has been conducted Informst~on is lacking on basic ecological relationship at both plant communitymiddot and individual species level lactors influencing distribution of these woodlands are poorly understood lor example in many situations pinyon-juniper appears to be moving uphill in elevation and encroaching on ponderosa pine forests Such situation have not been analyzed Success~onal patterns where alligator juniper is a major potenUal component of the vegetation have not been determined Analyses of these woodlands for several uses and products are needed for laUd unagament purposes
4 bull ~
Table 3 -- General pattern of succession on cabled pinyon-juniper wood1anda on two soil types (From Schott and Pieper 1986)
Sera1 Stages Climax 1 2 3
Original Conditions
General successional Annual forb Grassforb Shrubgrass Pinyon-juniper model
Lithic hapustoll Annuals and Perennial Shrubs dominant Pinyon and juniper perennials from grasses and shade conducive dominating Pinyon seeds which disshy forbs with to tree establishshy eventually dominant perse readily establishment ment surviving perenshy and spread of nials shrubs (esp
0 wavy-leaf oak)
Lithic hapusto11- Annuals and These stages absent or poorly represhy Pinyon dominating Rock outcrop complex perennials from sented Rock outcropsmiddotrestrict vegshy Climax with juniper bull
seed which disshy etative reproduction perse readily surviving perenshynials
fI
LITERATURE CITED
Armentrout S M and R D Pieper 1988 Plant distribution surrounding Rocky Mountain Pinyon and one seed juniper in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range Management 41 (In press) bull
Arnold J F bullbull D A Jameson and E H Reid 1964bull The pinyon~jun1per type of Arizona Effects of grazing fire and tree control US Department of Agriculture Production Research Report 84~
Barney MA and N C Frischknechtmiddot 1974 Vegetation change follOwing fire in the
pinyon-juniper type of west-central Utah Journal of Range Management 279~-96
Barrett J W 1962 Regional Silviculture of the United States The Ronald Press Co bullbull NY 610p
BetancourtJ L 1987 Paleoecology of pinyon-juniper woodlands summary In Everett R L (compiler) proceedings~ pinyon-juniper conference USDA For SerGen Techbull Rep INT-215~
Boeker E Lbullbull V E Scott H G Reynolds and B A Donaldson 1972~ Seasonal food habits of mule deer in southWestern Ne Mexicobull Journal of Wildlife Management 3656-63 bull
Erdman Jbull A 1970 Pinyon-juniper succession after natural fires in residual soils of MesaVerde Colorado Brigham Young University Science Bulletin Series 11 ~rovo Utah
Fowler J M R D Bowe BE Peacock KC McDanielT Garner-Hurt J R Gray and
M Cardenas 1974 Wood fiber production in pinyon-juniper woodlands on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico New MeXico State University Agricultural Experiment~tation Research Report NO~ 519
Francis R E and E bull F Alden 1983 Preliminary habitat types of a semiarid grassland In MOir W H and L Hendzel (Tech COQrdinatora) Proceeding of the workshop pn southwestern habitat types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Gehlbach F R 1967 Vegetation of the Guadalupe escarpment New Mexico-Texas Ecology 48404-419
Kennedy K L 1983 A habitat type classification of the p~yon-juniper woodlands of the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico In Moir W H and Leonard Hendzel (Tech-Coordinators) Proceedings of the workshop on southwestern habitat
types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Lanner bull R M 1975 Pinyon pines and junipers of the southwestern woodlandsmiddot In Gifford G F and 1 E Buspy The pinyonjunipr ecosystem a symposium Utah State Univ bullbull Logan
Lanner R Mmiddot1981 The pinyon pine a natural and cultural history Univ Nevada Press
Reno
Little E L bull 1950 Southwestern trees Amiddot guide to the native species of middotNew Mexico and Arizona US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Agricultural Handbook 9
Lymbery bull G A and R D Pieper 1983 Ecology of pinyon-juniper vegetation in the northern Sacramento Mountains New Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 698
Pieper R D 1~77 The southwestern pinyon-juniper ecosystem In Aldon Earl F and T J~ Loring (Tech Coord) US Departmentmiddot Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report RM-31
Pieper R D and G A Lymbery 1987 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegettion in south-central New Mexico In~ Everett Richard L (compiler) proceedings - pinyon-juniper conference US Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT-21S
Plumh-Mentjes M L and R D Pieper 1983 Diameter distribution and age class structure of pinyon pine (Pinus eduiis Engelm) in south-central~Mexico Abstract 36th annual meeting Society for Range Management Denver CO bull
Schmidt L j 1987 Present and future themes in ptnyon-juniper hydrology In ~verett R L (compiler) U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report 1NT-215
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1985 Influence of canoP1 characteristics of one-seed juniper on understory grasses Journal of Range Management 38328-331
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1986 Succession in pinyon-juniper vegetation in New Mexico Rangelands 8126-128
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987a Succession of pinyon-juniper communities a~ter mechanical disturbance in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range ~anagement 4088-94
1Q
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987bbull Water relationships of Quercus undulata ~ edulis and Juniperus monosperma in seral pinyon-juniper communities of south-central New Mexico In Everett R L (compiler) us Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT~215 bull
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987cbull bull Succession in tree pits following cabliD8
in pinyon-juniper c01lllllUt1ities Southwestern Naturalist 32399-402
~ Short H L t W Evans and E L Boeker 1977 The use of natural and modified pinyon pine-juniper wOodlands by deer and elk Journal of Wildlife Management 41543-559
Springfield H W 1976 Characteristics and management of southwestern pinyon-juniper ranges the status of our knowledge US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Res Pap RM-160
Tueller P T C D Beeson R J Tausch N E West and K HRea 1979 Pinyon-juniper woodlands of themiddotGreat Basin distribution flora vegetal cover U SbullDepartment of Agriculture Forest Service Research Paper INT~229
USDA 1941 Cltmate and man Yearbook of Agriculture U S Govt Printing Office Washington DC
Wasson G E 1987 The American Indian response to the pinyon-juniper conference In Everett R L(compller) USDA For Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Wells P V 1987 Systematics and distribution of pinyons in the late quarternary In Everett R Lbull (compiler) Proc - Pinyon-juniper Conference USDA For Sere Gen Tech Rep INT-215
West N E K H Rea and R J Tausch 1975 Basic Synecological relationahips in pinyon-juniper woodlands In Gifford G E and F E Busby (eds) ~e pinyon-juniper ecosystem A symposium Utah State University Logan
Woodin H E and A A Lindsey 1954 Juniper-pinyon east of the Continental Divide as analyzed by the line-strip metWod Ecology 35473-489
11
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES I CROP
bullJ
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH WOODLAND STA~D MANAGEMENT l
James T Fisher John G Me~al and Gregory C Phillips
Abstract-- New Mexicos native pinyon pines produce high-value crops including nuts Christmas trees and nursery or~amentals Crop values can be increased through more intensive stand management and more innovative marketing of such products as pinyon nuts and Christmas trees to compete with imported products Research needs pertaining to these crops are discussed
1 Ne~ Mexico State University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-II
2 Authors are re~pectively
Professor and Associate Professors Dept of Agronomy and Horticulture New
Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
13
INTRODUCTlON
Pinyons (pinon p~nes) ield diverse productsranging frolll valuable nuts ~nd landscape sp~cll11ens to fuelwood
Rowever littleforethought is give~ to crop illlprovelllentbeforecropsare ha~vested This paper addresses high-value pinyon products ~hat appear to justify at least modest levels omiddotf lIIanacelllent inputs to improve product quality quantity or avail- abilty Greater elllphasis on ~ntensive lIIanagelllentmiddot recognizes the nee~ for deriving economic benefits as well as the need for cu~todiai lIIanagelllent to pre~erve the
woodland type (Lanner 1977)
Pinyon and pinyon-juniper woodlands hav~ be~n the su~lect of severai symposia The reader iamp directed to proceedings of these lIIeetings providing several papers on the subject [~ee Gifford and Busby (19-75) Aldon and Loring (1977) Evrett (1987) and a fbrthcoming volume reporting a n~~ional lIIeeting held in Mexico in 1987]
This paper specifi~ally exalllines pinyon nut production including lIIarket developlllents that potentially threaten regional markets and the selective harvest of Christlllas trees and nursery or~alllentals Methods available t~ illlprove crop profitability will be discussed in addition to cuirent and future research
NUT BEARING PINES
Plant taxonomists recognize about 100 species in the falllily Pinaceae Alllongthese 12 to 26 species produce quality edible nuts (Rosengarten 1984 Lanner 1981) An edible nut is large middot(generallly les8 than 2200 seedkg) and has a thin shell that can be cracked with the teeth Pines producing edible nuts are found mostly in Europe Asia and western North middotAmerica Large ~dlblen~ts are found ~ostiyalllong the ~tone pines ~Sub8ection Celllbraa) nat~ve to Europe and ASia and the pinyon pines (Subsection Celllbroides) native to North Alllerica
Pinyons are dwarf trees nd shrubS 9f sellliarid regions of the southwestern Uni ted Sta tes and Mexico Because pinyons grow slowly it ismiddot difficult to lustify th~ cost of establishing and cultivatin~ p~aniations for nut production IncreaSingly nuts gathered
from the stone pines are imported f~om Asia and marketed at a lIIuch lower cost According to D~nielFox (pers C~IIII11) about 1000 ~tric tons of ~helled Asian pine nuts are imported each year Re also reports that abou~ 100 ton~ of ~ pinea nuts are illlported from Portugal and Spain
To protect pinyonnut m~rkets it lIIay becollle necessary to develop criteria that effectively distinguish pinyon nuts frolll illlported pine ~uts~ To exallline the feasibility of developing these criteria we will examine t~egeographic ranges and speclal characteristics of nut-producing pines under their respective subsections of the family Pinaceae proposed by Critchfield and Little (1966)
lli Subsec tiOn Celllbroides (Pinyons)
Pines classified und~i the subse~tion Ce~bi~ides (pinyons) have 1-5 needles in a fascicle Seeds are large wingl~ss a~d sOlllewhat oval in shape Lanner (1981) reported 11 species but a more recent treatlllent ofmiddot the alliance r~cognizes 15ta~a (Bailey and Ha~ksworth 1988) Eight species occur in the United States 12 in Mexico and 3 in New Mexico (P edulis I lIIonophylla and I~di-cOlor) The pinyon species discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988)include
Uni ted States
(l) Pinus edulis (pinyon) t 4200 seedkg
The predominant pinyon species of New Mexico Widespread in the southwestern United States lust
entering Wyollling and extending south through Utah Colorado and ~ew ~~xico to the western ~nd of Oklahollla~ west Texas and the northern border of Chihuahua extending west throughout lIIuch of Arizona to an outlier in eastern California Range ov~rlaps ~ith P celllbroides in south~rn New Mexico and Arizona and with P monophylla at the westerD edge of its range (southw~stern Utah northwestern Arizona and the New York Mountains o~ sOuthern California (Fig 1) Kay occa~ionally intergrade with P lIIonophylla
(2) monophylla lsingleleaf plny~n)
[ 2400 seed kg ] The pinyon pine ~fthe Great
14
bull P SAalNIANA bull P aMIIilOIOEl III Po OUAOIIIIOUA bull P MONOPttYLLA bull P eDULIS
Figure 1 Diatrlbution of pinyon pines in lJOuthwestern United States and northern Mexieo
Basin and Mohave Desert Com~onin Nevada and in parts of southern California and western Utah but also ex~ends acr~ss Arizona and southwestern Ke~ Mexico (ig~ 1)
United States and Mexico
(3) Pinus middotcellbroides (Mexican pinyon)
[ 2400 seedkg J Range widespread at low
elevations in the mountains bordering the arid plate~u of northern Mexico Ranges from southeastern Arizona southwestern Arizona southwestern New Mexico and western Texas through northern Mexico and south to Puebla and Mexico City (Fig 1) Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) middotrecognize three subspecies cembroides (northern Mexi~o) lagunae (Baja California) and orizabensis (Central Mexico) (Fig 1)
(4) P californiarum-
Subspecies californiarum
occurs in southern Californ~a and northern Baja California I californiarum subsp fallax (formerly P edulis var fallax) is-found in Arizona
(5) Pinus discolor (border pinyon)
Formerly P cembroides var bicolor~ Principal range lies along both sides of the intershynational boundary between Mexico and the United States extending about 120 miles into eac~ country Sp-ecifically occurs in southeast Arizona extreme southwest New Mexico northeas~ ~onora and northwest Chihuahua
( 6) quad r ifo11a (Parry pinyon) [ 2100 seedkg J
Confined to 10 elevations in the dry mountains of southern California from the San Jacinto Mountains south to the S~erra San Ped~o Martir Its range overlaps that of I monOphylla but no intermediates have been reported (Fig 1)middot
(7) Pinus remo ta (paper-shell pinyon also called
Texas pinyon) Formerly P cembroides var
remota Main range in Coahuila but reaches parts of adjacent Nuevo Leon southeastern Chihuahua and rexas (Bailey and Wendt 1979) Has thinnest shell among pinyons~
Local Endemics Found Exclusively in Mexico
(8) Pinus culminicola (Potosi pinyon)
Documented occurrence Cerro PotOSi Nuevo Leon Mexico
(9) johannis Li~ited r4nge in Mexico
(west of Concepcion del Oro Zacatecas
(10) Pin~s maximartinezii (Martinez pinyon)
Documented Occurrence Zacatecas Mexico
(11 ) Pinus nelsonii (Nelson pinyon)
Documented ocaurrence north- eastern Mexicobull
(12) ~pinceana (Pinca pinyon)
15
Documented occurrence northshy Grows at high elevations inth~ eastern and eastern Mexco Alps and the Carpathian ~ountains
(3) bullbull koraiensis S~eb amp Zucco ~ SUDsect PINEAE Shaw (Korean pine)
[ 1800 seedkg](n Pinuspinea L Rngebull through Korea and (Italian stone pine) eastern Manchuria into southeastern [ 1300 seedkg ] Siberia with outlirs ~ri t~e
Wide_pread in Spain and Japalliue islands of Honshu and Portugal and aiong the northern and Shikoku (Fig 2) eastern shores ~f the Mediterranean Sea including minor occurrences (4) P sibirica near the north coast of Turkey rSibe~ian ston~ pine(Fig 2) [ 4000 seedkg
Ranges from the Ural Mountains Pinus Subsect CEMBRAE through western and central ~iberia---(Stone Pines) to northern Mongolia with outliers
in northern Russia (Fig ~)(1) Pinus albicaulis Engelm~
(whitebark pine) Pinus Subsect GERARDIANAE [ 5700 seedk ] -- shy
Occurs at high eleyations fro~ (1) gerardian Wall~ central British Columbia sout~ to (Chilgoza pine)s~uthern Sierra Nevada of [ 400 seedkg J California the Ruby Mountain of Noted for large edible seed Nevada and the mOuntains of Confined to mountainous regions of northwestern Wyoming eastern Asia principally in
eastern Afgha~itan~ parts of (2) Pin~s cembra L Pakistan ~nd ~catt~red localities
(Swiss stone pine) in the dry inner valleys of the [ 4400 seedkg 1 north~rn Himalayas (Fig 2)
eocIIn_a _shyFigure 2 Distribution of edible pine nuts in Europe and
Asia
16
bull
Pinus Subsect SABINIANAE Loud Opportumiddotnities aay exist to separate pinyOn nuts other froa pine nuts Most
(I) Pinu~ ~abiniana Dougl pine nuts have a ridge where the (Digger pine) membranous wing is attached Also [ 1300 seed kg criteria based upon seed content could
Confined to California Found be applied when large vol~aes of in dry foothills of ihe Sierra imported pine nuts are suspected to be Nevada and the Coast Rangemiddot Ras aislabeled Tests aight exaine levels large edible but rather hard-shelled of starch fat or piotein or even seeds (Fig bull1) smiddotpecific enzyaes (Table 1)
(2) Pinus coulteri D Don (Coulter pine) New Mexico Pinyon Nut Crops ( 3100 seedkg]
Restr~cted to the coastal mountains of cen~ral and southern Pinyon nuts have been harvested California and northern Baja commercially for about 50 years California (Little 1938a) The nut crop averages
045 to 09 million kg (I to 2 million The preceding list makes clear that pounds) annually for New Mexico Arizona
many pinyon species are found in North and Colorado but one year exceeded 36 America with the greatest number found million kg (Little 1942) The more in Mexico Further it seems neither productive stands may yield 330 kglha practical nor necessary to develop (300 lbsac) during a good year market criteria to separate nut products (Springfield 1976) At a cur~ent found among these species Morphological retail value of $883 I kg value on a differences among pinyon nuts are per hectare basis would be $297000 generally so slight as ~o pre~lude (120000 lac) Fowler and Oliver (this practical field identification publication) provide additional Also most Mexican species occur as information on nut values rather isolated populations with local value but low export potential For New Mexico species criteria would have to recognize as genuinely natibullbull those Pinyon Reproductive Biology nuts produced by at least three pinyon species edulis monophylla and P di$color Again nut morphological Pinyons begin bearing nuts at about criteria would not separate these 25 years but crops do not reach pinyons from other species of the same commercial size until about 75 years subsection (Little 1941) Cones are borne
Table 1-- Composition of pine nuts and true nuts (Lanner 1981 Woodroof 1979) All values are expressed as percentages
Kernal H2O Protein Fat Carboshyhydrates
Ash
Pinyon nuts P edulisP monophIllaImiddot cembroides
58 31 14 10 19
60 23 60
18 54 14
3
Pine nuts P sabinianaP pineaImiddot sibirica P lerardiana
49 30 34 19 14
60 48 63 51
9 7
12 23
4
True nuts
Almond Pecan Pistacio Walnut Peanut
51 52
shy45
47 30
33
19 9
20 15 26
54 73 53 64 39
20 15 19 16 24
3 2 3 2
laterally ~n the a~il of a scale leaf near branch tips (jhaw~ 1914) although a r~re observation 01 termin~l cones b~s been reported (Lanner 1969) Developing cones can be ~een in the e~rliest stages as ovulate primordia in longitudinal sections of bu4s Within buds ovulate cone primordia are only at the tip of the bud an~have larger and broader bases than spur shoots (Little 1938-b)
ovuiate primordia are formed in buds in August and September and cones mature by October of the third year Because 3 years are required for seeds to mature treatments applied to stimulate nut quantity~il~ require 3 years before evaluation The first year must be especially suited to production of ovulate primordia and the second and third seaasons favorable to growth and maturation of cones and nuts(Li~tle 1938b)
The Periodicity of Bumper Crops
Pinyon ~ut crops are prodUCed at intervals of 3 to 7 years The periodicity of above-average cropshas been related to the dtain of nutrients required to produce the crop an~ the time required for nutrients to be replenished Developing cones act as food sinks for carbohydrate and nitrogen (N) reserves at the expense of vegetative structures (Pickmann and Kozlowski 1969 1970 ~ook and S~et 1971) Consequently large cone crops adversely affect vegetative tree growth
Forcella (1981) found cone production was inversely relate~ to temperatures during late-August to early September Maximum production in northern New Mexeio occurred when the mean maximum weekly temperature was below 24 degrees C Temperatures above 24 degrees C resulted in virtually no cone crops
However other environmental factors~ acting independently or inte~actinl with temperature caa be involved Rainfall is positively correia ted with the flowering of pines This is because photosynthat~ 9roduction is needed to develop carbohydrate reserves and this process is limited by ~lant water stres~ Also tree growth is determined by photosynthetic gain and the onset of abundant flowering is more directly rela~ed to tree siZe than
age (Schmidtling 1969) More speci1icallj nut ~roduction is e~osely
related to crown surface area
An exception to the adverse influen~e of wa~er ~tress is the positive roie stress plays in the initiat~on of ovula~e primordia Studies have shown that summer moisture
stress results in an above-average flower crop the following spring This suggests moisture stress at the time of ovulate primordia formation promotes reproductive rather than vegetative bull growth This view is supported by studies shOwing that branches exposed to full sun bore more female cones and had lower tissue moisture levels than partially shaded branches (Wareing~ 1958)
Water ~tress also can indirectly affect flowering thro~gh its interaction with tree nutrient status E~ell (1970) showd that nitrate fertili~ation or exposure to moisture stress caused similar tiowe~ing responses in Dougl~s-firaccompaniedby increases in total foliage N content and free amino
acids especially ~rgini~e Similarly Schmidtling (1974) suggested that water stress or N fertilization can increase flowering through the same metabolic intermediary namely arginine or some related N-containing substance~
Manipulation of Native Nut Crops
pespite the importance of coniferous nuts in many parts of th~
world only two pine species appear to be cultivated for their seed crops P
pinea in the Medi terranean and - sibirica in the Urals (Pravdin 1963) The pinyons of estern North America and Meiico ar mos~ly ignored in terma of cultiv~tion or domestication
Little (1140) was among the first to suggest that pinyon nu~ prQduction could be augme~ted tbtough the USe of simple cultutal practices However these received little attention and we have no grea~er und~rstanding of the effi~lcy or econoic feasibility of these treatments now than we did more than 40 ~ears ago Nev~rtheles~ with the present emphasis on wocidland management ~uch treatmenta seem worthy of serious attention
Ca) selective thinning
Some pibyonsapear to be
18
Nut sizes from pruned and unpruned Pinus edulis trees
19
consistently good nut producers (Little 1940) Heavy producers usually show immature and old cones on branches and cones are conspicuous b~neath them Selective thinning of unpr04uctive trees should increase flowering of those left standing (Little 1940)
(b) basal pruning
Theoretically low branches receiving partial sun light do not photosynthesize enough energy to offset energy losses to respiration It follows that low branches are energy sinks that potentially r~b nutrients from seed crops To test this relationship Montano et al (1980) pruned baial branches of 70 to 80-year old pinyons (8 to 10 m tall) to a height of 15 m and SUbsequently determined effects of this treatment on seed development They reported av~rage nut volumes from gruned and ungruned trees were 040 cm and 032 cm and the average nut weights were 033 g and 020 g respectively (see Fig3) Also pruned trees produced a greater percentage of filled nuts 99 as opposed to 84 The effects observed were related to the growth of nuts already developing in cones when the treatment was applied
Basal pruning reduced disease and insect injury of southern pnes (Wilson and Rudolph 1970) Also pruned wood could b sold for ~uelwood potentially offsetting the cost of the benefits anticipated Owing to its simplicity and overall benefits basal pruning appears to merit greater attention
(c) fertilization
Fertilization usually stimulates female cone production (Puritch 1972) More specifically the following trends become apparent when studies are reviewed collectively
(1) N stimulates cone production even when N is applied with other nutrients (Morris and Beers 1969) Also trees producing greater cone yields generally have higher levels of tisue N than low producers
(2) The presence of specific amino acids (especially arginine) is a more reliable predictor of fruitfulness than tissue N content per se For example nitrat N ana ammcinium N increased Douglasshyfir foliar N content and shoot growth similarly However only nitrate N significantly increased arginine content which was positively and quantitatively related to female flower proshyduction (Ebell and McMullin 1970) Following ichmidtlings (1974) explanation of fruit shyfulness fertilization shyespecially with nitrate N - could increase tis~ue organip Nand consequently flowering
(d) cultivation and irrigation
Supplemental water could increase growth reSUlting in greater crown density and iurface area In times of drought additional water could prevent premature abortion of immature cones Drip irrigaeion technology may be feaible for som~ sites However it seems more likely that less intensive ~ethods will prove to be practical Among these are land treatments that direct precipitation run-off to trees improve infiltration or remove weed competition
CHRISTMAS TREES
Pinyons are harvested from natural stands and comprise about 25 of all
Christmas trees sold in New Mexico Arizona Colorado Wyoming Utah and Nevada (Sowder 1965) Trimmed branches also are used for wreath manufacture In spite of their slow growth in native stands pinyons have many desirable Christmas tree attributes including dense foliage symmetrical shape green color natural fragrance good branch angle and limb strength and good needle retention Plantation trees can reach marketable size in about 11 years (Fisher and Fa~cher 1987)
Stand Thinning
Several techniques can be used to improve tree quality Stand thinning allows remaining trees to receive sufficient sunlight for limbs to develop uniformly on all sides During the thinning operation handles can be made on main stems by removing branches at the trees base to a height of 30 em
Removal of branches below a full whorl of branches will allow another tree to be culturedmiddotfrom the stump after harvest A year after the first tree is cut the remaining low branches will begin to turn up and all but one of these can be pruned to promote the growth of a new central leader
Pruning and Shearing
~he ideal pin~on Christmas tree resembles an inverted cone wide at the base and tapered uniformly tg the tip Accemiddotptable crown taper for pines is 40 to 90 but for spr~ces and firs is 40 to 70 Pruning and shearing will make native pinyons conform more closely to the ideal which improve marke tabi Ii ty
Pruning removes dead or unattractive branches Shearing is used to co~troi leader growth so the distance between whorls is not excessive increase the number of branches arising from branch buds and promote the pyramidal crown f~Im Because pinyon leader growth rarely exceeds 20 cm excessive distance between whorls is rarely a problem Pruning and shearing most often will be used to correct uneven o~oid and thia crowns
In pines eac~ needle bun~le ~ontains a dormant or axillary bud Removal of a branch terminal at the proper time promotes development of these dormant buds into short shoots improving crown density In singleshyneedled conifers such as spruces firs and Douglas-fir intermediate buds are produced along the terminal branch stem between each whorl For this reason they can be sheared during any season of the year and produce about the same number of branch buds However with pines the number and size of branch buds developed after shearing depends upon the physiological state of the tree when sheared
Pines respond best when sheared shortly after height growth is complete but before tissues in the new shoot becom~ woody S~oots prun~d at this time produce two to four times the number of buds found on unpruned trees Pinyon shoots elongata during late June but needles continue to elongatemiddotduring July and August after branches are fully elongated Buds are formed in late August
From studies conducted with other pine Christmas tree species the following course of treatments can be recommended for pinyons
1 Before spring growth begins prune all double and multiple leaders (eg bullbull April)
~ She~r when needles on new candles are 13 as long as last yeara needles (usually from June 15 to July 1)
3 Shape the tre~ from the top down by shearing the tips of lateral branches Pzomote a conical crown so thebase is no more than 90 as wide as the tree is tall Ideally taper should be 40-90 Avoid shearing back to woody tissue because this encourages multiple leaders
4 If the tree is oblong rather than tapered shear the top in June or eirly July and the sides in late summer fall or winter Growt~ of laterals will be reduced Repeat steps 2-4 yearly as needed
5 Avoid shearing the year the tree is ~o be marke~ed
20
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
contributed to the effort through their committee participitation or papers or both
~
pre Bruce Buchanan Department of Agronomy and Horticulture Dr John Fowler Department of Agricultural Economics and Agricultural Business bull
bull Dr VW Howard Jr Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences
Dr Greg Phillip Department of Agronomy and Horticulture Dr Emroy Shannon Cooperative Extension Service Dr Karl Wood Department of Animal and Range Sciences
Thanks are due these faculty members for having undertaken the preparation of this report in addition to their many other teaching research and Extension duties
Finally the intended purpose of this document is to report th~ status of the pinyon resource in New Mexico so our legislators can accomplish their objectives more effectively We hope our purpose has been accomplished
John C Owens Dean and Chief Administrat1v~ Officer College of Agriculture and Home Economics New Mexico State University
II
lECOLOGY OF PINYON-JUNIPER VEGETATION IN NEW MEXICO
2Rex D Pieper M Karl Wood and Bruce B Buchanan
bull
Abstract Ecologically pinyon-juniper woodlands are extremely varied in New Mexico bull They occupy nearly all topographical positions in mid-elevational mountain ranges throughout the western two-thirds of the state Three species dominate the tree overstory layer -Juniperus monosperma Pinus edulis and Juniperus deppeana Understory shrubs and grasses vary considerably with site and geographic location Successional patterns follow those described for other locations but soil types may influence the development of seral stages
INew Mexico State University Agricultural Exper~ent Station SR 73-1
Professor and Associate Professor Department of Animal and Range Sciences Associate Professor Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las
Cruces NM 88003
1
INTRODUCTION
Pinyon-juniper vegetation in New Mexico is extremely variable because of climate soils topography and understory vegetation (Pieper 1977 Springfield 196) Pinyon-juniper vegetation generally occupies foothills and lower mountain slopes below 7500 ft in elevation (Springfield 1976) This vegetadon type occurs occasionally in valley bottoms on nearly Jevel terrain
Pinyon-junipervegetatiol1 occurred throughout the Intermountain Region and the Southwest as far back as the Last Great Ice Age and possibly earlier (Quarternary period) (Wells 1987) Although many shifts have apparently occurred in the distribution of individual species over the pait 2 million years recent increases in woody plant distribution and density is traced by many workers to mans disturbances Betancourt 1987)
Native American Indians have occupi4itd pinyon-juniper wood+ands in the western United States for centuries (Wasson 1987) and have utilized plants from these areas for many purposes including food
Much has been learned abOut ecology of pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico and the Southwest but IllUch remains to be learned This paper will summarize some of this knowledge
ECOLOGICAL FACTORSCONTROLLING DISTRIBUTION
Climate
Climatic patterns within the pinyon-juniper woodlampnd in the Southwest vary considerably in response to geographic variation and eleVation (Springfield 1977)
Precipitation
Inthesouthern portions of the pinyon-juniper woodland precipi~ation peaks occur during the summer from storms originating from the Gulf of Mexico (Springfield 1977) Winter storms from the Pacific Coast provide moisture for cool-season understory species in northern areas which are largely absent from southern areas
Table 1 shows the contrasting precipitstion pattern for Carlsbad in southeastern New Mexico and Fort Wingate in the northwestern part of the state By the end of May more than 35 of the total annual precipitation has been received at Fort Wingate compared to only 23 at Carlsbad The spring months tend to be much drier in southern portions of the woodland than in the north Both northern and southern portions exhibit summer peaks but it is somewhat delayed in the north (Table 1) More than 45 inches- pf precipitation occurs on the average in Carlsbad
during May June and July compared to only about 3~5 inches for Fort Wingate
Elevation also influences annual precipitation but not distribution Near Carlsbad Caverns in southeastern New Mexico annual precipitation averaged 13 in compared to 145 in at 4500 ft (Geh1bach 1967)
Temperature
Temperatures also vary geographically middotand with elevation Mean July temperatures were 70middot at ort Wingate and 80middot at Carlsbad while
mean JanuarY temperatures were 32degF at Fort Wingate and 44degF at Carlsbad (USDA 1941) Some of these differences may also be related to elevational differences For example maximum June temperatures were 4middoto F lower at Carlsbad New Mexico at 3120 ft elevation than at Carlsbad Caverns at 4435 ft Februaryminimums were 7degF warmsr at Carlsbad compared to those at the caverns (Gehtbach 1967)
So11s
Soils of the pinyon-juniper type are extremely variable bull Many authors assoctatethe woodland to be on coarse texture soils low in organic matter and alkaline (Barrett 1962) There are virtually no published works on the soil characteristics of the ecosystem but what appearsmiddot in the literature are scant descri~tions of specific study sites
rn New Mexico the USDA-Forest Service have identified three categories of the woodland ecosystem in their Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey of the Soutbwest region The so11s of these categories are dOm1nate1y Alfisols (primarily Hap1ustalfs) meSic (a-15middotmiddotC) temperature regime andustic moisture regime Ustic suggests primarily summer precipitation or a uniform distribution of precipitation The concept of the moisture regime is one of limited moisture but the soil moisture is present at a time wheo conditions are suitable for plant growth The definition of ustic is a rooting zone that is moist for either 180 cumulative days or 90 consecutive days iu most years (Barrett J W 1962) There are stands of pinyon-juniper in New Mexico that occur on cooler soils than mesic which are identified as frigid (O_8degC) but few that are found on warmer sites Other than Alfisols the major soils that support the woodland are Inceptisols (usually ustochrepts) Mollisols (usually calciustol1s Argicestolls and Haplustolls) Entisols (usually ustorthents) and to a limited extent Aridisols (usually Bap1argtds) bull
The three categories of the woodland recognized by the USDA-Forest are
1) Juniper composed of ~ monosperma (d osteosperma) This classifmiddotication is found at
2
Table 1--Monthly precipitation for Carlsbad and Fort Wingate New Mexico (From USDA 1941)
Fort Winsate Carlsbad -
Monthly Cumulative Monthly Cumulative Month Total Cumulative (Inches) Total Cumulative (Inches)
January 081 081 55 033 033middotbull 25
February 101 182 126 043 076 58
March 116 298 206 054 130 99
April 151 449 310 086 216 164
May 071 520 359 091 307 234
June 070 590 407 149 456 347
July 206 796 550 223 679 515
August 279 1075 742 1 70 849 647
September 143 1218 841 203 1052 801
October 076 1294 894 144 1196 908
Novembemiddotr 074 1368 945 060 1256 957
December 081 1449 1000 056 1312 1000
Total 1449 1312
middotbull
the lower elevat~ons and tends to bemiddotthe warmest and driest of the three Itmiddotis the least productive in total biomass production and in terms of wood averages about five cords of wood per hectare (2cordsAC)~
2) Pinyon-ju~iper composed of ~~ and a mix of monosperma and limited amounts of osteosperlila~ This classifieation has a shrub understory and has a higher biomass produetion than eategory 1 The cord-wood available is estimated to be from 10-20 cords per hectare (4-8 cordsAC)
middot3) Pinyonjuniper composed of edul1smiddot and a mix of monosperma and deppeana with a significant understory of Gambel Oak Thiamp category has the highest biomas production and cord-wood available is estimated to be nearly 35 cords per hectare (14 cordsAC)
The soils are widely distributed over all three categories of the woodland ecosystem and are not easily stratified to any one group It is common for the soils to have accumulations of carbcinatfils middotand frequently have calcic horizons These carbonate accumulations are mo~e frequent in oldermiddot soils on stable landscapes There seems to be no generalization with soil texture Almost any soil texture will support the ecosystem as will most ~y middotsoil depth Onemiddot common characteristic is the low amount of accumulated organic matter The upper 18 cm (Fincher or plow-layer) has less than 1 organic matter When organic matter does accumulate above this level it seems to be in soils with some combination of high clay content wettest end of the ustic moisture regimes or coolr than mesic temperature regimes Little is known about the influencemiddotof soil on the distribution and growth of the pinyon-juniperwoodlampnd
Site Index
Site index is an expressionmiddot of the tree growth potential of a site or a sites productive capacity Stocking expresses the density of trees on the land and spacing refers to its spatial distribution Standardpractice is to define site in terms of the total height of trees that have consistently been in a dominant position in well-stocked stands at specified key ages bull
A1thou~h tree height growth h4s been the most practical consistent and generally useful indicator of forest-site quality other features may be more mean~ngfulfor pinyon pine and junipers of New MexiCO These could include stem diameter volume or number Of stems per tree or some combination of these variables
Site indeX is used in land management to determine a forestis rotation A forest rotation is defined as the period of years required for treestobecome established and
grOW to a specified condition of maturity
Determining themiddotlengthof the rotation is one of the key d~cisions a manager of pinYon-juniper must make There are two basic groups of physical and financial factors that influence the length of the rotation (1) des1red products (largely a matter of markets or of a demand in a general economic sense) and (2) forest productivity or what Can be grown (supply) bull
The praetical importance of site index often is notgiven inadequate attention in the buying and selling of forest lands and in forest management The report by Fowler (1984) indicates there is presently a little infcirmstiondealingwith the production of fiber on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico They
constructed volume tables based on tree diameter and height for a so11 site near Taos andmiddot another near Cloudcroft More than 600 observations were used at each site and they concluded that the tables were not int~rchangeable these authors suggested a rotation of greater than 200 years
A comparison of photographs taken upto 100 years ago and recent photographs of the s~e areas indicate that many soils in New Mexico have pinyon-juniper growth rates that are much more rapid than the sites near Cloudcroft and Taos Some sites probably could be managed for fence posts and fuel wood on a 50-year rotationmiddot or less This would change manag~nt schemes tremendously and be much more useful than a rotation of more than 200 years for the entire state Obviously site indices need to be established for at least the major so11 types associated with pinyon~juniper stands in New Mexico
Topography
Pinyon-juniper woodlands occmiddotur on a wide variety of topographical positions (Lymbery and Pieper 1983) S~dies in theSacramento Mountains of southcentral New Mexico showed that
aspect (exposure) slope steepness and slope position did not have major impacts on tree characteristics (Lymbery and Pieper 1983 Pieper and Lymbery 1987) Only general patterns were
apparent Rocky Mountain pinYon density was higher in relation to that of singleseed juniper
on steeper slopes and possibly on northern middotaspects Tree density appeared to be more sensitive to topographic variables than tree size or canopy cover
Shrubby species showed a response to topographic position (Lymbery and Pieper 1983)bull Walkingstick Cholla (Opuntia imbricata) was more abundant on xeric sputh-faeing slopes while skunkbush (Rhus trilobata) and wavy-leaf oak (Quercus undUlata) were more abundant on nortb-facing slopes Gehlbach (1967) fout)d similar relationships on the Gusdalupe Mountains in southeastern NewMexico
4
Rocky MoUntain pinyon generally increasesin abundance with elevation as abundance of juniper decreases (Pieper and Lymbery an4 Woodin and Lindsey 1954) Similar patterns are also apparent in the Great Basin (Tueller at ale 1979)
Hydrology
A diverse range of vegetatie species climatic factors and soil parent materials govern the water in pinyon-juniper ecosystems Unfortunately little hydrologic-related researchbullbull has been accomplished This is shocking in light of the importance on water to New Mexico and its neighbors Schmidt (1987) claims a gap exists between the available scientific knowledge base and application by land managers This results at l~ast in part from apast tendency to accept hydrologiC information supporting eradication of pinyon-juniper and to disregard findings tbat questioned the watershed benefit of these practices Changes in public demands haw resulted in a reassesaent of management goals for pinyonjuniper Managers lackadequate knowledge of inventory methods si1vicu1tura1systemsand productivity in relation to runoff processes Schmidt also
stated that fuxther long-termaall-watershed studies are needed to fill knowledge gaps and provide a framework for plot ~tudies
Because of its topographic position pinyon-juniper woodl~nds greatly influence runoff generated from higher elevation ecosystems It is often the last ecosystem that water passes through before being diverted for use Most water yield studies for pinyon-juniper have been conducted at Corduroy Creek and Beaver Creek in Arizona with a few 881411 plot studies in Nevada and Utah These studies centered on potentials for increasing water yields and effects of various type conversion strategies Pinyon-juniper was considetedundesirable and merely represented a barrier to increasing grassland cover The energy crisis and environmental movements ofthe 1970s curtailed major type-converSion efforts Fuel wood demand changed the emphasis to sustain yield Maintaining pinyon-juniper stands on soils that have been invaded by these plants because of cessation of fire may prove to be ecologically disastrous because of hydrologiC tmpacts especially erosion
Highlights of Current Knowledge
Climate Few studies ~ist on the climate of pinyon-juniper stands A Nevada study showed pinyon-juniper to be confined to a thermal belt above the valley inversions and below the colder upslope elevations This may also be true in much of New Mexico
Precipitation Total daily monthly and annual precipitation patterns for the
pinyon-juniper type are well known but storm characteristics are not These are needed to identify runoff-producing storms and predict erosion Some 5-minute intensities have approached 8 inches per hour in Arizona A study of maximum 2-m1nute intensities found 42 inches per hour at Alamogordo Cteek New Mexico A Utah study shows the greatest intensities to occur at elevations between 6s0Q and 8000 feet which coincides with the pinyon-juniper ecosystlim
Interception This variable is usually insignificant in most eoosystems However in a pinyon-juniper stand an interception capacity of 02 inch would reduce the effective 5-minute intensity by 24 inches per hour Interception values have been found to range from 013 to 094 inch per hour in Arizona The 094 inch would reduce the effective s-minute intensity by 1128 inches per hour Blue grams has been found to retain about 015 inch of precipitation which reduces the effective S-m1nute intensity by only 18 inches per hour No pinyon-juniper litter studies are known
Infiltration Studies of infiltration have received the greatest amount of attention from watershed scientists from other states Generally where pinyon-juniper trees are not part ofmiddot the climax vegetationbullinflltratt-0n rates between trees are much lower than underneath trees This is especially true where the understory is sparce because of competition forllght soil water and nutrients by the more dominant pinyon-juniper trees Where pinyon-juniper are climal ie rocky hillsides infiltration rates were similar Management and miaanagement can greatly alter the infiltration rates
Runoff Pinyon-juniper often produces surface-runoff in response to high-intensity short-duration storms which are the most frequent storms in New Mexico The Saliz watershed near Reserve New Mexico once reported a peak flow rate of 1380 cubic feet per second per square mile Schmidt (1987) reports that currently information on frequency and magnitude of precipitation-runoff related to site conditions is inadequate for design of facilities in this ecosystem
Sedfment production This is the major water quality concern from the pinyon-juniper ecosystem Some stands ID Arizona produced more than a ton of sedfment from each acre each year Impacts of new uses of the pinyon-juniper type are not known and need investigation
HydrologiC Impacts from Increasing Mu1t1pie Use Demands
Uses of pinyon-juniper ecosystems are rapidly expanding in New Mexico New and innovative land management schemes are needed to respond to these demands while maintaining and
5
improving the productive potential Many roads Ue in the bottoms of drainage ways Which concentrates diffuse runoff into damaging flows arid serious erosion Road systems continue to expand in many pinyon-juniper stanels as a result of off-road vehicle recreation hunting arid wood gathedng Many livestock anel wilellife grazing msnagement strategies are geareel to proviele for plant health but fail to conaieler adequately the impacts of use that affect infiltration flow concentrations ariel erosion It is not known hoW much plant material should be left on-site to protect most rangelands including pinyon-junper ecosystems in New Mexico
A significant amount of the existing unsatisfactory watersheelconclitionsare associateel with the pinyon-juniper ecosystem The hydrologic variables associated with pinyon-juniper are highly sensitive to use
Opt~um watershed treatment strategies to restore iong-term productivity and reduce flood and sediment risks need to be identified
PINYON-JUNIPER VEGETATION
Overstory tree Species
The threemaj)r tree species found in New Mexico within the pinyon-juniper woodland are Rocky Mountain pinyon Singleseed juniper ancl Alligatorjuniper (LaDner 1975 1981 Little 1950 Pieper 1977 anel Sprlngfield) Rocky Mountain pinyon and Singleseed juniper are founel throughout the pinyor-juniper wooellanel in the Southwest but Alligator juniper is more abunclant in western New Mexico anel Arizona Utah juniper also occurs in some pinyon-juniper woodlands in northwestern New Mexico while Rocky Mountain juniper (Juniperus scopulorum) occurs in northern New Mexico
Unclerstory Vegetation
Big sagebrush (Artelisia tridentata) is a common understory shrubby species in northern and northwestern New Mexico (Pieper 1977 Springfield 1976) Several oak species (Quercus arizonica 51 grisea 9 emoryi anel 9 oblongifolia) are ilIiportant understory shrubs in western and southwestern New Mexico Mountain
mshogany (Cercocarpus montana) and Wrights silk tassel (Garrya wrightii) are also important browse species in this area (Boeker et al 1972shyand Short et al 1977) Blue gra- (BouteloUa gracilis) occurs as an understory grass species throughout the wooellancl vegetation in thestate In northern areas cool season species of such genera as 2Festuca anel Agropyron occur ONest et al 1975) In central ancl southeastern New Mexico warm season species of the general Muhlenbergia Hilaria Lycurus anel Bouteloua occur
Habitat Types
Kennedy (1983) identified six relatively undisturbed habitatmiddot types in the Sacramento Mountains of southcentralNewMexicQ (Table 2) These habitat types ranged from about 6200ft to 7000 ft in average elevation and from 33 to 47 understory cover (Kennedy 1983 Table 2) The ~ ecluUs-Juniperus monospermal
Muhlenbergia pauc1flora habitat type was perhaps themost common type in this area Francis and Aldon (1983) also identified three pinyonshyjuniper habitat typu innortbwestern New Mexico
Uriderstory Patterns
Pinyon-juniper vegetation forma a mosaic pattern with trees interspersed with open grassland areas between the trees Armentrout and Pieper (1988) have described three understory zones associated with singleseed juniper and Rocky Mountain pinyon The first zone is that surrounding the trunk of the tree and is characterized by shrubs such as skunkbrush ancl algerita (Berberis haematocarpa) The seconcl zone is largely beneath the tree canopy Several grass species such as sideoats grams (Boute1oua curtipendula) wolftal (Lycurus phleoides) and blUe grams were abundant in the seconcl zone Several species inclUding blue grama wolf tail ancl creeping muhly (Muhlenbergia repeus) were more abundant under tree canopy ori the north side rather than on the southmiddot side (Schott and Pieper 1985) Pinyon ricegrass (Piptochaetium fimbriatum) appears to be favored by conditions under canopies of singleseed juniper Grass species of the open grassland zone included blue grama wolftaU gal~eta sanddrapseed and mat muhly~
Age and Size Class Structure
Many pi~yon-juniper stands h~vebeen disturbeel during the past 100 years by fuel or fence post harvesting bUrDing or mechanical control treatments Consequently many trees are relatively young bull Age class distributions consequently do not followmiddot the typical inverted J-shaped curve for ma~ure stanels Figure 1 shows age-class distribution for 202 Rocky Mountain pinyon trees from five study sites in the Sacramento Mountains This distribution appears to be nearly normal with most trees falling in the 70 to 130 yearmiddotage class However the specific distribution at each site depended on time since last disturbance and type of disturbance (Plumb-Mentjes anel Pieper 1983) Pinyon age is relatedto basal diameter but only 38 of the variation in age can be explained by basal diameter (Figure 2) Apparently~stand density (competition) influences siz~ of trees sUbstantially
6
0
Table 2 - Pinyon-Juniper Habitat Types of the Lincoln National Forest (From Kennedy 1983)
Tree Density
Average Understory Avg Stems Habitat Type Elev Ft Cover Plot
bull PINYON-JUNIPER SERIES
1 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Cercocarpus montanusAndropogon gerardi HT 6178 42 36
2 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Muhlenbergia pauciflora HT 6470 33 63
3 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Stipa columbiana HT 6678 36 123
4 Pinus edulis-Junil rus monosperma Bouteloua gracilis HT 6977 37 163
5 Punis edulis-Juniperus deppeana Bouteloua gracilis HT 6739 46 65
6 Pinus edulis-Juniperus deppeana Muhlenbergia dubia HT 6920 47 105
22 I
20
11
I
I
20 110 611 1110012011101611130 middotIY_I
Figure 1 Age class distribution of aU pinyon pines on study areas
- 1511r bull 100
1 bull 05 ~ 11amp50 2 r bull 031 n bull zaz
22 11 111 _ 1HIICMIl
Figure 2bull Relationship betweenDBB and age of pinyon pine for all trees bull
RESPONSE TO DISTURBANCE (SECONDARY SUCCESSION)
Several successional models have been proposed for secondary succession followingmiddot disturbance that removes most of the trees (Arnold et a1 1964 Barney and Frischknecht 1974 and Erdman 1976) These general patterns alsomiddotapply to conditions in middotpinyon-juniper woodlands in central New Mexico (Dwyer and Pieper 1967 Rippel et al 1980 1983 Schott and Pieper 1986 1987a 1987b 1987C) Bowever specific patterns are influenced by the type of soils supporting the woodland vegetation (Schott arid Pieper 1986 1987a) Generally- soils that are fairly shallow and rocky have some seral stages poorly represented (Table 3) When sitesmiddot with these soils are treated mechanically shrubs such as wavy-leaf oak do not increase (Rippel et al 1983) On similar soils with few roek outarops grassforb and shrubgrass stages are common Response of Rocky Hountainpinyon
and singleseed juniper appear to be dependent on density and size of trees before treatment If
the stanpmiddot was near climax before cabling pinypnsrapidly become dominant on the site If the stand was in someseral stage there would be more junipers but theimiddotr relatively slow growth and time for uturation require more time before middotthey would dominate the site
RESEARCH NEEDS
Only limited research on pinyon-juniper ecology in northern and westernmiddot New Mexico has been conducted Informst~on is lacking on basic ecological relationship at both plant communitymiddot and individual species level lactors influencing distribution of these woodlands are poorly understood lor example in many situations pinyon-juniper appears to be moving uphill in elevation and encroaching on ponderosa pine forests Such situation have not been analyzed Success~onal patterns where alligator juniper is a major potenUal component of the vegetation have not been determined Analyses of these woodlands for several uses and products are needed for laUd unagament purposes
4 bull ~
Table 3 -- General pattern of succession on cabled pinyon-juniper wood1anda on two soil types (From Schott and Pieper 1986)
Sera1 Stages Climax 1 2 3
Original Conditions
General successional Annual forb Grassforb Shrubgrass Pinyon-juniper model
Lithic hapustoll Annuals and Perennial Shrubs dominant Pinyon and juniper perennials from grasses and shade conducive dominating Pinyon seeds which disshy forbs with to tree establishshy eventually dominant perse readily establishment ment surviving perenshy and spread of nials shrubs (esp
0 wavy-leaf oak)
Lithic hapusto11- Annuals and These stages absent or poorly represhy Pinyon dominating Rock outcrop complex perennials from sented Rock outcropsmiddotrestrict vegshy Climax with juniper bull
seed which disshy etative reproduction perse readily surviving perenshynials
fI
LITERATURE CITED
Armentrout S M and R D Pieper 1988 Plant distribution surrounding Rocky Mountain Pinyon and one seed juniper in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range Management 41 (In press) bull
Arnold J F bullbull D A Jameson and E H Reid 1964bull The pinyon~jun1per type of Arizona Effects of grazing fire and tree control US Department of Agriculture Production Research Report 84~
Barney MA and N C Frischknechtmiddot 1974 Vegetation change follOwing fire in the
pinyon-juniper type of west-central Utah Journal of Range Management 279~-96
Barrett J W 1962 Regional Silviculture of the United States The Ronald Press Co bullbull NY 610p
BetancourtJ L 1987 Paleoecology of pinyon-juniper woodlands summary In Everett R L (compiler) proceedings~ pinyon-juniper conference USDA For SerGen Techbull Rep INT-215~
Boeker E Lbullbull V E Scott H G Reynolds and B A Donaldson 1972~ Seasonal food habits of mule deer in southWestern Ne Mexicobull Journal of Wildlife Management 3656-63 bull
Erdman Jbull A 1970 Pinyon-juniper succession after natural fires in residual soils of MesaVerde Colorado Brigham Young University Science Bulletin Series 11 ~rovo Utah
Fowler J M R D Bowe BE Peacock KC McDanielT Garner-Hurt J R Gray and
M Cardenas 1974 Wood fiber production in pinyon-juniper woodlands on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico New MeXico State University Agricultural Experiment~tation Research Report NO~ 519
Francis R E and E bull F Alden 1983 Preliminary habitat types of a semiarid grassland In MOir W H and L Hendzel (Tech COQrdinatora) Proceeding of the workshop pn southwestern habitat types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Gehlbach F R 1967 Vegetation of the Guadalupe escarpment New Mexico-Texas Ecology 48404-419
Kennedy K L 1983 A habitat type classification of the p~yon-juniper woodlands of the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico In Moir W H and Leonard Hendzel (Tech-Coordinators) Proceedings of the workshop on southwestern habitat
types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Lanner bull R M 1975 Pinyon pines and junipers of the southwestern woodlandsmiddot In Gifford G F and 1 E Buspy The pinyonjunipr ecosystem a symposium Utah State Univ bullbull Logan
Lanner R Mmiddot1981 The pinyon pine a natural and cultural history Univ Nevada Press
Reno
Little E L bull 1950 Southwestern trees Amiddot guide to the native species of middotNew Mexico and Arizona US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Agricultural Handbook 9
Lymbery bull G A and R D Pieper 1983 Ecology of pinyon-juniper vegetation in the northern Sacramento Mountains New Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 698
Pieper R D 1~77 The southwestern pinyon-juniper ecosystem In Aldon Earl F and T J~ Loring (Tech Coord) US Departmentmiddot Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report RM-31
Pieper R D and G A Lymbery 1987 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegettion in south-central New Mexico In~ Everett Richard L (compiler) proceedings - pinyon-juniper conference US Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT-21S
Plumh-Mentjes M L and R D Pieper 1983 Diameter distribution and age class structure of pinyon pine (Pinus eduiis Engelm) in south-central~Mexico Abstract 36th annual meeting Society for Range Management Denver CO bull
Schmidt L j 1987 Present and future themes in ptnyon-juniper hydrology In ~verett R L (compiler) U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report 1NT-215
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1985 Influence of canoP1 characteristics of one-seed juniper on understory grasses Journal of Range Management 38328-331
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1986 Succession in pinyon-juniper vegetation in New Mexico Rangelands 8126-128
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987a Succession of pinyon-juniper communities a~ter mechanical disturbance in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range ~anagement 4088-94
1Q
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987bbull Water relationships of Quercus undulata ~ edulis and Juniperus monosperma in seral pinyon-juniper communities of south-central New Mexico In Everett R L (compiler) us Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT~215 bull
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987cbull bull Succession in tree pits following cabliD8
in pinyon-juniper c01lllllUt1ities Southwestern Naturalist 32399-402
~ Short H L t W Evans and E L Boeker 1977 The use of natural and modified pinyon pine-juniper wOodlands by deer and elk Journal of Wildlife Management 41543-559
Springfield H W 1976 Characteristics and management of southwestern pinyon-juniper ranges the status of our knowledge US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Res Pap RM-160
Tueller P T C D Beeson R J Tausch N E West and K HRea 1979 Pinyon-juniper woodlands of themiddotGreat Basin distribution flora vegetal cover U SbullDepartment of Agriculture Forest Service Research Paper INT~229
USDA 1941 Cltmate and man Yearbook of Agriculture U S Govt Printing Office Washington DC
Wasson G E 1987 The American Indian response to the pinyon-juniper conference In Everett R L(compller) USDA For Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Wells P V 1987 Systematics and distribution of pinyons in the late quarternary In Everett R Lbull (compiler) Proc - Pinyon-juniper Conference USDA For Sere Gen Tech Rep INT-215
West N E K H Rea and R J Tausch 1975 Basic Synecological relationahips in pinyon-juniper woodlands In Gifford G E and F E Busby (eds) ~e pinyon-juniper ecosystem A symposium Utah State University Logan
Woodin H E and A A Lindsey 1954 Juniper-pinyon east of the Continental Divide as analyzed by the line-strip metWod Ecology 35473-489
11
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES I CROP
bullJ
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH WOODLAND STA~D MANAGEMENT l
James T Fisher John G Me~al and Gregory C Phillips
Abstract-- New Mexicos native pinyon pines produce high-value crops including nuts Christmas trees and nursery or~amentals Crop values can be increased through more intensive stand management and more innovative marketing of such products as pinyon nuts and Christmas trees to compete with imported products Research needs pertaining to these crops are discussed
1 Ne~ Mexico State University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-II
2 Authors are re~pectively
Professor and Associate Professors Dept of Agronomy and Horticulture New
Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
13
INTRODUCTlON
Pinyons (pinon p~nes) ield diverse productsranging frolll valuable nuts ~nd landscape sp~cll11ens to fuelwood
Rowever littleforethought is give~ to crop illlprovelllentbeforecropsare ha~vested This paper addresses high-value pinyon products ~hat appear to justify at least modest levels omiddotf lIIanacelllent inputs to improve product quality quantity or avail- abilty Greater elllphasis on ~ntensive lIIanagelllentmiddot recognizes the nee~ for deriving economic benefits as well as the need for cu~todiai lIIanagelllent to pre~erve the
woodland type (Lanner 1977)
Pinyon and pinyon-juniper woodlands hav~ be~n the su~lect of severai symposia The reader iamp directed to proceedings of these lIIeetings providing several papers on the subject [~ee Gifford and Busby (19-75) Aldon and Loring (1977) Evrett (1987) and a fbrthcoming volume reporting a n~~ional lIIeeting held in Mexico in 1987]
This paper specifi~ally exalllines pinyon nut production including lIIarket developlllents that potentially threaten regional markets and the selective harvest of Christlllas trees and nursery or~alllentals Methods available t~ illlprove crop profitability will be discussed in addition to cuirent and future research
NUT BEARING PINES
Plant taxonomists recognize about 100 species in the falllily Pinaceae Alllongthese 12 to 26 species produce quality edible nuts (Rosengarten 1984 Lanner 1981) An edible nut is large middot(generallly les8 than 2200 seedkg) and has a thin shell that can be cracked with the teeth Pines producing edible nuts are found mostly in Europe Asia and western North middotAmerica Large ~dlblen~ts are found ~ostiyalllong the ~tone pines ~Sub8ection Celllbraa) nat~ve to Europe and ASia and the pinyon pines (Subsection Celllbroides) native to North Alllerica
Pinyons are dwarf trees nd shrubS 9f sellliarid regions of the southwestern Uni ted Sta tes and Mexico Because pinyons grow slowly it ismiddot difficult to lustify th~ cost of establishing and cultivatin~ p~aniations for nut production IncreaSingly nuts gathered
from the stone pines are imported f~om Asia and marketed at a lIIuch lower cost According to D~nielFox (pers C~IIII11) about 1000 ~tric tons of ~helled Asian pine nuts are imported each year Re also reports that abou~ 100 ton~ of ~ pinea nuts are illlported from Portugal and Spain
To protect pinyonnut m~rkets it lIIay becollle necessary to develop criteria that effectively distinguish pinyon nuts frolll illlported pine ~uts~ To exallline the feasibility of developing these criteria we will examine t~egeographic ranges and speclal characteristics of nut-producing pines under their respective subsections of the family Pinaceae proposed by Critchfield and Little (1966)
lli Subsec tiOn Celllbroides (Pinyons)
Pines classified und~i the subse~tion Ce~bi~ides (pinyons) have 1-5 needles in a fascicle Seeds are large wingl~ss a~d sOlllewhat oval in shape Lanner (1981) reported 11 species but a more recent treatlllent ofmiddot the alliance r~cognizes 15ta~a (Bailey and Ha~ksworth 1988) Eight species occur in the United States 12 in Mexico and 3 in New Mexico (P edulis I lIIonophylla and I~di-cOlor) The pinyon species discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988)include
Uni ted States
(l) Pinus edulis (pinyon) t 4200 seedkg
The predominant pinyon species of New Mexico Widespread in the southwestern United States lust
entering Wyollling and extending south through Utah Colorado and ~ew ~~xico to the western ~nd of Oklahollla~ west Texas and the northern border of Chihuahua extending west throughout lIIuch of Arizona to an outlier in eastern California Range ov~rlaps ~ith P celllbroides in south~rn New Mexico and Arizona and with P monophylla at the westerD edge of its range (southw~stern Utah northwestern Arizona and the New York Mountains o~ sOuthern California (Fig 1) Kay occa~ionally intergrade with P lIIonophylla
(2) monophylla lsingleleaf plny~n)
[ 2400 seed kg ] The pinyon pine ~fthe Great
14
bull P SAalNIANA bull P aMIIilOIOEl III Po OUAOIIIIOUA bull P MONOPttYLLA bull P eDULIS
Figure 1 Diatrlbution of pinyon pines in lJOuthwestern United States and northern Mexieo
Basin and Mohave Desert Com~onin Nevada and in parts of southern California and western Utah but also ex~ends acr~ss Arizona and southwestern Ke~ Mexico (ig~ 1)
United States and Mexico
(3) Pinus middotcellbroides (Mexican pinyon)
[ 2400 seedkg J Range widespread at low
elevations in the mountains bordering the arid plate~u of northern Mexico Ranges from southeastern Arizona southwestern Arizona southwestern New Mexico and western Texas through northern Mexico and south to Puebla and Mexico City (Fig 1) Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) middotrecognize three subspecies cembroides (northern Mexi~o) lagunae (Baja California) and orizabensis (Central Mexico) (Fig 1)
(4) P californiarum-
Subspecies californiarum
occurs in southern Californ~a and northern Baja California I californiarum subsp fallax (formerly P edulis var fallax) is-found in Arizona
(5) Pinus discolor (border pinyon)
Formerly P cembroides var bicolor~ Principal range lies along both sides of the intershynational boundary between Mexico and the United States extending about 120 miles into eac~ country Sp-ecifically occurs in southeast Arizona extreme southwest New Mexico northeas~ ~onora and northwest Chihuahua
( 6) quad r ifo11a (Parry pinyon) [ 2100 seedkg J
Confined to 10 elevations in the dry mountains of southern California from the San Jacinto Mountains south to the S~erra San Ped~o Martir Its range overlaps that of I monOphylla but no intermediates have been reported (Fig 1)middot
(7) Pinus remo ta (paper-shell pinyon also called
Texas pinyon) Formerly P cembroides var
remota Main range in Coahuila but reaches parts of adjacent Nuevo Leon southeastern Chihuahua and rexas (Bailey and Wendt 1979) Has thinnest shell among pinyons~
Local Endemics Found Exclusively in Mexico
(8) Pinus culminicola (Potosi pinyon)
Documented occurrence Cerro PotOSi Nuevo Leon Mexico
(9) johannis Li~ited r4nge in Mexico
(west of Concepcion del Oro Zacatecas
(10) Pin~s maximartinezii (Martinez pinyon)
Documented Occurrence Zacatecas Mexico
(11 ) Pinus nelsonii (Nelson pinyon)
Documented ocaurrence north- eastern Mexicobull
(12) ~pinceana (Pinca pinyon)
15
Documented occurrence northshy Grows at high elevations inth~ eastern and eastern Mexco Alps and the Carpathian ~ountains
(3) bullbull koraiensis S~eb amp Zucco ~ SUDsect PINEAE Shaw (Korean pine)
[ 1800 seedkg](n Pinuspinea L Rngebull through Korea and (Italian stone pine) eastern Manchuria into southeastern [ 1300 seedkg ] Siberia with outlirs ~ri t~e
Wide_pread in Spain and Japalliue islands of Honshu and Portugal and aiong the northern and Shikoku (Fig 2) eastern shores ~f the Mediterranean Sea including minor occurrences (4) P sibirica near the north coast of Turkey rSibe~ian ston~ pine(Fig 2) [ 4000 seedkg
Ranges from the Ural Mountains Pinus Subsect CEMBRAE through western and central ~iberia---(Stone Pines) to northern Mongolia with outliers
in northern Russia (Fig ~)(1) Pinus albicaulis Engelm~
(whitebark pine) Pinus Subsect GERARDIANAE [ 5700 seedk ] -- shy
Occurs at high eleyations fro~ (1) gerardian Wall~ central British Columbia sout~ to (Chilgoza pine)s~uthern Sierra Nevada of [ 400 seedkg J California the Ruby Mountain of Noted for large edible seed Nevada and the mOuntains of Confined to mountainous regions of northwestern Wyoming eastern Asia principally in
eastern Afgha~itan~ parts of (2) Pin~s cembra L Pakistan ~nd ~catt~red localities
(Swiss stone pine) in the dry inner valleys of the [ 4400 seedkg 1 north~rn Himalayas (Fig 2)
eocIIn_a _shyFigure 2 Distribution of edible pine nuts in Europe and
Asia
16
bull
Pinus Subsect SABINIANAE Loud Opportumiddotnities aay exist to separate pinyOn nuts other froa pine nuts Most
(I) Pinu~ ~abiniana Dougl pine nuts have a ridge where the (Digger pine) membranous wing is attached Also [ 1300 seed kg criteria based upon seed content could
Confined to California Found be applied when large vol~aes of in dry foothills of ihe Sierra imported pine nuts are suspected to be Nevada and the Coast Rangemiddot Ras aislabeled Tests aight exaine levels large edible but rather hard-shelled of starch fat or piotein or even seeds (Fig bull1) smiddotpecific enzyaes (Table 1)
(2) Pinus coulteri D Don (Coulter pine) New Mexico Pinyon Nut Crops ( 3100 seedkg]
Restr~cted to the coastal mountains of cen~ral and southern Pinyon nuts have been harvested California and northern Baja commercially for about 50 years California (Little 1938a) The nut crop averages
045 to 09 million kg (I to 2 million The preceding list makes clear that pounds) annually for New Mexico Arizona
many pinyon species are found in North and Colorado but one year exceeded 36 America with the greatest number found million kg (Little 1942) The more in Mexico Further it seems neither productive stands may yield 330 kglha practical nor necessary to develop (300 lbsac) during a good year market criteria to separate nut products (Springfield 1976) At a cur~ent found among these species Morphological retail value of $883 I kg value on a differences among pinyon nuts are per hectare basis would be $297000 generally so slight as ~o pre~lude (120000 lac) Fowler and Oliver (this practical field identification publication) provide additional Also most Mexican species occur as information on nut values rather isolated populations with local value but low export potential For New Mexico species criteria would have to recognize as genuinely natibullbull those Pinyon Reproductive Biology nuts produced by at least three pinyon species edulis monophylla and P di$color Again nut morphological Pinyons begin bearing nuts at about criteria would not separate these 25 years but crops do not reach pinyons from other species of the same commercial size until about 75 years subsection (Little 1941) Cones are borne
Table 1-- Composition of pine nuts and true nuts (Lanner 1981 Woodroof 1979) All values are expressed as percentages
Kernal H2O Protein Fat Carboshyhydrates
Ash
Pinyon nuts P edulisP monophIllaImiddot cembroides
58 31 14 10 19
60 23 60
18 54 14
3
Pine nuts P sabinianaP pineaImiddot sibirica P lerardiana
49 30 34 19 14
60 48 63 51
9 7
12 23
4
True nuts
Almond Pecan Pistacio Walnut Peanut
51 52
shy45
47 30
33
19 9
20 15 26
54 73 53 64 39
20 15 19 16 24
3 2 3 2
laterally ~n the a~il of a scale leaf near branch tips (jhaw~ 1914) although a r~re observation 01 termin~l cones b~s been reported (Lanner 1969) Developing cones can be ~een in the e~rliest stages as ovulate primordia in longitudinal sections of bu4s Within buds ovulate cone primordia are only at the tip of the bud an~have larger and broader bases than spur shoots (Little 1938-b)
ovuiate primordia are formed in buds in August and September and cones mature by October of the third year Because 3 years are required for seeds to mature treatments applied to stimulate nut quantity~il~ require 3 years before evaluation The first year must be especially suited to production of ovulate primordia and the second and third seaasons favorable to growth and maturation of cones and nuts(Li~tle 1938b)
The Periodicity of Bumper Crops
Pinyon ~ut crops are prodUCed at intervals of 3 to 7 years The periodicity of above-average cropshas been related to the dtain of nutrients required to produce the crop an~ the time required for nutrients to be replenished Developing cones act as food sinks for carbohydrate and nitrogen (N) reserves at the expense of vegetative structures (Pickmann and Kozlowski 1969 1970 ~ook and S~et 1971) Consequently large cone crops adversely affect vegetative tree growth
Forcella (1981) found cone production was inversely relate~ to temperatures during late-August to early September Maximum production in northern New Mexeio occurred when the mean maximum weekly temperature was below 24 degrees C Temperatures above 24 degrees C resulted in virtually no cone crops
However other environmental factors~ acting independently or inte~actinl with temperature caa be involved Rainfall is positively correia ted with the flowering of pines This is because photosynthat~ 9roduction is needed to develop carbohydrate reserves and this process is limited by ~lant water stres~ Also tree growth is determined by photosynthetic gain and the onset of abundant flowering is more directly rela~ed to tree siZe than
age (Schmidtling 1969) More speci1icallj nut ~roduction is e~osely
related to crown surface area
An exception to the adverse influen~e of wa~er ~tress is the positive roie stress plays in the initiat~on of ovula~e primordia Studies have shown that summer moisture
stress results in an above-average flower crop the following spring This suggests moisture stress at the time of ovulate primordia formation promotes reproductive rather than vegetative bull growth This view is supported by studies shOwing that branches exposed to full sun bore more female cones and had lower tissue moisture levels than partially shaded branches (Wareing~ 1958)
Water ~tress also can indirectly affect flowering thro~gh its interaction with tree nutrient status E~ell (1970) showd that nitrate fertili~ation or exposure to moisture stress caused similar tiowe~ing responses in Dougl~s-firaccompaniedby increases in total foliage N content and free amino
acids especially ~rgini~e Similarly Schmidtling (1974) suggested that water stress or N fertilization can increase flowering through the same metabolic intermediary namely arginine or some related N-containing substance~
Manipulation of Native Nut Crops
pespite the importance of coniferous nuts in many parts of th~
world only two pine species appear to be cultivated for their seed crops P
pinea in the Medi terranean and - sibirica in the Urals (Pravdin 1963) The pinyons of estern North America and Meiico ar mos~ly ignored in terma of cultiv~tion or domestication
Little (1140) was among the first to suggest that pinyon nu~ prQduction could be augme~ted tbtough the USe of simple cultutal practices However these received little attention and we have no grea~er und~rstanding of the effi~lcy or econoic feasibility of these treatments now than we did more than 40 ~ears ago Nev~rtheles~ with the present emphasis on wocidland management ~uch treatmenta seem worthy of serious attention
Ca) selective thinning
Some pibyonsapear to be
18
Nut sizes from pruned and unpruned Pinus edulis trees
19
consistently good nut producers (Little 1940) Heavy producers usually show immature and old cones on branches and cones are conspicuous b~neath them Selective thinning of unpr04uctive trees should increase flowering of those left standing (Little 1940)
(b) basal pruning
Theoretically low branches receiving partial sun light do not photosynthesize enough energy to offset energy losses to respiration It follows that low branches are energy sinks that potentially r~b nutrients from seed crops To test this relationship Montano et al (1980) pruned baial branches of 70 to 80-year old pinyons (8 to 10 m tall) to a height of 15 m and SUbsequently determined effects of this treatment on seed development They reported av~rage nut volumes from gruned and ungruned trees were 040 cm and 032 cm and the average nut weights were 033 g and 020 g respectively (see Fig3) Also pruned trees produced a greater percentage of filled nuts 99 as opposed to 84 The effects observed were related to the growth of nuts already developing in cones when the treatment was applied
Basal pruning reduced disease and insect injury of southern pnes (Wilson and Rudolph 1970) Also pruned wood could b sold for ~uelwood potentially offsetting the cost of the benefits anticipated Owing to its simplicity and overall benefits basal pruning appears to merit greater attention
(c) fertilization
Fertilization usually stimulates female cone production (Puritch 1972) More specifically the following trends become apparent when studies are reviewed collectively
(1) N stimulates cone production even when N is applied with other nutrients (Morris and Beers 1969) Also trees producing greater cone yields generally have higher levels of tisue N than low producers
(2) The presence of specific amino acids (especially arginine) is a more reliable predictor of fruitfulness than tissue N content per se For example nitrat N ana ammcinium N increased Douglasshyfir foliar N content and shoot growth similarly However only nitrate N significantly increased arginine content which was positively and quantitatively related to female flower proshyduction (Ebell and McMullin 1970) Following ichmidtlings (1974) explanation of fruit shyfulness fertilization shyespecially with nitrate N - could increase tis~ue organip Nand consequently flowering
(d) cultivation and irrigation
Supplemental water could increase growth reSUlting in greater crown density and iurface area In times of drought additional water could prevent premature abortion of immature cones Drip irrigaeion technology may be feaible for som~ sites However it seems more likely that less intensive ~ethods will prove to be practical Among these are land treatments that direct precipitation run-off to trees improve infiltration or remove weed competition
CHRISTMAS TREES
Pinyons are harvested from natural stands and comprise about 25 of all
Christmas trees sold in New Mexico Arizona Colorado Wyoming Utah and Nevada (Sowder 1965) Trimmed branches also are used for wreath manufacture In spite of their slow growth in native stands pinyons have many desirable Christmas tree attributes including dense foliage symmetrical shape green color natural fragrance good branch angle and limb strength and good needle retention Plantation trees can reach marketable size in about 11 years (Fisher and Fa~cher 1987)
Stand Thinning
Several techniques can be used to improve tree quality Stand thinning allows remaining trees to receive sufficient sunlight for limbs to develop uniformly on all sides During the thinning operation handles can be made on main stems by removing branches at the trees base to a height of 30 em
Removal of branches below a full whorl of branches will allow another tree to be culturedmiddotfrom the stump after harvest A year after the first tree is cut the remaining low branches will begin to turn up and all but one of these can be pruned to promote the growth of a new central leader
Pruning and Shearing
~he ideal pin~on Christmas tree resembles an inverted cone wide at the base and tapered uniformly tg the tip Accemiddotptable crown taper for pines is 40 to 90 but for spr~ces and firs is 40 to 70 Pruning and shearing will make native pinyons conform more closely to the ideal which improve marke tabi Ii ty
Pruning removes dead or unattractive branches Shearing is used to co~troi leader growth so the distance between whorls is not excessive increase the number of branches arising from branch buds and promote the pyramidal crown f~Im Because pinyon leader growth rarely exceeds 20 cm excessive distance between whorls is rarely a problem Pruning and shearing most often will be used to correct uneven o~oid and thia crowns
In pines eac~ needle bun~le ~ontains a dormant or axillary bud Removal of a branch terminal at the proper time promotes development of these dormant buds into short shoots improving crown density In singleshyneedled conifers such as spruces firs and Douglas-fir intermediate buds are produced along the terminal branch stem between each whorl For this reason they can be sheared during any season of the year and produce about the same number of branch buds However with pines the number and size of branch buds developed after shearing depends upon the physiological state of the tree when sheared
Pines respond best when sheared shortly after height growth is complete but before tissues in the new shoot becom~ woody S~oots prun~d at this time produce two to four times the number of buds found on unpruned trees Pinyon shoots elongata during late June but needles continue to elongatemiddotduring July and August after branches are fully elongated Buds are formed in late August
From studies conducted with other pine Christmas tree species the following course of treatments can be recommended for pinyons
1 Before spring growth begins prune all double and multiple leaders (eg bullbull April)
~ She~r when needles on new candles are 13 as long as last yeara needles (usually from June 15 to July 1)
3 Shape the tre~ from the top down by shearing the tips of lateral branches Pzomote a conical crown so thebase is no more than 90 as wide as the tree is tall Ideally taper should be 40-90 Avoid shearing back to woody tissue because this encourages multiple leaders
4 If the tree is oblong rather than tapered shear the top in June or eirly July and the sides in late summer fall or winter Growt~ of laterals will be reduced Repeat steps 2-4 yearly as needed
5 Avoid shearing the year the tree is ~o be marke~ed
20
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
lECOLOGY OF PINYON-JUNIPER VEGETATION IN NEW MEXICO
2Rex D Pieper M Karl Wood and Bruce B Buchanan
bull
Abstract Ecologically pinyon-juniper woodlands are extremely varied in New Mexico bull They occupy nearly all topographical positions in mid-elevational mountain ranges throughout the western two-thirds of the state Three species dominate the tree overstory layer -Juniperus monosperma Pinus edulis and Juniperus deppeana Understory shrubs and grasses vary considerably with site and geographic location Successional patterns follow those described for other locations but soil types may influence the development of seral stages
INew Mexico State University Agricultural Exper~ent Station SR 73-1
Professor and Associate Professor Department of Animal and Range Sciences Associate Professor Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las
Cruces NM 88003
1
INTRODUCTION
Pinyon-juniper vegetation in New Mexico is extremely variable because of climate soils topography and understory vegetation (Pieper 1977 Springfield 196) Pinyon-juniper vegetation generally occupies foothills and lower mountain slopes below 7500 ft in elevation (Springfield 1976) This vegetadon type occurs occasionally in valley bottoms on nearly Jevel terrain
Pinyon-junipervegetatiol1 occurred throughout the Intermountain Region and the Southwest as far back as the Last Great Ice Age and possibly earlier (Quarternary period) (Wells 1987) Although many shifts have apparently occurred in the distribution of individual species over the pait 2 million years recent increases in woody plant distribution and density is traced by many workers to mans disturbances Betancourt 1987)
Native American Indians have occupi4itd pinyon-juniper wood+ands in the western United States for centuries (Wasson 1987) and have utilized plants from these areas for many purposes including food
Much has been learned abOut ecology of pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico and the Southwest but IllUch remains to be learned This paper will summarize some of this knowledge
ECOLOGICAL FACTORSCONTROLLING DISTRIBUTION
Climate
Climatic patterns within the pinyon-juniper woodlampnd in the Southwest vary considerably in response to geographic variation and eleVation (Springfield 1977)
Precipitation
Inthesouthern portions of the pinyon-juniper woodland precipi~ation peaks occur during the summer from storms originating from the Gulf of Mexico (Springfield 1977) Winter storms from the Pacific Coast provide moisture for cool-season understory species in northern areas which are largely absent from southern areas
Table 1 shows the contrasting precipitstion pattern for Carlsbad in southeastern New Mexico and Fort Wingate in the northwestern part of the state By the end of May more than 35 of the total annual precipitation has been received at Fort Wingate compared to only 23 at Carlsbad The spring months tend to be much drier in southern portions of the woodland than in the north Both northern and southern portions exhibit summer peaks but it is somewhat delayed in the north (Table 1) More than 45 inches- pf precipitation occurs on the average in Carlsbad
during May June and July compared to only about 3~5 inches for Fort Wingate
Elevation also influences annual precipitation but not distribution Near Carlsbad Caverns in southeastern New Mexico annual precipitation averaged 13 in compared to 145 in at 4500 ft (Geh1bach 1967)
Temperature
Temperatures also vary geographically middotand with elevation Mean July temperatures were 70middot at ort Wingate and 80middot at Carlsbad while
mean JanuarY temperatures were 32degF at Fort Wingate and 44degF at Carlsbad (USDA 1941) Some of these differences may also be related to elevational differences For example maximum June temperatures were 4middoto F lower at Carlsbad New Mexico at 3120 ft elevation than at Carlsbad Caverns at 4435 ft Februaryminimums were 7degF warmsr at Carlsbad compared to those at the caverns (Gehtbach 1967)
So11s
Soils of the pinyon-juniper type are extremely variable bull Many authors assoctatethe woodland to be on coarse texture soils low in organic matter and alkaline (Barrett 1962) There are virtually no published works on the soil characteristics of the ecosystem but what appearsmiddot in the literature are scant descri~tions of specific study sites
rn New Mexico the USDA-Forest Service have identified three categories of the woodland ecosystem in their Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey of the Soutbwest region The so11s of these categories are dOm1nate1y Alfisols (primarily Hap1ustalfs) meSic (a-15middotmiddotC) temperature regime andustic moisture regime Ustic suggests primarily summer precipitation or a uniform distribution of precipitation The concept of the moisture regime is one of limited moisture but the soil moisture is present at a time wheo conditions are suitable for plant growth The definition of ustic is a rooting zone that is moist for either 180 cumulative days or 90 consecutive days iu most years (Barrett J W 1962) There are stands of pinyon-juniper in New Mexico that occur on cooler soils than mesic which are identified as frigid (O_8degC) but few that are found on warmer sites Other than Alfisols the major soils that support the woodland are Inceptisols (usually ustochrepts) Mollisols (usually calciustol1s Argicestolls and Haplustolls) Entisols (usually ustorthents) and to a limited extent Aridisols (usually Bap1argtds) bull
The three categories of the woodland recognized by the USDA-Forest are
1) Juniper composed of ~ monosperma (d osteosperma) This classifmiddotication is found at
2
Table 1--Monthly precipitation for Carlsbad and Fort Wingate New Mexico (From USDA 1941)
Fort Winsate Carlsbad -
Monthly Cumulative Monthly Cumulative Month Total Cumulative (Inches) Total Cumulative (Inches)
January 081 081 55 033 033middotbull 25
February 101 182 126 043 076 58
March 116 298 206 054 130 99
April 151 449 310 086 216 164
May 071 520 359 091 307 234
June 070 590 407 149 456 347
July 206 796 550 223 679 515
August 279 1075 742 1 70 849 647
September 143 1218 841 203 1052 801
October 076 1294 894 144 1196 908
Novembemiddotr 074 1368 945 060 1256 957
December 081 1449 1000 056 1312 1000
Total 1449 1312
middotbull
the lower elevat~ons and tends to bemiddotthe warmest and driest of the three Itmiddotis the least productive in total biomass production and in terms of wood averages about five cords of wood per hectare (2cordsAC)~
2) Pinyon-ju~iper composed of ~~ and a mix of monosperma and limited amounts of osteosperlila~ This classifieation has a shrub understory and has a higher biomass produetion than eategory 1 The cord-wood available is estimated to be from 10-20 cords per hectare (4-8 cordsAC)
middot3) Pinyonjuniper composed of edul1smiddot and a mix of monosperma and deppeana with a significant understory of Gambel Oak Thiamp category has the highest biomas production and cord-wood available is estimated to be nearly 35 cords per hectare (14 cordsAC)
The soils are widely distributed over all three categories of the woodland ecosystem and are not easily stratified to any one group It is common for the soils to have accumulations of carbcinatfils middotand frequently have calcic horizons These carbonate accumulations are mo~e frequent in oldermiddot soils on stable landscapes There seems to be no generalization with soil texture Almost any soil texture will support the ecosystem as will most ~y middotsoil depth Onemiddot common characteristic is the low amount of accumulated organic matter The upper 18 cm (Fincher or plow-layer) has less than 1 organic matter When organic matter does accumulate above this level it seems to be in soils with some combination of high clay content wettest end of the ustic moisture regimes or coolr than mesic temperature regimes Little is known about the influencemiddotof soil on the distribution and growth of the pinyon-juniperwoodlampnd
Site Index
Site index is an expressionmiddot of the tree growth potential of a site or a sites productive capacity Stocking expresses the density of trees on the land and spacing refers to its spatial distribution Standardpractice is to define site in terms of the total height of trees that have consistently been in a dominant position in well-stocked stands at specified key ages bull
A1thou~h tree height growth h4s been the most practical consistent and generally useful indicator of forest-site quality other features may be more mean~ngfulfor pinyon pine and junipers of New MexiCO These could include stem diameter volume or number Of stems per tree or some combination of these variables
Site indeX is used in land management to determine a forestis rotation A forest rotation is defined as the period of years required for treestobecome established and
grOW to a specified condition of maturity
Determining themiddotlengthof the rotation is one of the key d~cisions a manager of pinYon-juniper must make There are two basic groups of physical and financial factors that influence the length of the rotation (1) des1red products (largely a matter of markets or of a demand in a general economic sense) and (2) forest productivity or what Can be grown (supply) bull
The praetical importance of site index often is notgiven inadequate attention in the buying and selling of forest lands and in forest management The report by Fowler (1984) indicates there is presently a little infcirmstiondealingwith the production of fiber on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico They
constructed volume tables based on tree diameter and height for a so11 site near Taos andmiddot another near Cloudcroft More than 600 observations were used at each site and they concluded that the tables were not int~rchangeable these authors suggested a rotation of greater than 200 years
A comparison of photographs taken upto 100 years ago and recent photographs of the s~e areas indicate that many soils in New Mexico have pinyon-juniper growth rates that are much more rapid than the sites near Cloudcroft and Taos Some sites probably could be managed for fence posts and fuel wood on a 50-year rotationmiddot or less This would change manag~nt schemes tremendously and be much more useful than a rotation of more than 200 years for the entire state Obviously site indices need to be established for at least the major so11 types associated with pinyon~juniper stands in New Mexico
Topography
Pinyon-juniper woodlands occmiddotur on a wide variety of topographical positions (Lymbery and Pieper 1983) S~dies in theSacramento Mountains of southcentral New Mexico showed that
aspect (exposure) slope steepness and slope position did not have major impacts on tree characteristics (Lymbery and Pieper 1983 Pieper and Lymbery 1987) Only general patterns were
apparent Rocky Mountain pinYon density was higher in relation to that of singleseed juniper
on steeper slopes and possibly on northern middotaspects Tree density appeared to be more sensitive to topographic variables than tree size or canopy cover
Shrubby species showed a response to topographic position (Lymbery and Pieper 1983)bull Walkingstick Cholla (Opuntia imbricata) was more abundant on xeric sputh-faeing slopes while skunkbush (Rhus trilobata) and wavy-leaf oak (Quercus undUlata) were more abundant on nortb-facing slopes Gehlbach (1967) fout)d similar relationships on the Gusdalupe Mountains in southeastern NewMexico
4
Rocky MoUntain pinyon generally increasesin abundance with elevation as abundance of juniper decreases (Pieper and Lymbery an4 Woodin and Lindsey 1954) Similar patterns are also apparent in the Great Basin (Tueller at ale 1979)
Hydrology
A diverse range of vegetatie species climatic factors and soil parent materials govern the water in pinyon-juniper ecosystems Unfortunately little hydrologic-related researchbullbull has been accomplished This is shocking in light of the importance on water to New Mexico and its neighbors Schmidt (1987) claims a gap exists between the available scientific knowledge base and application by land managers This results at l~ast in part from apast tendency to accept hydrologiC information supporting eradication of pinyon-juniper and to disregard findings tbat questioned the watershed benefit of these practices Changes in public demands haw resulted in a reassesaent of management goals for pinyonjuniper Managers lackadequate knowledge of inventory methods si1vicu1tura1systemsand productivity in relation to runoff processes Schmidt also
stated that fuxther long-termaall-watershed studies are needed to fill knowledge gaps and provide a framework for plot ~tudies
Because of its topographic position pinyon-juniper woodl~nds greatly influence runoff generated from higher elevation ecosystems It is often the last ecosystem that water passes through before being diverted for use Most water yield studies for pinyon-juniper have been conducted at Corduroy Creek and Beaver Creek in Arizona with a few 881411 plot studies in Nevada and Utah These studies centered on potentials for increasing water yields and effects of various type conversion strategies Pinyon-juniper was considetedundesirable and merely represented a barrier to increasing grassland cover The energy crisis and environmental movements ofthe 1970s curtailed major type-converSion efforts Fuel wood demand changed the emphasis to sustain yield Maintaining pinyon-juniper stands on soils that have been invaded by these plants because of cessation of fire may prove to be ecologically disastrous because of hydrologiC tmpacts especially erosion
Highlights of Current Knowledge
Climate Few studies ~ist on the climate of pinyon-juniper stands A Nevada study showed pinyon-juniper to be confined to a thermal belt above the valley inversions and below the colder upslope elevations This may also be true in much of New Mexico
Precipitation Total daily monthly and annual precipitation patterns for the
pinyon-juniper type are well known but storm characteristics are not These are needed to identify runoff-producing storms and predict erosion Some 5-minute intensities have approached 8 inches per hour in Arizona A study of maximum 2-m1nute intensities found 42 inches per hour at Alamogordo Cteek New Mexico A Utah study shows the greatest intensities to occur at elevations between 6s0Q and 8000 feet which coincides with the pinyon-juniper ecosystlim
Interception This variable is usually insignificant in most eoosystems However in a pinyon-juniper stand an interception capacity of 02 inch would reduce the effective 5-minute intensity by 24 inches per hour Interception values have been found to range from 013 to 094 inch per hour in Arizona The 094 inch would reduce the effective s-minute intensity by 1128 inches per hour Blue grams has been found to retain about 015 inch of precipitation which reduces the effective S-m1nute intensity by only 18 inches per hour No pinyon-juniper litter studies are known
Infiltration Studies of infiltration have received the greatest amount of attention from watershed scientists from other states Generally where pinyon-juniper trees are not part ofmiddot the climax vegetationbullinflltratt-0n rates between trees are much lower than underneath trees This is especially true where the understory is sparce because of competition forllght soil water and nutrients by the more dominant pinyon-juniper trees Where pinyon-juniper are climal ie rocky hillsides infiltration rates were similar Management and miaanagement can greatly alter the infiltration rates
Runoff Pinyon-juniper often produces surface-runoff in response to high-intensity short-duration storms which are the most frequent storms in New Mexico The Saliz watershed near Reserve New Mexico once reported a peak flow rate of 1380 cubic feet per second per square mile Schmidt (1987) reports that currently information on frequency and magnitude of precipitation-runoff related to site conditions is inadequate for design of facilities in this ecosystem
Sedfment production This is the major water quality concern from the pinyon-juniper ecosystem Some stands ID Arizona produced more than a ton of sedfment from each acre each year Impacts of new uses of the pinyon-juniper type are not known and need investigation
HydrologiC Impacts from Increasing Mu1t1pie Use Demands
Uses of pinyon-juniper ecosystems are rapidly expanding in New Mexico New and innovative land management schemes are needed to respond to these demands while maintaining and
5
improving the productive potential Many roads Ue in the bottoms of drainage ways Which concentrates diffuse runoff into damaging flows arid serious erosion Road systems continue to expand in many pinyon-juniper stanels as a result of off-road vehicle recreation hunting arid wood gathedng Many livestock anel wilellife grazing msnagement strategies are geareel to proviele for plant health but fail to conaieler adequately the impacts of use that affect infiltration flow concentrations ariel erosion It is not known hoW much plant material should be left on-site to protect most rangelands including pinyon-junper ecosystems in New Mexico
A significant amount of the existing unsatisfactory watersheelconclitionsare associateel with the pinyon-juniper ecosystem The hydrologic variables associated with pinyon-juniper are highly sensitive to use
Opt~um watershed treatment strategies to restore iong-term productivity and reduce flood and sediment risks need to be identified
PINYON-JUNIPER VEGETATION
Overstory tree Species
The threemaj)r tree species found in New Mexico within the pinyon-juniper woodland are Rocky Mountain pinyon Singleseed juniper ancl Alligatorjuniper (LaDner 1975 1981 Little 1950 Pieper 1977 anel Sprlngfield) Rocky Mountain pinyon and Singleseed juniper are founel throughout the pinyor-juniper wooellanel in the Southwest but Alligator juniper is more abunclant in western New Mexico anel Arizona Utah juniper also occurs in some pinyon-juniper woodlands in northwestern New Mexico while Rocky Mountain juniper (Juniperus scopulorum) occurs in northern New Mexico
Unclerstory Vegetation
Big sagebrush (Artelisia tridentata) is a common understory shrubby species in northern and northwestern New Mexico (Pieper 1977 Springfield 1976) Several oak species (Quercus arizonica 51 grisea 9 emoryi anel 9 oblongifolia) are ilIiportant understory shrubs in western and southwestern New Mexico Mountain
mshogany (Cercocarpus montana) and Wrights silk tassel (Garrya wrightii) are also important browse species in this area (Boeker et al 1972shyand Short et al 1977) Blue gra- (BouteloUa gracilis) occurs as an understory grass species throughout the wooellancl vegetation in thestate In northern areas cool season species of such genera as 2Festuca anel Agropyron occur ONest et al 1975) In central ancl southeastern New Mexico warm season species of the general Muhlenbergia Hilaria Lycurus anel Bouteloua occur
Habitat Types
Kennedy (1983) identified six relatively undisturbed habitatmiddot types in the Sacramento Mountains of southcentralNewMexicQ (Table 2) These habitat types ranged from about 6200ft to 7000 ft in average elevation and from 33 to 47 understory cover (Kennedy 1983 Table 2) The ~ ecluUs-Juniperus monospermal
Muhlenbergia pauc1flora habitat type was perhaps themost common type in this area Francis and Aldon (1983) also identified three pinyonshyjuniper habitat typu innortbwestern New Mexico
Uriderstory Patterns
Pinyon-juniper vegetation forma a mosaic pattern with trees interspersed with open grassland areas between the trees Armentrout and Pieper (1988) have described three understory zones associated with singleseed juniper and Rocky Mountain pinyon The first zone is that surrounding the trunk of the tree and is characterized by shrubs such as skunkbrush ancl algerita (Berberis haematocarpa) The seconcl zone is largely beneath the tree canopy Several grass species such as sideoats grams (Boute1oua curtipendula) wolftal (Lycurus phleoides) and blUe grams were abundant in the seconcl zone Several species inclUding blue grama wolf tail ancl creeping muhly (Muhlenbergia repeus) were more abundant under tree canopy ori the north side rather than on the southmiddot side (Schott and Pieper 1985) Pinyon ricegrass (Piptochaetium fimbriatum) appears to be favored by conditions under canopies of singleseed juniper Grass species of the open grassland zone included blue grama wolftaU gal~eta sanddrapseed and mat muhly~
Age and Size Class Structure
Many pi~yon-juniper stands h~vebeen disturbeel during the past 100 years by fuel or fence post harvesting bUrDing or mechanical control treatments Consequently many trees are relatively young bull Age class distributions consequently do not followmiddot the typical inverted J-shaped curve for ma~ure stanels Figure 1 shows age-class distribution for 202 Rocky Mountain pinyon trees from five study sites in the Sacramento Mountains This distribution appears to be nearly normal with most trees falling in the 70 to 130 yearmiddotage class However the specific distribution at each site depended on time since last disturbance and type of disturbance (Plumb-Mentjes anel Pieper 1983) Pinyon age is relatedto basal diameter but only 38 of the variation in age can be explained by basal diameter (Figure 2) Apparently~stand density (competition) influences siz~ of trees sUbstantially
6
0
Table 2 - Pinyon-Juniper Habitat Types of the Lincoln National Forest (From Kennedy 1983)
Tree Density
Average Understory Avg Stems Habitat Type Elev Ft Cover Plot
bull PINYON-JUNIPER SERIES
1 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Cercocarpus montanusAndropogon gerardi HT 6178 42 36
2 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Muhlenbergia pauciflora HT 6470 33 63
3 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Stipa columbiana HT 6678 36 123
4 Pinus edulis-Junil rus monosperma Bouteloua gracilis HT 6977 37 163
5 Punis edulis-Juniperus deppeana Bouteloua gracilis HT 6739 46 65
6 Pinus edulis-Juniperus deppeana Muhlenbergia dubia HT 6920 47 105
22 I
20
11
I
I
20 110 611 1110012011101611130 middotIY_I
Figure 1 Age class distribution of aU pinyon pines on study areas
- 1511r bull 100
1 bull 05 ~ 11amp50 2 r bull 031 n bull zaz
22 11 111 _ 1HIICMIl
Figure 2bull Relationship betweenDBB and age of pinyon pine for all trees bull
RESPONSE TO DISTURBANCE (SECONDARY SUCCESSION)
Several successional models have been proposed for secondary succession followingmiddot disturbance that removes most of the trees (Arnold et a1 1964 Barney and Frischknecht 1974 and Erdman 1976) These general patterns alsomiddotapply to conditions in middotpinyon-juniper woodlands in central New Mexico (Dwyer and Pieper 1967 Rippel et al 1980 1983 Schott and Pieper 1986 1987a 1987b 1987C) Bowever specific patterns are influenced by the type of soils supporting the woodland vegetation (Schott arid Pieper 1986 1987a) Generally- soils that are fairly shallow and rocky have some seral stages poorly represented (Table 3) When sitesmiddot with these soils are treated mechanically shrubs such as wavy-leaf oak do not increase (Rippel et al 1983) On similar soils with few roek outarops grassforb and shrubgrass stages are common Response of Rocky Hountainpinyon
and singleseed juniper appear to be dependent on density and size of trees before treatment If
the stanpmiddot was near climax before cabling pinypnsrapidly become dominant on the site If the stand was in someseral stage there would be more junipers but theimiddotr relatively slow growth and time for uturation require more time before middotthey would dominate the site
RESEARCH NEEDS
Only limited research on pinyon-juniper ecology in northern and westernmiddot New Mexico has been conducted Informst~on is lacking on basic ecological relationship at both plant communitymiddot and individual species level lactors influencing distribution of these woodlands are poorly understood lor example in many situations pinyon-juniper appears to be moving uphill in elevation and encroaching on ponderosa pine forests Such situation have not been analyzed Success~onal patterns where alligator juniper is a major potenUal component of the vegetation have not been determined Analyses of these woodlands for several uses and products are needed for laUd unagament purposes
4 bull ~
Table 3 -- General pattern of succession on cabled pinyon-juniper wood1anda on two soil types (From Schott and Pieper 1986)
Sera1 Stages Climax 1 2 3
Original Conditions
General successional Annual forb Grassforb Shrubgrass Pinyon-juniper model
Lithic hapustoll Annuals and Perennial Shrubs dominant Pinyon and juniper perennials from grasses and shade conducive dominating Pinyon seeds which disshy forbs with to tree establishshy eventually dominant perse readily establishment ment surviving perenshy and spread of nials shrubs (esp
0 wavy-leaf oak)
Lithic hapusto11- Annuals and These stages absent or poorly represhy Pinyon dominating Rock outcrop complex perennials from sented Rock outcropsmiddotrestrict vegshy Climax with juniper bull
seed which disshy etative reproduction perse readily surviving perenshynials
fI
LITERATURE CITED
Armentrout S M and R D Pieper 1988 Plant distribution surrounding Rocky Mountain Pinyon and one seed juniper in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range Management 41 (In press) bull
Arnold J F bullbull D A Jameson and E H Reid 1964bull The pinyon~jun1per type of Arizona Effects of grazing fire and tree control US Department of Agriculture Production Research Report 84~
Barney MA and N C Frischknechtmiddot 1974 Vegetation change follOwing fire in the
pinyon-juniper type of west-central Utah Journal of Range Management 279~-96
Barrett J W 1962 Regional Silviculture of the United States The Ronald Press Co bullbull NY 610p
BetancourtJ L 1987 Paleoecology of pinyon-juniper woodlands summary In Everett R L (compiler) proceedings~ pinyon-juniper conference USDA For SerGen Techbull Rep INT-215~
Boeker E Lbullbull V E Scott H G Reynolds and B A Donaldson 1972~ Seasonal food habits of mule deer in southWestern Ne Mexicobull Journal of Wildlife Management 3656-63 bull
Erdman Jbull A 1970 Pinyon-juniper succession after natural fires in residual soils of MesaVerde Colorado Brigham Young University Science Bulletin Series 11 ~rovo Utah
Fowler J M R D Bowe BE Peacock KC McDanielT Garner-Hurt J R Gray and
M Cardenas 1974 Wood fiber production in pinyon-juniper woodlands on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico New MeXico State University Agricultural Experiment~tation Research Report NO~ 519
Francis R E and E bull F Alden 1983 Preliminary habitat types of a semiarid grassland In MOir W H and L Hendzel (Tech COQrdinatora) Proceeding of the workshop pn southwestern habitat types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Gehlbach F R 1967 Vegetation of the Guadalupe escarpment New Mexico-Texas Ecology 48404-419
Kennedy K L 1983 A habitat type classification of the p~yon-juniper woodlands of the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico In Moir W H and Leonard Hendzel (Tech-Coordinators) Proceedings of the workshop on southwestern habitat
types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Lanner bull R M 1975 Pinyon pines and junipers of the southwestern woodlandsmiddot In Gifford G F and 1 E Buspy The pinyonjunipr ecosystem a symposium Utah State Univ bullbull Logan
Lanner R Mmiddot1981 The pinyon pine a natural and cultural history Univ Nevada Press
Reno
Little E L bull 1950 Southwestern trees Amiddot guide to the native species of middotNew Mexico and Arizona US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Agricultural Handbook 9
Lymbery bull G A and R D Pieper 1983 Ecology of pinyon-juniper vegetation in the northern Sacramento Mountains New Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 698
Pieper R D 1~77 The southwestern pinyon-juniper ecosystem In Aldon Earl F and T J~ Loring (Tech Coord) US Departmentmiddot Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report RM-31
Pieper R D and G A Lymbery 1987 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegettion in south-central New Mexico In~ Everett Richard L (compiler) proceedings - pinyon-juniper conference US Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT-21S
Plumh-Mentjes M L and R D Pieper 1983 Diameter distribution and age class structure of pinyon pine (Pinus eduiis Engelm) in south-central~Mexico Abstract 36th annual meeting Society for Range Management Denver CO bull
Schmidt L j 1987 Present and future themes in ptnyon-juniper hydrology In ~verett R L (compiler) U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report 1NT-215
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1985 Influence of canoP1 characteristics of one-seed juniper on understory grasses Journal of Range Management 38328-331
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1986 Succession in pinyon-juniper vegetation in New Mexico Rangelands 8126-128
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987a Succession of pinyon-juniper communities a~ter mechanical disturbance in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range ~anagement 4088-94
1Q
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987bbull Water relationships of Quercus undulata ~ edulis and Juniperus monosperma in seral pinyon-juniper communities of south-central New Mexico In Everett R L (compiler) us Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT~215 bull
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987cbull bull Succession in tree pits following cabliD8
in pinyon-juniper c01lllllUt1ities Southwestern Naturalist 32399-402
~ Short H L t W Evans and E L Boeker 1977 The use of natural and modified pinyon pine-juniper wOodlands by deer and elk Journal of Wildlife Management 41543-559
Springfield H W 1976 Characteristics and management of southwestern pinyon-juniper ranges the status of our knowledge US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Res Pap RM-160
Tueller P T C D Beeson R J Tausch N E West and K HRea 1979 Pinyon-juniper woodlands of themiddotGreat Basin distribution flora vegetal cover U SbullDepartment of Agriculture Forest Service Research Paper INT~229
USDA 1941 Cltmate and man Yearbook of Agriculture U S Govt Printing Office Washington DC
Wasson G E 1987 The American Indian response to the pinyon-juniper conference In Everett R L(compller) USDA For Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Wells P V 1987 Systematics and distribution of pinyons in the late quarternary In Everett R Lbull (compiler) Proc - Pinyon-juniper Conference USDA For Sere Gen Tech Rep INT-215
West N E K H Rea and R J Tausch 1975 Basic Synecological relationahips in pinyon-juniper woodlands In Gifford G E and F E Busby (eds) ~e pinyon-juniper ecosystem A symposium Utah State University Logan
Woodin H E and A A Lindsey 1954 Juniper-pinyon east of the Continental Divide as analyzed by the line-strip metWod Ecology 35473-489
11
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES I CROP
bullJ
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH WOODLAND STA~D MANAGEMENT l
James T Fisher John G Me~al and Gregory C Phillips
Abstract-- New Mexicos native pinyon pines produce high-value crops including nuts Christmas trees and nursery or~amentals Crop values can be increased through more intensive stand management and more innovative marketing of such products as pinyon nuts and Christmas trees to compete with imported products Research needs pertaining to these crops are discussed
1 Ne~ Mexico State University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-II
2 Authors are re~pectively
Professor and Associate Professors Dept of Agronomy and Horticulture New
Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
13
INTRODUCTlON
Pinyons (pinon p~nes) ield diverse productsranging frolll valuable nuts ~nd landscape sp~cll11ens to fuelwood
Rowever littleforethought is give~ to crop illlprovelllentbeforecropsare ha~vested This paper addresses high-value pinyon products ~hat appear to justify at least modest levels omiddotf lIIanacelllent inputs to improve product quality quantity or avail- abilty Greater elllphasis on ~ntensive lIIanagelllentmiddot recognizes the nee~ for deriving economic benefits as well as the need for cu~todiai lIIanagelllent to pre~erve the
woodland type (Lanner 1977)
Pinyon and pinyon-juniper woodlands hav~ be~n the su~lect of severai symposia The reader iamp directed to proceedings of these lIIeetings providing several papers on the subject [~ee Gifford and Busby (19-75) Aldon and Loring (1977) Evrett (1987) and a fbrthcoming volume reporting a n~~ional lIIeeting held in Mexico in 1987]
This paper specifi~ally exalllines pinyon nut production including lIIarket developlllents that potentially threaten regional markets and the selective harvest of Christlllas trees and nursery or~alllentals Methods available t~ illlprove crop profitability will be discussed in addition to cuirent and future research
NUT BEARING PINES
Plant taxonomists recognize about 100 species in the falllily Pinaceae Alllongthese 12 to 26 species produce quality edible nuts (Rosengarten 1984 Lanner 1981) An edible nut is large middot(generallly les8 than 2200 seedkg) and has a thin shell that can be cracked with the teeth Pines producing edible nuts are found mostly in Europe Asia and western North middotAmerica Large ~dlblen~ts are found ~ostiyalllong the ~tone pines ~Sub8ection Celllbraa) nat~ve to Europe and ASia and the pinyon pines (Subsection Celllbroides) native to North Alllerica
Pinyons are dwarf trees nd shrubS 9f sellliarid regions of the southwestern Uni ted Sta tes and Mexico Because pinyons grow slowly it ismiddot difficult to lustify th~ cost of establishing and cultivatin~ p~aniations for nut production IncreaSingly nuts gathered
from the stone pines are imported f~om Asia and marketed at a lIIuch lower cost According to D~nielFox (pers C~IIII11) about 1000 ~tric tons of ~helled Asian pine nuts are imported each year Re also reports that abou~ 100 ton~ of ~ pinea nuts are illlported from Portugal and Spain
To protect pinyonnut m~rkets it lIIay becollle necessary to develop criteria that effectively distinguish pinyon nuts frolll illlported pine ~uts~ To exallline the feasibility of developing these criteria we will examine t~egeographic ranges and speclal characteristics of nut-producing pines under their respective subsections of the family Pinaceae proposed by Critchfield and Little (1966)
lli Subsec tiOn Celllbroides (Pinyons)
Pines classified und~i the subse~tion Ce~bi~ides (pinyons) have 1-5 needles in a fascicle Seeds are large wingl~ss a~d sOlllewhat oval in shape Lanner (1981) reported 11 species but a more recent treatlllent ofmiddot the alliance r~cognizes 15ta~a (Bailey and Ha~ksworth 1988) Eight species occur in the United States 12 in Mexico and 3 in New Mexico (P edulis I lIIonophylla and I~di-cOlor) The pinyon species discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988)include
Uni ted States
(l) Pinus edulis (pinyon) t 4200 seedkg
The predominant pinyon species of New Mexico Widespread in the southwestern United States lust
entering Wyollling and extending south through Utah Colorado and ~ew ~~xico to the western ~nd of Oklahollla~ west Texas and the northern border of Chihuahua extending west throughout lIIuch of Arizona to an outlier in eastern California Range ov~rlaps ~ith P celllbroides in south~rn New Mexico and Arizona and with P monophylla at the westerD edge of its range (southw~stern Utah northwestern Arizona and the New York Mountains o~ sOuthern California (Fig 1) Kay occa~ionally intergrade with P lIIonophylla
(2) monophylla lsingleleaf plny~n)
[ 2400 seed kg ] The pinyon pine ~fthe Great
14
bull P SAalNIANA bull P aMIIilOIOEl III Po OUAOIIIIOUA bull P MONOPttYLLA bull P eDULIS
Figure 1 Diatrlbution of pinyon pines in lJOuthwestern United States and northern Mexieo
Basin and Mohave Desert Com~onin Nevada and in parts of southern California and western Utah but also ex~ends acr~ss Arizona and southwestern Ke~ Mexico (ig~ 1)
United States and Mexico
(3) Pinus middotcellbroides (Mexican pinyon)
[ 2400 seedkg J Range widespread at low
elevations in the mountains bordering the arid plate~u of northern Mexico Ranges from southeastern Arizona southwestern Arizona southwestern New Mexico and western Texas through northern Mexico and south to Puebla and Mexico City (Fig 1) Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) middotrecognize three subspecies cembroides (northern Mexi~o) lagunae (Baja California) and orizabensis (Central Mexico) (Fig 1)
(4) P californiarum-
Subspecies californiarum
occurs in southern Californ~a and northern Baja California I californiarum subsp fallax (formerly P edulis var fallax) is-found in Arizona
(5) Pinus discolor (border pinyon)
Formerly P cembroides var bicolor~ Principal range lies along both sides of the intershynational boundary between Mexico and the United States extending about 120 miles into eac~ country Sp-ecifically occurs in southeast Arizona extreme southwest New Mexico northeas~ ~onora and northwest Chihuahua
( 6) quad r ifo11a (Parry pinyon) [ 2100 seedkg J
Confined to 10 elevations in the dry mountains of southern California from the San Jacinto Mountains south to the S~erra San Ped~o Martir Its range overlaps that of I monOphylla but no intermediates have been reported (Fig 1)middot
(7) Pinus remo ta (paper-shell pinyon also called
Texas pinyon) Formerly P cembroides var
remota Main range in Coahuila but reaches parts of adjacent Nuevo Leon southeastern Chihuahua and rexas (Bailey and Wendt 1979) Has thinnest shell among pinyons~
Local Endemics Found Exclusively in Mexico
(8) Pinus culminicola (Potosi pinyon)
Documented occurrence Cerro PotOSi Nuevo Leon Mexico
(9) johannis Li~ited r4nge in Mexico
(west of Concepcion del Oro Zacatecas
(10) Pin~s maximartinezii (Martinez pinyon)
Documented Occurrence Zacatecas Mexico
(11 ) Pinus nelsonii (Nelson pinyon)
Documented ocaurrence north- eastern Mexicobull
(12) ~pinceana (Pinca pinyon)
15
Documented occurrence northshy Grows at high elevations inth~ eastern and eastern Mexco Alps and the Carpathian ~ountains
(3) bullbull koraiensis S~eb amp Zucco ~ SUDsect PINEAE Shaw (Korean pine)
[ 1800 seedkg](n Pinuspinea L Rngebull through Korea and (Italian stone pine) eastern Manchuria into southeastern [ 1300 seedkg ] Siberia with outlirs ~ri t~e
Wide_pread in Spain and Japalliue islands of Honshu and Portugal and aiong the northern and Shikoku (Fig 2) eastern shores ~f the Mediterranean Sea including minor occurrences (4) P sibirica near the north coast of Turkey rSibe~ian ston~ pine(Fig 2) [ 4000 seedkg
Ranges from the Ural Mountains Pinus Subsect CEMBRAE through western and central ~iberia---(Stone Pines) to northern Mongolia with outliers
in northern Russia (Fig ~)(1) Pinus albicaulis Engelm~
(whitebark pine) Pinus Subsect GERARDIANAE [ 5700 seedk ] -- shy
Occurs at high eleyations fro~ (1) gerardian Wall~ central British Columbia sout~ to (Chilgoza pine)s~uthern Sierra Nevada of [ 400 seedkg J California the Ruby Mountain of Noted for large edible seed Nevada and the mOuntains of Confined to mountainous regions of northwestern Wyoming eastern Asia principally in
eastern Afgha~itan~ parts of (2) Pin~s cembra L Pakistan ~nd ~catt~red localities
(Swiss stone pine) in the dry inner valleys of the [ 4400 seedkg 1 north~rn Himalayas (Fig 2)
eocIIn_a _shyFigure 2 Distribution of edible pine nuts in Europe and
Asia
16
bull
Pinus Subsect SABINIANAE Loud Opportumiddotnities aay exist to separate pinyOn nuts other froa pine nuts Most
(I) Pinu~ ~abiniana Dougl pine nuts have a ridge where the (Digger pine) membranous wing is attached Also [ 1300 seed kg criteria based upon seed content could
Confined to California Found be applied when large vol~aes of in dry foothills of ihe Sierra imported pine nuts are suspected to be Nevada and the Coast Rangemiddot Ras aislabeled Tests aight exaine levels large edible but rather hard-shelled of starch fat or piotein or even seeds (Fig bull1) smiddotpecific enzyaes (Table 1)
(2) Pinus coulteri D Don (Coulter pine) New Mexico Pinyon Nut Crops ( 3100 seedkg]
Restr~cted to the coastal mountains of cen~ral and southern Pinyon nuts have been harvested California and northern Baja commercially for about 50 years California (Little 1938a) The nut crop averages
045 to 09 million kg (I to 2 million The preceding list makes clear that pounds) annually for New Mexico Arizona
many pinyon species are found in North and Colorado but one year exceeded 36 America with the greatest number found million kg (Little 1942) The more in Mexico Further it seems neither productive stands may yield 330 kglha practical nor necessary to develop (300 lbsac) during a good year market criteria to separate nut products (Springfield 1976) At a cur~ent found among these species Morphological retail value of $883 I kg value on a differences among pinyon nuts are per hectare basis would be $297000 generally so slight as ~o pre~lude (120000 lac) Fowler and Oliver (this practical field identification publication) provide additional Also most Mexican species occur as information on nut values rather isolated populations with local value but low export potential For New Mexico species criteria would have to recognize as genuinely natibullbull those Pinyon Reproductive Biology nuts produced by at least three pinyon species edulis monophylla and P di$color Again nut morphological Pinyons begin bearing nuts at about criteria would not separate these 25 years but crops do not reach pinyons from other species of the same commercial size until about 75 years subsection (Little 1941) Cones are borne
Table 1-- Composition of pine nuts and true nuts (Lanner 1981 Woodroof 1979) All values are expressed as percentages
Kernal H2O Protein Fat Carboshyhydrates
Ash
Pinyon nuts P edulisP monophIllaImiddot cembroides
58 31 14 10 19
60 23 60
18 54 14
3
Pine nuts P sabinianaP pineaImiddot sibirica P lerardiana
49 30 34 19 14
60 48 63 51
9 7
12 23
4
True nuts
Almond Pecan Pistacio Walnut Peanut
51 52
shy45
47 30
33
19 9
20 15 26
54 73 53 64 39
20 15 19 16 24
3 2 3 2
laterally ~n the a~il of a scale leaf near branch tips (jhaw~ 1914) although a r~re observation 01 termin~l cones b~s been reported (Lanner 1969) Developing cones can be ~een in the e~rliest stages as ovulate primordia in longitudinal sections of bu4s Within buds ovulate cone primordia are only at the tip of the bud an~have larger and broader bases than spur shoots (Little 1938-b)
ovuiate primordia are formed in buds in August and September and cones mature by October of the third year Because 3 years are required for seeds to mature treatments applied to stimulate nut quantity~il~ require 3 years before evaluation The first year must be especially suited to production of ovulate primordia and the second and third seaasons favorable to growth and maturation of cones and nuts(Li~tle 1938b)
The Periodicity of Bumper Crops
Pinyon ~ut crops are prodUCed at intervals of 3 to 7 years The periodicity of above-average cropshas been related to the dtain of nutrients required to produce the crop an~ the time required for nutrients to be replenished Developing cones act as food sinks for carbohydrate and nitrogen (N) reserves at the expense of vegetative structures (Pickmann and Kozlowski 1969 1970 ~ook and S~et 1971) Consequently large cone crops adversely affect vegetative tree growth
Forcella (1981) found cone production was inversely relate~ to temperatures during late-August to early September Maximum production in northern New Mexeio occurred when the mean maximum weekly temperature was below 24 degrees C Temperatures above 24 degrees C resulted in virtually no cone crops
However other environmental factors~ acting independently or inte~actinl with temperature caa be involved Rainfall is positively correia ted with the flowering of pines This is because photosynthat~ 9roduction is needed to develop carbohydrate reserves and this process is limited by ~lant water stres~ Also tree growth is determined by photosynthetic gain and the onset of abundant flowering is more directly rela~ed to tree siZe than
age (Schmidtling 1969) More speci1icallj nut ~roduction is e~osely
related to crown surface area
An exception to the adverse influen~e of wa~er ~tress is the positive roie stress plays in the initiat~on of ovula~e primordia Studies have shown that summer moisture
stress results in an above-average flower crop the following spring This suggests moisture stress at the time of ovulate primordia formation promotes reproductive rather than vegetative bull growth This view is supported by studies shOwing that branches exposed to full sun bore more female cones and had lower tissue moisture levels than partially shaded branches (Wareing~ 1958)
Water ~tress also can indirectly affect flowering thro~gh its interaction with tree nutrient status E~ell (1970) showd that nitrate fertili~ation or exposure to moisture stress caused similar tiowe~ing responses in Dougl~s-firaccompaniedby increases in total foliage N content and free amino
acids especially ~rgini~e Similarly Schmidtling (1974) suggested that water stress or N fertilization can increase flowering through the same metabolic intermediary namely arginine or some related N-containing substance~
Manipulation of Native Nut Crops
pespite the importance of coniferous nuts in many parts of th~
world only two pine species appear to be cultivated for their seed crops P
pinea in the Medi terranean and - sibirica in the Urals (Pravdin 1963) The pinyons of estern North America and Meiico ar mos~ly ignored in terma of cultiv~tion or domestication
Little (1140) was among the first to suggest that pinyon nu~ prQduction could be augme~ted tbtough the USe of simple cultutal practices However these received little attention and we have no grea~er und~rstanding of the effi~lcy or econoic feasibility of these treatments now than we did more than 40 ~ears ago Nev~rtheles~ with the present emphasis on wocidland management ~uch treatmenta seem worthy of serious attention
Ca) selective thinning
Some pibyonsapear to be
18
Nut sizes from pruned and unpruned Pinus edulis trees
19
consistently good nut producers (Little 1940) Heavy producers usually show immature and old cones on branches and cones are conspicuous b~neath them Selective thinning of unpr04uctive trees should increase flowering of those left standing (Little 1940)
(b) basal pruning
Theoretically low branches receiving partial sun light do not photosynthesize enough energy to offset energy losses to respiration It follows that low branches are energy sinks that potentially r~b nutrients from seed crops To test this relationship Montano et al (1980) pruned baial branches of 70 to 80-year old pinyons (8 to 10 m tall) to a height of 15 m and SUbsequently determined effects of this treatment on seed development They reported av~rage nut volumes from gruned and ungruned trees were 040 cm and 032 cm and the average nut weights were 033 g and 020 g respectively (see Fig3) Also pruned trees produced a greater percentage of filled nuts 99 as opposed to 84 The effects observed were related to the growth of nuts already developing in cones when the treatment was applied
Basal pruning reduced disease and insect injury of southern pnes (Wilson and Rudolph 1970) Also pruned wood could b sold for ~uelwood potentially offsetting the cost of the benefits anticipated Owing to its simplicity and overall benefits basal pruning appears to merit greater attention
(c) fertilization
Fertilization usually stimulates female cone production (Puritch 1972) More specifically the following trends become apparent when studies are reviewed collectively
(1) N stimulates cone production even when N is applied with other nutrients (Morris and Beers 1969) Also trees producing greater cone yields generally have higher levels of tisue N than low producers
(2) The presence of specific amino acids (especially arginine) is a more reliable predictor of fruitfulness than tissue N content per se For example nitrat N ana ammcinium N increased Douglasshyfir foliar N content and shoot growth similarly However only nitrate N significantly increased arginine content which was positively and quantitatively related to female flower proshyduction (Ebell and McMullin 1970) Following ichmidtlings (1974) explanation of fruit shyfulness fertilization shyespecially with nitrate N - could increase tis~ue organip Nand consequently flowering
(d) cultivation and irrigation
Supplemental water could increase growth reSUlting in greater crown density and iurface area In times of drought additional water could prevent premature abortion of immature cones Drip irrigaeion technology may be feaible for som~ sites However it seems more likely that less intensive ~ethods will prove to be practical Among these are land treatments that direct precipitation run-off to trees improve infiltration or remove weed competition
CHRISTMAS TREES
Pinyons are harvested from natural stands and comprise about 25 of all
Christmas trees sold in New Mexico Arizona Colorado Wyoming Utah and Nevada (Sowder 1965) Trimmed branches also are used for wreath manufacture In spite of their slow growth in native stands pinyons have many desirable Christmas tree attributes including dense foliage symmetrical shape green color natural fragrance good branch angle and limb strength and good needle retention Plantation trees can reach marketable size in about 11 years (Fisher and Fa~cher 1987)
Stand Thinning
Several techniques can be used to improve tree quality Stand thinning allows remaining trees to receive sufficient sunlight for limbs to develop uniformly on all sides During the thinning operation handles can be made on main stems by removing branches at the trees base to a height of 30 em
Removal of branches below a full whorl of branches will allow another tree to be culturedmiddotfrom the stump after harvest A year after the first tree is cut the remaining low branches will begin to turn up and all but one of these can be pruned to promote the growth of a new central leader
Pruning and Shearing
~he ideal pin~on Christmas tree resembles an inverted cone wide at the base and tapered uniformly tg the tip Accemiddotptable crown taper for pines is 40 to 90 but for spr~ces and firs is 40 to 70 Pruning and shearing will make native pinyons conform more closely to the ideal which improve marke tabi Ii ty
Pruning removes dead or unattractive branches Shearing is used to co~troi leader growth so the distance between whorls is not excessive increase the number of branches arising from branch buds and promote the pyramidal crown f~Im Because pinyon leader growth rarely exceeds 20 cm excessive distance between whorls is rarely a problem Pruning and shearing most often will be used to correct uneven o~oid and thia crowns
In pines eac~ needle bun~le ~ontains a dormant or axillary bud Removal of a branch terminal at the proper time promotes development of these dormant buds into short shoots improving crown density In singleshyneedled conifers such as spruces firs and Douglas-fir intermediate buds are produced along the terminal branch stem between each whorl For this reason they can be sheared during any season of the year and produce about the same number of branch buds However with pines the number and size of branch buds developed after shearing depends upon the physiological state of the tree when sheared
Pines respond best when sheared shortly after height growth is complete but before tissues in the new shoot becom~ woody S~oots prun~d at this time produce two to four times the number of buds found on unpruned trees Pinyon shoots elongata during late June but needles continue to elongatemiddotduring July and August after branches are fully elongated Buds are formed in late August
From studies conducted with other pine Christmas tree species the following course of treatments can be recommended for pinyons
1 Before spring growth begins prune all double and multiple leaders (eg bullbull April)
~ She~r when needles on new candles are 13 as long as last yeara needles (usually from June 15 to July 1)
3 Shape the tre~ from the top down by shearing the tips of lateral branches Pzomote a conical crown so thebase is no more than 90 as wide as the tree is tall Ideally taper should be 40-90 Avoid shearing back to woody tissue because this encourages multiple leaders
4 If the tree is oblong rather than tapered shear the top in June or eirly July and the sides in late summer fall or winter Growt~ of laterals will be reduced Repeat steps 2-4 yearly as needed
5 Avoid shearing the year the tree is ~o be marke~ed
20
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
INTRODUCTION
Pinyon-juniper vegetation in New Mexico is extremely variable because of climate soils topography and understory vegetation (Pieper 1977 Springfield 196) Pinyon-juniper vegetation generally occupies foothills and lower mountain slopes below 7500 ft in elevation (Springfield 1976) This vegetadon type occurs occasionally in valley bottoms on nearly Jevel terrain
Pinyon-junipervegetatiol1 occurred throughout the Intermountain Region and the Southwest as far back as the Last Great Ice Age and possibly earlier (Quarternary period) (Wells 1987) Although many shifts have apparently occurred in the distribution of individual species over the pait 2 million years recent increases in woody plant distribution and density is traced by many workers to mans disturbances Betancourt 1987)
Native American Indians have occupi4itd pinyon-juniper wood+ands in the western United States for centuries (Wasson 1987) and have utilized plants from these areas for many purposes including food
Much has been learned abOut ecology of pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico and the Southwest but IllUch remains to be learned This paper will summarize some of this knowledge
ECOLOGICAL FACTORSCONTROLLING DISTRIBUTION
Climate
Climatic patterns within the pinyon-juniper woodlampnd in the Southwest vary considerably in response to geographic variation and eleVation (Springfield 1977)
Precipitation
Inthesouthern portions of the pinyon-juniper woodland precipi~ation peaks occur during the summer from storms originating from the Gulf of Mexico (Springfield 1977) Winter storms from the Pacific Coast provide moisture for cool-season understory species in northern areas which are largely absent from southern areas
Table 1 shows the contrasting precipitstion pattern for Carlsbad in southeastern New Mexico and Fort Wingate in the northwestern part of the state By the end of May more than 35 of the total annual precipitation has been received at Fort Wingate compared to only 23 at Carlsbad The spring months tend to be much drier in southern portions of the woodland than in the north Both northern and southern portions exhibit summer peaks but it is somewhat delayed in the north (Table 1) More than 45 inches- pf precipitation occurs on the average in Carlsbad
during May June and July compared to only about 3~5 inches for Fort Wingate
Elevation also influences annual precipitation but not distribution Near Carlsbad Caverns in southeastern New Mexico annual precipitation averaged 13 in compared to 145 in at 4500 ft (Geh1bach 1967)
Temperature
Temperatures also vary geographically middotand with elevation Mean July temperatures were 70middot at ort Wingate and 80middot at Carlsbad while
mean JanuarY temperatures were 32degF at Fort Wingate and 44degF at Carlsbad (USDA 1941) Some of these differences may also be related to elevational differences For example maximum June temperatures were 4middoto F lower at Carlsbad New Mexico at 3120 ft elevation than at Carlsbad Caverns at 4435 ft Februaryminimums were 7degF warmsr at Carlsbad compared to those at the caverns (Gehtbach 1967)
So11s
Soils of the pinyon-juniper type are extremely variable bull Many authors assoctatethe woodland to be on coarse texture soils low in organic matter and alkaline (Barrett 1962) There are virtually no published works on the soil characteristics of the ecosystem but what appearsmiddot in the literature are scant descri~tions of specific study sites
rn New Mexico the USDA-Forest Service have identified three categories of the woodland ecosystem in their Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey of the Soutbwest region The so11s of these categories are dOm1nate1y Alfisols (primarily Hap1ustalfs) meSic (a-15middotmiddotC) temperature regime andustic moisture regime Ustic suggests primarily summer precipitation or a uniform distribution of precipitation The concept of the moisture regime is one of limited moisture but the soil moisture is present at a time wheo conditions are suitable for plant growth The definition of ustic is a rooting zone that is moist for either 180 cumulative days or 90 consecutive days iu most years (Barrett J W 1962) There are stands of pinyon-juniper in New Mexico that occur on cooler soils than mesic which are identified as frigid (O_8degC) but few that are found on warmer sites Other than Alfisols the major soils that support the woodland are Inceptisols (usually ustochrepts) Mollisols (usually calciustol1s Argicestolls and Haplustolls) Entisols (usually ustorthents) and to a limited extent Aridisols (usually Bap1argtds) bull
The three categories of the woodland recognized by the USDA-Forest are
1) Juniper composed of ~ monosperma (d osteosperma) This classifmiddotication is found at
2
Table 1--Monthly precipitation for Carlsbad and Fort Wingate New Mexico (From USDA 1941)
Fort Winsate Carlsbad -
Monthly Cumulative Monthly Cumulative Month Total Cumulative (Inches) Total Cumulative (Inches)
January 081 081 55 033 033middotbull 25
February 101 182 126 043 076 58
March 116 298 206 054 130 99
April 151 449 310 086 216 164
May 071 520 359 091 307 234
June 070 590 407 149 456 347
July 206 796 550 223 679 515
August 279 1075 742 1 70 849 647
September 143 1218 841 203 1052 801
October 076 1294 894 144 1196 908
Novembemiddotr 074 1368 945 060 1256 957
December 081 1449 1000 056 1312 1000
Total 1449 1312
middotbull
the lower elevat~ons and tends to bemiddotthe warmest and driest of the three Itmiddotis the least productive in total biomass production and in terms of wood averages about five cords of wood per hectare (2cordsAC)~
2) Pinyon-ju~iper composed of ~~ and a mix of monosperma and limited amounts of osteosperlila~ This classifieation has a shrub understory and has a higher biomass produetion than eategory 1 The cord-wood available is estimated to be from 10-20 cords per hectare (4-8 cordsAC)
middot3) Pinyonjuniper composed of edul1smiddot and a mix of monosperma and deppeana with a significant understory of Gambel Oak Thiamp category has the highest biomas production and cord-wood available is estimated to be nearly 35 cords per hectare (14 cordsAC)
The soils are widely distributed over all three categories of the woodland ecosystem and are not easily stratified to any one group It is common for the soils to have accumulations of carbcinatfils middotand frequently have calcic horizons These carbonate accumulations are mo~e frequent in oldermiddot soils on stable landscapes There seems to be no generalization with soil texture Almost any soil texture will support the ecosystem as will most ~y middotsoil depth Onemiddot common characteristic is the low amount of accumulated organic matter The upper 18 cm (Fincher or plow-layer) has less than 1 organic matter When organic matter does accumulate above this level it seems to be in soils with some combination of high clay content wettest end of the ustic moisture regimes or coolr than mesic temperature regimes Little is known about the influencemiddotof soil on the distribution and growth of the pinyon-juniperwoodlampnd
Site Index
Site index is an expressionmiddot of the tree growth potential of a site or a sites productive capacity Stocking expresses the density of trees on the land and spacing refers to its spatial distribution Standardpractice is to define site in terms of the total height of trees that have consistently been in a dominant position in well-stocked stands at specified key ages bull
A1thou~h tree height growth h4s been the most practical consistent and generally useful indicator of forest-site quality other features may be more mean~ngfulfor pinyon pine and junipers of New MexiCO These could include stem diameter volume or number Of stems per tree or some combination of these variables
Site indeX is used in land management to determine a forestis rotation A forest rotation is defined as the period of years required for treestobecome established and
grOW to a specified condition of maturity
Determining themiddotlengthof the rotation is one of the key d~cisions a manager of pinYon-juniper must make There are two basic groups of physical and financial factors that influence the length of the rotation (1) des1red products (largely a matter of markets or of a demand in a general economic sense) and (2) forest productivity or what Can be grown (supply) bull
The praetical importance of site index often is notgiven inadequate attention in the buying and selling of forest lands and in forest management The report by Fowler (1984) indicates there is presently a little infcirmstiondealingwith the production of fiber on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico They
constructed volume tables based on tree diameter and height for a so11 site near Taos andmiddot another near Cloudcroft More than 600 observations were used at each site and they concluded that the tables were not int~rchangeable these authors suggested a rotation of greater than 200 years
A comparison of photographs taken upto 100 years ago and recent photographs of the s~e areas indicate that many soils in New Mexico have pinyon-juniper growth rates that are much more rapid than the sites near Cloudcroft and Taos Some sites probably could be managed for fence posts and fuel wood on a 50-year rotationmiddot or less This would change manag~nt schemes tremendously and be much more useful than a rotation of more than 200 years for the entire state Obviously site indices need to be established for at least the major so11 types associated with pinyon~juniper stands in New Mexico
Topography
Pinyon-juniper woodlands occmiddotur on a wide variety of topographical positions (Lymbery and Pieper 1983) S~dies in theSacramento Mountains of southcentral New Mexico showed that
aspect (exposure) slope steepness and slope position did not have major impacts on tree characteristics (Lymbery and Pieper 1983 Pieper and Lymbery 1987) Only general patterns were
apparent Rocky Mountain pinYon density was higher in relation to that of singleseed juniper
on steeper slopes and possibly on northern middotaspects Tree density appeared to be more sensitive to topographic variables than tree size or canopy cover
Shrubby species showed a response to topographic position (Lymbery and Pieper 1983)bull Walkingstick Cholla (Opuntia imbricata) was more abundant on xeric sputh-faeing slopes while skunkbush (Rhus trilobata) and wavy-leaf oak (Quercus undUlata) were more abundant on nortb-facing slopes Gehlbach (1967) fout)d similar relationships on the Gusdalupe Mountains in southeastern NewMexico
4
Rocky MoUntain pinyon generally increasesin abundance with elevation as abundance of juniper decreases (Pieper and Lymbery an4 Woodin and Lindsey 1954) Similar patterns are also apparent in the Great Basin (Tueller at ale 1979)
Hydrology
A diverse range of vegetatie species climatic factors and soil parent materials govern the water in pinyon-juniper ecosystems Unfortunately little hydrologic-related researchbullbull has been accomplished This is shocking in light of the importance on water to New Mexico and its neighbors Schmidt (1987) claims a gap exists between the available scientific knowledge base and application by land managers This results at l~ast in part from apast tendency to accept hydrologiC information supporting eradication of pinyon-juniper and to disregard findings tbat questioned the watershed benefit of these practices Changes in public demands haw resulted in a reassesaent of management goals for pinyonjuniper Managers lackadequate knowledge of inventory methods si1vicu1tura1systemsand productivity in relation to runoff processes Schmidt also
stated that fuxther long-termaall-watershed studies are needed to fill knowledge gaps and provide a framework for plot ~tudies
Because of its topographic position pinyon-juniper woodl~nds greatly influence runoff generated from higher elevation ecosystems It is often the last ecosystem that water passes through before being diverted for use Most water yield studies for pinyon-juniper have been conducted at Corduroy Creek and Beaver Creek in Arizona with a few 881411 plot studies in Nevada and Utah These studies centered on potentials for increasing water yields and effects of various type conversion strategies Pinyon-juniper was considetedundesirable and merely represented a barrier to increasing grassland cover The energy crisis and environmental movements ofthe 1970s curtailed major type-converSion efforts Fuel wood demand changed the emphasis to sustain yield Maintaining pinyon-juniper stands on soils that have been invaded by these plants because of cessation of fire may prove to be ecologically disastrous because of hydrologiC tmpacts especially erosion
Highlights of Current Knowledge
Climate Few studies ~ist on the climate of pinyon-juniper stands A Nevada study showed pinyon-juniper to be confined to a thermal belt above the valley inversions and below the colder upslope elevations This may also be true in much of New Mexico
Precipitation Total daily monthly and annual precipitation patterns for the
pinyon-juniper type are well known but storm characteristics are not These are needed to identify runoff-producing storms and predict erosion Some 5-minute intensities have approached 8 inches per hour in Arizona A study of maximum 2-m1nute intensities found 42 inches per hour at Alamogordo Cteek New Mexico A Utah study shows the greatest intensities to occur at elevations between 6s0Q and 8000 feet which coincides with the pinyon-juniper ecosystlim
Interception This variable is usually insignificant in most eoosystems However in a pinyon-juniper stand an interception capacity of 02 inch would reduce the effective 5-minute intensity by 24 inches per hour Interception values have been found to range from 013 to 094 inch per hour in Arizona The 094 inch would reduce the effective s-minute intensity by 1128 inches per hour Blue grams has been found to retain about 015 inch of precipitation which reduces the effective S-m1nute intensity by only 18 inches per hour No pinyon-juniper litter studies are known
Infiltration Studies of infiltration have received the greatest amount of attention from watershed scientists from other states Generally where pinyon-juniper trees are not part ofmiddot the climax vegetationbullinflltratt-0n rates between trees are much lower than underneath trees This is especially true where the understory is sparce because of competition forllght soil water and nutrients by the more dominant pinyon-juniper trees Where pinyon-juniper are climal ie rocky hillsides infiltration rates were similar Management and miaanagement can greatly alter the infiltration rates
Runoff Pinyon-juniper often produces surface-runoff in response to high-intensity short-duration storms which are the most frequent storms in New Mexico The Saliz watershed near Reserve New Mexico once reported a peak flow rate of 1380 cubic feet per second per square mile Schmidt (1987) reports that currently information on frequency and magnitude of precipitation-runoff related to site conditions is inadequate for design of facilities in this ecosystem
Sedfment production This is the major water quality concern from the pinyon-juniper ecosystem Some stands ID Arizona produced more than a ton of sedfment from each acre each year Impacts of new uses of the pinyon-juniper type are not known and need investigation
HydrologiC Impacts from Increasing Mu1t1pie Use Demands
Uses of pinyon-juniper ecosystems are rapidly expanding in New Mexico New and innovative land management schemes are needed to respond to these demands while maintaining and
5
improving the productive potential Many roads Ue in the bottoms of drainage ways Which concentrates diffuse runoff into damaging flows arid serious erosion Road systems continue to expand in many pinyon-juniper stanels as a result of off-road vehicle recreation hunting arid wood gathedng Many livestock anel wilellife grazing msnagement strategies are geareel to proviele for plant health but fail to conaieler adequately the impacts of use that affect infiltration flow concentrations ariel erosion It is not known hoW much plant material should be left on-site to protect most rangelands including pinyon-junper ecosystems in New Mexico
A significant amount of the existing unsatisfactory watersheelconclitionsare associateel with the pinyon-juniper ecosystem The hydrologic variables associated with pinyon-juniper are highly sensitive to use
Opt~um watershed treatment strategies to restore iong-term productivity and reduce flood and sediment risks need to be identified
PINYON-JUNIPER VEGETATION
Overstory tree Species
The threemaj)r tree species found in New Mexico within the pinyon-juniper woodland are Rocky Mountain pinyon Singleseed juniper ancl Alligatorjuniper (LaDner 1975 1981 Little 1950 Pieper 1977 anel Sprlngfield) Rocky Mountain pinyon and Singleseed juniper are founel throughout the pinyor-juniper wooellanel in the Southwest but Alligator juniper is more abunclant in western New Mexico anel Arizona Utah juniper also occurs in some pinyon-juniper woodlands in northwestern New Mexico while Rocky Mountain juniper (Juniperus scopulorum) occurs in northern New Mexico
Unclerstory Vegetation
Big sagebrush (Artelisia tridentata) is a common understory shrubby species in northern and northwestern New Mexico (Pieper 1977 Springfield 1976) Several oak species (Quercus arizonica 51 grisea 9 emoryi anel 9 oblongifolia) are ilIiportant understory shrubs in western and southwestern New Mexico Mountain
mshogany (Cercocarpus montana) and Wrights silk tassel (Garrya wrightii) are also important browse species in this area (Boeker et al 1972shyand Short et al 1977) Blue gra- (BouteloUa gracilis) occurs as an understory grass species throughout the wooellancl vegetation in thestate In northern areas cool season species of such genera as 2Festuca anel Agropyron occur ONest et al 1975) In central ancl southeastern New Mexico warm season species of the general Muhlenbergia Hilaria Lycurus anel Bouteloua occur
Habitat Types
Kennedy (1983) identified six relatively undisturbed habitatmiddot types in the Sacramento Mountains of southcentralNewMexicQ (Table 2) These habitat types ranged from about 6200ft to 7000 ft in average elevation and from 33 to 47 understory cover (Kennedy 1983 Table 2) The ~ ecluUs-Juniperus monospermal
Muhlenbergia pauc1flora habitat type was perhaps themost common type in this area Francis and Aldon (1983) also identified three pinyonshyjuniper habitat typu innortbwestern New Mexico
Uriderstory Patterns
Pinyon-juniper vegetation forma a mosaic pattern with trees interspersed with open grassland areas between the trees Armentrout and Pieper (1988) have described three understory zones associated with singleseed juniper and Rocky Mountain pinyon The first zone is that surrounding the trunk of the tree and is characterized by shrubs such as skunkbrush ancl algerita (Berberis haematocarpa) The seconcl zone is largely beneath the tree canopy Several grass species such as sideoats grams (Boute1oua curtipendula) wolftal (Lycurus phleoides) and blUe grams were abundant in the seconcl zone Several species inclUding blue grama wolf tail ancl creeping muhly (Muhlenbergia repeus) were more abundant under tree canopy ori the north side rather than on the southmiddot side (Schott and Pieper 1985) Pinyon ricegrass (Piptochaetium fimbriatum) appears to be favored by conditions under canopies of singleseed juniper Grass species of the open grassland zone included blue grama wolftaU gal~eta sanddrapseed and mat muhly~
Age and Size Class Structure
Many pi~yon-juniper stands h~vebeen disturbeel during the past 100 years by fuel or fence post harvesting bUrDing or mechanical control treatments Consequently many trees are relatively young bull Age class distributions consequently do not followmiddot the typical inverted J-shaped curve for ma~ure stanels Figure 1 shows age-class distribution for 202 Rocky Mountain pinyon trees from five study sites in the Sacramento Mountains This distribution appears to be nearly normal with most trees falling in the 70 to 130 yearmiddotage class However the specific distribution at each site depended on time since last disturbance and type of disturbance (Plumb-Mentjes anel Pieper 1983) Pinyon age is relatedto basal diameter but only 38 of the variation in age can be explained by basal diameter (Figure 2) Apparently~stand density (competition) influences siz~ of trees sUbstantially
6
0
Table 2 - Pinyon-Juniper Habitat Types of the Lincoln National Forest (From Kennedy 1983)
Tree Density
Average Understory Avg Stems Habitat Type Elev Ft Cover Plot
bull PINYON-JUNIPER SERIES
1 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Cercocarpus montanusAndropogon gerardi HT 6178 42 36
2 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Muhlenbergia pauciflora HT 6470 33 63
3 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Stipa columbiana HT 6678 36 123
4 Pinus edulis-Junil rus monosperma Bouteloua gracilis HT 6977 37 163
5 Punis edulis-Juniperus deppeana Bouteloua gracilis HT 6739 46 65
6 Pinus edulis-Juniperus deppeana Muhlenbergia dubia HT 6920 47 105
22 I
20
11
I
I
20 110 611 1110012011101611130 middotIY_I
Figure 1 Age class distribution of aU pinyon pines on study areas
- 1511r bull 100
1 bull 05 ~ 11amp50 2 r bull 031 n bull zaz
22 11 111 _ 1HIICMIl
Figure 2bull Relationship betweenDBB and age of pinyon pine for all trees bull
RESPONSE TO DISTURBANCE (SECONDARY SUCCESSION)
Several successional models have been proposed for secondary succession followingmiddot disturbance that removes most of the trees (Arnold et a1 1964 Barney and Frischknecht 1974 and Erdman 1976) These general patterns alsomiddotapply to conditions in middotpinyon-juniper woodlands in central New Mexico (Dwyer and Pieper 1967 Rippel et al 1980 1983 Schott and Pieper 1986 1987a 1987b 1987C) Bowever specific patterns are influenced by the type of soils supporting the woodland vegetation (Schott arid Pieper 1986 1987a) Generally- soils that are fairly shallow and rocky have some seral stages poorly represented (Table 3) When sitesmiddot with these soils are treated mechanically shrubs such as wavy-leaf oak do not increase (Rippel et al 1983) On similar soils with few roek outarops grassforb and shrubgrass stages are common Response of Rocky Hountainpinyon
and singleseed juniper appear to be dependent on density and size of trees before treatment If
the stanpmiddot was near climax before cabling pinypnsrapidly become dominant on the site If the stand was in someseral stage there would be more junipers but theimiddotr relatively slow growth and time for uturation require more time before middotthey would dominate the site
RESEARCH NEEDS
Only limited research on pinyon-juniper ecology in northern and westernmiddot New Mexico has been conducted Informst~on is lacking on basic ecological relationship at both plant communitymiddot and individual species level lactors influencing distribution of these woodlands are poorly understood lor example in many situations pinyon-juniper appears to be moving uphill in elevation and encroaching on ponderosa pine forests Such situation have not been analyzed Success~onal patterns where alligator juniper is a major potenUal component of the vegetation have not been determined Analyses of these woodlands for several uses and products are needed for laUd unagament purposes
4 bull ~
Table 3 -- General pattern of succession on cabled pinyon-juniper wood1anda on two soil types (From Schott and Pieper 1986)
Sera1 Stages Climax 1 2 3
Original Conditions
General successional Annual forb Grassforb Shrubgrass Pinyon-juniper model
Lithic hapustoll Annuals and Perennial Shrubs dominant Pinyon and juniper perennials from grasses and shade conducive dominating Pinyon seeds which disshy forbs with to tree establishshy eventually dominant perse readily establishment ment surviving perenshy and spread of nials shrubs (esp
0 wavy-leaf oak)
Lithic hapusto11- Annuals and These stages absent or poorly represhy Pinyon dominating Rock outcrop complex perennials from sented Rock outcropsmiddotrestrict vegshy Climax with juniper bull
seed which disshy etative reproduction perse readily surviving perenshynials
fI
LITERATURE CITED
Armentrout S M and R D Pieper 1988 Plant distribution surrounding Rocky Mountain Pinyon and one seed juniper in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range Management 41 (In press) bull
Arnold J F bullbull D A Jameson and E H Reid 1964bull The pinyon~jun1per type of Arizona Effects of grazing fire and tree control US Department of Agriculture Production Research Report 84~
Barney MA and N C Frischknechtmiddot 1974 Vegetation change follOwing fire in the
pinyon-juniper type of west-central Utah Journal of Range Management 279~-96
Barrett J W 1962 Regional Silviculture of the United States The Ronald Press Co bullbull NY 610p
BetancourtJ L 1987 Paleoecology of pinyon-juniper woodlands summary In Everett R L (compiler) proceedings~ pinyon-juniper conference USDA For SerGen Techbull Rep INT-215~
Boeker E Lbullbull V E Scott H G Reynolds and B A Donaldson 1972~ Seasonal food habits of mule deer in southWestern Ne Mexicobull Journal of Wildlife Management 3656-63 bull
Erdman Jbull A 1970 Pinyon-juniper succession after natural fires in residual soils of MesaVerde Colorado Brigham Young University Science Bulletin Series 11 ~rovo Utah
Fowler J M R D Bowe BE Peacock KC McDanielT Garner-Hurt J R Gray and
M Cardenas 1974 Wood fiber production in pinyon-juniper woodlands on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico New MeXico State University Agricultural Experiment~tation Research Report NO~ 519
Francis R E and E bull F Alden 1983 Preliminary habitat types of a semiarid grassland In MOir W H and L Hendzel (Tech COQrdinatora) Proceeding of the workshop pn southwestern habitat types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Gehlbach F R 1967 Vegetation of the Guadalupe escarpment New Mexico-Texas Ecology 48404-419
Kennedy K L 1983 A habitat type classification of the p~yon-juniper woodlands of the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico In Moir W H and Leonard Hendzel (Tech-Coordinators) Proceedings of the workshop on southwestern habitat
types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Lanner bull R M 1975 Pinyon pines and junipers of the southwestern woodlandsmiddot In Gifford G F and 1 E Buspy The pinyonjunipr ecosystem a symposium Utah State Univ bullbull Logan
Lanner R Mmiddot1981 The pinyon pine a natural and cultural history Univ Nevada Press
Reno
Little E L bull 1950 Southwestern trees Amiddot guide to the native species of middotNew Mexico and Arizona US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Agricultural Handbook 9
Lymbery bull G A and R D Pieper 1983 Ecology of pinyon-juniper vegetation in the northern Sacramento Mountains New Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 698
Pieper R D 1~77 The southwestern pinyon-juniper ecosystem In Aldon Earl F and T J~ Loring (Tech Coord) US Departmentmiddot Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report RM-31
Pieper R D and G A Lymbery 1987 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegettion in south-central New Mexico In~ Everett Richard L (compiler) proceedings - pinyon-juniper conference US Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT-21S
Plumh-Mentjes M L and R D Pieper 1983 Diameter distribution and age class structure of pinyon pine (Pinus eduiis Engelm) in south-central~Mexico Abstract 36th annual meeting Society for Range Management Denver CO bull
Schmidt L j 1987 Present and future themes in ptnyon-juniper hydrology In ~verett R L (compiler) U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report 1NT-215
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1985 Influence of canoP1 characteristics of one-seed juniper on understory grasses Journal of Range Management 38328-331
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1986 Succession in pinyon-juniper vegetation in New Mexico Rangelands 8126-128
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987a Succession of pinyon-juniper communities a~ter mechanical disturbance in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range ~anagement 4088-94
1Q
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987bbull Water relationships of Quercus undulata ~ edulis and Juniperus monosperma in seral pinyon-juniper communities of south-central New Mexico In Everett R L (compiler) us Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT~215 bull
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987cbull bull Succession in tree pits following cabliD8
in pinyon-juniper c01lllllUt1ities Southwestern Naturalist 32399-402
~ Short H L t W Evans and E L Boeker 1977 The use of natural and modified pinyon pine-juniper wOodlands by deer and elk Journal of Wildlife Management 41543-559
Springfield H W 1976 Characteristics and management of southwestern pinyon-juniper ranges the status of our knowledge US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Res Pap RM-160
Tueller P T C D Beeson R J Tausch N E West and K HRea 1979 Pinyon-juniper woodlands of themiddotGreat Basin distribution flora vegetal cover U SbullDepartment of Agriculture Forest Service Research Paper INT~229
USDA 1941 Cltmate and man Yearbook of Agriculture U S Govt Printing Office Washington DC
Wasson G E 1987 The American Indian response to the pinyon-juniper conference In Everett R L(compller) USDA For Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Wells P V 1987 Systematics and distribution of pinyons in the late quarternary In Everett R Lbull (compiler) Proc - Pinyon-juniper Conference USDA For Sere Gen Tech Rep INT-215
West N E K H Rea and R J Tausch 1975 Basic Synecological relationahips in pinyon-juniper woodlands In Gifford G E and F E Busby (eds) ~e pinyon-juniper ecosystem A symposium Utah State University Logan
Woodin H E and A A Lindsey 1954 Juniper-pinyon east of the Continental Divide as analyzed by the line-strip metWod Ecology 35473-489
11
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES I CROP
bullJ
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH WOODLAND STA~D MANAGEMENT l
James T Fisher John G Me~al and Gregory C Phillips
Abstract-- New Mexicos native pinyon pines produce high-value crops including nuts Christmas trees and nursery or~amentals Crop values can be increased through more intensive stand management and more innovative marketing of such products as pinyon nuts and Christmas trees to compete with imported products Research needs pertaining to these crops are discussed
1 Ne~ Mexico State University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-II
2 Authors are re~pectively
Professor and Associate Professors Dept of Agronomy and Horticulture New
Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
13
INTRODUCTlON
Pinyons (pinon p~nes) ield diverse productsranging frolll valuable nuts ~nd landscape sp~cll11ens to fuelwood
Rowever littleforethought is give~ to crop illlprovelllentbeforecropsare ha~vested This paper addresses high-value pinyon products ~hat appear to justify at least modest levels omiddotf lIIanacelllent inputs to improve product quality quantity or avail- abilty Greater elllphasis on ~ntensive lIIanagelllentmiddot recognizes the nee~ for deriving economic benefits as well as the need for cu~todiai lIIanagelllent to pre~erve the
woodland type (Lanner 1977)
Pinyon and pinyon-juniper woodlands hav~ be~n the su~lect of severai symposia The reader iamp directed to proceedings of these lIIeetings providing several papers on the subject [~ee Gifford and Busby (19-75) Aldon and Loring (1977) Evrett (1987) and a fbrthcoming volume reporting a n~~ional lIIeeting held in Mexico in 1987]
This paper specifi~ally exalllines pinyon nut production including lIIarket developlllents that potentially threaten regional markets and the selective harvest of Christlllas trees and nursery or~alllentals Methods available t~ illlprove crop profitability will be discussed in addition to cuirent and future research
NUT BEARING PINES
Plant taxonomists recognize about 100 species in the falllily Pinaceae Alllongthese 12 to 26 species produce quality edible nuts (Rosengarten 1984 Lanner 1981) An edible nut is large middot(generallly les8 than 2200 seedkg) and has a thin shell that can be cracked with the teeth Pines producing edible nuts are found mostly in Europe Asia and western North middotAmerica Large ~dlblen~ts are found ~ostiyalllong the ~tone pines ~Sub8ection Celllbraa) nat~ve to Europe and ASia and the pinyon pines (Subsection Celllbroides) native to North Alllerica
Pinyons are dwarf trees nd shrubS 9f sellliarid regions of the southwestern Uni ted Sta tes and Mexico Because pinyons grow slowly it ismiddot difficult to lustify th~ cost of establishing and cultivatin~ p~aniations for nut production IncreaSingly nuts gathered
from the stone pines are imported f~om Asia and marketed at a lIIuch lower cost According to D~nielFox (pers C~IIII11) about 1000 ~tric tons of ~helled Asian pine nuts are imported each year Re also reports that abou~ 100 ton~ of ~ pinea nuts are illlported from Portugal and Spain
To protect pinyonnut m~rkets it lIIay becollle necessary to develop criteria that effectively distinguish pinyon nuts frolll illlported pine ~uts~ To exallline the feasibility of developing these criteria we will examine t~egeographic ranges and speclal characteristics of nut-producing pines under their respective subsections of the family Pinaceae proposed by Critchfield and Little (1966)
lli Subsec tiOn Celllbroides (Pinyons)
Pines classified und~i the subse~tion Ce~bi~ides (pinyons) have 1-5 needles in a fascicle Seeds are large wingl~ss a~d sOlllewhat oval in shape Lanner (1981) reported 11 species but a more recent treatlllent ofmiddot the alliance r~cognizes 15ta~a (Bailey and Ha~ksworth 1988) Eight species occur in the United States 12 in Mexico and 3 in New Mexico (P edulis I lIIonophylla and I~di-cOlor) The pinyon species discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988)include
Uni ted States
(l) Pinus edulis (pinyon) t 4200 seedkg
The predominant pinyon species of New Mexico Widespread in the southwestern United States lust
entering Wyollling and extending south through Utah Colorado and ~ew ~~xico to the western ~nd of Oklahollla~ west Texas and the northern border of Chihuahua extending west throughout lIIuch of Arizona to an outlier in eastern California Range ov~rlaps ~ith P celllbroides in south~rn New Mexico and Arizona and with P monophylla at the westerD edge of its range (southw~stern Utah northwestern Arizona and the New York Mountains o~ sOuthern California (Fig 1) Kay occa~ionally intergrade with P lIIonophylla
(2) monophylla lsingleleaf plny~n)
[ 2400 seed kg ] The pinyon pine ~fthe Great
14
bull P SAalNIANA bull P aMIIilOIOEl III Po OUAOIIIIOUA bull P MONOPttYLLA bull P eDULIS
Figure 1 Diatrlbution of pinyon pines in lJOuthwestern United States and northern Mexieo
Basin and Mohave Desert Com~onin Nevada and in parts of southern California and western Utah but also ex~ends acr~ss Arizona and southwestern Ke~ Mexico (ig~ 1)
United States and Mexico
(3) Pinus middotcellbroides (Mexican pinyon)
[ 2400 seedkg J Range widespread at low
elevations in the mountains bordering the arid plate~u of northern Mexico Ranges from southeastern Arizona southwestern Arizona southwestern New Mexico and western Texas through northern Mexico and south to Puebla and Mexico City (Fig 1) Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) middotrecognize three subspecies cembroides (northern Mexi~o) lagunae (Baja California) and orizabensis (Central Mexico) (Fig 1)
(4) P californiarum-
Subspecies californiarum
occurs in southern Californ~a and northern Baja California I californiarum subsp fallax (formerly P edulis var fallax) is-found in Arizona
(5) Pinus discolor (border pinyon)
Formerly P cembroides var bicolor~ Principal range lies along both sides of the intershynational boundary between Mexico and the United States extending about 120 miles into eac~ country Sp-ecifically occurs in southeast Arizona extreme southwest New Mexico northeas~ ~onora and northwest Chihuahua
( 6) quad r ifo11a (Parry pinyon) [ 2100 seedkg J
Confined to 10 elevations in the dry mountains of southern California from the San Jacinto Mountains south to the S~erra San Ped~o Martir Its range overlaps that of I monOphylla but no intermediates have been reported (Fig 1)middot
(7) Pinus remo ta (paper-shell pinyon also called
Texas pinyon) Formerly P cembroides var
remota Main range in Coahuila but reaches parts of adjacent Nuevo Leon southeastern Chihuahua and rexas (Bailey and Wendt 1979) Has thinnest shell among pinyons~
Local Endemics Found Exclusively in Mexico
(8) Pinus culminicola (Potosi pinyon)
Documented occurrence Cerro PotOSi Nuevo Leon Mexico
(9) johannis Li~ited r4nge in Mexico
(west of Concepcion del Oro Zacatecas
(10) Pin~s maximartinezii (Martinez pinyon)
Documented Occurrence Zacatecas Mexico
(11 ) Pinus nelsonii (Nelson pinyon)
Documented ocaurrence north- eastern Mexicobull
(12) ~pinceana (Pinca pinyon)
15
Documented occurrence northshy Grows at high elevations inth~ eastern and eastern Mexco Alps and the Carpathian ~ountains
(3) bullbull koraiensis S~eb amp Zucco ~ SUDsect PINEAE Shaw (Korean pine)
[ 1800 seedkg](n Pinuspinea L Rngebull through Korea and (Italian stone pine) eastern Manchuria into southeastern [ 1300 seedkg ] Siberia with outlirs ~ri t~e
Wide_pread in Spain and Japalliue islands of Honshu and Portugal and aiong the northern and Shikoku (Fig 2) eastern shores ~f the Mediterranean Sea including minor occurrences (4) P sibirica near the north coast of Turkey rSibe~ian ston~ pine(Fig 2) [ 4000 seedkg
Ranges from the Ural Mountains Pinus Subsect CEMBRAE through western and central ~iberia---(Stone Pines) to northern Mongolia with outliers
in northern Russia (Fig ~)(1) Pinus albicaulis Engelm~
(whitebark pine) Pinus Subsect GERARDIANAE [ 5700 seedk ] -- shy
Occurs at high eleyations fro~ (1) gerardian Wall~ central British Columbia sout~ to (Chilgoza pine)s~uthern Sierra Nevada of [ 400 seedkg J California the Ruby Mountain of Noted for large edible seed Nevada and the mOuntains of Confined to mountainous regions of northwestern Wyoming eastern Asia principally in
eastern Afgha~itan~ parts of (2) Pin~s cembra L Pakistan ~nd ~catt~red localities
(Swiss stone pine) in the dry inner valleys of the [ 4400 seedkg 1 north~rn Himalayas (Fig 2)
eocIIn_a _shyFigure 2 Distribution of edible pine nuts in Europe and
Asia
16
bull
Pinus Subsect SABINIANAE Loud Opportumiddotnities aay exist to separate pinyOn nuts other froa pine nuts Most
(I) Pinu~ ~abiniana Dougl pine nuts have a ridge where the (Digger pine) membranous wing is attached Also [ 1300 seed kg criteria based upon seed content could
Confined to California Found be applied when large vol~aes of in dry foothills of ihe Sierra imported pine nuts are suspected to be Nevada and the Coast Rangemiddot Ras aislabeled Tests aight exaine levels large edible but rather hard-shelled of starch fat or piotein or even seeds (Fig bull1) smiddotpecific enzyaes (Table 1)
(2) Pinus coulteri D Don (Coulter pine) New Mexico Pinyon Nut Crops ( 3100 seedkg]
Restr~cted to the coastal mountains of cen~ral and southern Pinyon nuts have been harvested California and northern Baja commercially for about 50 years California (Little 1938a) The nut crop averages
045 to 09 million kg (I to 2 million The preceding list makes clear that pounds) annually for New Mexico Arizona
many pinyon species are found in North and Colorado but one year exceeded 36 America with the greatest number found million kg (Little 1942) The more in Mexico Further it seems neither productive stands may yield 330 kglha practical nor necessary to develop (300 lbsac) during a good year market criteria to separate nut products (Springfield 1976) At a cur~ent found among these species Morphological retail value of $883 I kg value on a differences among pinyon nuts are per hectare basis would be $297000 generally so slight as ~o pre~lude (120000 lac) Fowler and Oliver (this practical field identification publication) provide additional Also most Mexican species occur as information on nut values rather isolated populations with local value but low export potential For New Mexico species criteria would have to recognize as genuinely natibullbull those Pinyon Reproductive Biology nuts produced by at least three pinyon species edulis monophylla and P di$color Again nut morphological Pinyons begin bearing nuts at about criteria would not separate these 25 years but crops do not reach pinyons from other species of the same commercial size until about 75 years subsection (Little 1941) Cones are borne
Table 1-- Composition of pine nuts and true nuts (Lanner 1981 Woodroof 1979) All values are expressed as percentages
Kernal H2O Protein Fat Carboshyhydrates
Ash
Pinyon nuts P edulisP monophIllaImiddot cembroides
58 31 14 10 19
60 23 60
18 54 14
3
Pine nuts P sabinianaP pineaImiddot sibirica P lerardiana
49 30 34 19 14
60 48 63 51
9 7
12 23
4
True nuts
Almond Pecan Pistacio Walnut Peanut
51 52
shy45
47 30
33
19 9
20 15 26
54 73 53 64 39
20 15 19 16 24
3 2 3 2
laterally ~n the a~il of a scale leaf near branch tips (jhaw~ 1914) although a r~re observation 01 termin~l cones b~s been reported (Lanner 1969) Developing cones can be ~een in the e~rliest stages as ovulate primordia in longitudinal sections of bu4s Within buds ovulate cone primordia are only at the tip of the bud an~have larger and broader bases than spur shoots (Little 1938-b)
ovuiate primordia are formed in buds in August and September and cones mature by October of the third year Because 3 years are required for seeds to mature treatments applied to stimulate nut quantity~il~ require 3 years before evaluation The first year must be especially suited to production of ovulate primordia and the second and third seaasons favorable to growth and maturation of cones and nuts(Li~tle 1938b)
The Periodicity of Bumper Crops
Pinyon ~ut crops are prodUCed at intervals of 3 to 7 years The periodicity of above-average cropshas been related to the dtain of nutrients required to produce the crop an~ the time required for nutrients to be replenished Developing cones act as food sinks for carbohydrate and nitrogen (N) reserves at the expense of vegetative structures (Pickmann and Kozlowski 1969 1970 ~ook and S~et 1971) Consequently large cone crops adversely affect vegetative tree growth
Forcella (1981) found cone production was inversely relate~ to temperatures during late-August to early September Maximum production in northern New Mexeio occurred when the mean maximum weekly temperature was below 24 degrees C Temperatures above 24 degrees C resulted in virtually no cone crops
However other environmental factors~ acting independently or inte~actinl with temperature caa be involved Rainfall is positively correia ted with the flowering of pines This is because photosynthat~ 9roduction is needed to develop carbohydrate reserves and this process is limited by ~lant water stres~ Also tree growth is determined by photosynthetic gain and the onset of abundant flowering is more directly rela~ed to tree siZe than
age (Schmidtling 1969) More speci1icallj nut ~roduction is e~osely
related to crown surface area
An exception to the adverse influen~e of wa~er ~tress is the positive roie stress plays in the initiat~on of ovula~e primordia Studies have shown that summer moisture
stress results in an above-average flower crop the following spring This suggests moisture stress at the time of ovulate primordia formation promotes reproductive rather than vegetative bull growth This view is supported by studies shOwing that branches exposed to full sun bore more female cones and had lower tissue moisture levels than partially shaded branches (Wareing~ 1958)
Water ~tress also can indirectly affect flowering thro~gh its interaction with tree nutrient status E~ell (1970) showd that nitrate fertili~ation or exposure to moisture stress caused similar tiowe~ing responses in Dougl~s-firaccompaniedby increases in total foliage N content and free amino
acids especially ~rgini~e Similarly Schmidtling (1974) suggested that water stress or N fertilization can increase flowering through the same metabolic intermediary namely arginine or some related N-containing substance~
Manipulation of Native Nut Crops
pespite the importance of coniferous nuts in many parts of th~
world only two pine species appear to be cultivated for their seed crops P
pinea in the Medi terranean and - sibirica in the Urals (Pravdin 1963) The pinyons of estern North America and Meiico ar mos~ly ignored in terma of cultiv~tion or domestication
Little (1140) was among the first to suggest that pinyon nu~ prQduction could be augme~ted tbtough the USe of simple cultutal practices However these received little attention and we have no grea~er und~rstanding of the effi~lcy or econoic feasibility of these treatments now than we did more than 40 ~ears ago Nev~rtheles~ with the present emphasis on wocidland management ~uch treatmenta seem worthy of serious attention
Ca) selective thinning
Some pibyonsapear to be
18
Nut sizes from pruned and unpruned Pinus edulis trees
19
consistently good nut producers (Little 1940) Heavy producers usually show immature and old cones on branches and cones are conspicuous b~neath them Selective thinning of unpr04uctive trees should increase flowering of those left standing (Little 1940)
(b) basal pruning
Theoretically low branches receiving partial sun light do not photosynthesize enough energy to offset energy losses to respiration It follows that low branches are energy sinks that potentially r~b nutrients from seed crops To test this relationship Montano et al (1980) pruned baial branches of 70 to 80-year old pinyons (8 to 10 m tall) to a height of 15 m and SUbsequently determined effects of this treatment on seed development They reported av~rage nut volumes from gruned and ungruned trees were 040 cm and 032 cm and the average nut weights were 033 g and 020 g respectively (see Fig3) Also pruned trees produced a greater percentage of filled nuts 99 as opposed to 84 The effects observed were related to the growth of nuts already developing in cones when the treatment was applied
Basal pruning reduced disease and insect injury of southern pnes (Wilson and Rudolph 1970) Also pruned wood could b sold for ~uelwood potentially offsetting the cost of the benefits anticipated Owing to its simplicity and overall benefits basal pruning appears to merit greater attention
(c) fertilization
Fertilization usually stimulates female cone production (Puritch 1972) More specifically the following trends become apparent when studies are reviewed collectively
(1) N stimulates cone production even when N is applied with other nutrients (Morris and Beers 1969) Also trees producing greater cone yields generally have higher levels of tisue N than low producers
(2) The presence of specific amino acids (especially arginine) is a more reliable predictor of fruitfulness than tissue N content per se For example nitrat N ana ammcinium N increased Douglasshyfir foliar N content and shoot growth similarly However only nitrate N significantly increased arginine content which was positively and quantitatively related to female flower proshyduction (Ebell and McMullin 1970) Following ichmidtlings (1974) explanation of fruit shyfulness fertilization shyespecially with nitrate N - could increase tis~ue organip Nand consequently flowering
(d) cultivation and irrigation
Supplemental water could increase growth reSUlting in greater crown density and iurface area In times of drought additional water could prevent premature abortion of immature cones Drip irrigaeion technology may be feaible for som~ sites However it seems more likely that less intensive ~ethods will prove to be practical Among these are land treatments that direct precipitation run-off to trees improve infiltration or remove weed competition
CHRISTMAS TREES
Pinyons are harvested from natural stands and comprise about 25 of all
Christmas trees sold in New Mexico Arizona Colorado Wyoming Utah and Nevada (Sowder 1965) Trimmed branches also are used for wreath manufacture In spite of their slow growth in native stands pinyons have many desirable Christmas tree attributes including dense foliage symmetrical shape green color natural fragrance good branch angle and limb strength and good needle retention Plantation trees can reach marketable size in about 11 years (Fisher and Fa~cher 1987)
Stand Thinning
Several techniques can be used to improve tree quality Stand thinning allows remaining trees to receive sufficient sunlight for limbs to develop uniformly on all sides During the thinning operation handles can be made on main stems by removing branches at the trees base to a height of 30 em
Removal of branches below a full whorl of branches will allow another tree to be culturedmiddotfrom the stump after harvest A year after the first tree is cut the remaining low branches will begin to turn up and all but one of these can be pruned to promote the growth of a new central leader
Pruning and Shearing
~he ideal pin~on Christmas tree resembles an inverted cone wide at the base and tapered uniformly tg the tip Accemiddotptable crown taper for pines is 40 to 90 but for spr~ces and firs is 40 to 70 Pruning and shearing will make native pinyons conform more closely to the ideal which improve marke tabi Ii ty
Pruning removes dead or unattractive branches Shearing is used to co~troi leader growth so the distance between whorls is not excessive increase the number of branches arising from branch buds and promote the pyramidal crown f~Im Because pinyon leader growth rarely exceeds 20 cm excessive distance between whorls is rarely a problem Pruning and shearing most often will be used to correct uneven o~oid and thia crowns
In pines eac~ needle bun~le ~ontains a dormant or axillary bud Removal of a branch terminal at the proper time promotes development of these dormant buds into short shoots improving crown density In singleshyneedled conifers such as spruces firs and Douglas-fir intermediate buds are produced along the terminal branch stem between each whorl For this reason they can be sheared during any season of the year and produce about the same number of branch buds However with pines the number and size of branch buds developed after shearing depends upon the physiological state of the tree when sheared
Pines respond best when sheared shortly after height growth is complete but before tissues in the new shoot becom~ woody S~oots prun~d at this time produce two to four times the number of buds found on unpruned trees Pinyon shoots elongata during late June but needles continue to elongatemiddotduring July and August after branches are fully elongated Buds are formed in late August
From studies conducted with other pine Christmas tree species the following course of treatments can be recommended for pinyons
1 Before spring growth begins prune all double and multiple leaders (eg bullbull April)
~ She~r when needles on new candles are 13 as long as last yeara needles (usually from June 15 to July 1)
3 Shape the tre~ from the top down by shearing the tips of lateral branches Pzomote a conical crown so thebase is no more than 90 as wide as the tree is tall Ideally taper should be 40-90 Avoid shearing back to woody tissue because this encourages multiple leaders
4 If the tree is oblong rather than tapered shear the top in June or eirly July and the sides in late summer fall or winter Growt~ of laterals will be reduced Repeat steps 2-4 yearly as needed
5 Avoid shearing the year the tree is ~o be marke~ed
20
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
Table 1--Monthly precipitation for Carlsbad and Fort Wingate New Mexico (From USDA 1941)
Fort Winsate Carlsbad -
Monthly Cumulative Monthly Cumulative Month Total Cumulative (Inches) Total Cumulative (Inches)
January 081 081 55 033 033middotbull 25
February 101 182 126 043 076 58
March 116 298 206 054 130 99
April 151 449 310 086 216 164
May 071 520 359 091 307 234
June 070 590 407 149 456 347
July 206 796 550 223 679 515
August 279 1075 742 1 70 849 647
September 143 1218 841 203 1052 801
October 076 1294 894 144 1196 908
Novembemiddotr 074 1368 945 060 1256 957
December 081 1449 1000 056 1312 1000
Total 1449 1312
middotbull
the lower elevat~ons and tends to bemiddotthe warmest and driest of the three Itmiddotis the least productive in total biomass production and in terms of wood averages about five cords of wood per hectare (2cordsAC)~
2) Pinyon-ju~iper composed of ~~ and a mix of monosperma and limited amounts of osteosperlila~ This classifieation has a shrub understory and has a higher biomass produetion than eategory 1 The cord-wood available is estimated to be from 10-20 cords per hectare (4-8 cordsAC)
middot3) Pinyonjuniper composed of edul1smiddot and a mix of monosperma and deppeana with a significant understory of Gambel Oak Thiamp category has the highest biomas production and cord-wood available is estimated to be nearly 35 cords per hectare (14 cordsAC)
The soils are widely distributed over all three categories of the woodland ecosystem and are not easily stratified to any one group It is common for the soils to have accumulations of carbcinatfils middotand frequently have calcic horizons These carbonate accumulations are mo~e frequent in oldermiddot soils on stable landscapes There seems to be no generalization with soil texture Almost any soil texture will support the ecosystem as will most ~y middotsoil depth Onemiddot common characteristic is the low amount of accumulated organic matter The upper 18 cm (Fincher or plow-layer) has less than 1 organic matter When organic matter does accumulate above this level it seems to be in soils with some combination of high clay content wettest end of the ustic moisture regimes or coolr than mesic temperature regimes Little is known about the influencemiddotof soil on the distribution and growth of the pinyon-juniperwoodlampnd
Site Index
Site index is an expressionmiddot of the tree growth potential of a site or a sites productive capacity Stocking expresses the density of trees on the land and spacing refers to its spatial distribution Standardpractice is to define site in terms of the total height of trees that have consistently been in a dominant position in well-stocked stands at specified key ages bull
A1thou~h tree height growth h4s been the most practical consistent and generally useful indicator of forest-site quality other features may be more mean~ngfulfor pinyon pine and junipers of New MexiCO These could include stem diameter volume or number Of stems per tree or some combination of these variables
Site indeX is used in land management to determine a forestis rotation A forest rotation is defined as the period of years required for treestobecome established and
grOW to a specified condition of maturity
Determining themiddotlengthof the rotation is one of the key d~cisions a manager of pinYon-juniper must make There are two basic groups of physical and financial factors that influence the length of the rotation (1) des1red products (largely a matter of markets or of a demand in a general economic sense) and (2) forest productivity or what Can be grown (supply) bull
The praetical importance of site index often is notgiven inadequate attention in the buying and selling of forest lands and in forest management The report by Fowler (1984) indicates there is presently a little infcirmstiondealingwith the production of fiber on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico They
constructed volume tables based on tree diameter and height for a so11 site near Taos andmiddot another near Cloudcroft More than 600 observations were used at each site and they concluded that the tables were not int~rchangeable these authors suggested a rotation of greater than 200 years
A comparison of photographs taken upto 100 years ago and recent photographs of the s~e areas indicate that many soils in New Mexico have pinyon-juniper growth rates that are much more rapid than the sites near Cloudcroft and Taos Some sites probably could be managed for fence posts and fuel wood on a 50-year rotationmiddot or less This would change manag~nt schemes tremendously and be much more useful than a rotation of more than 200 years for the entire state Obviously site indices need to be established for at least the major so11 types associated with pinyon~juniper stands in New Mexico
Topography
Pinyon-juniper woodlands occmiddotur on a wide variety of topographical positions (Lymbery and Pieper 1983) S~dies in theSacramento Mountains of southcentral New Mexico showed that
aspect (exposure) slope steepness and slope position did not have major impacts on tree characteristics (Lymbery and Pieper 1983 Pieper and Lymbery 1987) Only general patterns were
apparent Rocky Mountain pinYon density was higher in relation to that of singleseed juniper
on steeper slopes and possibly on northern middotaspects Tree density appeared to be more sensitive to topographic variables than tree size or canopy cover
Shrubby species showed a response to topographic position (Lymbery and Pieper 1983)bull Walkingstick Cholla (Opuntia imbricata) was more abundant on xeric sputh-faeing slopes while skunkbush (Rhus trilobata) and wavy-leaf oak (Quercus undUlata) were more abundant on nortb-facing slopes Gehlbach (1967) fout)d similar relationships on the Gusdalupe Mountains in southeastern NewMexico
4
Rocky MoUntain pinyon generally increasesin abundance with elevation as abundance of juniper decreases (Pieper and Lymbery an4 Woodin and Lindsey 1954) Similar patterns are also apparent in the Great Basin (Tueller at ale 1979)
Hydrology
A diverse range of vegetatie species climatic factors and soil parent materials govern the water in pinyon-juniper ecosystems Unfortunately little hydrologic-related researchbullbull has been accomplished This is shocking in light of the importance on water to New Mexico and its neighbors Schmidt (1987) claims a gap exists between the available scientific knowledge base and application by land managers This results at l~ast in part from apast tendency to accept hydrologiC information supporting eradication of pinyon-juniper and to disregard findings tbat questioned the watershed benefit of these practices Changes in public demands haw resulted in a reassesaent of management goals for pinyonjuniper Managers lackadequate knowledge of inventory methods si1vicu1tura1systemsand productivity in relation to runoff processes Schmidt also
stated that fuxther long-termaall-watershed studies are needed to fill knowledge gaps and provide a framework for plot ~tudies
Because of its topographic position pinyon-juniper woodl~nds greatly influence runoff generated from higher elevation ecosystems It is often the last ecosystem that water passes through before being diverted for use Most water yield studies for pinyon-juniper have been conducted at Corduroy Creek and Beaver Creek in Arizona with a few 881411 plot studies in Nevada and Utah These studies centered on potentials for increasing water yields and effects of various type conversion strategies Pinyon-juniper was considetedundesirable and merely represented a barrier to increasing grassland cover The energy crisis and environmental movements ofthe 1970s curtailed major type-converSion efforts Fuel wood demand changed the emphasis to sustain yield Maintaining pinyon-juniper stands on soils that have been invaded by these plants because of cessation of fire may prove to be ecologically disastrous because of hydrologiC tmpacts especially erosion
Highlights of Current Knowledge
Climate Few studies ~ist on the climate of pinyon-juniper stands A Nevada study showed pinyon-juniper to be confined to a thermal belt above the valley inversions and below the colder upslope elevations This may also be true in much of New Mexico
Precipitation Total daily monthly and annual precipitation patterns for the
pinyon-juniper type are well known but storm characteristics are not These are needed to identify runoff-producing storms and predict erosion Some 5-minute intensities have approached 8 inches per hour in Arizona A study of maximum 2-m1nute intensities found 42 inches per hour at Alamogordo Cteek New Mexico A Utah study shows the greatest intensities to occur at elevations between 6s0Q and 8000 feet which coincides with the pinyon-juniper ecosystlim
Interception This variable is usually insignificant in most eoosystems However in a pinyon-juniper stand an interception capacity of 02 inch would reduce the effective 5-minute intensity by 24 inches per hour Interception values have been found to range from 013 to 094 inch per hour in Arizona The 094 inch would reduce the effective s-minute intensity by 1128 inches per hour Blue grams has been found to retain about 015 inch of precipitation which reduces the effective S-m1nute intensity by only 18 inches per hour No pinyon-juniper litter studies are known
Infiltration Studies of infiltration have received the greatest amount of attention from watershed scientists from other states Generally where pinyon-juniper trees are not part ofmiddot the climax vegetationbullinflltratt-0n rates between trees are much lower than underneath trees This is especially true where the understory is sparce because of competition forllght soil water and nutrients by the more dominant pinyon-juniper trees Where pinyon-juniper are climal ie rocky hillsides infiltration rates were similar Management and miaanagement can greatly alter the infiltration rates
Runoff Pinyon-juniper often produces surface-runoff in response to high-intensity short-duration storms which are the most frequent storms in New Mexico The Saliz watershed near Reserve New Mexico once reported a peak flow rate of 1380 cubic feet per second per square mile Schmidt (1987) reports that currently information on frequency and magnitude of precipitation-runoff related to site conditions is inadequate for design of facilities in this ecosystem
Sedfment production This is the major water quality concern from the pinyon-juniper ecosystem Some stands ID Arizona produced more than a ton of sedfment from each acre each year Impacts of new uses of the pinyon-juniper type are not known and need investigation
HydrologiC Impacts from Increasing Mu1t1pie Use Demands
Uses of pinyon-juniper ecosystems are rapidly expanding in New Mexico New and innovative land management schemes are needed to respond to these demands while maintaining and
5
improving the productive potential Many roads Ue in the bottoms of drainage ways Which concentrates diffuse runoff into damaging flows arid serious erosion Road systems continue to expand in many pinyon-juniper stanels as a result of off-road vehicle recreation hunting arid wood gathedng Many livestock anel wilellife grazing msnagement strategies are geareel to proviele for plant health but fail to conaieler adequately the impacts of use that affect infiltration flow concentrations ariel erosion It is not known hoW much plant material should be left on-site to protect most rangelands including pinyon-junper ecosystems in New Mexico
A significant amount of the existing unsatisfactory watersheelconclitionsare associateel with the pinyon-juniper ecosystem The hydrologic variables associated with pinyon-juniper are highly sensitive to use
Opt~um watershed treatment strategies to restore iong-term productivity and reduce flood and sediment risks need to be identified
PINYON-JUNIPER VEGETATION
Overstory tree Species
The threemaj)r tree species found in New Mexico within the pinyon-juniper woodland are Rocky Mountain pinyon Singleseed juniper ancl Alligatorjuniper (LaDner 1975 1981 Little 1950 Pieper 1977 anel Sprlngfield) Rocky Mountain pinyon and Singleseed juniper are founel throughout the pinyor-juniper wooellanel in the Southwest but Alligator juniper is more abunclant in western New Mexico anel Arizona Utah juniper also occurs in some pinyon-juniper woodlands in northwestern New Mexico while Rocky Mountain juniper (Juniperus scopulorum) occurs in northern New Mexico
Unclerstory Vegetation
Big sagebrush (Artelisia tridentata) is a common understory shrubby species in northern and northwestern New Mexico (Pieper 1977 Springfield 1976) Several oak species (Quercus arizonica 51 grisea 9 emoryi anel 9 oblongifolia) are ilIiportant understory shrubs in western and southwestern New Mexico Mountain
mshogany (Cercocarpus montana) and Wrights silk tassel (Garrya wrightii) are also important browse species in this area (Boeker et al 1972shyand Short et al 1977) Blue gra- (BouteloUa gracilis) occurs as an understory grass species throughout the wooellancl vegetation in thestate In northern areas cool season species of such genera as 2Festuca anel Agropyron occur ONest et al 1975) In central ancl southeastern New Mexico warm season species of the general Muhlenbergia Hilaria Lycurus anel Bouteloua occur
Habitat Types
Kennedy (1983) identified six relatively undisturbed habitatmiddot types in the Sacramento Mountains of southcentralNewMexicQ (Table 2) These habitat types ranged from about 6200ft to 7000 ft in average elevation and from 33 to 47 understory cover (Kennedy 1983 Table 2) The ~ ecluUs-Juniperus monospermal
Muhlenbergia pauc1flora habitat type was perhaps themost common type in this area Francis and Aldon (1983) also identified three pinyonshyjuniper habitat typu innortbwestern New Mexico
Uriderstory Patterns
Pinyon-juniper vegetation forma a mosaic pattern with trees interspersed with open grassland areas between the trees Armentrout and Pieper (1988) have described three understory zones associated with singleseed juniper and Rocky Mountain pinyon The first zone is that surrounding the trunk of the tree and is characterized by shrubs such as skunkbrush ancl algerita (Berberis haematocarpa) The seconcl zone is largely beneath the tree canopy Several grass species such as sideoats grams (Boute1oua curtipendula) wolftal (Lycurus phleoides) and blUe grams were abundant in the seconcl zone Several species inclUding blue grama wolf tail ancl creeping muhly (Muhlenbergia repeus) were more abundant under tree canopy ori the north side rather than on the southmiddot side (Schott and Pieper 1985) Pinyon ricegrass (Piptochaetium fimbriatum) appears to be favored by conditions under canopies of singleseed juniper Grass species of the open grassland zone included blue grama wolftaU gal~eta sanddrapseed and mat muhly~
Age and Size Class Structure
Many pi~yon-juniper stands h~vebeen disturbeel during the past 100 years by fuel or fence post harvesting bUrDing or mechanical control treatments Consequently many trees are relatively young bull Age class distributions consequently do not followmiddot the typical inverted J-shaped curve for ma~ure stanels Figure 1 shows age-class distribution for 202 Rocky Mountain pinyon trees from five study sites in the Sacramento Mountains This distribution appears to be nearly normal with most trees falling in the 70 to 130 yearmiddotage class However the specific distribution at each site depended on time since last disturbance and type of disturbance (Plumb-Mentjes anel Pieper 1983) Pinyon age is relatedto basal diameter but only 38 of the variation in age can be explained by basal diameter (Figure 2) Apparently~stand density (competition) influences siz~ of trees sUbstantially
6
0
Table 2 - Pinyon-Juniper Habitat Types of the Lincoln National Forest (From Kennedy 1983)
Tree Density
Average Understory Avg Stems Habitat Type Elev Ft Cover Plot
bull PINYON-JUNIPER SERIES
1 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Cercocarpus montanusAndropogon gerardi HT 6178 42 36
2 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Muhlenbergia pauciflora HT 6470 33 63
3 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Stipa columbiana HT 6678 36 123
4 Pinus edulis-Junil rus monosperma Bouteloua gracilis HT 6977 37 163
5 Punis edulis-Juniperus deppeana Bouteloua gracilis HT 6739 46 65
6 Pinus edulis-Juniperus deppeana Muhlenbergia dubia HT 6920 47 105
22 I
20
11
I
I
20 110 611 1110012011101611130 middotIY_I
Figure 1 Age class distribution of aU pinyon pines on study areas
- 1511r bull 100
1 bull 05 ~ 11amp50 2 r bull 031 n bull zaz
22 11 111 _ 1HIICMIl
Figure 2bull Relationship betweenDBB and age of pinyon pine for all trees bull
RESPONSE TO DISTURBANCE (SECONDARY SUCCESSION)
Several successional models have been proposed for secondary succession followingmiddot disturbance that removes most of the trees (Arnold et a1 1964 Barney and Frischknecht 1974 and Erdman 1976) These general patterns alsomiddotapply to conditions in middotpinyon-juniper woodlands in central New Mexico (Dwyer and Pieper 1967 Rippel et al 1980 1983 Schott and Pieper 1986 1987a 1987b 1987C) Bowever specific patterns are influenced by the type of soils supporting the woodland vegetation (Schott arid Pieper 1986 1987a) Generally- soils that are fairly shallow and rocky have some seral stages poorly represented (Table 3) When sitesmiddot with these soils are treated mechanically shrubs such as wavy-leaf oak do not increase (Rippel et al 1983) On similar soils with few roek outarops grassforb and shrubgrass stages are common Response of Rocky Hountainpinyon
and singleseed juniper appear to be dependent on density and size of trees before treatment If
the stanpmiddot was near climax before cabling pinypnsrapidly become dominant on the site If the stand was in someseral stage there would be more junipers but theimiddotr relatively slow growth and time for uturation require more time before middotthey would dominate the site
RESEARCH NEEDS
Only limited research on pinyon-juniper ecology in northern and westernmiddot New Mexico has been conducted Informst~on is lacking on basic ecological relationship at both plant communitymiddot and individual species level lactors influencing distribution of these woodlands are poorly understood lor example in many situations pinyon-juniper appears to be moving uphill in elevation and encroaching on ponderosa pine forests Such situation have not been analyzed Success~onal patterns where alligator juniper is a major potenUal component of the vegetation have not been determined Analyses of these woodlands for several uses and products are needed for laUd unagament purposes
4 bull ~
Table 3 -- General pattern of succession on cabled pinyon-juniper wood1anda on two soil types (From Schott and Pieper 1986)
Sera1 Stages Climax 1 2 3
Original Conditions
General successional Annual forb Grassforb Shrubgrass Pinyon-juniper model
Lithic hapustoll Annuals and Perennial Shrubs dominant Pinyon and juniper perennials from grasses and shade conducive dominating Pinyon seeds which disshy forbs with to tree establishshy eventually dominant perse readily establishment ment surviving perenshy and spread of nials shrubs (esp
0 wavy-leaf oak)
Lithic hapusto11- Annuals and These stages absent or poorly represhy Pinyon dominating Rock outcrop complex perennials from sented Rock outcropsmiddotrestrict vegshy Climax with juniper bull
seed which disshy etative reproduction perse readily surviving perenshynials
fI
LITERATURE CITED
Armentrout S M and R D Pieper 1988 Plant distribution surrounding Rocky Mountain Pinyon and one seed juniper in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range Management 41 (In press) bull
Arnold J F bullbull D A Jameson and E H Reid 1964bull The pinyon~jun1per type of Arizona Effects of grazing fire and tree control US Department of Agriculture Production Research Report 84~
Barney MA and N C Frischknechtmiddot 1974 Vegetation change follOwing fire in the
pinyon-juniper type of west-central Utah Journal of Range Management 279~-96
Barrett J W 1962 Regional Silviculture of the United States The Ronald Press Co bullbull NY 610p
BetancourtJ L 1987 Paleoecology of pinyon-juniper woodlands summary In Everett R L (compiler) proceedings~ pinyon-juniper conference USDA For SerGen Techbull Rep INT-215~
Boeker E Lbullbull V E Scott H G Reynolds and B A Donaldson 1972~ Seasonal food habits of mule deer in southWestern Ne Mexicobull Journal of Wildlife Management 3656-63 bull
Erdman Jbull A 1970 Pinyon-juniper succession after natural fires in residual soils of MesaVerde Colorado Brigham Young University Science Bulletin Series 11 ~rovo Utah
Fowler J M R D Bowe BE Peacock KC McDanielT Garner-Hurt J R Gray and
M Cardenas 1974 Wood fiber production in pinyon-juniper woodlands on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico New MeXico State University Agricultural Experiment~tation Research Report NO~ 519
Francis R E and E bull F Alden 1983 Preliminary habitat types of a semiarid grassland In MOir W H and L Hendzel (Tech COQrdinatora) Proceeding of the workshop pn southwestern habitat types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Gehlbach F R 1967 Vegetation of the Guadalupe escarpment New Mexico-Texas Ecology 48404-419
Kennedy K L 1983 A habitat type classification of the p~yon-juniper woodlands of the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico In Moir W H and Leonard Hendzel (Tech-Coordinators) Proceedings of the workshop on southwestern habitat
types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Lanner bull R M 1975 Pinyon pines and junipers of the southwestern woodlandsmiddot In Gifford G F and 1 E Buspy The pinyonjunipr ecosystem a symposium Utah State Univ bullbull Logan
Lanner R Mmiddot1981 The pinyon pine a natural and cultural history Univ Nevada Press
Reno
Little E L bull 1950 Southwestern trees Amiddot guide to the native species of middotNew Mexico and Arizona US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Agricultural Handbook 9
Lymbery bull G A and R D Pieper 1983 Ecology of pinyon-juniper vegetation in the northern Sacramento Mountains New Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 698
Pieper R D 1~77 The southwestern pinyon-juniper ecosystem In Aldon Earl F and T J~ Loring (Tech Coord) US Departmentmiddot Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report RM-31
Pieper R D and G A Lymbery 1987 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegettion in south-central New Mexico In~ Everett Richard L (compiler) proceedings - pinyon-juniper conference US Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT-21S
Plumh-Mentjes M L and R D Pieper 1983 Diameter distribution and age class structure of pinyon pine (Pinus eduiis Engelm) in south-central~Mexico Abstract 36th annual meeting Society for Range Management Denver CO bull
Schmidt L j 1987 Present and future themes in ptnyon-juniper hydrology In ~verett R L (compiler) U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report 1NT-215
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1985 Influence of canoP1 characteristics of one-seed juniper on understory grasses Journal of Range Management 38328-331
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1986 Succession in pinyon-juniper vegetation in New Mexico Rangelands 8126-128
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987a Succession of pinyon-juniper communities a~ter mechanical disturbance in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range ~anagement 4088-94
1Q
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987bbull Water relationships of Quercus undulata ~ edulis and Juniperus monosperma in seral pinyon-juniper communities of south-central New Mexico In Everett R L (compiler) us Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT~215 bull
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987cbull bull Succession in tree pits following cabliD8
in pinyon-juniper c01lllllUt1ities Southwestern Naturalist 32399-402
~ Short H L t W Evans and E L Boeker 1977 The use of natural and modified pinyon pine-juniper wOodlands by deer and elk Journal of Wildlife Management 41543-559
Springfield H W 1976 Characteristics and management of southwestern pinyon-juniper ranges the status of our knowledge US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Res Pap RM-160
Tueller P T C D Beeson R J Tausch N E West and K HRea 1979 Pinyon-juniper woodlands of themiddotGreat Basin distribution flora vegetal cover U SbullDepartment of Agriculture Forest Service Research Paper INT~229
USDA 1941 Cltmate and man Yearbook of Agriculture U S Govt Printing Office Washington DC
Wasson G E 1987 The American Indian response to the pinyon-juniper conference In Everett R L(compller) USDA For Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Wells P V 1987 Systematics and distribution of pinyons in the late quarternary In Everett R Lbull (compiler) Proc - Pinyon-juniper Conference USDA For Sere Gen Tech Rep INT-215
West N E K H Rea and R J Tausch 1975 Basic Synecological relationahips in pinyon-juniper woodlands In Gifford G E and F E Busby (eds) ~e pinyon-juniper ecosystem A symposium Utah State University Logan
Woodin H E and A A Lindsey 1954 Juniper-pinyon east of the Continental Divide as analyzed by the line-strip metWod Ecology 35473-489
11
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES I CROP
bullJ
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH WOODLAND STA~D MANAGEMENT l
James T Fisher John G Me~al and Gregory C Phillips
Abstract-- New Mexicos native pinyon pines produce high-value crops including nuts Christmas trees and nursery or~amentals Crop values can be increased through more intensive stand management and more innovative marketing of such products as pinyon nuts and Christmas trees to compete with imported products Research needs pertaining to these crops are discussed
1 Ne~ Mexico State University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-II
2 Authors are re~pectively
Professor and Associate Professors Dept of Agronomy and Horticulture New
Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
13
INTRODUCTlON
Pinyons (pinon p~nes) ield diverse productsranging frolll valuable nuts ~nd landscape sp~cll11ens to fuelwood
Rowever littleforethought is give~ to crop illlprovelllentbeforecropsare ha~vested This paper addresses high-value pinyon products ~hat appear to justify at least modest levels omiddotf lIIanacelllent inputs to improve product quality quantity or avail- abilty Greater elllphasis on ~ntensive lIIanagelllentmiddot recognizes the nee~ for deriving economic benefits as well as the need for cu~todiai lIIanagelllent to pre~erve the
woodland type (Lanner 1977)
Pinyon and pinyon-juniper woodlands hav~ be~n the su~lect of severai symposia The reader iamp directed to proceedings of these lIIeetings providing several papers on the subject [~ee Gifford and Busby (19-75) Aldon and Loring (1977) Evrett (1987) and a fbrthcoming volume reporting a n~~ional lIIeeting held in Mexico in 1987]
This paper specifi~ally exalllines pinyon nut production including lIIarket developlllents that potentially threaten regional markets and the selective harvest of Christlllas trees and nursery or~alllentals Methods available t~ illlprove crop profitability will be discussed in addition to cuirent and future research
NUT BEARING PINES
Plant taxonomists recognize about 100 species in the falllily Pinaceae Alllongthese 12 to 26 species produce quality edible nuts (Rosengarten 1984 Lanner 1981) An edible nut is large middot(generallly les8 than 2200 seedkg) and has a thin shell that can be cracked with the teeth Pines producing edible nuts are found mostly in Europe Asia and western North middotAmerica Large ~dlblen~ts are found ~ostiyalllong the ~tone pines ~Sub8ection Celllbraa) nat~ve to Europe and ASia and the pinyon pines (Subsection Celllbroides) native to North Alllerica
Pinyons are dwarf trees nd shrubS 9f sellliarid regions of the southwestern Uni ted Sta tes and Mexico Because pinyons grow slowly it ismiddot difficult to lustify th~ cost of establishing and cultivatin~ p~aniations for nut production IncreaSingly nuts gathered
from the stone pines are imported f~om Asia and marketed at a lIIuch lower cost According to D~nielFox (pers C~IIII11) about 1000 ~tric tons of ~helled Asian pine nuts are imported each year Re also reports that abou~ 100 ton~ of ~ pinea nuts are illlported from Portugal and Spain
To protect pinyonnut m~rkets it lIIay becollle necessary to develop criteria that effectively distinguish pinyon nuts frolll illlported pine ~uts~ To exallline the feasibility of developing these criteria we will examine t~egeographic ranges and speclal characteristics of nut-producing pines under their respective subsections of the family Pinaceae proposed by Critchfield and Little (1966)
lli Subsec tiOn Celllbroides (Pinyons)
Pines classified und~i the subse~tion Ce~bi~ides (pinyons) have 1-5 needles in a fascicle Seeds are large wingl~ss a~d sOlllewhat oval in shape Lanner (1981) reported 11 species but a more recent treatlllent ofmiddot the alliance r~cognizes 15ta~a (Bailey and Ha~ksworth 1988) Eight species occur in the United States 12 in Mexico and 3 in New Mexico (P edulis I lIIonophylla and I~di-cOlor) The pinyon species discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988)include
Uni ted States
(l) Pinus edulis (pinyon) t 4200 seedkg
The predominant pinyon species of New Mexico Widespread in the southwestern United States lust
entering Wyollling and extending south through Utah Colorado and ~ew ~~xico to the western ~nd of Oklahollla~ west Texas and the northern border of Chihuahua extending west throughout lIIuch of Arizona to an outlier in eastern California Range ov~rlaps ~ith P celllbroides in south~rn New Mexico and Arizona and with P monophylla at the westerD edge of its range (southw~stern Utah northwestern Arizona and the New York Mountains o~ sOuthern California (Fig 1) Kay occa~ionally intergrade with P lIIonophylla
(2) monophylla lsingleleaf plny~n)
[ 2400 seed kg ] The pinyon pine ~fthe Great
14
bull P SAalNIANA bull P aMIIilOIOEl III Po OUAOIIIIOUA bull P MONOPttYLLA bull P eDULIS
Figure 1 Diatrlbution of pinyon pines in lJOuthwestern United States and northern Mexieo
Basin and Mohave Desert Com~onin Nevada and in parts of southern California and western Utah but also ex~ends acr~ss Arizona and southwestern Ke~ Mexico (ig~ 1)
United States and Mexico
(3) Pinus middotcellbroides (Mexican pinyon)
[ 2400 seedkg J Range widespread at low
elevations in the mountains bordering the arid plate~u of northern Mexico Ranges from southeastern Arizona southwestern Arizona southwestern New Mexico and western Texas through northern Mexico and south to Puebla and Mexico City (Fig 1) Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) middotrecognize three subspecies cembroides (northern Mexi~o) lagunae (Baja California) and orizabensis (Central Mexico) (Fig 1)
(4) P californiarum-
Subspecies californiarum
occurs in southern Californ~a and northern Baja California I californiarum subsp fallax (formerly P edulis var fallax) is-found in Arizona
(5) Pinus discolor (border pinyon)
Formerly P cembroides var bicolor~ Principal range lies along both sides of the intershynational boundary between Mexico and the United States extending about 120 miles into eac~ country Sp-ecifically occurs in southeast Arizona extreme southwest New Mexico northeas~ ~onora and northwest Chihuahua
( 6) quad r ifo11a (Parry pinyon) [ 2100 seedkg J
Confined to 10 elevations in the dry mountains of southern California from the San Jacinto Mountains south to the S~erra San Ped~o Martir Its range overlaps that of I monOphylla but no intermediates have been reported (Fig 1)middot
(7) Pinus remo ta (paper-shell pinyon also called
Texas pinyon) Formerly P cembroides var
remota Main range in Coahuila but reaches parts of adjacent Nuevo Leon southeastern Chihuahua and rexas (Bailey and Wendt 1979) Has thinnest shell among pinyons~
Local Endemics Found Exclusively in Mexico
(8) Pinus culminicola (Potosi pinyon)
Documented occurrence Cerro PotOSi Nuevo Leon Mexico
(9) johannis Li~ited r4nge in Mexico
(west of Concepcion del Oro Zacatecas
(10) Pin~s maximartinezii (Martinez pinyon)
Documented Occurrence Zacatecas Mexico
(11 ) Pinus nelsonii (Nelson pinyon)
Documented ocaurrence north- eastern Mexicobull
(12) ~pinceana (Pinca pinyon)
15
Documented occurrence northshy Grows at high elevations inth~ eastern and eastern Mexco Alps and the Carpathian ~ountains
(3) bullbull koraiensis S~eb amp Zucco ~ SUDsect PINEAE Shaw (Korean pine)
[ 1800 seedkg](n Pinuspinea L Rngebull through Korea and (Italian stone pine) eastern Manchuria into southeastern [ 1300 seedkg ] Siberia with outlirs ~ri t~e
Wide_pread in Spain and Japalliue islands of Honshu and Portugal and aiong the northern and Shikoku (Fig 2) eastern shores ~f the Mediterranean Sea including minor occurrences (4) P sibirica near the north coast of Turkey rSibe~ian ston~ pine(Fig 2) [ 4000 seedkg
Ranges from the Ural Mountains Pinus Subsect CEMBRAE through western and central ~iberia---(Stone Pines) to northern Mongolia with outliers
in northern Russia (Fig ~)(1) Pinus albicaulis Engelm~
(whitebark pine) Pinus Subsect GERARDIANAE [ 5700 seedk ] -- shy
Occurs at high eleyations fro~ (1) gerardian Wall~ central British Columbia sout~ to (Chilgoza pine)s~uthern Sierra Nevada of [ 400 seedkg J California the Ruby Mountain of Noted for large edible seed Nevada and the mOuntains of Confined to mountainous regions of northwestern Wyoming eastern Asia principally in
eastern Afgha~itan~ parts of (2) Pin~s cembra L Pakistan ~nd ~catt~red localities
(Swiss stone pine) in the dry inner valleys of the [ 4400 seedkg 1 north~rn Himalayas (Fig 2)
eocIIn_a _shyFigure 2 Distribution of edible pine nuts in Europe and
Asia
16
bull
Pinus Subsect SABINIANAE Loud Opportumiddotnities aay exist to separate pinyOn nuts other froa pine nuts Most
(I) Pinu~ ~abiniana Dougl pine nuts have a ridge where the (Digger pine) membranous wing is attached Also [ 1300 seed kg criteria based upon seed content could
Confined to California Found be applied when large vol~aes of in dry foothills of ihe Sierra imported pine nuts are suspected to be Nevada and the Coast Rangemiddot Ras aislabeled Tests aight exaine levels large edible but rather hard-shelled of starch fat or piotein or even seeds (Fig bull1) smiddotpecific enzyaes (Table 1)
(2) Pinus coulteri D Don (Coulter pine) New Mexico Pinyon Nut Crops ( 3100 seedkg]
Restr~cted to the coastal mountains of cen~ral and southern Pinyon nuts have been harvested California and northern Baja commercially for about 50 years California (Little 1938a) The nut crop averages
045 to 09 million kg (I to 2 million The preceding list makes clear that pounds) annually for New Mexico Arizona
many pinyon species are found in North and Colorado but one year exceeded 36 America with the greatest number found million kg (Little 1942) The more in Mexico Further it seems neither productive stands may yield 330 kglha practical nor necessary to develop (300 lbsac) during a good year market criteria to separate nut products (Springfield 1976) At a cur~ent found among these species Morphological retail value of $883 I kg value on a differences among pinyon nuts are per hectare basis would be $297000 generally so slight as ~o pre~lude (120000 lac) Fowler and Oliver (this practical field identification publication) provide additional Also most Mexican species occur as information on nut values rather isolated populations with local value but low export potential For New Mexico species criteria would have to recognize as genuinely natibullbull those Pinyon Reproductive Biology nuts produced by at least three pinyon species edulis monophylla and P di$color Again nut morphological Pinyons begin bearing nuts at about criteria would not separate these 25 years but crops do not reach pinyons from other species of the same commercial size until about 75 years subsection (Little 1941) Cones are borne
Table 1-- Composition of pine nuts and true nuts (Lanner 1981 Woodroof 1979) All values are expressed as percentages
Kernal H2O Protein Fat Carboshyhydrates
Ash
Pinyon nuts P edulisP monophIllaImiddot cembroides
58 31 14 10 19
60 23 60
18 54 14
3
Pine nuts P sabinianaP pineaImiddot sibirica P lerardiana
49 30 34 19 14
60 48 63 51
9 7
12 23
4
True nuts
Almond Pecan Pistacio Walnut Peanut
51 52
shy45
47 30
33
19 9
20 15 26
54 73 53 64 39
20 15 19 16 24
3 2 3 2
laterally ~n the a~il of a scale leaf near branch tips (jhaw~ 1914) although a r~re observation 01 termin~l cones b~s been reported (Lanner 1969) Developing cones can be ~een in the e~rliest stages as ovulate primordia in longitudinal sections of bu4s Within buds ovulate cone primordia are only at the tip of the bud an~have larger and broader bases than spur shoots (Little 1938-b)
ovuiate primordia are formed in buds in August and September and cones mature by October of the third year Because 3 years are required for seeds to mature treatments applied to stimulate nut quantity~il~ require 3 years before evaluation The first year must be especially suited to production of ovulate primordia and the second and third seaasons favorable to growth and maturation of cones and nuts(Li~tle 1938b)
The Periodicity of Bumper Crops
Pinyon ~ut crops are prodUCed at intervals of 3 to 7 years The periodicity of above-average cropshas been related to the dtain of nutrients required to produce the crop an~ the time required for nutrients to be replenished Developing cones act as food sinks for carbohydrate and nitrogen (N) reserves at the expense of vegetative structures (Pickmann and Kozlowski 1969 1970 ~ook and S~et 1971) Consequently large cone crops adversely affect vegetative tree growth
Forcella (1981) found cone production was inversely relate~ to temperatures during late-August to early September Maximum production in northern New Mexeio occurred when the mean maximum weekly temperature was below 24 degrees C Temperatures above 24 degrees C resulted in virtually no cone crops
However other environmental factors~ acting independently or inte~actinl with temperature caa be involved Rainfall is positively correia ted with the flowering of pines This is because photosynthat~ 9roduction is needed to develop carbohydrate reserves and this process is limited by ~lant water stres~ Also tree growth is determined by photosynthetic gain and the onset of abundant flowering is more directly rela~ed to tree siZe than
age (Schmidtling 1969) More speci1icallj nut ~roduction is e~osely
related to crown surface area
An exception to the adverse influen~e of wa~er ~tress is the positive roie stress plays in the initiat~on of ovula~e primordia Studies have shown that summer moisture
stress results in an above-average flower crop the following spring This suggests moisture stress at the time of ovulate primordia formation promotes reproductive rather than vegetative bull growth This view is supported by studies shOwing that branches exposed to full sun bore more female cones and had lower tissue moisture levels than partially shaded branches (Wareing~ 1958)
Water ~tress also can indirectly affect flowering thro~gh its interaction with tree nutrient status E~ell (1970) showd that nitrate fertili~ation or exposure to moisture stress caused similar tiowe~ing responses in Dougl~s-firaccompaniedby increases in total foliage N content and free amino
acids especially ~rgini~e Similarly Schmidtling (1974) suggested that water stress or N fertilization can increase flowering through the same metabolic intermediary namely arginine or some related N-containing substance~
Manipulation of Native Nut Crops
pespite the importance of coniferous nuts in many parts of th~
world only two pine species appear to be cultivated for their seed crops P
pinea in the Medi terranean and - sibirica in the Urals (Pravdin 1963) The pinyons of estern North America and Meiico ar mos~ly ignored in terma of cultiv~tion or domestication
Little (1140) was among the first to suggest that pinyon nu~ prQduction could be augme~ted tbtough the USe of simple cultutal practices However these received little attention and we have no grea~er und~rstanding of the effi~lcy or econoic feasibility of these treatments now than we did more than 40 ~ears ago Nev~rtheles~ with the present emphasis on wocidland management ~uch treatmenta seem worthy of serious attention
Ca) selective thinning
Some pibyonsapear to be
18
Nut sizes from pruned and unpruned Pinus edulis trees
19
consistently good nut producers (Little 1940) Heavy producers usually show immature and old cones on branches and cones are conspicuous b~neath them Selective thinning of unpr04uctive trees should increase flowering of those left standing (Little 1940)
(b) basal pruning
Theoretically low branches receiving partial sun light do not photosynthesize enough energy to offset energy losses to respiration It follows that low branches are energy sinks that potentially r~b nutrients from seed crops To test this relationship Montano et al (1980) pruned baial branches of 70 to 80-year old pinyons (8 to 10 m tall) to a height of 15 m and SUbsequently determined effects of this treatment on seed development They reported av~rage nut volumes from gruned and ungruned trees were 040 cm and 032 cm and the average nut weights were 033 g and 020 g respectively (see Fig3) Also pruned trees produced a greater percentage of filled nuts 99 as opposed to 84 The effects observed were related to the growth of nuts already developing in cones when the treatment was applied
Basal pruning reduced disease and insect injury of southern pnes (Wilson and Rudolph 1970) Also pruned wood could b sold for ~uelwood potentially offsetting the cost of the benefits anticipated Owing to its simplicity and overall benefits basal pruning appears to merit greater attention
(c) fertilization
Fertilization usually stimulates female cone production (Puritch 1972) More specifically the following trends become apparent when studies are reviewed collectively
(1) N stimulates cone production even when N is applied with other nutrients (Morris and Beers 1969) Also trees producing greater cone yields generally have higher levels of tisue N than low producers
(2) The presence of specific amino acids (especially arginine) is a more reliable predictor of fruitfulness than tissue N content per se For example nitrat N ana ammcinium N increased Douglasshyfir foliar N content and shoot growth similarly However only nitrate N significantly increased arginine content which was positively and quantitatively related to female flower proshyduction (Ebell and McMullin 1970) Following ichmidtlings (1974) explanation of fruit shyfulness fertilization shyespecially with nitrate N - could increase tis~ue organip Nand consequently flowering
(d) cultivation and irrigation
Supplemental water could increase growth reSUlting in greater crown density and iurface area In times of drought additional water could prevent premature abortion of immature cones Drip irrigaeion technology may be feaible for som~ sites However it seems more likely that less intensive ~ethods will prove to be practical Among these are land treatments that direct precipitation run-off to trees improve infiltration or remove weed competition
CHRISTMAS TREES
Pinyons are harvested from natural stands and comprise about 25 of all
Christmas trees sold in New Mexico Arizona Colorado Wyoming Utah and Nevada (Sowder 1965) Trimmed branches also are used for wreath manufacture In spite of their slow growth in native stands pinyons have many desirable Christmas tree attributes including dense foliage symmetrical shape green color natural fragrance good branch angle and limb strength and good needle retention Plantation trees can reach marketable size in about 11 years (Fisher and Fa~cher 1987)
Stand Thinning
Several techniques can be used to improve tree quality Stand thinning allows remaining trees to receive sufficient sunlight for limbs to develop uniformly on all sides During the thinning operation handles can be made on main stems by removing branches at the trees base to a height of 30 em
Removal of branches below a full whorl of branches will allow another tree to be culturedmiddotfrom the stump after harvest A year after the first tree is cut the remaining low branches will begin to turn up and all but one of these can be pruned to promote the growth of a new central leader
Pruning and Shearing
~he ideal pin~on Christmas tree resembles an inverted cone wide at the base and tapered uniformly tg the tip Accemiddotptable crown taper for pines is 40 to 90 but for spr~ces and firs is 40 to 70 Pruning and shearing will make native pinyons conform more closely to the ideal which improve marke tabi Ii ty
Pruning removes dead or unattractive branches Shearing is used to co~troi leader growth so the distance between whorls is not excessive increase the number of branches arising from branch buds and promote the pyramidal crown f~Im Because pinyon leader growth rarely exceeds 20 cm excessive distance between whorls is rarely a problem Pruning and shearing most often will be used to correct uneven o~oid and thia crowns
In pines eac~ needle bun~le ~ontains a dormant or axillary bud Removal of a branch terminal at the proper time promotes development of these dormant buds into short shoots improving crown density In singleshyneedled conifers such as spruces firs and Douglas-fir intermediate buds are produced along the terminal branch stem between each whorl For this reason they can be sheared during any season of the year and produce about the same number of branch buds However with pines the number and size of branch buds developed after shearing depends upon the physiological state of the tree when sheared
Pines respond best when sheared shortly after height growth is complete but before tissues in the new shoot becom~ woody S~oots prun~d at this time produce two to four times the number of buds found on unpruned trees Pinyon shoots elongata during late June but needles continue to elongatemiddotduring July and August after branches are fully elongated Buds are formed in late August
From studies conducted with other pine Christmas tree species the following course of treatments can be recommended for pinyons
1 Before spring growth begins prune all double and multiple leaders (eg bullbull April)
~ She~r when needles on new candles are 13 as long as last yeara needles (usually from June 15 to July 1)
3 Shape the tre~ from the top down by shearing the tips of lateral branches Pzomote a conical crown so thebase is no more than 90 as wide as the tree is tall Ideally taper should be 40-90 Avoid shearing back to woody tissue because this encourages multiple leaders
4 If the tree is oblong rather than tapered shear the top in June or eirly July and the sides in late summer fall or winter Growt~ of laterals will be reduced Repeat steps 2-4 yearly as needed
5 Avoid shearing the year the tree is ~o be marke~ed
20
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
the lower elevat~ons and tends to bemiddotthe warmest and driest of the three Itmiddotis the least productive in total biomass production and in terms of wood averages about five cords of wood per hectare (2cordsAC)~
2) Pinyon-ju~iper composed of ~~ and a mix of monosperma and limited amounts of osteosperlila~ This classifieation has a shrub understory and has a higher biomass produetion than eategory 1 The cord-wood available is estimated to be from 10-20 cords per hectare (4-8 cordsAC)
middot3) Pinyonjuniper composed of edul1smiddot and a mix of monosperma and deppeana with a significant understory of Gambel Oak Thiamp category has the highest biomas production and cord-wood available is estimated to be nearly 35 cords per hectare (14 cordsAC)
The soils are widely distributed over all three categories of the woodland ecosystem and are not easily stratified to any one group It is common for the soils to have accumulations of carbcinatfils middotand frequently have calcic horizons These carbonate accumulations are mo~e frequent in oldermiddot soils on stable landscapes There seems to be no generalization with soil texture Almost any soil texture will support the ecosystem as will most ~y middotsoil depth Onemiddot common characteristic is the low amount of accumulated organic matter The upper 18 cm (Fincher or plow-layer) has less than 1 organic matter When organic matter does accumulate above this level it seems to be in soils with some combination of high clay content wettest end of the ustic moisture regimes or coolr than mesic temperature regimes Little is known about the influencemiddotof soil on the distribution and growth of the pinyon-juniperwoodlampnd
Site Index
Site index is an expressionmiddot of the tree growth potential of a site or a sites productive capacity Stocking expresses the density of trees on the land and spacing refers to its spatial distribution Standardpractice is to define site in terms of the total height of trees that have consistently been in a dominant position in well-stocked stands at specified key ages bull
A1thou~h tree height growth h4s been the most practical consistent and generally useful indicator of forest-site quality other features may be more mean~ngfulfor pinyon pine and junipers of New MexiCO These could include stem diameter volume or number Of stems per tree or some combination of these variables
Site indeX is used in land management to determine a forestis rotation A forest rotation is defined as the period of years required for treestobecome established and
grOW to a specified condition of maturity
Determining themiddotlengthof the rotation is one of the key d~cisions a manager of pinYon-juniper must make There are two basic groups of physical and financial factors that influence the length of the rotation (1) des1red products (largely a matter of markets or of a demand in a general economic sense) and (2) forest productivity or what Can be grown (supply) bull
The praetical importance of site index often is notgiven inadequate attention in the buying and selling of forest lands and in forest management The report by Fowler (1984) indicates there is presently a little infcirmstiondealingwith the production of fiber on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico They
constructed volume tables based on tree diameter and height for a so11 site near Taos andmiddot another near Cloudcroft More than 600 observations were used at each site and they concluded that the tables were not int~rchangeable these authors suggested a rotation of greater than 200 years
A comparison of photographs taken upto 100 years ago and recent photographs of the s~e areas indicate that many soils in New Mexico have pinyon-juniper growth rates that are much more rapid than the sites near Cloudcroft and Taos Some sites probably could be managed for fence posts and fuel wood on a 50-year rotationmiddot or less This would change manag~nt schemes tremendously and be much more useful than a rotation of more than 200 years for the entire state Obviously site indices need to be established for at least the major so11 types associated with pinyon~juniper stands in New Mexico
Topography
Pinyon-juniper woodlands occmiddotur on a wide variety of topographical positions (Lymbery and Pieper 1983) S~dies in theSacramento Mountains of southcentral New Mexico showed that
aspect (exposure) slope steepness and slope position did not have major impacts on tree characteristics (Lymbery and Pieper 1983 Pieper and Lymbery 1987) Only general patterns were
apparent Rocky Mountain pinYon density was higher in relation to that of singleseed juniper
on steeper slopes and possibly on northern middotaspects Tree density appeared to be more sensitive to topographic variables than tree size or canopy cover
Shrubby species showed a response to topographic position (Lymbery and Pieper 1983)bull Walkingstick Cholla (Opuntia imbricata) was more abundant on xeric sputh-faeing slopes while skunkbush (Rhus trilobata) and wavy-leaf oak (Quercus undUlata) were more abundant on nortb-facing slopes Gehlbach (1967) fout)d similar relationships on the Gusdalupe Mountains in southeastern NewMexico
4
Rocky MoUntain pinyon generally increasesin abundance with elevation as abundance of juniper decreases (Pieper and Lymbery an4 Woodin and Lindsey 1954) Similar patterns are also apparent in the Great Basin (Tueller at ale 1979)
Hydrology
A diverse range of vegetatie species climatic factors and soil parent materials govern the water in pinyon-juniper ecosystems Unfortunately little hydrologic-related researchbullbull has been accomplished This is shocking in light of the importance on water to New Mexico and its neighbors Schmidt (1987) claims a gap exists between the available scientific knowledge base and application by land managers This results at l~ast in part from apast tendency to accept hydrologiC information supporting eradication of pinyon-juniper and to disregard findings tbat questioned the watershed benefit of these practices Changes in public demands haw resulted in a reassesaent of management goals for pinyonjuniper Managers lackadequate knowledge of inventory methods si1vicu1tura1systemsand productivity in relation to runoff processes Schmidt also
stated that fuxther long-termaall-watershed studies are needed to fill knowledge gaps and provide a framework for plot ~tudies
Because of its topographic position pinyon-juniper woodl~nds greatly influence runoff generated from higher elevation ecosystems It is often the last ecosystem that water passes through before being diverted for use Most water yield studies for pinyon-juniper have been conducted at Corduroy Creek and Beaver Creek in Arizona with a few 881411 plot studies in Nevada and Utah These studies centered on potentials for increasing water yields and effects of various type conversion strategies Pinyon-juniper was considetedundesirable and merely represented a barrier to increasing grassland cover The energy crisis and environmental movements ofthe 1970s curtailed major type-converSion efforts Fuel wood demand changed the emphasis to sustain yield Maintaining pinyon-juniper stands on soils that have been invaded by these plants because of cessation of fire may prove to be ecologically disastrous because of hydrologiC tmpacts especially erosion
Highlights of Current Knowledge
Climate Few studies ~ist on the climate of pinyon-juniper stands A Nevada study showed pinyon-juniper to be confined to a thermal belt above the valley inversions and below the colder upslope elevations This may also be true in much of New Mexico
Precipitation Total daily monthly and annual precipitation patterns for the
pinyon-juniper type are well known but storm characteristics are not These are needed to identify runoff-producing storms and predict erosion Some 5-minute intensities have approached 8 inches per hour in Arizona A study of maximum 2-m1nute intensities found 42 inches per hour at Alamogordo Cteek New Mexico A Utah study shows the greatest intensities to occur at elevations between 6s0Q and 8000 feet which coincides with the pinyon-juniper ecosystlim
Interception This variable is usually insignificant in most eoosystems However in a pinyon-juniper stand an interception capacity of 02 inch would reduce the effective 5-minute intensity by 24 inches per hour Interception values have been found to range from 013 to 094 inch per hour in Arizona The 094 inch would reduce the effective s-minute intensity by 1128 inches per hour Blue grams has been found to retain about 015 inch of precipitation which reduces the effective S-m1nute intensity by only 18 inches per hour No pinyon-juniper litter studies are known
Infiltration Studies of infiltration have received the greatest amount of attention from watershed scientists from other states Generally where pinyon-juniper trees are not part ofmiddot the climax vegetationbullinflltratt-0n rates between trees are much lower than underneath trees This is especially true where the understory is sparce because of competition forllght soil water and nutrients by the more dominant pinyon-juniper trees Where pinyon-juniper are climal ie rocky hillsides infiltration rates were similar Management and miaanagement can greatly alter the infiltration rates
Runoff Pinyon-juniper often produces surface-runoff in response to high-intensity short-duration storms which are the most frequent storms in New Mexico The Saliz watershed near Reserve New Mexico once reported a peak flow rate of 1380 cubic feet per second per square mile Schmidt (1987) reports that currently information on frequency and magnitude of precipitation-runoff related to site conditions is inadequate for design of facilities in this ecosystem
Sedfment production This is the major water quality concern from the pinyon-juniper ecosystem Some stands ID Arizona produced more than a ton of sedfment from each acre each year Impacts of new uses of the pinyon-juniper type are not known and need investigation
HydrologiC Impacts from Increasing Mu1t1pie Use Demands
Uses of pinyon-juniper ecosystems are rapidly expanding in New Mexico New and innovative land management schemes are needed to respond to these demands while maintaining and
5
improving the productive potential Many roads Ue in the bottoms of drainage ways Which concentrates diffuse runoff into damaging flows arid serious erosion Road systems continue to expand in many pinyon-juniper stanels as a result of off-road vehicle recreation hunting arid wood gathedng Many livestock anel wilellife grazing msnagement strategies are geareel to proviele for plant health but fail to conaieler adequately the impacts of use that affect infiltration flow concentrations ariel erosion It is not known hoW much plant material should be left on-site to protect most rangelands including pinyon-junper ecosystems in New Mexico
A significant amount of the existing unsatisfactory watersheelconclitionsare associateel with the pinyon-juniper ecosystem The hydrologic variables associated with pinyon-juniper are highly sensitive to use
Opt~um watershed treatment strategies to restore iong-term productivity and reduce flood and sediment risks need to be identified
PINYON-JUNIPER VEGETATION
Overstory tree Species
The threemaj)r tree species found in New Mexico within the pinyon-juniper woodland are Rocky Mountain pinyon Singleseed juniper ancl Alligatorjuniper (LaDner 1975 1981 Little 1950 Pieper 1977 anel Sprlngfield) Rocky Mountain pinyon and Singleseed juniper are founel throughout the pinyor-juniper wooellanel in the Southwest but Alligator juniper is more abunclant in western New Mexico anel Arizona Utah juniper also occurs in some pinyon-juniper woodlands in northwestern New Mexico while Rocky Mountain juniper (Juniperus scopulorum) occurs in northern New Mexico
Unclerstory Vegetation
Big sagebrush (Artelisia tridentata) is a common understory shrubby species in northern and northwestern New Mexico (Pieper 1977 Springfield 1976) Several oak species (Quercus arizonica 51 grisea 9 emoryi anel 9 oblongifolia) are ilIiportant understory shrubs in western and southwestern New Mexico Mountain
mshogany (Cercocarpus montana) and Wrights silk tassel (Garrya wrightii) are also important browse species in this area (Boeker et al 1972shyand Short et al 1977) Blue gra- (BouteloUa gracilis) occurs as an understory grass species throughout the wooellancl vegetation in thestate In northern areas cool season species of such genera as 2Festuca anel Agropyron occur ONest et al 1975) In central ancl southeastern New Mexico warm season species of the general Muhlenbergia Hilaria Lycurus anel Bouteloua occur
Habitat Types
Kennedy (1983) identified six relatively undisturbed habitatmiddot types in the Sacramento Mountains of southcentralNewMexicQ (Table 2) These habitat types ranged from about 6200ft to 7000 ft in average elevation and from 33 to 47 understory cover (Kennedy 1983 Table 2) The ~ ecluUs-Juniperus monospermal
Muhlenbergia pauc1flora habitat type was perhaps themost common type in this area Francis and Aldon (1983) also identified three pinyonshyjuniper habitat typu innortbwestern New Mexico
Uriderstory Patterns
Pinyon-juniper vegetation forma a mosaic pattern with trees interspersed with open grassland areas between the trees Armentrout and Pieper (1988) have described three understory zones associated with singleseed juniper and Rocky Mountain pinyon The first zone is that surrounding the trunk of the tree and is characterized by shrubs such as skunkbrush ancl algerita (Berberis haematocarpa) The seconcl zone is largely beneath the tree canopy Several grass species such as sideoats grams (Boute1oua curtipendula) wolftal (Lycurus phleoides) and blUe grams were abundant in the seconcl zone Several species inclUding blue grama wolf tail ancl creeping muhly (Muhlenbergia repeus) were more abundant under tree canopy ori the north side rather than on the southmiddot side (Schott and Pieper 1985) Pinyon ricegrass (Piptochaetium fimbriatum) appears to be favored by conditions under canopies of singleseed juniper Grass species of the open grassland zone included blue grama wolftaU gal~eta sanddrapseed and mat muhly~
Age and Size Class Structure
Many pi~yon-juniper stands h~vebeen disturbeel during the past 100 years by fuel or fence post harvesting bUrDing or mechanical control treatments Consequently many trees are relatively young bull Age class distributions consequently do not followmiddot the typical inverted J-shaped curve for ma~ure stanels Figure 1 shows age-class distribution for 202 Rocky Mountain pinyon trees from five study sites in the Sacramento Mountains This distribution appears to be nearly normal with most trees falling in the 70 to 130 yearmiddotage class However the specific distribution at each site depended on time since last disturbance and type of disturbance (Plumb-Mentjes anel Pieper 1983) Pinyon age is relatedto basal diameter but only 38 of the variation in age can be explained by basal diameter (Figure 2) Apparently~stand density (competition) influences siz~ of trees sUbstantially
6
0
Table 2 - Pinyon-Juniper Habitat Types of the Lincoln National Forest (From Kennedy 1983)
Tree Density
Average Understory Avg Stems Habitat Type Elev Ft Cover Plot
bull PINYON-JUNIPER SERIES
1 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Cercocarpus montanusAndropogon gerardi HT 6178 42 36
2 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Muhlenbergia pauciflora HT 6470 33 63
3 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Stipa columbiana HT 6678 36 123
4 Pinus edulis-Junil rus monosperma Bouteloua gracilis HT 6977 37 163
5 Punis edulis-Juniperus deppeana Bouteloua gracilis HT 6739 46 65
6 Pinus edulis-Juniperus deppeana Muhlenbergia dubia HT 6920 47 105
22 I
20
11
I
I
20 110 611 1110012011101611130 middotIY_I
Figure 1 Age class distribution of aU pinyon pines on study areas
- 1511r bull 100
1 bull 05 ~ 11amp50 2 r bull 031 n bull zaz
22 11 111 _ 1HIICMIl
Figure 2bull Relationship betweenDBB and age of pinyon pine for all trees bull
RESPONSE TO DISTURBANCE (SECONDARY SUCCESSION)
Several successional models have been proposed for secondary succession followingmiddot disturbance that removes most of the trees (Arnold et a1 1964 Barney and Frischknecht 1974 and Erdman 1976) These general patterns alsomiddotapply to conditions in middotpinyon-juniper woodlands in central New Mexico (Dwyer and Pieper 1967 Rippel et al 1980 1983 Schott and Pieper 1986 1987a 1987b 1987C) Bowever specific patterns are influenced by the type of soils supporting the woodland vegetation (Schott arid Pieper 1986 1987a) Generally- soils that are fairly shallow and rocky have some seral stages poorly represented (Table 3) When sitesmiddot with these soils are treated mechanically shrubs such as wavy-leaf oak do not increase (Rippel et al 1983) On similar soils with few roek outarops grassforb and shrubgrass stages are common Response of Rocky Hountainpinyon
and singleseed juniper appear to be dependent on density and size of trees before treatment If
the stanpmiddot was near climax before cabling pinypnsrapidly become dominant on the site If the stand was in someseral stage there would be more junipers but theimiddotr relatively slow growth and time for uturation require more time before middotthey would dominate the site
RESEARCH NEEDS
Only limited research on pinyon-juniper ecology in northern and westernmiddot New Mexico has been conducted Informst~on is lacking on basic ecological relationship at both plant communitymiddot and individual species level lactors influencing distribution of these woodlands are poorly understood lor example in many situations pinyon-juniper appears to be moving uphill in elevation and encroaching on ponderosa pine forests Such situation have not been analyzed Success~onal patterns where alligator juniper is a major potenUal component of the vegetation have not been determined Analyses of these woodlands for several uses and products are needed for laUd unagament purposes
4 bull ~
Table 3 -- General pattern of succession on cabled pinyon-juniper wood1anda on two soil types (From Schott and Pieper 1986)
Sera1 Stages Climax 1 2 3
Original Conditions
General successional Annual forb Grassforb Shrubgrass Pinyon-juniper model
Lithic hapustoll Annuals and Perennial Shrubs dominant Pinyon and juniper perennials from grasses and shade conducive dominating Pinyon seeds which disshy forbs with to tree establishshy eventually dominant perse readily establishment ment surviving perenshy and spread of nials shrubs (esp
0 wavy-leaf oak)
Lithic hapusto11- Annuals and These stages absent or poorly represhy Pinyon dominating Rock outcrop complex perennials from sented Rock outcropsmiddotrestrict vegshy Climax with juniper bull
seed which disshy etative reproduction perse readily surviving perenshynials
fI
LITERATURE CITED
Armentrout S M and R D Pieper 1988 Plant distribution surrounding Rocky Mountain Pinyon and one seed juniper in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range Management 41 (In press) bull
Arnold J F bullbull D A Jameson and E H Reid 1964bull The pinyon~jun1per type of Arizona Effects of grazing fire and tree control US Department of Agriculture Production Research Report 84~
Barney MA and N C Frischknechtmiddot 1974 Vegetation change follOwing fire in the
pinyon-juniper type of west-central Utah Journal of Range Management 279~-96
Barrett J W 1962 Regional Silviculture of the United States The Ronald Press Co bullbull NY 610p
BetancourtJ L 1987 Paleoecology of pinyon-juniper woodlands summary In Everett R L (compiler) proceedings~ pinyon-juniper conference USDA For SerGen Techbull Rep INT-215~
Boeker E Lbullbull V E Scott H G Reynolds and B A Donaldson 1972~ Seasonal food habits of mule deer in southWestern Ne Mexicobull Journal of Wildlife Management 3656-63 bull
Erdman Jbull A 1970 Pinyon-juniper succession after natural fires in residual soils of MesaVerde Colorado Brigham Young University Science Bulletin Series 11 ~rovo Utah
Fowler J M R D Bowe BE Peacock KC McDanielT Garner-Hurt J R Gray and
M Cardenas 1974 Wood fiber production in pinyon-juniper woodlands on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico New MeXico State University Agricultural Experiment~tation Research Report NO~ 519
Francis R E and E bull F Alden 1983 Preliminary habitat types of a semiarid grassland In MOir W H and L Hendzel (Tech COQrdinatora) Proceeding of the workshop pn southwestern habitat types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Gehlbach F R 1967 Vegetation of the Guadalupe escarpment New Mexico-Texas Ecology 48404-419
Kennedy K L 1983 A habitat type classification of the p~yon-juniper woodlands of the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico In Moir W H and Leonard Hendzel (Tech-Coordinators) Proceedings of the workshop on southwestern habitat
types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Lanner bull R M 1975 Pinyon pines and junipers of the southwestern woodlandsmiddot In Gifford G F and 1 E Buspy The pinyonjunipr ecosystem a symposium Utah State Univ bullbull Logan
Lanner R Mmiddot1981 The pinyon pine a natural and cultural history Univ Nevada Press
Reno
Little E L bull 1950 Southwestern trees Amiddot guide to the native species of middotNew Mexico and Arizona US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Agricultural Handbook 9
Lymbery bull G A and R D Pieper 1983 Ecology of pinyon-juniper vegetation in the northern Sacramento Mountains New Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 698
Pieper R D 1~77 The southwestern pinyon-juniper ecosystem In Aldon Earl F and T J~ Loring (Tech Coord) US Departmentmiddot Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report RM-31
Pieper R D and G A Lymbery 1987 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegettion in south-central New Mexico In~ Everett Richard L (compiler) proceedings - pinyon-juniper conference US Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT-21S
Plumh-Mentjes M L and R D Pieper 1983 Diameter distribution and age class structure of pinyon pine (Pinus eduiis Engelm) in south-central~Mexico Abstract 36th annual meeting Society for Range Management Denver CO bull
Schmidt L j 1987 Present and future themes in ptnyon-juniper hydrology In ~verett R L (compiler) U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report 1NT-215
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1985 Influence of canoP1 characteristics of one-seed juniper on understory grasses Journal of Range Management 38328-331
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1986 Succession in pinyon-juniper vegetation in New Mexico Rangelands 8126-128
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987a Succession of pinyon-juniper communities a~ter mechanical disturbance in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range ~anagement 4088-94
1Q
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987bbull Water relationships of Quercus undulata ~ edulis and Juniperus monosperma in seral pinyon-juniper communities of south-central New Mexico In Everett R L (compiler) us Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT~215 bull
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987cbull bull Succession in tree pits following cabliD8
in pinyon-juniper c01lllllUt1ities Southwestern Naturalist 32399-402
~ Short H L t W Evans and E L Boeker 1977 The use of natural and modified pinyon pine-juniper wOodlands by deer and elk Journal of Wildlife Management 41543-559
Springfield H W 1976 Characteristics and management of southwestern pinyon-juniper ranges the status of our knowledge US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Res Pap RM-160
Tueller P T C D Beeson R J Tausch N E West and K HRea 1979 Pinyon-juniper woodlands of themiddotGreat Basin distribution flora vegetal cover U SbullDepartment of Agriculture Forest Service Research Paper INT~229
USDA 1941 Cltmate and man Yearbook of Agriculture U S Govt Printing Office Washington DC
Wasson G E 1987 The American Indian response to the pinyon-juniper conference In Everett R L(compller) USDA For Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Wells P V 1987 Systematics and distribution of pinyons in the late quarternary In Everett R Lbull (compiler) Proc - Pinyon-juniper Conference USDA For Sere Gen Tech Rep INT-215
West N E K H Rea and R J Tausch 1975 Basic Synecological relationahips in pinyon-juniper woodlands In Gifford G E and F E Busby (eds) ~e pinyon-juniper ecosystem A symposium Utah State University Logan
Woodin H E and A A Lindsey 1954 Juniper-pinyon east of the Continental Divide as analyzed by the line-strip metWod Ecology 35473-489
11
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES I CROP
bullJ
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH WOODLAND STA~D MANAGEMENT l
James T Fisher John G Me~al and Gregory C Phillips
Abstract-- New Mexicos native pinyon pines produce high-value crops including nuts Christmas trees and nursery or~amentals Crop values can be increased through more intensive stand management and more innovative marketing of such products as pinyon nuts and Christmas trees to compete with imported products Research needs pertaining to these crops are discussed
1 Ne~ Mexico State University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-II
2 Authors are re~pectively
Professor and Associate Professors Dept of Agronomy and Horticulture New
Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
13
INTRODUCTlON
Pinyons (pinon p~nes) ield diverse productsranging frolll valuable nuts ~nd landscape sp~cll11ens to fuelwood
Rowever littleforethought is give~ to crop illlprovelllentbeforecropsare ha~vested This paper addresses high-value pinyon products ~hat appear to justify at least modest levels omiddotf lIIanacelllent inputs to improve product quality quantity or avail- abilty Greater elllphasis on ~ntensive lIIanagelllentmiddot recognizes the nee~ for deriving economic benefits as well as the need for cu~todiai lIIanagelllent to pre~erve the
woodland type (Lanner 1977)
Pinyon and pinyon-juniper woodlands hav~ be~n the su~lect of severai symposia The reader iamp directed to proceedings of these lIIeetings providing several papers on the subject [~ee Gifford and Busby (19-75) Aldon and Loring (1977) Evrett (1987) and a fbrthcoming volume reporting a n~~ional lIIeeting held in Mexico in 1987]
This paper specifi~ally exalllines pinyon nut production including lIIarket developlllents that potentially threaten regional markets and the selective harvest of Christlllas trees and nursery or~alllentals Methods available t~ illlprove crop profitability will be discussed in addition to cuirent and future research
NUT BEARING PINES
Plant taxonomists recognize about 100 species in the falllily Pinaceae Alllongthese 12 to 26 species produce quality edible nuts (Rosengarten 1984 Lanner 1981) An edible nut is large middot(generallly les8 than 2200 seedkg) and has a thin shell that can be cracked with the teeth Pines producing edible nuts are found mostly in Europe Asia and western North middotAmerica Large ~dlblen~ts are found ~ostiyalllong the ~tone pines ~Sub8ection Celllbraa) nat~ve to Europe and ASia and the pinyon pines (Subsection Celllbroides) native to North Alllerica
Pinyons are dwarf trees nd shrubS 9f sellliarid regions of the southwestern Uni ted Sta tes and Mexico Because pinyons grow slowly it ismiddot difficult to lustify th~ cost of establishing and cultivatin~ p~aniations for nut production IncreaSingly nuts gathered
from the stone pines are imported f~om Asia and marketed at a lIIuch lower cost According to D~nielFox (pers C~IIII11) about 1000 ~tric tons of ~helled Asian pine nuts are imported each year Re also reports that abou~ 100 ton~ of ~ pinea nuts are illlported from Portugal and Spain
To protect pinyonnut m~rkets it lIIay becollle necessary to develop criteria that effectively distinguish pinyon nuts frolll illlported pine ~uts~ To exallline the feasibility of developing these criteria we will examine t~egeographic ranges and speclal characteristics of nut-producing pines under their respective subsections of the family Pinaceae proposed by Critchfield and Little (1966)
lli Subsec tiOn Celllbroides (Pinyons)
Pines classified und~i the subse~tion Ce~bi~ides (pinyons) have 1-5 needles in a fascicle Seeds are large wingl~ss a~d sOlllewhat oval in shape Lanner (1981) reported 11 species but a more recent treatlllent ofmiddot the alliance r~cognizes 15ta~a (Bailey and Ha~ksworth 1988) Eight species occur in the United States 12 in Mexico and 3 in New Mexico (P edulis I lIIonophylla and I~di-cOlor) The pinyon species discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988)include
Uni ted States
(l) Pinus edulis (pinyon) t 4200 seedkg
The predominant pinyon species of New Mexico Widespread in the southwestern United States lust
entering Wyollling and extending south through Utah Colorado and ~ew ~~xico to the western ~nd of Oklahollla~ west Texas and the northern border of Chihuahua extending west throughout lIIuch of Arizona to an outlier in eastern California Range ov~rlaps ~ith P celllbroides in south~rn New Mexico and Arizona and with P monophylla at the westerD edge of its range (southw~stern Utah northwestern Arizona and the New York Mountains o~ sOuthern California (Fig 1) Kay occa~ionally intergrade with P lIIonophylla
(2) monophylla lsingleleaf plny~n)
[ 2400 seed kg ] The pinyon pine ~fthe Great
14
bull P SAalNIANA bull P aMIIilOIOEl III Po OUAOIIIIOUA bull P MONOPttYLLA bull P eDULIS
Figure 1 Diatrlbution of pinyon pines in lJOuthwestern United States and northern Mexieo
Basin and Mohave Desert Com~onin Nevada and in parts of southern California and western Utah but also ex~ends acr~ss Arizona and southwestern Ke~ Mexico (ig~ 1)
United States and Mexico
(3) Pinus middotcellbroides (Mexican pinyon)
[ 2400 seedkg J Range widespread at low
elevations in the mountains bordering the arid plate~u of northern Mexico Ranges from southeastern Arizona southwestern Arizona southwestern New Mexico and western Texas through northern Mexico and south to Puebla and Mexico City (Fig 1) Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) middotrecognize three subspecies cembroides (northern Mexi~o) lagunae (Baja California) and orizabensis (Central Mexico) (Fig 1)
(4) P californiarum-
Subspecies californiarum
occurs in southern Californ~a and northern Baja California I californiarum subsp fallax (formerly P edulis var fallax) is-found in Arizona
(5) Pinus discolor (border pinyon)
Formerly P cembroides var bicolor~ Principal range lies along both sides of the intershynational boundary between Mexico and the United States extending about 120 miles into eac~ country Sp-ecifically occurs in southeast Arizona extreme southwest New Mexico northeas~ ~onora and northwest Chihuahua
( 6) quad r ifo11a (Parry pinyon) [ 2100 seedkg J
Confined to 10 elevations in the dry mountains of southern California from the San Jacinto Mountains south to the S~erra San Ped~o Martir Its range overlaps that of I monOphylla but no intermediates have been reported (Fig 1)middot
(7) Pinus remo ta (paper-shell pinyon also called
Texas pinyon) Formerly P cembroides var
remota Main range in Coahuila but reaches parts of adjacent Nuevo Leon southeastern Chihuahua and rexas (Bailey and Wendt 1979) Has thinnest shell among pinyons~
Local Endemics Found Exclusively in Mexico
(8) Pinus culminicola (Potosi pinyon)
Documented occurrence Cerro PotOSi Nuevo Leon Mexico
(9) johannis Li~ited r4nge in Mexico
(west of Concepcion del Oro Zacatecas
(10) Pin~s maximartinezii (Martinez pinyon)
Documented Occurrence Zacatecas Mexico
(11 ) Pinus nelsonii (Nelson pinyon)
Documented ocaurrence north- eastern Mexicobull
(12) ~pinceana (Pinca pinyon)
15
Documented occurrence northshy Grows at high elevations inth~ eastern and eastern Mexco Alps and the Carpathian ~ountains
(3) bullbull koraiensis S~eb amp Zucco ~ SUDsect PINEAE Shaw (Korean pine)
[ 1800 seedkg](n Pinuspinea L Rngebull through Korea and (Italian stone pine) eastern Manchuria into southeastern [ 1300 seedkg ] Siberia with outlirs ~ri t~e
Wide_pread in Spain and Japalliue islands of Honshu and Portugal and aiong the northern and Shikoku (Fig 2) eastern shores ~f the Mediterranean Sea including minor occurrences (4) P sibirica near the north coast of Turkey rSibe~ian ston~ pine(Fig 2) [ 4000 seedkg
Ranges from the Ural Mountains Pinus Subsect CEMBRAE through western and central ~iberia---(Stone Pines) to northern Mongolia with outliers
in northern Russia (Fig ~)(1) Pinus albicaulis Engelm~
(whitebark pine) Pinus Subsect GERARDIANAE [ 5700 seedk ] -- shy
Occurs at high eleyations fro~ (1) gerardian Wall~ central British Columbia sout~ to (Chilgoza pine)s~uthern Sierra Nevada of [ 400 seedkg J California the Ruby Mountain of Noted for large edible seed Nevada and the mOuntains of Confined to mountainous regions of northwestern Wyoming eastern Asia principally in
eastern Afgha~itan~ parts of (2) Pin~s cembra L Pakistan ~nd ~catt~red localities
(Swiss stone pine) in the dry inner valleys of the [ 4400 seedkg 1 north~rn Himalayas (Fig 2)
eocIIn_a _shyFigure 2 Distribution of edible pine nuts in Europe and
Asia
16
bull
Pinus Subsect SABINIANAE Loud Opportumiddotnities aay exist to separate pinyOn nuts other froa pine nuts Most
(I) Pinu~ ~abiniana Dougl pine nuts have a ridge where the (Digger pine) membranous wing is attached Also [ 1300 seed kg criteria based upon seed content could
Confined to California Found be applied when large vol~aes of in dry foothills of ihe Sierra imported pine nuts are suspected to be Nevada and the Coast Rangemiddot Ras aislabeled Tests aight exaine levels large edible but rather hard-shelled of starch fat or piotein or even seeds (Fig bull1) smiddotpecific enzyaes (Table 1)
(2) Pinus coulteri D Don (Coulter pine) New Mexico Pinyon Nut Crops ( 3100 seedkg]
Restr~cted to the coastal mountains of cen~ral and southern Pinyon nuts have been harvested California and northern Baja commercially for about 50 years California (Little 1938a) The nut crop averages
045 to 09 million kg (I to 2 million The preceding list makes clear that pounds) annually for New Mexico Arizona
many pinyon species are found in North and Colorado but one year exceeded 36 America with the greatest number found million kg (Little 1942) The more in Mexico Further it seems neither productive stands may yield 330 kglha practical nor necessary to develop (300 lbsac) during a good year market criteria to separate nut products (Springfield 1976) At a cur~ent found among these species Morphological retail value of $883 I kg value on a differences among pinyon nuts are per hectare basis would be $297000 generally so slight as ~o pre~lude (120000 lac) Fowler and Oliver (this practical field identification publication) provide additional Also most Mexican species occur as information on nut values rather isolated populations with local value but low export potential For New Mexico species criteria would have to recognize as genuinely natibullbull those Pinyon Reproductive Biology nuts produced by at least three pinyon species edulis monophylla and P di$color Again nut morphological Pinyons begin bearing nuts at about criteria would not separate these 25 years but crops do not reach pinyons from other species of the same commercial size until about 75 years subsection (Little 1941) Cones are borne
Table 1-- Composition of pine nuts and true nuts (Lanner 1981 Woodroof 1979) All values are expressed as percentages
Kernal H2O Protein Fat Carboshyhydrates
Ash
Pinyon nuts P edulisP monophIllaImiddot cembroides
58 31 14 10 19
60 23 60
18 54 14
3
Pine nuts P sabinianaP pineaImiddot sibirica P lerardiana
49 30 34 19 14
60 48 63 51
9 7
12 23
4
True nuts
Almond Pecan Pistacio Walnut Peanut
51 52
shy45
47 30
33
19 9
20 15 26
54 73 53 64 39
20 15 19 16 24
3 2 3 2
laterally ~n the a~il of a scale leaf near branch tips (jhaw~ 1914) although a r~re observation 01 termin~l cones b~s been reported (Lanner 1969) Developing cones can be ~een in the e~rliest stages as ovulate primordia in longitudinal sections of bu4s Within buds ovulate cone primordia are only at the tip of the bud an~have larger and broader bases than spur shoots (Little 1938-b)
ovuiate primordia are formed in buds in August and September and cones mature by October of the third year Because 3 years are required for seeds to mature treatments applied to stimulate nut quantity~il~ require 3 years before evaluation The first year must be especially suited to production of ovulate primordia and the second and third seaasons favorable to growth and maturation of cones and nuts(Li~tle 1938b)
The Periodicity of Bumper Crops
Pinyon ~ut crops are prodUCed at intervals of 3 to 7 years The periodicity of above-average cropshas been related to the dtain of nutrients required to produce the crop an~ the time required for nutrients to be replenished Developing cones act as food sinks for carbohydrate and nitrogen (N) reserves at the expense of vegetative structures (Pickmann and Kozlowski 1969 1970 ~ook and S~et 1971) Consequently large cone crops adversely affect vegetative tree growth
Forcella (1981) found cone production was inversely relate~ to temperatures during late-August to early September Maximum production in northern New Mexeio occurred when the mean maximum weekly temperature was below 24 degrees C Temperatures above 24 degrees C resulted in virtually no cone crops
However other environmental factors~ acting independently or inte~actinl with temperature caa be involved Rainfall is positively correia ted with the flowering of pines This is because photosynthat~ 9roduction is needed to develop carbohydrate reserves and this process is limited by ~lant water stres~ Also tree growth is determined by photosynthetic gain and the onset of abundant flowering is more directly rela~ed to tree siZe than
age (Schmidtling 1969) More speci1icallj nut ~roduction is e~osely
related to crown surface area
An exception to the adverse influen~e of wa~er ~tress is the positive roie stress plays in the initiat~on of ovula~e primordia Studies have shown that summer moisture
stress results in an above-average flower crop the following spring This suggests moisture stress at the time of ovulate primordia formation promotes reproductive rather than vegetative bull growth This view is supported by studies shOwing that branches exposed to full sun bore more female cones and had lower tissue moisture levels than partially shaded branches (Wareing~ 1958)
Water ~tress also can indirectly affect flowering thro~gh its interaction with tree nutrient status E~ell (1970) showd that nitrate fertili~ation or exposure to moisture stress caused similar tiowe~ing responses in Dougl~s-firaccompaniedby increases in total foliage N content and free amino
acids especially ~rgini~e Similarly Schmidtling (1974) suggested that water stress or N fertilization can increase flowering through the same metabolic intermediary namely arginine or some related N-containing substance~
Manipulation of Native Nut Crops
pespite the importance of coniferous nuts in many parts of th~
world only two pine species appear to be cultivated for their seed crops P
pinea in the Medi terranean and - sibirica in the Urals (Pravdin 1963) The pinyons of estern North America and Meiico ar mos~ly ignored in terma of cultiv~tion or domestication
Little (1140) was among the first to suggest that pinyon nu~ prQduction could be augme~ted tbtough the USe of simple cultutal practices However these received little attention and we have no grea~er und~rstanding of the effi~lcy or econoic feasibility of these treatments now than we did more than 40 ~ears ago Nev~rtheles~ with the present emphasis on wocidland management ~uch treatmenta seem worthy of serious attention
Ca) selective thinning
Some pibyonsapear to be
18
Nut sizes from pruned and unpruned Pinus edulis trees
19
consistently good nut producers (Little 1940) Heavy producers usually show immature and old cones on branches and cones are conspicuous b~neath them Selective thinning of unpr04uctive trees should increase flowering of those left standing (Little 1940)
(b) basal pruning
Theoretically low branches receiving partial sun light do not photosynthesize enough energy to offset energy losses to respiration It follows that low branches are energy sinks that potentially r~b nutrients from seed crops To test this relationship Montano et al (1980) pruned baial branches of 70 to 80-year old pinyons (8 to 10 m tall) to a height of 15 m and SUbsequently determined effects of this treatment on seed development They reported av~rage nut volumes from gruned and ungruned trees were 040 cm and 032 cm and the average nut weights were 033 g and 020 g respectively (see Fig3) Also pruned trees produced a greater percentage of filled nuts 99 as opposed to 84 The effects observed were related to the growth of nuts already developing in cones when the treatment was applied
Basal pruning reduced disease and insect injury of southern pnes (Wilson and Rudolph 1970) Also pruned wood could b sold for ~uelwood potentially offsetting the cost of the benefits anticipated Owing to its simplicity and overall benefits basal pruning appears to merit greater attention
(c) fertilization
Fertilization usually stimulates female cone production (Puritch 1972) More specifically the following trends become apparent when studies are reviewed collectively
(1) N stimulates cone production even when N is applied with other nutrients (Morris and Beers 1969) Also trees producing greater cone yields generally have higher levels of tisue N than low producers
(2) The presence of specific amino acids (especially arginine) is a more reliable predictor of fruitfulness than tissue N content per se For example nitrat N ana ammcinium N increased Douglasshyfir foliar N content and shoot growth similarly However only nitrate N significantly increased arginine content which was positively and quantitatively related to female flower proshyduction (Ebell and McMullin 1970) Following ichmidtlings (1974) explanation of fruit shyfulness fertilization shyespecially with nitrate N - could increase tis~ue organip Nand consequently flowering
(d) cultivation and irrigation
Supplemental water could increase growth reSUlting in greater crown density and iurface area In times of drought additional water could prevent premature abortion of immature cones Drip irrigaeion technology may be feaible for som~ sites However it seems more likely that less intensive ~ethods will prove to be practical Among these are land treatments that direct precipitation run-off to trees improve infiltration or remove weed competition
CHRISTMAS TREES
Pinyons are harvested from natural stands and comprise about 25 of all
Christmas trees sold in New Mexico Arizona Colorado Wyoming Utah and Nevada (Sowder 1965) Trimmed branches also are used for wreath manufacture In spite of their slow growth in native stands pinyons have many desirable Christmas tree attributes including dense foliage symmetrical shape green color natural fragrance good branch angle and limb strength and good needle retention Plantation trees can reach marketable size in about 11 years (Fisher and Fa~cher 1987)
Stand Thinning
Several techniques can be used to improve tree quality Stand thinning allows remaining trees to receive sufficient sunlight for limbs to develop uniformly on all sides During the thinning operation handles can be made on main stems by removing branches at the trees base to a height of 30 em
Removal of branches below a full whorl of branches will allow another tree to be culturedmiddotfrom the stump after harvest A year after the first tree is cut the remaining low branches will begin to turn up and all but one of these can be pruned to promote the growth of a new central leader
Pruning and Shearing
~he ideal pin~on Christmas tree resembles an inverted cone wide at the base and tapered uniformly tg the tip Accemiddotptable crown taper for pines is 40 to 90 but for spr~ces and firs is 40 to 70 Pruning and shearing will make native pinyons conform more closely to the ideal which improve marke tabi Ii ty
Pruning removes dead or unattractive branches Shearing is used to co~troi leader growth so the distance between whorls is not excessive increase the number of branches arising from branch buds and promote the pyramidal crown f~Im Because pinyon leader growth rarely exceeds 20 cm excessive distance between whorls is rarely a problem Pruning and shearing most often will be used to correct uneven o~oid and thia crowns
In pines eac~ needle bun~le ~ontains a dormant or axillary bud Removal of a branch terminal at the proper time promotes development of these dormant buds into short shoots improving crown density In singleshyneedled conifers such as spruces firs and Douglas-fir intermediate buds are produced along the terminal branch stem between each whorl For this reason they can be sheared during any season of the year and produce about the same number of branch buds However with pines the number and size of branch buds developed after shearing depends upon the physiological state of the tree when sheared
Pines respond best when sheared shortly after height growth is complete but before tissues in the new shoot becom~ woody S~oots prun~d at this time produce two to four times the number of buds found on unpruned trees Pinyon shoots elongata during late June but needles continue to elongatemiddotduring July and August after branches are fully elongated Buds are formed in late August
From studies conducted with other pine Christmas tree species the following course of treatments can be recommended for pinyons
1 Before spring growth begins prune all double and multiple leaders (eg bullbull April)
~ She~r when needles on new candles are 13 as long as last yeara needles (usually from June 15 to July 1)
3 Shape the tre~ from the top down by shearing the tips of lateral branches Pzomote a conical crown so thebase is no more than 90 as wide as the tree is tall Ideally taper should be 40-90 Avoid shearing back to woody tissue because this encourages multiple leaders
4 If the tree is oblong rather than tapered shear the top in June or eirly July and the sides in late summer fall or winter Growt~ of laterals will be reduced Repeat steps 2-4 yearly as needed
5 Avoid shearing the year the tree is ~o be marke~ed
20
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
Rocky MoUntain pinyon generally increasesin abundance with elevation as abundance of juniper decreases (Pieper and Lymbery an4 Woodin and Lindsey 1954) Similar patterns are also apparent in the Great Basin (Tueller at ale 1979)
Hydrology
A diverse range of vegetatie species climatic factors and soil parent materials govern the water in pinyon-juniper ecosystems Unfortunately little hydrologic-related researchbullbull has been accomplished This is shocking in light of the importance on water to New Mexico and its neighbors Schmidt (1987) claims a gap exists between the available scientific knowledge base and application by land managers This results at l~ast in part from apast tendency to accept hydrologiC information supporting eradication of pinyon-juniper and to disregard findings tbat questioned the watershed benefit of these practices Changes in public demands haw resulted in a reassesaent of management goals for pinyonjuniper Managers lackadequate knowledge of inventory methods si1vicu1tura1systemsand productivity in relation to runoff processes Schmidt also
stated that fuxther long-termaall-watershed studies are needed to fill knowledge gaps and provide a framework for plot ~tudies
Because of its topographic position pinyon-juniper woodl~nds greatly influence runoff generated from higher elevation ecosystems It is often the last ecosystem that water passes through before being diverted for use Most water yield studies for pinyon-juniper have been conducted at Corduroy Creek and Beaver Creek in Arizona with a few 881411 plot studies in Nevada and Utah These studies centered on potentials for increasing water yields and effects of various type conversion strategies Pinyon-juniper was considetedundesirable and merely represented a barrier to increasing grassland cover The energy crisis and environmental movements ofthe 1970s curtailed major type-converSion efforts Fuel wood demand changed the emphasis to sustain yield Maintaining pinyon-juniper stands on soils that have been invaded by these plants because of cessation of fire may prove to be ecologically disastrous because of hydrologiC tmpacts especially erosion
Highlights of Current Knowledge
Climate Few studies ~ist on the climate of pinyon-juniper stands A Nevada study showed pinyon-juniper to be confined to a thermal belt above the valley inversions and below the colder upslope elevations This may also be true in much of New Mexico
Precipitation Total daily monthly and annual precipitation patterns for the
pinyon-juniper type are well known but storm characteristics are not These are needed to identify runoff-producing storms and predict erosion Some 5-minute intensities have approached 8 inches per hour in Arizona A study of maximum 2-m1nute intensities found 42 inches per hour at Alamogordo Cteek New Mexico A Utah study shows the greatest intensities to occur at elevations between 6s0Q and 8000 feet which coincides with the pinyon-juniper ecosystlim
Interception This variable is usually insignificant in most eoosystems However in a pinyon-juniper stand an interception capacity of 02 inch would reduce the effective 5-minute intensity by 24 inches per hour Interception values have been found to range from 013 to 094 inch per hour in Arizona The 094 inch would reduce the effective s-minute intensity by 1128 inches per hour Blue grams has been found to retain about 015 inch of precipitation which reduces the effective S-m1nute intensity by only 18 inches per hour No pinyon-juniper litter studies are known
Infiltration Studies of infiltration have received the greatest amount of attention from watershed scientists from other states Generally where pinyon-juniper trees are not part ofmiddot the climax vegetationbullinflltratt-0n rates between trees are much lower than underneath trees This is especially true where the understory is sparce because of competition forllght soil water and nutrients by the more dominant pinyon-juniper trees Where pinyon-juniper are climal ie rocky hillsides infiltration rates were similar Management and miaanagement can greatly alter the infiltration rates
Runoff Pinyon-juniper often produces surface-runoff in response to high-intensity short-duration storms which are the most frequent storms in New Mexico The Saliz watershed near Reserve New Mexico once reported a peak flow rate of 1380 cubic feet per second per square mile Schmidt (1987) reports that currently information on frequency and magnitude of precipitation-runoff related to site conditions is inadequate for design of facilities in this ecosystem
Sedfment production This is the major water quality concern from the pinyon-juniper ecosystem Some stands ID Arizona produced more than a ton of sedfment from each acre each year Impacts of new uses of the pinyon-juniper type are not known and need investigation
HydrologiC Impacts from Increasing Mu1t1pie Use Demands
Uses of pinyon-juniper ecosystems are rapidly expanding in New Mexico New and innovative land management schemes are needed to respond to these demands while maintaining and
5
improving the productive potential Many roads Ue in the bottoms of drainage ways Which concentrates diffuse runoff into damaging flows arid serious erosion Road systems continue to expand in many pinyon-juniper stanels as a result of off-road vehicle recreation hunting arid wood gathedng Many livestock anel wilellife grazing msnagement strategies are geareel to proviele for plant health but fail to conaieler adequately the impacts of use that affect infiltration flow concentrations ariel erosion It is not known hoW much plant material should be left on-site to protect most rangelands including pinyon-junper ecosystems in New Mexico
A significant amount of the existing unsatisfactory watersheelconclitionsare associateel with the pinyon-juniper ecosystem The hydrologic variables associated with pinyon-juniper are highly sensitive to use
Opt~um watershed treatment strategies to restore iong-term productivity and reduce flood and sediment risks need to be identified
PINYON-JUNIPER VEGETATION
Overstory tree Species
The threemaj)r tree species found in New Mexico within the pinyon-juniper woodland are Rocky Mountain pinyon Singleseed juniper ancl Alligatorjuniper (LaDner 1975 1981 Little 1950 Pieper 1977 anel Sprlngfield) Rocky Mountain pinyon and Singleseed juniper are founel throughout the pinyor-juniper wooellanel in the Southwest but Alligator juniper is more abunclant in western New Mexico anel Arizona Utah juniper also occurs in some pinyon-juniper woodlands in northwestern New Mexico while Rocky Mountain juniper (Juniperus scopulorum) occurs in northern New Mexico
Unclerstory Vegetation
Big sagebrush (Artelisia tridentata) is a common understory shrubby species in northern and northwestern New Mexico (Pieper 1977 Springfield 1976) Several oak species (Quercus arizonica 51 grisea 9 emoryi anel 9 oblongifolia) are ilIiportant understory shrubs in western and southwestern New Mexico Mountain
mshogany (Cercocarpus montana) and Wrights silk tassel (Garrya wrightii) are also important browse species in this area (Boeker et al 1972shyand Short et al 1977) Blue gra- (BouteloUa gracilis) occurs as an understory grass species throughout the wooellancl vegetation in thestate In northern areas cool season species of such genera as 2Festuca anel Agropyron occur ONest et al 1975) In central ancl southeastern New Mexico warm season species of the general Muhlenbergia Hilaria Lycurus anel Bouteloua occur
Habitat Types
Kennedy (1983) identified six relatively undisturbed habitatmiddot types in the Sacramento Mountains of southcentralNewMexicQ (Table 2) These habitat types ranged from about 6200ft to 7000 ft in average elevation and from 33 to 47 understory cover (Kennedy 1983 Table 2) The ~ ecluUs-Juniperus monospermal
Muhlenbergia pauc1flora habitat type was perhaps themost common type in this area Francis and Aldon (1983) also identified three pinyonshyjuniper habitat typu innortbwestern New Mexico
Uriderstory Patterns
Pinyon-juniper vegetation forma a mosaic pattern with trees interspersed with open grassland areas between the trees Armentrout and Pieper (1988) have described three understory zones associated with singleseed juniper and Rocky Mountain pinyon The first zone is that surrounding the trunk of the tree and is characterized by shrubs such as skunkbrush ancl algerita (Berberis haematocarpa) The seconcl zone is largely beneath the tree canopy Several grass species such as sideoats grams (Boute1oua curtipendula) wolftal (Lycurus phleoides) and blUe grams were abundant in the seconcl zone Several species inclUding blue grama wolf tail ancl creeping muhly (Muhlenbergia repeus) were more abundant under tree canopy ori the north side rather than on the southmiddot side (Schott and Pieper 1985) Pinyon ricegrass (Piptochaetium fimbriatum) appears to be favored by conditions under canopies of singleseed juniper Grass species of the open grassland zone included blue grama wolftaU gal~eta sanddrapseed and mat muhly~
Age and Size Class Structure
Many pi~yon-juniper stands h~vebeen disturbeel during the past 100 years by fuel or fence post harvesting bUrDing or mechanical control treatments Consequently many trees are relatively young bull Age class distributions consequently do not followmiddot the typical inverted J-shaped curve for ma~ure stanels Figure 1 shows age-class distribution for 202 Rocky Mountain pinyon trees from five study sites in the Sacramento Mountains This distribution appears to be nearly normal with most trees falling in the 70 to 130 yearmiddotage class However the specific distribution at each site depended on time since last disturbance and type of disturbance (Plumb-Mentjes anel Pieper 1983) Pinyon age is relatedto basal diameter but only 38 of the variation in age can be explained by basal diameter (Figure 2) Apparently~stand density (competition) influences siz~ of trees sUbstantially
6
0
Table 2 - Pinyon-Juniper Habitat Types of the Lincoln National Forest (From Kennedy 1983)
Tree Density
Average Understory Avg Stems Habitat Type Elev Ft Cover Plot
bull PINYON-JUNIPER SERIES
1 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Cercocarpus montanusAndropogon gerardi HT 6178 42 36
2 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Muhlenbergia pauciflora HT 6470 33 63
3 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Stipa columbiana HT 6678 36 123
4 Pinus edulis-Junil rus monosperma Bouteloua gracilis HT 6977 37 163
5 Punis edulis-Juniperus deppeana Bouteloua gracilis HT 6739 46 65
6 Pinus edulis-Juniperus deppeana Muhlenbergia dubia HT 6920 47 105
22 I
20
11
I
I
20 110 611 1110012011101611130 middotIY_I
Figure 1 Age class distribution of aU pinyon pines on study areas
- 1511r bull 100
1 bull 05 ~ 11amp50 2 r bull 031 n bull zaz
22 11 111 _ 1HIICMIl
Figure 2bull Relationship betweenDBB and age of pinyon pine for all trees bull
RESPONSE TO DISTURBANCE (SECONDARY SUCCESSION)
Several successional models have been proposed for secondary succession followingmiddot disturbance that removes most of the trees (Arnold et a1 1964 Barney and Frischknecht 1974 and Erdman 1976) These general patterns alsomiddotapply to conditions in middotpinyon-juniper woodlands in central New Mexico (Dwyer and Pieper 1967 Rippel et al 1980 1983 Schott and Pieper 1986 1987a 1987b 1987C) Bowever specific patterns are influenced by the type of soils supporting the woodland vegetation (Schott arid Pieper 1986 1987a) Generally- soils that are fairly shallow and rocky have some seral stages poorly represented (Table 3) When sitesmiddot with these soils are treated mechanically shrubs such as wavy-leaf oak do not increase (Rippel et al 1983) On similar soils with few roek outarops grassforb and shrubgrass stages are common Response of Rocky Hountainpinyon
and singleseed juniper appear to be dependent on density and size of trees before treatment If
the stanpmiddot was near climax before cabling pinypnsrapidly become dominant on the site If the stand was in someseral stage there would be more junipers but theimiddotr relatively slow growth and time for uturation require more time before middotthey would dominate the site
RESEARCH NEEDS
Only limited research on pinyon-juniper ecology in northern and westernmiddot New Mexico has been conducted Informst~on is lacking on basic ecological relationship at both plant communitymiddot and individual species level lactors influencing distribution of these woodlands are poorly understood lor example in many situations pinyon-juniper appears to be moving uphill in elevation and encroaching on ponderosa pine forests Such situation have not been analyzed Success~onal patterns where alligator juniper is a major potenUal component of the vegetation have not been determined Analyses of these woodlands for several uses and products are needed for laUd unagament purposes
4 bull ~
Table 3 -- General pattern of succession on cabled pinyon-juniper wood1anda on two soil types (From Schott and Pieper 1986)
Sera1 Stages Climax 1 2 3
Original Conditions
General successional Annual forb Grassforb Shrubgrass Pinyon-juniper model
Lithic hapustoll Annuals and Perennial Shrubs dominant Pinyon and juniper perennials from grasses and shade conducive dominating Pinyon seeds which disshy forbs with to tree establishshy eventually dominant perse readily establishment ment surviving perenshy and spread of nials shrubs (esp
0 wavy-leaf oak)
Lithic hapusto11- Annuals and These stages absent or poorly represhy Pinyon dominating Rock outcrop complex perennials from sented Rock outcropsmiddotrestrict vegshy Climax with juniper bull
seed which disshy etative reproduction perse readily surviving perenshynials
fI
LITERATURE CITED
Armentrout S M and R D Pieper 1988 Plant distribution surrounding Rocky Mountain Pinyon and one seed juniper in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range Management 41 (In press) bull
Arnold J F bullbull D A Jameson and E H Reid 1964bull The pinyon~jun1per type of Arizona Effects of grazing fire and tree control US Department of Agriculture Production Research Report 84~
Barney MA and N C Frischknechtmiddot 1974 Vegetation change follOwing fire in the
pinyon-juniper type of west-central Utah Journal of Range Management 279~-96
Barrett J W 1962 Regional Silviculture of the United States The Ronald Press Co bullbull NY 610p
BetancourtJ L 1987 Paleoecology of pinyon-juniper woodlands summary In Everett R L (compiler) proceedings~ pinyon-juniper conference USDA For SerGen Techbull Rep INT-215~
Boeker E Lbullbull V E Scott H G Reynolds and B A Donaldson 1972~ Seasonal food habits of mule deer in southWestern Ne Mexicobull Journal of Wildlife Management 3656-63 bull
Erdman Jbull A 1970 Pinyon-juniper succession after natural fires in residual soils of MesaVerde Colorado Brigham Young University Science Bulletin Series 11 ~rovo Utah
Fowler J M R D Bowe BE Peacock KC McDanielT Garner-Hurt J R Gray and
M Cardenas 1974 Wood fiber production in pinyon-juniper woodlands on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico New MeXico State University Agricultural Experiment~tation Research Report NO~ 519
Francis R E and E bull F Alden 1983 Preliminary habitat types of a semiarid grassland In MOir W H and L Hendzel (Tech COQrdinatora) Proceeding of the workshop pn southwestern habitat types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Gehlbach F R 1967 Vegetation of the Guadalupe escarpment New Mexico-Texas Ecology 48404-419
Kennedy K L 1983 A habitat type classification of the p~yon-juniper woodlands of the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico In Moir W H and Leonard Hendzel (Tech-Coordinators) Proceedings of the workshop on southwestern habitat
types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Lanner bull R M 1975 Pinyon pines and junipers of the southwestern woodlandsmiddot In Gifford G F and 1 E Buspy The pinyonjunipr ecosystem a symposium Utah State Univ bullbull Logan
Lanner R Mmiddot1981 The pinyon pine a natural and cultural history Univ Nevada Press
Reno
Little E L bull 1950 Southwestern trees Amiddot guide to the native species of middotNew Mexico and Arizona US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Agricultural Handbook 9
Lymbery bull G A and R D Pieper 1983 Ecology of pinyon-juniper vegetation in the northern Sacramento Mountains New Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 698
Pieper R D 1~77 The southwestern pinyon-juniper ecosystem In Aldon Earl F and T J~ Loring (Tech Coord) US Departmentmiddot Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report RM-31
Pieper R D and G A Lymbery 1987 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegettion in south-central New Mexico In~ Everett Richard L (compiler) proceedings - pinyon-juniper conference US Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT-21S
Plumh-Mentjes M L and R D Pieper 1983 Diameter distribution and age class structure of pinyon pine (Pinus eduiis Engelm) in south-central~Mexico Abstract 36th annual meeting Society for Range Management Denver CO bull
Schmidt L j 1987 Present and future themes in ptnyon-juniper hydrology In ~verett R L (compiler) U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report 1NT-215
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1985 Influence of canoP1 characteristics of one-seed juniper on understory grasses Journal of Range Management 38328-331
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1986 Succession in pinyon-juniper vegetation in New Mexico Rangelands 8126-128
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987a Succession of pinyon-juniper communities a~ter mechanical disturbance in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range ~anagement 4088-94
1Q
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987bbull Water relationships of Quercus undulata ~ edulis and Juniperus monosperma in seral pinyon-juniper communities of south-central New Mexico In Everett R L (compiler) us Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT~215 bull
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987cbull bull Succession in tree pits following cabliD8
in pinyon-juniper c01lllllUt1ities Southwestern Naturalist 32399-402
~ Short H L t W Evans and E L Boeker 1977 The use of natural and modified pinyon pine-juniper wOodlands by deer and elk Journal of Wildlife Management 41543-559
Springfield H W 1976 Characteristics and management of southwestern pinyon-juniper ranges the status of our knowledge US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Res Pap RM-160
Tueller P T C D Beeson R J Tausch N E West and K HRea 1979 Pinyon-juniper woodlands of themiddotGreat Basin distribution flora vegetal cover U SbullDepartment of Agriculture Forest Service Research Paper INT~229
USDA 1941 Cltmate and man Yearbook of Agriculture U S Govt Printing Office Washington DC
Wasson G E 1987 The American Indian response to the pinyon-juniper conference In Everett R L(compller) USDA For Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Wells P V 1987 Systematics and distribution of pinyons in the late quarternary In Everett R Lbull (compiler) Proc - Pinyon-juniper Conference USDA For Sere Gen Tech Rep INT-215
West N E K H Rea and R J Tausch 1975 Basic Synecological relationahips in pinyon-juniper woodlands In Gifford G E and F E Busby (eds) ~e pinyon-juniper ecosystem A symposium Utah State University Logan
Woodin H E and A A Lindsey 1954 Juniper-pinyon east of the Continental Divide as analyzed by the line-strip metWod Ecology 35473-489
11
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES I CROP
bullJ
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH WOODLAND STA~D MANAGEMENT l
James T Fisher John G Me~al and Gregory C Phillips
Abstract-- New Mexicos native pinyon pines produce high-value crops including nuts Christmas trees and nursery or~amentals Crop values can be increased through more intensive stand management and more innovative marketing of such products as pinyon nuts and Christmas trees to compete with imported products Research needs pertaining to these crops are discussed
1 Ne~ Mexico State University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-II
2 Authors are re~pectively
Professor and Associate Professors Dept of Agronomy and Horticulture New
Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
13
INTRODUCTlON
Pinyons (pinon p~nes) ield diverse productsranging frolll valuable nuts ~nd landscape sp~cll11ens to fuelwood
Rowever littleforethought is give~ to crop illlprovelllentbeforecropsare ha~vested This paper addresses high-value pinyon products ~hat appear to justify at least modest levels omiddotf lIIanacelllent inputs to improve product quality quantity or avail- abilty Greater elllphasis on ~ntensive lIIanagelllentmiddot recognizes the nee~ for deriving economic benefits as well as the need for cu~todiai lIIanagelllent to pre~erve the
woodland type (Lanner 1977)
Pinyon and pinyon-juniper woodlands hav~ be~n the su~lect of severai symposia The reader iamp directed to proceedings of these lIIeetings providing several papers on the subject [~ee Gifford and Busby (19-75) Aldon and Loring (1977) Evrett (1987) and a fbrthcoming volume reporting a n~~ional lIIeeting held in Mexico in 1987]
This paper specifi~ally exalllines pinyon nut production including lIIarket developlllents that potentially threaten regional markets and the selective harvest of Christlllas trees and nursery or~alllentals Methods available t~ illlprove crop profitability will be discussed in addition to cuirent and future research
NUT BEARING PINES
Plant taxonomists recognize about 100 species in the falllily Pinaceae Alllongthese 12 to 26 species produce quality edible nuts (Rosengarten 1984 Lanner 1981) An edible nut is large middot(generallly les8 than 2200 seedkg) and has a thin shell that can be cracked with the teeth Pines producing edible nuts are found mostly in Europe Asia and western North middotAmerica Large ~dlblen~ts are found ~ostiyalllong the ~tone pines ~Sub8ection Celllbraa) nat~ve to Europe and ASia and the pinyon pines (Subsection Celllbroides) native to North Alllerica
Pinyons are dwarf trees nd shrubS 9f sellliarid regions of the southwestern Uni ted Sta tes and Mexico Because pinyons grow slowly it ismiddot difficult to lustify th~ cost of establishing and cultivatin~ p~aniations for nut production IncreaSingly nuts gathered
from the stone pines are imported f~om Asia and marketed at a lIIuch lower cost According to D~nielFox (pers C~IIII11) about 1000 ~tric tons of ~helled Asian pine nuts are imported each year Re also reports that abou~ 100 ton~ of ~ pinea nuts are illlported from Portugal and Spain
To protect pinyonnut m~rkets it lIIay becollle necessary to develop criteria that effectively distinguish pinyon nuts frolll illlported pine ~uts~ To exallline the feasibility of developing these criteria we will examine t~egeographic ranges and speclal characteristics of nut-producing pines under their respective subsections of the family Pinaceae proposed by Critchfield and Little (1966)
lli Subsec tiOn Celllbroides (Pinyons)
Pines classified und~i the subse~tion Ce~bi~ides (pinyons) have 1-5 needles in a fascicle Seeds are large wingl~ss a~d sOlllewhat oval in shape Lanner (1981) reported 11 species but a more recent treatlllent ofmiddot the alliance r~cognizes 15ta~a (Bailey and Ha~ksworth 1988) Eight species occur in the United States 12 in Mexico and 3 in New Mexico (P edulis I lIIonophylla and I~di-cOlor) The pinyon species discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988)include
Uni ted States
(l) Pinus edulis (pinyon) t 4200 seedkg
The predominant pinyon species of New Mexico Widespread in the southwestern United States lust
entering Wyollling and extending south through Utah Colorado and ~ew ~~xico to the western ~nd of Oklahollla~ west Texas and the northern border of Chihuahua extending west throughout lIIuch of Arizona to an outlier in eastern California Range ov~rlaps ~ith P celllbroides in south~rn New Mexico and Arizona and with P monophylla at the westerD edge of its range (southw~stern Utah northwestern Arizona and the New York Mountains o~ sOuthern California (Fig 1) Kay occa~ionally intergrade with P lIIonophylla
(2) monophylla lsingleleaf plny~n)
[ 2400 seed kg ] The pinyon pine ~fthe Great
14
bull P SAalNIANA bull P aMIIilOIOEl III Po OUAOIIIIOUA bull P MONOPttYLLA bull P eDULIS
Figure 1 Diatrlbution of pinyon pines in lJOuthwestern United States and northern Mexieo
Basin and Mohave Desert Com~onin Nevada and in parts of southern California and western Utah but also ex~ends acr~ss Arizona and southwestern Ke~ Mexico (ig~ 1)
United States and Mexico
(3) Pinus middotcellbroides (Mexican pinyon)
[ 2400 seedkg J Range widespread at low
elevations in the mountains bordering the arid plate~u of northern Mexico Ranges from southeastern Arizona southwestern Arizona southwestern New Mexico and western Texas through northern Mexico and south to Puebla and Mexico City (Fig 1) Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) middotrecognize three subspecies cembroides (northern Mexi~o) lagunae (Baja California) and orizabensis (Central Mexico) (Fig 1)
(4) P californiarum-
Subspecies californiarum
occurs in southern Californ~a and northern Baja California I californiarum subsp fallax (formerly P edulis var fallax) is-found in Arizona
(5) Pinus discolor (border pinyon)
Formerly P cembroides var bicolor~ Principal range lies along both sides of the intershynational boundary between Mexico and the United States extending about 120 miles into eac~ country Sp-ecifically occurs in southeast Arizona extreme southwest New Mexico northeas~ ~onora and northwest Chihuahua
( 6) quad r ifo11a (Parry pinyon) [ 2100 seedkg J
Confined to 10 elevations in the dry mountains of southern California from the San Jacinto Mountains south to the S~erra San Ped~o Martir Its range overlaps that of I monOphylla but no intermediates have been reported (Fig 1)middot
(7) Pinus remo ta (paper-shell pinyon also called
Texas pinyon) Formerly P cembroides var
remota Main range in Coahuila but reaches parts of adjacent Nuevo Leon southeastern Chihuahua and rexas (Bailey and Wendt 1979) Has thinnest shell among pinyons~
Local Endemics Found Exclusively in Mexico
(8) Pinus culminicola (Potosi pinyon)
Documented occurrence Cerro PotOSi Nuevo Leon Mexico
(9) johannis Li~ited r4nge in Mexico
(west of Concepcion del Oro Zacatecas
(10) Pin~s maximartinezii (Martinez pinyon)
Documented Occurrence Zacatecas Mexico
(11 ) Pinus nelsonii (Nelson pinyon)
Documented ocaurrence north- eastern Mexicobull
(12) ~pinceana (Pinca pinyon)
15
Documented occurrence northshy Grows at high elevations inth~ eastern and eastern Mexco Alps and the Carpathian ~ountains
(3) bullbull koraiensis S~eb amp Zucco ~ SUDsect PINEAE Shaw (Korean pine)
[ 1800 seedkg](n Pinuspinea L Rngebull through Korea and (Italian stone pine) eastern Manchuria into southeastern [ 1300 seedkg ] Siberia with outlirs ~ri t~e
Wide_pread in Spain and Japalliue islands of Honshu and Portugal and aiong the northern and Shikoku (Fig 2) eastern shores ~f the Mediterranean Sea including minor occurrences (4) P sibirica near the north coast of Turkey rSibe~ian ston~ pine(Fig 2) [ 4000 seedkg
Ranges from the Ural Mountains Pinus Subsect CEMBRAE through western and central ~iberia---(Stone Pines) to northern Mongolia with outliers
in northern Russia (Fig ~)(1) Pinus albicaulis Engelm~
(whitebark pine) Pinus Subsect GERARDIANAE [ 5700 seedk ] -- shy
Occurs at high eleyations fro~ (1) gerardian Wall~ central British Columbia sout~ to (Chilgoza pine)s~uthern Sierra Nevada of [ 400 seedkg J California the Ruby Mountain of Noted for large edible seed Nevada and the mOuntains of Confined to mountainous regions of northwestern Wyoming eastern Asia principally in
eastern Afgha~itan~ parts of (2) Pin~s cembra L Pakistan ~nd ~catt~red localities
(Swiss stone pine) in the dry inner valleys of the [ 4400 seedkg 1 north~rn Himalayas (Fig 2)
eocIIn_a _shyFigure 2 Distribution of edible pine nuts in Europe and
Asia
16
bull
Pinus Subsect SABINIANAE Loud Opportumiddotnities aay exist to separate pinyOn nuts other froa pine nuts Most
(I) Pinu~ ~abiniana Dougl pine nuts have a ridge where the (Digger pine) membranous wing is attached Also [ 1300 seed kg criteria based upon seed content could
Confined to California Found be applied when large vol~aes of in dry foothills of ihe Sierra imported pine nuts are suspected to be Nevada and the Coast Rangemiddot Ras aislabeled Tests aight exaine levels large edible but rather hard-shelled of starch fat or piotein or even seeds (Fig bull1) smiddotpecific enzyaes (Table 1)
(2) Pinus coulteri D Don (Coulter pine) New Mexico Pinyon Nut Crops ( 3100 seedkg]
Restr~cted to the coastal mountains of cen~ral and southern Pinyon nuts have been harvested California and northern Baja commercially for about 50 years California (Little 1938a) The nut crop averages
045 to 09 million kg (I to 2 million The preceding list makes clear that pounds) annually for New Mexico Arizona
many pinyon species are found in North and Colorado but one year exceeded 36 America with the greatest number found million kg (Little 1942) The more in Mexico Further it seems neither productive stands may yield 330 kglha practical nor necessary to develop (300 lbsac) during a good year market criteria to separate nut products (Springfield 1976) At a cur~ent found among these species Morphological retail value of $883 I kg value on a differences among pinyon nuts are per hectare basis would be $297000 generally so slight as ~o pre~lude (120000 lac) Fowler and Oliver (this practical field identification publication) provide additional Also most Mexican species occur as information on nut values rather isolated populations with local value but low export potential For New Mexico species criteria would have to recognize as genuinely natibullbull those Pinyon Reproductive Biology nuts produced by at least three pinyon species edulis monophylla and P di$color Again nut morphological Pinyons begin bearing nuts at about criteria would not separate these 25 years but crops do not reach pinyons from other species of the same commercial size until about 75 years subsection (Little 1941) Cones are borne
Table 1-- Composition of pine nuts and true nuts (Lanner 1981 Woodroof 1979) All values are expressed as percentages
Kernal H2O Protein Fat Carboshyhydrates
Ash
Pinyon nuts P edulisP monophIllaImiddot cembroides
58 31 14 10 19
60 23 60
18 54 14
3
Pine nuts P sabinianaP pineaImiddot sibirica P lerardiana
49 30 34 19 14
60 48 63 51
9 7
12 23
4
True nuts
Almond Pecan Pistacio Walnut Peanut
51 52
shy45
47 30
33
19 9
20 15 26
54 73 53 64 39
20 15 19 16 24
3 2 3 2
laterally ~n the a~il of a scale leaf near branch tips (jhaw~ 1914) although a r~re observation 01 termin~l cones b~s been reported (Lanner 1969) Developing cones can be ~een in the e~rliest stages as ovulate primordia in longitudinal sections of bu4s Within buds ovulate cone primordia are only at the tip of the bud an~have larger and broader bases than spur shoots (Little 1938-b)
ovuiate primordia are formed in buds in August and September and cones mature by October of the third year Because 3 years are required for seeds to mature treatments applied to stimulate nut quantity~il~ require 3 years before evaluation The first year must be especially suited to production of ovulate primordia and the second and third seaasons favorable to growth and maturation of cones and nuts(Li~tle 1938b)
The Periodicity of Bumper Crops
Pinyon ~ut crops are prodUCed at intervals of 3 to 7 years The periodicity of above-average cropshas been related to the dtain of nutrients required to produce the crop an~ the time required for nutrients to be replenished Developing cones act as food sinks for carbohydrate and nitrogen (N) reserves at the expense of vegetative structures (Pickmann and Kozlowski 1969 1970 ~ook and S~et 1971) Consequently large cone crops adversely affect vegetative tree growth
Forcella (1981) found cone production was inversely relate~ to temperatures during late-August to early September Maximum production in northern New Mexeio occurred when the mean maximum weekly temperature was below 24 degrees C Temperatures above 24 degrees C resulted in virtually no cone crops
However other environmental factors~ acting independently or inte~actinl with temperature caa be involved Rainfall is positively correia ted with the flowering of pines This is because photosynthat~ 9roduction is needed to develop carbohydrate reserves and this process is limited by ~lant water stres~ Also tree growth is determined by photosynthetic gain and the onset of abundant flowering is more directly rela~ed to tree siZe than
age (Schmidtling 1969) More speci1icallj nut ~roduction is e~osely
related to crown surface area
An exception to the adverse influen~e of wa~er ~tress is the positive roie stress plays in the initiat~on of ovula~e primordia Studies have shown that summer moisture
stress results in an above-average flower crop the following spring This suggests moisture stress at the time of ovulate primordia formation promotes reproductive rather than vegetative bull growth This view is supported by studies shOwing that branches exposed to full sun bore more female cones and had lower tissue moisture levels than partially shaded branches (Wareing~ 1958)
Water ~tress also can indirectly affect flowering thro~gh its interaction with tree nutrient status E~ell (1970) showd that nitrate fertili~ation or exposure to moisture stress caused similar tiowe~ing responses in Dougl~s-firaccompaniedby increases in total foliage N content and free amino
acids especially ~rgini~e Similarly Schmidtling (1974) suggested that water stress or N fertilization can increase flowering through the same metabolic intermediary namely arginine or some related N-containing substance~
Manipulation of Native Nut Crops
pespite the importance of coniferous nuts in many parts of th~
world only two pine species appear to be cultivated for their seed crops P
pinea in the Medi terranean and - sibirica in the Urals (Pravdin 1963) The pinyons of estern North America and Meiico ar mos~ly ignored in terma of cultiv~tion or domestication
Little (1140) was among the first to suggest that pinyon nu~ prQduction could be augme~ted tbtough the USe of simple cultutal practices However these received little attention and we have no grea~er und~rstanding of the effi~lcy or econoic feasibility of these treatments now than we did more than 40 ~ears ago Nev~rtheles~ with the present emphasis on wocidland management ~uch treatmenta seem worthy of serious attention
Ca) selective thinning
Some pibyonsapear to be
18
Nut sizes from pruned and unpruned Pinus edulis trees
19
consistently good nut producers (Little 1940) Heavy producers usually show immature and old cones on branches and cones are conspicuous b~neath them Selective thinning of unpr04uctive trees should increase flowering of those left standing (Little 1940)
(b) basal pruning
Theoretically low branches receiving partial sun light do not photosynthesize enough energy to offset energy losses to respiration It follows that low branches are energy sinks that potentially r~b nutrients from seed crops To test this relationship Montano et al (1980) pruned baial branches of 70 to 80-year old pinyons (8 to 10 m tall) to a height of 15 m and SUbsequently determined effects of this treatment on seed development They reported av~rage nut volumes from gruned and ungruned trees were 040 cm and 032 cm and the average nut weights were 033 g and 020 g respectively (see Fig3) Also pruned trees produced a greater percentage of filled nuts 99 as opposed to 84 The effects observed were related to the growth of nuts already developing in cones when the treatment was applied
Basal pruning reduced disease and insect injury of southern pnes (Wilson and Rudolph 1970) Also pruned wood could b sold for ~uelwood potentially offsetting the cost of the benefits anticipated Owing to its simplicity and overall benefits basal pruning appears to merit greater attention
(c) fertilization
Fertilization usually stimulates female cone production (Puritch 1972) More specifically the following trends become apparent when studies are reviewed collectively
(1) N stimulates cone production even when N is applied with other nutrients (Morris and Beers 1969) Also trees producing greater cone yields generally have higher levels of tisue N than low producers
(2) The presence of specific amino acids (especially arginine) is a more reliable predictor of fruitfulness than tissue N content per se For example nitrat N ana ammcinium N increased Douglasshyfir foliar N content and shoot growth similarly However only nitrate N significantly increased arginine content which was positively and quantitatively related to female flower proshyduction (Ebell and McMullin 1970) Following ichmidtlings (1974) explanation of fruit shyfulness fertilization shyespecially with nitrate N - could increase tis~ue organip Nand consequently flowering
(d) cultivation and irrigation
Supplemental water could increase growth reSUlting in greater crown density and iurface area In times of drought additional water could prevent premature abortion of immature cones Drip irrigaeion technology may be feaible for som~ sites However it seems more likely that less intensive ~ethods will prove to be practical Among these are land treatments that direct precipitation run-off to trees improve infiltration or remove weed competition
CHRISTMAS TREES
Pinyons are harvested from natural stands and comprise about 25 of all
Christmas trees sold in New Mexico Arizona Colorado Wyoming Utah and Nevada (Sowder 1965) Trimmed branches also are used for wreath manufacture In spite of their slow growth in native stands pinyons have many desirable Christmas tree attributes including dense foliage symmetrical shape green color natural fragrance good branch angle and limb strength and good needle retention Plantation trees can reach marketable size in about 11 years (Fisher and Fa~cher 1987)
Stand Thinning
Several techniques can be used to improve tree quality Stand thinning allows remaining trees to receive sufficient sunlight for limbs to develop uniformly on all sides During the thinning operation handles can be made on main stems by removing branches at the trees base to a height of 30 em
Removal of branches below a full whorl of branches will allow another tree to be culturedmiddotfrom the stump after harvest A year after the first tree is cut the remaining low branches will begin to turn up and all but one of these can be pruned to promote the growth of a new central leader
Pruning and Shearing
~he ideal pin~on Christmas tree resembles an inverted cone wide at the base and tapered uniformly tg the tip Accemiddotptable crown taper for pines is 40 to 90 but for spr~ces and firs is 40 to 70 Pruning and shearing will make native pinyons conform more closely to the ideal which improve marke tabi Ii ty
Pruning removes dead or unattractive branches Shearing is used to co~troi leader growth so the distance between whorls is not excessive increase the number of branches arising from branch buds and promote the pyramidal crown f~Im Because pinyon leader growth rarely exceeds 20 cm excessive distance between whorls is rarely a problem Pruning and shearing most often will be used to correct uneven o~oid and thia crowns
In pines eac~ needle bun~le ~ontains a dormant or axillary bud Removal of a branch terminal at the proper time promotes development of these dormant buds into short shoots improving crown density In singleshyneedled conifers such as spruces firs and Douglas-fir intermediate buds are produced along the terminal branch stem between each whorl For this reason they can be sheared during any season of the year and produce about the same number of branch buds However with pines the number and size of branch buds developed after shearing depends upon the physiological state of the tree when sheared
Pines respond best when sheared shortly after height growth is complete but before tissues in the new shoot becom~ woody S~oots prun~d at this time produce two to four times the number of buds found on unpruned trees Pinyon shoots elongata during late June but needles continue to elongatemiddotduring July and August after branches are fully elongated Buds are formed in late August
From studies conducted with other pine Christmas tree species the following course of treatments can be recommended for pinyons
1 Before spring growth begins prune all double and multiple leaders (eg bullbull April)
~ She~r when needles on new candles are 13 as long as last yeara needles (usually from June 15 to July 1)
3 Shape the tre~ from the top down by shearing the tips of lateral branches Pzomote a conical crown so thebase is no more than 90 as wide as the tree is tall Ideally taper should be 40-90 Avoid shearing back to woody tissue because this encourages multiple leaders
4 If the tree is oblong rather than tapered shear the top in June or eirly July and the sides in late summer fall or winter Growt~ of laterals will be reduced Repeat steps 2-4 yearly as needed
5 Avoid shearing the year the tree is ~o be marke~ed
20
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
improving the productive potential Many roads Ue in the bottoms of drainage ways Which concentrates diffuse runoff into damaging flows arid serious erosion Road systems continue to expand in many pinyon-juniper stanels as a result of off-road vehicle recreation hunting arid wood gathedng Many livestock anel wilellife grazing msnagement strategies are geareel to proviele for plant health but fail to conaieler adequately the impacts of use that affect infiltration flow concentrations ariel erosion It is not known hoW much plant material should be left on-site to protect most rangelands including pinyon-junper ecosystems in New Mexico
A significant amount of the existing unsatisfactory watersheelconclitionsare associateel with the pinyon-juniper ecosystem The hydrologic variables associated with pinyon-juniper are highly sensitive to use
Opt~um watershed treatment strategies to restore iong-term productivity and reduce flood and sediment risks need to be identified
PINYON-JUNIPER VEGETATION
Overstory tree Species
The threemaj)r tree species found in New Mexico within the pinyon-juniper woodland are Rocky Mountain pinyon Singleseed juniper ancl Alligatorjuniper (LaDner 1975 1981 Little 1950 Pieper 1977 anel Sprlngfield) Rocky Mountain pinyon and Singleseed juniper are founel throughout the pinyor-juniper wooellanel in the Southwest but Alligator juniper is more abunclant in western New Mexico anel Arizona Utah juniper also occurs in some pinyon-juniper woodlands in northwestern New Mexico while Rocky Mountain juniper (Juniperus scopulorum) occurs in northern New Mexico
Unclerstory Vegetation
Big sagebrush (Artelisia tridentata) is a common understory shrubby species in northern and northwestern New Mexico (Pieper 1977 Springfield 1976) Several oak species (Quercus arizonica 51 grisea 9 emoryi anel 9 oblongifolia) are ilIiportant understory shrubs in western and southwestern New Mexico Mountain
mshogany (Cercocarpus montana) and Wrights silk tassel (Garrya wrightii) are also important browse species in this area (Boeker et al 1972shyand Short et al 1977) Blue gra- (BouteloUa gracilis) occurs as an understory grass species throughout the wooellancl vegetation in thestate In northern areas cool season species of such genera as 2Festuca anel Agropyron occur ONest et al 1975) In central ancl southeastern New Mexico warm season species of the general Muhlenbergia Hilaria Lycurus anel Bouteloua occur
Habitat Types
Kennedy (1983) identified six relatively undisturbed habitatmiddot types in the Sacramento Mountains of southcentralNewMexicQ (Table 2) These habitat types ranged from about 6200ft to 7000 ft in average elevation and from 33 to 47 understory cover (Kennedy 1983 Table 2) The ~ ecluUs-Juniperus monospermal
Muhlenbergia pauc1flora habitat type was perhaps themost common type in this area Francis and Aldon (1983) also identified three pinyonshyjuniper habitat typu innortbwestern New Mexico
Uriderstory Patterns
Pinyon-juniper vegetation forma a mosaic pattern with trees interspersed with open grassland areas between the trees Armentrout and Pieper (1988) have described three understory zones associated with singleseed juniper and Rocky Mountain pinyon The first zone is that surrounding the trunk of the tree and is characterized by shrubs such as skunkbrush ancl algerita (Berberis haematocarpa) The seconcl zone is largely beneath the tree canopy Several grass species such as sideoats grams (Boute1oua curtipendula) wolftal (Lycurus phleoides) and blUe grams were abundant in the seconcl zone Several species inclUding blue grama wolf tail ancl creeping muhly (Muhlenbergia repeus) were more abundant under tree canopy ori the north side rather than on the southmiddot side (Schott and Pieper 1985) Pinyon ricegrass (Piptochaetium fimbriatum) appears to be favored by conditions under canopies of singleseed juniper Grass species of the open grassland zone included blue grama wolftaU gal~eta sanddrapseed and mat muhly~
Age and Size Class Structure
Many pi~yon-juniper stands h~vebeen disturbeel during the past 100 years by fuel or fence post harvesting bUrDing or mechanical control treatments Consequently many trees are relatively young bull Age class distributions consequently do not followmiddot the typical inverted J-shaped curve for ma~ure stanels Figure 1 shows age-class distribution for 202 Rocky Mountain pinyon trees from five study sites in the Sacramento Mountains This distribution appears to be nearly normal with most trees falling in the 70 to 130 yearmiddotage class However the specific distribution at each site depended on time since last disturbance and type of disturbance (Plumb-Mentjes anel Pieper 1983) Pinyon age is relatedto basal diameter but only 38 of the variation in age can be explained by basal diameter (Figure 2) Apparently~stand density (competition) influences siz~ of trees sUbstantially
6
0
Table 2 - Pinyon-Juniper Habitat Types of the Lincoln National Forest (From Kennedy 1983)
Tree Density
Average Understory Avg Stems Habitat Type Elev Ft Cover Plot
bull PINYON-JUNIPER SERIES
1 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Cercocarpus montanusAndropogon gerardi HT 6178 42 36
2 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Muhlenbergia pauciflora HT 6470 33 63
3 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Stipa columbiana HT 6678 36 123
4 Pinus edulis-Junil rus monosperma Bouteloua gracilis HT 6977 37 163
5 Punis edulis-Juniperus deppeana Bouteloua gracilis HT 6739 46 65
6 Pinus edulis-Juniperus deppeana Muhlenbergia dubia HT 6920 47 105
22 I
20
11
I
I
20 110 611 1110012011101611130 middotIY_I
Figure 1 Age class distribution of aU pinyon pines on study areas
- 1511r bull 100
1 bull 05 ~ 11amp50 2 r bull 031 n bull zaz
22 11 111 _ 1HIICMIl
Figure 2bull Relationship betweenDBB and age of pinyon pine for all trees bull
RESPONSE TO DISTURBANCE (SECONDARY SUCCESSION)
Several successional models have been proposed for secondary succession followingmiddot disturbance that removes most of the trees (Arnold et a1 1964 Barney and Frischknecht 1974 and Erdman 1976) These general patterns alsomiddotapply to conditions in middotpinyon-juniper woodlands in central New Mexico (Dwyer and Pieper 1967 Rippel et al 1980 1983 Schott and Pieper 1986 1987a 1987b 1987C) Bowever specific patterns are influenced by the type of soils supporting the woodland vegetation (Schott arid Pieper 1986 1987a) Generally- soils that are fairly shallow and rocky have some seral stages poorly represented (Table 3) When sitesmiddot with these soils are treated mechanically shrubs such as wavy-leaf oak do not increase (Rippel et al 1983) On similar soils with few roek outarops grassforb and shrubgrass stages are common Response of Rocky Hountainpinyon
and singleseed juniper appear to be dependent on density and size of trees before treatment If
the stanpmiddot was near climax before cabling pinypnsrapidly become dominant on the site If the stand was in someseral stage there would be more junipers but theimiddotr relatively slow growth and time for uturation require more time before middotthey would dominate the site
RESEARCH NEEDS
Only limited research on pinyon-juniper ecology in northern and westernmiddot New Mexico has been conducted Informst~on is lacking on basic ecological relationship at both plant communitymiddot and individual species level lactors influencing distribution of these woodlands are poorly understood lor example in many situations pinyon-juniper appears to be moving uphill in elevation and encroaching on ponderosa pine forests Such situation have not been analyzed Success~onal patterns where alligator juniper is a major potenUal component of the vegetation have not been determined Analyses of these woodlands for several uses and products are needed for laUd unagament purposes
4 bull ~
Table 3 -- General pattern of succession on cabled pinyon-juniper wood1anda on two soil types (From Schott and Pieper 1986)
Sera1 Stages Climax 1 2 3
Original Conditions
General successional Annual forb Grassforb Shrubgrass Pinyon-juniper model
Lithic hapustoll Annuals and Perennial Shrubs dominant Pinyon and juniper perennials from grasses and shade conducive dominating Pinyon seeds which disshy forbs with to tree establishshy eventually dominant perse readily establishment ment surviving perenshy and spread of nials shrubs (esp
0 wavy-leaf oak)
Lithic hapusto11- Annuals and These stages absent or poorly represhy Pinyon dominating Rock outcrop complex perennials from sented Rock outcropsmiddotrestrict vegshy Climax with juniper bull
seed which disshy etative reproduction perse readily surviving perenshynials
fI
LITERATURE CITED
Armentrout S M and R D Pieper 1988 Plant distribution surrounding Rocky Mountain Pinyon and one seed juniper in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range Management 41 (In press) bull
Arnold J F bullbull D A Jameson and E H Reid 1964bull The pinyon~jun1per type of Arizona Effects of grazing fire and tree control US Department of Agriculture Production Research Report 84~
Barney MA and N C Frischknechtmiddot 1974 Vegetation change follOwing fire in the
pinyon-juniper type of west-central Utah Journal of Range Management 279~-96
Barrett J W 1962 Regional Silviculture of the United States The Ronald Press Co bullbull NY 610p
BetancourtJ L 1987 Paleoecology of pinyon-juniper woodlands summary In Everett R L (compiler) proceedings~ pinyon-juniper conference USDA For SerGen Techbull Rep INT-215~
Boeker E Lbullbull V E Scott H G Reynolds and B A Donaldson 1972~ Seasonal food habits of mule deer in southWestern Ne Mexicobull Journal of Wildlife Management 3656-63 bull
Erdman Jbull A 1970 Pinyon-juniper succession after natural fires in residual soils of MesaVerde Colorado Brigham Young University Science Bulletin Series 11 ~rovo Utah
Fowler J M R D Bowe BE Peacock KC McDanielT Garner-Hurt J R Gray and
M Cardenas 1974 Wood fiber production in pinyon-juniper woodlands on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico New MeXico State University Agricultural Experiment~tation Research Report NO~ 519
Francis R E and E bull F Alden 1983 Preliminary habitat types of a semiarid grassland In MOir W H and L Hendzel (Tech COQrdinatora) Proceeding of the workshop pn southwestern habitat types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Gehlbach F R 1967 Vegetation of the Guadalupe escarpment New Mexico-Texas Ecology 48404-419
Kennedy K L 1983 A habitat type classification of the p~yon-juniper woodlands of the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico In Moir W H and Leonard Hendzel (Tech-Coordinators) Proceedings of the workshop on southwestern habitat
types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Lanner bull R M 1975 Pinyon pines and junipers of the southwestern woodlandsmiddot In Gifford G F and 1 E Buspy The pinyonjunipr ecosystem a symposium Utah State Univ bullbull Logan
Lanner R Mmiddot1981 The pinyon pine a natural and cultural history Univ Nevada Press
Reno
Little E L bull 1950 Southwestern trees Amiddot guide to the native species of middotNew Mexico and Arizona US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Agricultural Handbook 9
Lymbery bull G A and R D Pieper 1983 Ecology of pinyon-juniper vegetation in the northern Sacramento Mountains New Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 698
Pieper R D 1~77 The southwestern pinyon-juniper ecosystem In Aldon Earl F and T J~ Loring (Tech Coord) US Departmentmiddot Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report RM-31
Pieper R D and G A Lymbery 1987 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegettion in south-central New Mexico In~ Everett Richard L (compiler) proceedings - pinyon-juniper conference US Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT-21S
Plumh-Mentjes M L and R D Pieper 1983 Diameter distribution and age class structure of pinyon pine (Pinus eduiis Engelm) in south-central~Mexico Abstract 36th annual meeting Society for Range Management Denver CO bull
Schmidt L j 1987 Present and future themes in ptnyon-juniper hydrology In ~verett R L (compiler) U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report 1NT-215
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1985 Influence of canoP1 characteristics of one-seed juniper on understory grasses Journal of Range Management 38328-331
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1986 Succession in pinyon-juniper vegetation in New Mexico Rangelands 8126-128
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987a Succession of pinyon-juniper communities a~ter mechanical disturbance in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range ~anagement 4088-94
1Q
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987bbull Water relationships of Quercus undulata ~ edulis and Juniperus monosperma in seral pinyon-juniper communities of south-central New Mexico In Everett R L (compiler) us Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT~215 bull
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987cbull bull Succession in tree pits following cabliD8
in pinyon-juniper c01lllllUt1ities Southwestern Naturalist 32399-402
~ Short H L t W Evans and E L Boeker 1977 The use of natural and modified pinyon pine-juniper wOodlands by deer and elk Journal of Wildlife Management 41543-559
Springfield H W 1976 Characteristics and management of southwestern pinyon-juniper ranges the status of our knowledge US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Res Pap RM-160
Tueller P T C D Beeson R J Tausch N E West and K HRea 1979 Pinyon-juniper woodlands of themiddotGreat Basin distribution flora vegetal cover U SbullDepartment of Agriculture Forest Service Research Paper INT~229
USDA 1941 Cltmate and man Yearbook of Agriculture U S Govt Printing Office Washington DC
Wasson G E 1987 The American Indian response to the pinyon-juniper conference In Everett R L(compller) USDA For Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Wells P V 1987 Systematics and distribution of pinyons in the late quarternary In Everett R Lbull (compiler) Proc - Pinyon-juniper Conference USDA For Sere Gen Tech Rep INT-215
West N E K H Rea and R J Tausch 1975 Basic Synecological relationahips in pinyon-juniper woodlands In Gifford G E and F E Busby (eds) ~e pinyon-juniper ecosystem A symposium Utah State University Logan
Woodin H E and A A Lindsey 1954 Juniper-pinyon east of the Continental Divide as analyzed by the line-strip metWod Ecology 35473-489
11
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES I CROP
bullJ
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH WOODLAND STA~D MANAGEMENT l
James T Fisher John G Me~al and Gregory C Phillips
Abstract-- New Mexicos native pinyon pines produce high-value crops including nuts Christmas trees and nursery or~amentals Crop values can be increased through more intensive stand management and more innovative marketing of such products as pinyon nuts and Christmas trees to compete with imported products Research needs pertaining to these crops are discussed
1 Ne~ Mexico State University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-II
2 Authors are re~pectively
Professor and Associate Professors Dept of Agronomy and Horticulture New
Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
13
INTRODUCTlON
Pinyons (pinon p~nes) ield diverse productsranging frolll valuable nuts ~nd landscape sp~cll11ens to fuelwood
Rowever littleforethought is give~ to crop illlprovelllentbeforecropsare ha~vested This paper addresses high-value pinyon products ~hat appear to justify at least modest levels omiddotf lIIanacelllent inputs to improve product quality quantity or avail- abilty Greater elllphasis on ~ntensive lIIanagelllentmiddot recognizes the nee~ for deriving economic benefits as well as the need for cu~todiai lIIanagelllent to pre~erve the
woodland type (Lanner 1977)
Pinyon and pinyon-juniper woodlands hav~ be~n the su~lect of severai symposia The reader iamp directed to proceedings of these lIIeetings providing several papers on the subject [~ee Gifford and Busby (19-75) Aldon and Loring (1977) Evrett (1987) and a fbrthcoming volume reporting a n~~ional lIIeeting held in Mexico in 1987]
This paper specifi~ally exalllines pinyon nut production including lIIarket developlllents that potentially threaten regional markets and the selective harvest of Christlllas trees and nursery or~alllentals Methods available t~ illlprove crop profitability will be discussed in addition to cuirent and future research
NUT BEARING PINES
Plant taxonomists recognize about 100 species in the falllily Pinaceae Alllongthese 12 to 26 species produce quality edible nuts (Rosengarten 1984 Lanner 1981) An edible nut is large middot(generallly les8 than 2200 seedkg) and has a thin shell that can be cracked with the teeth Pines producing edible nuts are found mostly in Europe Asia and western North middotAmerica Large ~dlblen~ts are found ~ostiyalllong the ~tone pines ~Sub8ection Celllbraa) nat~ve to Europe and ASia and the pinyon pines (Subsection Celllbroides) native to North Alllerica
Pinyons are dwarf trees nd shrubS 9f sellliarid regions of the southwestern Uni ted Sta tes and Mexico Because pinyons grow slowly it ismiddot difficult to lustify th~ cost of establishing and cultivatin~ p~aniations for nut production IncreaSingly nuts gathered
from the stone pines are imported f~om Asia and marketed at a lIIuch lower cost According to D~nielFox (pers C~IIII11) about 1000 ~tric tons of ~helled Asian pine nuts are imported each year Re also reports that abou~ 100 ton~ of ~ pinea nuts are illlported from Portugal and Spain
To protect pinyonnut m~rkets it lIIay becollle necessary to develop criteria that effectively distinguish pinyon nuts frolll illlported pine ~uts~ To exallline the feasibility of developing these criteria we will examine t~egeographic ranges and speclal characteristics of nut-producing pines under their respective subsections of the family Pinaceae proposed by Critchfield and Little (1966)
lli Subsec tiOn Celllbroides (Pinyons)
Pines classified und~i the subse~tion Ce~bi~ides (pinyons) have 1-5 needles in a fascicle Seeds are large wingl~ss a~d sOlllewhat oval in shape Lanner (1981) reported 11 species but a more recent treatlllent ofmiddot the alliance r~cognizes 15ta~a (Bailey and Ha~ksworth 1988) Eight species occur in the United States 12 in Mexico and 3 in New Mexico (P edulis I lIIonophylla and I~di-cOlor) The pinyon species discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988)include
Uni ted States
(l) Pinus edulis (pinyon) t 4200 seedkg
The predominant pinyon species of New Mexico Widespread in the southwestern United States lust
entering Wyollling and extending south through Utah Colorado and ~ew ~~xico to the western ~nd of Oklahollla~ west Texas and the northern border of Chihuahua extending west throughout lIIuch of Arizona to an outlier in eastern California Range ov~rlaps ~ith P celllbroides in south~rn New Mexico and Arizona and with P monophylla at the westerD edge of its range (southw~stern Utah northwestern Arizona and the New York Mountains o~ sOuthern California (Fig 1) Kay occa~ionally intergrade with P lIIonophylla
(2) monophylla lsingleleaf plny~n)
[ 2400 seed kg ] The pinyon pine ~fthe Great
14
bull P SAalNIANA bull P aMIIilOIOEl III Po OUAOIIIIOUA bull P MONOPttYLLA bull P eDULIS
Figure 1 Diatrlbution of pinyon pines in lJOuthwestern United States and northern Mexieo
Basin and Mohave Desert Com~onin Nevada and in parts of southern California and western Utah but also ex~ends acr~ss Arizona and southwestern Ke~ Mexico (ig~ 1)
United States and Mexico
(3) Pinus middotcellbroides (Mexican pinyon)
[ 2400 seedkg J Range widespread at low
elevations in the mountains bordering the arid plate~u of northern Mexico Ranges from southeastern Arizona southwestern Arizona southwestern New Mexico and western Texas through northern Mexico and south to Puebla and Mexico City (Fig 1) Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) middotrecognize three subspecies cembroides (northern Mexi~o) lagunae (Baja California) and orizabensis (Central Mexico) (Fig 1)
(4) P californiarum-
Subspecies californiarum
occurs in southern Californ~a and northern Baja California I californiarum subsp fallax (formerly P edulis var fallax) is-found in Arizona
(5) Pinus discolor (border pinyon)
Formerly P cembroides var bicolor~ Principal range lies along both sides of the intershynational boundary between Mexico and the United States extending about 120 miles into eac~ country Sp-ecifically occurs in southeast Arizona extreme southwest New Mexico northeas~ ~onora and northwest Chihuahua
( 6) quad r ifo11a (Parry pinyon) [ 2100 seedkg J
Confined to 10 elevations in the dry mountains of southern California from the San Jacinto Mountains south to the S~erra San Ped~o Martir Its range overlaps that of I monOphylla but no intermediates have been reported (Fig 1)middot
(7) Pinus remo ta (paper-shell pinyon also called
Texas pinyon) Formerly P cembroides var
remota Main range in Coahuila but reaches parts of adjacent Nuevo Leon southeastern Chihuahua and rexas (Bailey and Wendt 1979) Has thinnest shell among pinyons~
Local Endemics Found Exclusively in Mexico
(8) Pinus culminicola (Potosi pinyon)
Documented occurrence Cerro PotOSi Nuevo Leon Mexico
(9) johannis Li~ited r4nge in Mexico
(west of Concepcion del Oro Zacatecas
(10) Pin~s maximartinezii (Martinez pinyon)
Documented Occurrence Zacatecas Mexico
(11 ) Pinus nelsonii (Nelson pinyon)
Documented ocaurrence north- eastern Mexicobull
(12) ~pinceana (Pinca pinyon)
15
Documented occurrence northshy Grows at high elevations inth~ eastern and eastern Mexco Alps and the Carpathian ~ountains
(3) bullbull koraiensis S~eb amp Zucco ~ SUDsect PINEAE Shaw (Korean pine)
[ 1800 seedkg](n Pinuspinea L Rngebull through Korea and (Italian stone pine) eastern Manchuria into southeastern [ 1300 seedkg ] Siberia with outlirs ~ri t~e
Wide_pread in Spain and Japalliue islands of Honshu and Portugal and aiong the northern and Shikoku (Fig 2) eastern shores ~f the Mediterranean Sea including minor occurrences (4) P sibirica near the north coast of Turkey rSibe~ian ston~ pine(Fig 2) [ 4000 seedkg
Ranges from the Ural Mountains Pinus Subsect CEMBRAE through western and central ~iberia---(Stone Pines) to northern Mongolia with outliers
in northern Russia (Fig ~)(1) Pinus albicaulis Engelm~
(whitebark pine) Pinus Subsect GERARDIANAE [ 5700 seedk ] -- shy
Occurs at high eleyations fro~ (1) gerardian Wall~ central British Columbia sout~ to (Chilgoza pine)s~uthern Sierra Nevada of [ 400 seedkg J California the Ruby Mountain of Noted for large edible seed Nevada and the mOuntains of Confined to mountainous regions of northwestern Wyoming eastern Asia principally in
eastern Afgha~itan~ parts of (2) Pin~s cembra L Pakistan ~nd ~catt~red localities
(Swiss stone pine) in the dry inner valleys of the [ 4400 seedkg 1 north~rn Himalayas (Fig 2)
eocIIn_a _shyFigure 2 Distribution of edible pine nuts in Europe and
Asia
16
bull
Pinus Subsect SABINIANAE Loud Opportumiddotnities aay exist to separate pinyOn nuts other froa pine nuts Most
(I) Pinu~ ~abiniana Dougl pine nuts have a ridge where the (Digger pine) membranous wing is attached Also [ 1300 seed kg criteria based upon seed content could
Confined to California Found be applied when large vol~aes of in dry foothills of ihe Sierra imported pine nuts are suspected to be Nevada and the Coast Rangemiddot Ras aislabeled Tests aight exaine levels large edible but rather hard-shelled of starch fat or piotein or even seeds (Fig bull1) smiddotpecific enzyaes (Table 1)
(2) Pinus coulteri D Don (Coulter pine) New Mexico Pinyon Nut Crops ( 3100 seedkg]
Restr~cted to the coastal mountains of cen~ral and southern Pinyon nuts have been harvested California and northern Baja commercially for about 50 years California (Little 1938a) The nut crop averages
045 to 09 million kg (I to 2 million The preceding list makes clear that pounds) annually for New Mexico Arizona
many pinyon species are found in North and Colorado but one year exceeded 36 America with the greatest number found million kg (Little 1942) The more in Mexico Further it seems neither productive stands may yield 330 kglha practical nor necessary to develop (300 lbsac) during a good year market criteria to separate nut products (Springfield 1976) At a cur~ent found among these species Morphological retail value of $883 I kg value on a differences among pinyon nuts are per hectare basis would be $297000 generally so slight as ~o pre~lude (120000 lac) Fowler and Oliver (this practical field identification publication) provide additional Also most Mexican species occur as information on nut values rather isolated populations with local value but low export potential For New Mexico species criteria would have to recognize as genuinely natibullbull those Pinyon Reproductive Biology nuts produced by at least three pinyon species edulis monophylla and P di$color Again nut morphological Pinyons begin bearing nuts at about criteria would not separate these 25 years but crops do not reach pinyons from other species of the same commercial size until about 75 years subsection (Little 1941) Cones are borne
Table 1-- Composition of pine nuts and true nuts (Lanner 1981 Woodroof 1979) All values are expressed as percentages
Kernal H2O Protein Fat Carboshyhydrates
Ash
Pinyon nuts P edulisP monophIllaImiddot cembroides
58 31 14 10 19
60 23 60
18 54 14
3
Pine nuts P sabinianaP pineaImiddot sibirica P lerardiana
49 30 34 19 14
60 48 63 51
9 7
12 23
4
True nuts
Almond Pecan Pistacio Walnut Peanut
51 52
shy45
47 30
33
19 9
20 15 26
54 73 53 64 39
20 15 19 16 24
3 2 3 2
laterally ~n the a~il of a scale leaf near branch tips (jhaw~ 1914) although a r~re observation 01 termin~l cones b~s been reported (Lanner 1969) Developing cones can be ~een in the e~rliest stages as ovulate primordia in longitudinal sections of bu4s Within buds ovulate cone primordia are only at the tip of the bud an~have larger and broader bases than spur shoots (Little 1938-b)
ovuiate primordia are formed in buds in August and September and cones mature by October of the third year Because 3 years are required for seeds to mature treatments applied to stimulate nut quantity~il~ require 3 years before evaluation The first year must be especially suited to production of ovulate primordia and the second and third seaasons favorable to growth and maturation of cones and nuts(Li~tle 1938b)
The Periodicity of Bumper Crops
Pinyon ~ut crops are prodUCed at intervals of 3 to 7 years The periodicity of above-average cropshas been related to the dtain of nutrients required to produce the crop an~ the time required for nutrients to be replenished Developing cones act as food sinks for carbohydrate and nitrogen (N) reserves at the expense of vegetative structures (Pickmann and Kozlowski 1969 1970 ~ook and S~et 1971) Consequently large cone crops adversely affect vegetative tree growth
Forcella (1981) found cone production was inversely relate~ to temperatures during late-August to early September Maximum production in northern New Mexeio occurred when the mean maximum weekly temperature was below 24 degrees C Temperatures above 24 degrees C resulted in virtually no cone crops
However other environmental factors~ acting independently or inte~actinl with temperature caa be involved Rainfall is positively correia ted with the flowering of pines This is because photosynthat~ 9roduction is needed to develop carbohydrate reserves and this process is limited by ~lant water stres~ Also tree growth is determined by photosynthetic gain and the onset of abundant flowering is more directly rela~ed to tree siZe than
age (Schmidtling 1969) More speci1icallj nut ~roduction is e~osely
related to crown surface area
An exception to the adverse influen~e of wa~er ~tress is the positive roie stress plays in the initiat~on of ovula~e primordia Studies have shown that summer moisture
stress results in an above-average flower crop the following spring This suggests moisture stress at the time of ovulate primordia formation promotes reproductive rather than vegetative bull growth This view is supported by studies shOwing that branches exposed to full sun bore more female cones and had lower tissue moisture levels than partially shaded branches (Wareing~ 1958)
Water ~tress also can indirectly affect flowering thro~gh its interaction with tree nutrient status E~ell (1970) showd that nitrate fertili~ation or exposure to moisture stress caused similar tiowe~ing responses in Dougl~s-firaccompaniedby increases in total foliage N content and free amino
acids especially ~rgini~e Similarly Schmidtling (1974) suggested that water stress or N fertilization can increase flowering through the same metabolic intermediary namely arginine or some related N-containing substance~
Manipulation of Native Nut Crops
pespite the importance of coniferous nuts in many parts of th~
world only two pine species appear to be cultivated for their seed crops P
pinea in the Medi terranean and - sibirica in the Urals (Pravdin 1963) The pinyons of estern North America and Meiico ar mos~ly ignored in terma of cultiv~tion or domestication
Little (1140) was among the first to suggest that pinyon nu~ prQduction could be augme~ted tbtough the USe of simple cultutal practices However these received little attention and we have no grea~er und~rstanding of the effi~lcy or econoic feasibility of these treatments now than we did more than 40 ~ears ago Nev~rtheles~ with the present emphasis on wocidland management ~uch treatmenta seem worthy of serious attention
Ca) selective thinning
Some pibyonsapear to be
18
Nut sizes from pruned and unpruned Pinus edulis trees
19
consistently good nut producers (Little 1940) Heavy producers usually show immature and old cones on branches and cones are conspicuous b~neath them Selective thinning of unpr04uctive trees should increase flowering of those left standing (Little 1940)
(b) basal pruning
Theoretically low branches receiving partial sun light do not photosynthesize enough energy to offset energy losses to respiration It follows that low branches are energy sinks that potentially r~b nutrients from seed crops To test this relationship Montano et al (1980) pruned baial branches of 70 to 80-year old pinyons (8 to 10 m tall) to a height of 15 m and SUbsequently determined effects of this treatment on seed development They reported av~rage nut volumes from gruned and ungruned trees were 040 cm and 032 cm and the average nut weights were 033 g and 020 g respectively (see Fig3) Also pruned trees produced a greater percentage of filled nuts 99 as opposed to 84 The effects observed were related to the growth of nuts already developing in cones when the treatment was applied
Basal pruning reduced disease and insect injury of southern pnes (Wilson and Rudolph 1970) Also pruned wood could b sold for ~uelwood potentially offsetting the cost of the benefits anticipated Owing to its simplicity and overall benefits basal pruning appears to merit greater attention
(c) fertilization
Fertilization usually stimulates female cone production (Puritch 1972) More specifically the following trends become apparent when studies are reviewed collectively
(1) N stimulates cone production even when N is applied with other nutrients (Morris and Beers 1969) Also trees producing greater cone yields generally have higher levels of tisue N than low producers
(2) The presence of specific amino acids (especially arginine) is a more reliable predictor of fruitfulness than tissue N content per se For example nitrat N ana ammcinium N increased Douglasshyfir foliar N content and shoot growth similarly However only nitrate N significantly increased arginine content which was positively and quantitatively related to female flower proshyduction (Ebell and McMullin 1970) Following ichmidtlings (1974) explanation of fruit shyfulness fertilization shyespecially with nitrate N - could increase tis~ue organip Nand consequently flowering
(d) cultivation and irrigation
Supplemental water could increase growth reSUlting in greater crown density and iurface area In times of drought additional water could prevent premature abortion of immature cones Drip irrigaeion technology may be feaible for som~ sites However it seems more likely that less intensive ~ethods will prove to be practical Among these are land treatments that direct precipitation run-off to trees improve infiltration or remove weed competition
CHRISTMAS TREES
Pinyons are harvested from natural stands and comprise about 25 of all
Christmas trees sold in New Mexico Arizona Colorado Wyoming Utah and Nevada (Sowder 1965) Trimmed branches also are used for wreath manufacture In spite of their slow growth in native stands pinyons have many desirable Christmas tree attributes including dense foliage symmetrical shape green color natural fragrance good branch angle and limb strength and good needle retention Plantation trees can reach marketable size in about 11 years (Fisher and Fa~cher 1987)
Stand Thinning
Several techniques can be used to improve tree quality Stand thinning allows remaining trees to receive sufficient sunlight for limbs to develop uniformly on all sides During the thinning operation handles can be made on main stems by removing branches at the trees base to a height of 30 em
Removal of branches below a full whorl of branches will allow another tree to be culturedmiddotfrom the stump after harvest A year after the first tree is cut the remaining low branches will begin to turn up and all but one of these can be pruned to promote the growth of a new central leader
Pruning and Shearing
~he ideal pin~on Christmas tree resembles an inverted cone wide at the base and tapered uniformly tg the tip Accemiddotptable crown taper for pines is 40 to 90 but for spr~ces and firs is 40 to 70 Pruning and shearing will make native pinyons conform more closely to the ideal which improve marke tabi Ii ty
Pruning removes dead or unattractive branches Shearing is used to co~troi leader growth so the distance between whorls is not excessive increase the number of branches arising from branch buds and promote the pyramidal crown f~Im Because pinyon leader growth rarely exceeds 20 cm excessive distance between whorls is rarely a problem Pruning and shearing most often will be used to correct uneven o~oid and thia crowns
In pines eac~ needle bun~le ~ontains a dormant or axillary bud Removal of a branch terminal at the proper time promotes development of these dormant buds into short shoots improving crown density In singleshyneedled conifers such as spruces firs and Douglas-fir intermediate buds are produced along the terminal branch stem between each whorl For this reason they can be sheared during any season of the year and produce about the same number of branch buds However with pines the number and size of branch buds developed after shearing depends upon the physiological state of the tree when sheared
Pines respond best when sheared shortly after height growth is complete but before tissues in the new shoot becom~ woody S~oots prun~d at this time produce two to four times the number of buds found on unpruned trees Pinyon shoots elongata during late June but needles continue to elongatemiddotduring July and August after branches are fully elongated Buds are formed in late August
From studies conducted with other pine Christmas tree species the following course of treatments can be recommended for pinyons
1 Before spring growth begins prune all double and multiple leaders (eg bullbull April)
~ She~r when needles on new candles are 13 as long as last yeara needles (usually from June 15 to July 1)
3 Shape the tre~ from the top down by shearing the tips of lateral branches Pzomote a conical crown so thebase is no more than 90 as wide as the tree is tall Ideally taper should be 40-90 Avoid shearing back to woody tissue because this encourages multiple leaders
4 If the tree is oblong rather than tapered shear the top in June or eirly July and the sides in late summer fall or winter Growt~ of laterals will be reduced Repeat steps 2-4 yearly as needed
5 Avoid shearing the year the tree is ~o be marke~ed
20
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
0
Table 2 - Pinyon-Juniper Habitat Types of the Lincoln National Forest (From Kennedy 1983)
Tree Density
Average Understory Avg Stems Habitat Type Elev Ft Cover Plot
bull PINYON-JUNIPER SERIES
1 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Cercocarpus montanusAndropogon gerardi HT 6178 42 36
2 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Muhlenbergia pauciflora HT 6470 33 63
3 Pinus edulis-Juniperus monosperma Stipa columbiana HT 6678 36 123
4 Pinus edulis-Junil rus monosperma Bouteloua gracilis HT 6977 37 163
5 Punis edulis-Juniperus deppeana Bouteloua gracilis HT 6739 46 65
6 Pinus edulis-Juniperus deppeana Muhlenbergia dubia HT 6920 47 105
22 I
20
11
I
I
20 110 611 1110012011101611130 middotIY_I
Figure 1 Age class distribution of aU pinyon pines on study areas
- 1511r bull 100
1 bull 05 ~ 11amp50 2 r bull 031 n bull zaz
22 11 111 _ 1HIICMIl
Figure 2bull Relationship betweenDBB and age of pinyon pine for all trees bull
RESPONSE TO DISTURBANCE (SECONDARY SUCCESSION)
Several successional models have been proposed for secondary succession followingmiddot disturbance that removes most of the trees (Arnold et a1 1964 Barney and Frischknecht 1974 and Erdman 1976) These general patterns alsomiddotapply to conditions in middotpinyon-juniper woodlands in central New Mexico (Dwyer and Pieper 1967 Rippel et al 1980 1983 Schott and Pieper 1986 1987a 1987b 1987C) Bowever specific patterns are influenced by the type of soils supporting the woodland vegetation (Schott arid Pieper 1986 1987a) Generally- soils that are fairly shallow and rocky have some seral stages poorly represented (Table 3) When sitesmiddot with these soils are treated mechanically shrubs such as wavy-leaf oak do not increase (Rippel et al 1983) On similar soils with few roek outarops grassforb and shrubgrass stages are common Response of Rocky Hountainpinyon
and singleseed juniper appear to be dependent on density and size of trees before treatment If
the stanpmiddot was near climax before cabling pinypnsrapidly become dominant on the site If the stand was in someseral stage there would be more junipers but theimiddotr relatively slow growth and time for uturation require more time before middotthey would dominate the site
RESEARCH NEEDS
Only limited research on pinyon-juniper ecology in northern and westernmiddot New Mexico has been conducted Informst~on is lacking on basic ecological relationship at both plant communitymiddot and individual species level lactors influencing distribution of these woodlands are poorly understood lor example in many situations pinyon-juniper appears to be moving uphill in elevation and encroaching on ponderosa pine forests Such situation have not been analyzed Success~onal patterns where alligator juniper is a major potenUal component of the vegetation have not been determined Analyses of these woodlands for several uses and products are needed for laUd unagament purposes
4 bull ~
Table 3 -- General pattern of succession on cabled pinyon-juniper wood1anda on two soil types (From Schott and Pieper 1986)
Sera1 Stages Climax 1 2 3
Original Conditions
General successional Annual forb Grassforb Shrubgrass Pinyon-juniper model
Lithic hapustoll Annuals and Perennial Shrubs dominant Pinyon and juniper perennials from grasses and shade conducive dominating Pinyon seeds which disshy forbs with to tree establishshy eventually dominant perse readily establishment ment surviving perenshy and spread of nials shrubs (esp
0 wavy-leaf oak)
Lithic hapusto11- Annuals and These stages absent or poorly represhy Pinyon dominating Rock outcrop complex perennials from sented Rock outcropsmiddotrestrict vegshy Climax with juniper bull
seed which disshy etative reproduction perse readily surviving perenshynials
fI
LITERATURE CITED
Armentrout S M and R D Pieper 1988 Plant distribution surrounding Rocky Mountain Pinyon and one seed juniper in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range Management 41 (In press) bull
Arnold J F bullbull D A Jameson and E H Reid 1964bull The pinyon~jun1per type of Arizona Effects of grazing fire and tree control US Department of Agriculture Production Research Report 84~
Barney MA and N C Frischknechtmiddot 1974 Vegetation change follOwing fire in the
pinyon-juniper type of west-central Utah Journal of Range Management 279~-96
Barrett J W 1962 Regional Silviculture of the United States The Ronald Press Co bullbull NY 610p
BetancourtJ L 1987 Paleoecology of pinyon-juniper woodlands summary In Everett R L (compiler) proceedings~ pinyon-juniper conference USDA For SerGen Techbull Rep INT-215~
Boeker E Lbullbull V E Scott H G Reynolds and B A Donaldson 1972~ Seasonal food habits of mule deer in southWestern Ne Mexicobull Journal of Wildlife Management 3656-63 bull
Erdman Jbull A 1970 Pinyon-juniper succession after natural fires in residual soils of MesaVerde Colorado Brigham Young University Science Bulletin Series 11 ~rovo Utah
Fowler J M R D Bowe BE Peacock KC McDanielT Garner-Hurt J R Gray and
M Cardenas 1974 Wood fiber production in pinyon-juniper woodlands on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico New MeXico State University Agricultural Experiment~tation Research Report NO~ 519
Francis R E and E bull F Alden 1983 Preliminary habitat types of a semiarid grassland In MOir W H and L Hendzel (Tech COQrdinatora) Proceeding of the workshop pn southwestern habitat types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Gehlbach F R 1967 Vegetation of the Guadalupe escarpment New Mexico-Texas Ecology 48404-419
Kennedy K L 1983 A habitat type classification of the p~yon-juniper woodlands of the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico In Moir W H and Leonard Hendzel (Tech-Coordinators) Proceedings of the workshop on southwestern habitat
types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Lanner bull R M 1975 Pinyon pines and junipers of the southwestern woodlandsmiddot In Gifford G F and 1 E Buspy The pinyonjunipr ecosystem a symposium Utah State Univ bullbull Logan
Lanner R Mmiddot1981 The pinyon pine a natural and cultural history Univ Nevada Press
Reno
Little E L bull 1950 Southwestern trees Amiddot guide to the native species of middotNew Mexico and Arizona US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Agricultural Handbook 9
Lymbery bull G A and R D Pieper 1983 Ecology of pinyon-juniper vegetation in the northern Sacramento Mountains New Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 698
Pieper R D 1~77 The southwestern pinyon-juniper ecosystem In Aldon Earl F and T J~ Loring (Tech Coord) US Departmentmiddot Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report RM-31
Pieper R D and G A Lymbery 1987 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegettion in south-central New Mexico In~ Everett Richard L (compiler) proceedings - pinyon-juniper conference US Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT-21S
Plumh-Mentjes M L and R D Pieper 1983 Diameter distribution and age class structure of pinyon pine (Pinus eduiis Engelm) in south-central~Mexico Abstract 36th annual meeting Society for Range Management Denver CO bull
Schmidt L j 1987 Present and future themes in ptnyon-juniper hydrology In ~verett R L (compiler) U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report 1NT-215
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1985 Influence of canoP1 characteristics of one-seed juniper on understory grasses Journal of Range Management 38328-331
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1986 Succession in pinyon-juniper vegetation in New Mexico Rangelands 8126-128
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987a Succession of pinyon-juniper communities a~ter mechanical disturbance in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range ~anagement 4088-94
1Q
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987bbull Water relationships of Quercus undulata ~ edulis and Juniperus monosperma in seral pinyon-juniper communities of south-central New Mexico In Everett R L (compiler) us Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT~215 bull
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987cbull bull Succession in tree pits following cabliD8
in pinyon-juniper c01lllllUt1ities Southwestern Naturalist 32399-402
~ Short H L t W Evans and E L Boeker 1977 The use of natural and modified pinyon pine-juniper wOodlands by deer and elk Journal of Wildlife Management 41543-559
Springfield H W 1976 Characteristics and management of southwestern pinyon-juniper ranges the status of our knowledge US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Res Pap RM-160
Tueller P T C D Beeson R J Tausch N E West and K HRea 1979 Pinyon-juniper woodlands of themiddotGreat Basin distribution flora vegetal cover U SbullDepartment of Agriculture Forest Service Research Paper INT~229
USDA 1941 Cltmate and man Yearbook of Agriculture U S Govt Printing Office Washington DC
Wasson G E 1987 The American Indian response to the pinyon-juniper conference In Everett R L(compller) USDA For Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Wells P V 1987 Systematics and distribution of pinyons in the late quarternary In Everett R Lbull (compiler) Proc - Pinyon-juniper Conference USDA For Sere Gen Tech Rep INT-215
West N E K H Rea and R J Tausch 1975 Basic Synecological relationahips in pinyon-juniper woodlands In Gifford G E and F E Busby (eds) ~e pinyon-juniper ecosystem A symposium Utah State University Logan
Woodin H E and A A Lindsey 1954 Juniper-pinyon east of the Continental Divide as analyzed by the line-strip metWod Ecology 35473-489
11
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES I CROP
bullJ
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH WOODLAND STA~D MANAGEMENT l
James T Fisher John G Me~al and Gregory C Phillips
Abstract-- New Mexicos native pinyon pines produce high-value crops including nuts Christmas trees and nursery or~amentals Crop values can be increased through more intensive stand management and more innovative marketing of such products as pinyon nuts and Christmas trees to compete with imported products Research needs pertaining to these crops are discussed
1 Ne~ Mexico State University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-II
2 Authors are re~pectively
Professor and Associate Professors Dept of Agronomy and Horticulture New
Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
13
INTRODUCTlON
Pinyons (pinon p~nes) ield diverse productsranging frolll valuable nuts ~nd landscape sp~cll11ens to fuelwood
Rowever littleforethought is give~ to crop illlprovelllentbeforecropsare ha~vested This paper addresses high-value pinyon products ~hat appear to justify at least modest levels omiddotf lIIanacelllent inputs to improve product quality quantity or avail- abilty Greater elllphasis on ~ntensive lIIanagelllentmiddot recognizes the nee~ for deriving economic benefits as well as the need for cu~todiai lIIanagelllent to pre~erve the
woodland type (Lanner 1977)
Pinyon and pinyon-juniper woodlands hav~ be~n the su~lect of severai symposia The reader iamp directed to proceedings of these lIIeetings providing several papers on the subject [~ee Gifford and Busby (19-75) Aldon and Loring (1977) Evrett (1987) and a fbrthcoming volume reporting a n~~ional lIIeeting held in Mexico in 1987]
This paper specifi~ally exalllines pinyon nut production including lIIarket developlllents that potentially threaten regional markets and the selective harvest of Christlllas trees and nursery or~alllentals Methods available t~ illlprove crop profitability will be discussed in addition to cuirent and future research
NUT BEARING PINES
Plant taxonomists recognize about 100 species in the falllily Pinaceae Alllongthese 12 to 26 species produce quality edible nuts (Rosengarten 1984 Lanner 1981) An edible nut is large middot(generallly les8 than 2200 seedkg) and has a thin shell that can be cracked with the teeth Pines producing edible nuts are found mostly in Europe Asia and western North middotAmerica Large ~dlblen~ts are found ~ostiyalllong the ~tone pines ~Sub8ection Celllbraa) nat~ve to Europe and ASia and the pinyon pines (Subsection Celllbroides) native to North Alllerica
Pinyons are dwarf trees nd shrubS 9f sellliarid regions of the southwestern Uni ted Sta tes and Mexico Because pinyons grow slowly it ismiddot difficult to lustify th~ cost of establishing and cultivatin~ p~aniations for nut production IncreaSingly nuts gathered
from the stone pines are imported f~om Asia and marketed at a lIIuch lower cost According to D~nielFox (pers C~IIII11) about 1000 ~tric tons of ~helled Asian pine nuts are imported each year Re also reports that abou~ 100 ton~ of ~ pinea nuts are illlported from Portugal and Spain
To protect pinyonnut m~rkets it lIIay becollle necessary to develop criteria that effectively distinguish pinyon nuts frolll illlported pine ~uts~ To exallline the feasibility of developing these criteria we will examine t~egeographic ranges and speclal characteristics of nut-producing pines under their respective subsections of the family Pinaceae proposed by Critchfield and Little (1966)
lli Subsec tiOn Celllbroides (Pinyons)
Pines classified und~i the subse~tion Ce~bi~ides (pinyons) have 1-5 needles in a fascicle Seeds are large wingl~ss a~d sOlllewhat oval in shape Lanner (1981) reported 11 species but a more recent treatlllent ofmiddot the alliance r~cognizes 15ta~a (Bailey and Ha~ksworth 1988) Eight species occur in the United States 12 in Mexico and 3 in New Mexico (P edulis I lIIonophylla and I~di-cOlor) The pinyon species discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988)include
Uni ted States
(l) Pinus edulis (pinyon) t 4200 seedkg
The predominant pinyon species of New Mexico Widespread in the southwestern United States lust
entering Wyollling and extending south through Utah Colorado and ~ew ~~xico to the western ~nd of Oklahollla~ west Texas and the northern border of Chihuahua extending west throughout lIIuch of Arizona to an outlier in eastern California Range ov~rlaps ~ith P celllbroides in south~rn New Mexico and Arizona and with P monophylla at the westerD edge of its range (southw~stern Utah northwestern Arizona and the New York Mountains o~ sOuthern California (Fig 1) Kay occa~ionally intergrade with P lIIonophylla
(2) monophylla lsingleleaf plny~n)
[ 2400 seed kg ] The pinyon pine ~fthe Great
14
bull P SAalNIANA bull P aMIIilOIOEl III Po OUAOIIIIOUA bull P MONOPttYLLA bull P eDULIS
Figure 1 Diatrlbution of pinyon pines in lJOuthwestern United States and northern Mexieo
Basin and Mohave Desert Com~onin Nevada and in parts of southern California and western Utah but also ex~ends acr~ss Arizona and southwestern Ke~ Mexico (ig~ 1)
United States and Mexico
(3) Pinus middotcellbroides (Mexican pinyon)
[ 2400 seedkg J Range widespread at low
elevations in the mountains bordering the arid plate~u of northern Mexico Ranges from southeastern Arizona southwestern Arizona southwestern New Mexico and western Texas through northern Mexico and south to Puebla and Mexico City (Fig 1) Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) middotrecognize three subspecies cembroides (northern Mexi~o) lagunae (Baja California) and orizabensis (Central Mexico) (Fig 1)
(4) P californiarum-
Subspecies californiarum
occurs in southern Californ~a and northern Baja California I californiarum subsp fallax (formerly P edulis var fallax) is-found in Arizona
(5) Pinus discolor (border pinyon)
Formerly P cembroides var bicolor~ Principal range lies along both sides of the intershynational boundary between Mexico and the United States extending about 120 miles into eac~ country Sp-ecifically occurs in southeast Arizona extreme southwest New Mexico northeas~ ~onora and northwest Chihuahua
( 6) quad r ifo11a (Parry pinyon) [ 2100 seedkg J
Confined to 10 elevations in the dry mountains of southern California from the San Jacinto Mountains south to the S~erra San Ped~o Martir Its range overlaps that of I monOphylla but no intermediates have been reported (Fig 1)middot
(7) Pinus remo ta (paper-shell pinyon also called
Texas pinyon) Formerly P cembroides var
remota Main range in Coahuila but reaches parts of adjacent Nuevo Leon southeastern Chihuahua and rexas (Bailey and Wendt 1979) Has thinnest shell among pinyons~
Local Endemics Found Exclusively in Mexico
(8) Pinus culminicola (Potosi pinyon)
Documented occurrence Cerro PotOSi Nuevo Leon Mexico
(9) johannis Li~ited r4nge in Mexico
(west of Concepcion del Oro Zacatecas
(10) Pin~s maximartinezii (Martinez pinyon)
Documented Occurrence Zacatecas Mexico
(11 ) Pinus nelsonii (Nelson pinyon)
Documented ocaurrence north- eastern Mexicobull
(12) ~pinceana (Pinca pinyon)
15
Documented occurrence northshy Grows at high elevations inth~ eastern and eastern Mexco Alps and the Carpathian ~ountains
(3) bullbull koraiensis S~eb amp Zucco ~ SUDsect PINEAE Shaw (Korean pine)
[ 1800 seedkg](n Pinuspinea L Rngebull through Korea and (Italian stone pine) eastern Manchuria into southeastern [ 1300 seedkg ] Siberia with outlirs ~ri t~e
Wide_pread in Spain and Japalliue islands of Honshu and Portugal and aiong the northern and Shikoku (Fig 2) eastern shores ~f the Mediterranean Sea including minor occurrences (4) P sibirica near the north coast of Turkey rSibe~ian ston~ pine(Fig 2) [ 4000 seedkg
Ranges from the Ural Mountains Pinus Subsect CEMBRAE through western and central ~iberia---(Stone Pines) to northern Mongolia with outliers
in northern Russia (Fig ~)(1) Pinus albicaulis Engelm~
(whitebark pine) Pinus Subsect GERARDIANAE [ 5700 seedk ] -- shy
Occurs at high eleyations fro~ (1) gerardian Wall~ central British Columbia sout~ to (Chilgoza pine)s~uthern Sierra Nevada of [ 400 seedkg J California the Ruby Mountain of Noted for large edible seed Nevada and the mOuntains of Confined to mountainous regions of northwestern Wyoming eastern Asia principally in
eastern Afgha~itan~ parts of (2) Pin~s cembra L Pakistan ~nd ~catt~red localities
(Swiss stone pine) in the dry inner valleys of the [ 4400 seedkg 1 north~rn Himalayas (Fig 2)
eocIIn_a _shyFigure 2 Distribution of edible pine nuts in Europe and
Asia
16
bull
Pinus Subsect SABINIANAE Loud Opportumiddotnities aay exist to separate pinyOn nuts other froa pine nuts Most
(I) Pinu~ ~abiniana Dougl pine nuts have a ridge where the (Digger pine) membranous wing is attached Also [ 1300 seed kg criteria based upon seed content could
Confined to California Found be applied when large vol~aes of in dry foothills of ihe Sierra imported pine nuts are suspected to be Nevada and the Coast Rangemiddot Ras aislabeled Tests aight exaine levels large edible but rather hard-shelled of starch fat or piotein or even seeds (Fig bull1) smiddotpecific enzyaes (Table 1)
(2) Pinus coulteri D Don (Coulter pine) New Mexico Pinyon Nut Crops ( 3100 seedkg]
Restr~cted to the coastal mountains of cen~ral and southern Pinyon nuts have been harvested California and northern Baja commercially for about 50 years California (Little 1938a) The nut crop averages
045 to 09 million kg (I to 2 million The preceding list makes clear that pounds) annually for New Mexico Arizona
many pinyon species are found in North and Colorado but one year exceeded 36 America with the greatest number found million kg (Little 1942) The more in Mexico Further it seems neither productive stands may yield 330 kglha practical nor necessary to develop (300 lbsac) during a good year market criteria to separate nut products (Springfield 1976) At a cur~ent found among these species Morphological retail value of $883 I kg value on a differences among pinyon nuts are per hectare basis would be $297000 generally so slight as ~o pre~lude (120000 lac) Fowler and Oliver (this practical field identification publication) provide additional Also most Mexican species occur as information on nut values rather isolated populations with local value but low export potential For New Mexico species criteria would have to recognize as genuinely natibullbull those Pinyon Reproductive Biology nuts produced by at least three pinyon species edulis monophylla and P di$color Again nut morphological Pinyons begin bearing nuts at about criteria would not separate these 25 years but crops do not reach pinyons from other species of the same commercial size until about 75 years subsection (Little 1941) Cones are borne
Table 1-- Composition of pine nuts and true nuts (Lanner 1981 Woodroof 1979) All values are expressed as percentages
Kernal H2O Protein Fat Carboshyhydrates
Ash
Pinyon nuts P edulisP monophIllaImiddot cembroides
58 31 14 10 19
60 23 60
18 54 14
3
Pine nuts P sabinianaP pineaImiddot sibirica P lerardiana
49 30 34 19 14
60 48 63 51
9 7
12 23
4
True nuts
Almond Pecan Pistacio Walnut Peanut
51 52
shy45
47 30
33
19 9
20 15 26
54 73 53 64 39
20 15 19 16 24
3 2 3 2
laterally ~n the a~il of a scale leaf near branch tips (jhaw~ 1914) although a r~re observation 01 termin~l cones b~s been reported (Lanner 1969) Developing cones can be ~een in the e~rliest stages as ovulate primordia in longitudinal sections of bu4s Within buds ovulate cone primordia are only at the tip of the bud an~have larger and broader bases than spur shoots (Little 1938-b)
ovuiate primordia are formed in buds in August and September and cones mature by October of the third year Because 3 years are required for seeds to mature treatments applied to stimulate nut quantity~il~ require 3 years before evaluation The first year must be especially suited to production of ovulate primordia and the second and third seaasons favorable to growth and maturation of cones and nuts(Li~tle 1938b)
The Periodicity of Bumper Crops
Pinyon ~ut crops are prodUCed at intervals of 3 to 7 years The periodicity of above-average cropshas been related to the dtain of nutrients required to produce the crop an~ the time required for nutrients to be replenished Developing cones act as food sinks for carbohydrate and nitrogen (N) reserves at the expense of vegetative structures (Pickmann and Kozlowski 1969 1970 ~ook and S~et 1971) Consequently large cone crops adversely affect vegetative tree growth
Forcella (1981) found cone production was inversely relate~ to temperatures during late-August to early September Maximum production in northern New Mexeio occurred when the mean maximum weekly temperature was below 24 degrees C Temperatures above 24 degrees C resulted in virtually no cone crops
However other environmental factors~ acting independently or inte~actinl with temperature caa be involved Rainfall is positively correia ted with the flowering of pines This is because photosynthat~ 9roduction is needed to develop carbohydrate reserves and this process is limited by ~lant water stres~ Also tree growth is determined by photosynthetic gain and the onset of abundant flowering is more directly rela~ed to tree siZe than
age (Schmidtling 1969) More speci1icallj nut ~roduction is e~osely
related to crown surface area
An exception to the adverse influen~e of wa~er ~tress is the positive roie stress plays in the initiat~on of ovula~e primordia Studies have shown that summer moisture
stress results in an above-average flower crop the following spring This suggests moisture stress at the time of ovulate primordia formation promotes reproductive rather than vegetative bull growth This view is supported by studies shOwing that branches exposed to full sun bore more female cones and had lower tissue moisture levels than partially shaded branches (Wareing~ 1958)
Water ~tress also can indirectly affect flowering thro~gh its interaction with tree nutrient status E~ell (1970) showd that nitrate fertili~ation or exposure to moisture stress caused similar tiowe~ing responses in Dougl~s-firaccompaniedby increases in total foliage N content and free amino
acids especially ~rgini~e Similarly Schmidtling (1974) suggested that water stress or N fertilization can increase flowering through the same metabolic intermediary namely arginine or some related N-containing substance~
Manipulation of Native Nut Crops
pespite the importance of coniferous nuts in many parts of th~
world only two pine species appear to be cultivated for their seed crops P
pinea in the Medi terranean and - sibirica in the Urals (Pravdin 1963) The pinyons of estern North America and Meiico ar mos~ly ignored in terma of cultiv~tion or domestication
Little (1140) was among the first to suggest that pinyon nu~ prQduction could be augme~ted tbtough the USe of simple cultutal practices However these received little attention and we have no grea~er und~rstanding of the effi~lcy or econoic feasibility of these treatments now than we did more than 40 ~ears ago Nev~rtheles~ with the present emphasis on wocidland management ~uch treatmenta seem worthy of serious attention
Ca) selective thinning
Some pibyonsapear to be
18
Nut sizes from pruned and unpruned Pinus edulis trees
19
consistently good nut producers (Little 1940) Heavy producers usually show immature and old cones on branches and cones are conspicuous b~neath them Selective thinning of unpr04uctive trees should increase flowering of those left standing (Little 1940)
(b) basal pruning
Theoretically low branches receiving partial sun light do not photosynthesize enough energy to offset energy losses to respiration It follows that low branches are energy sinks that potentially r~b nutrients from seed crops To test this relationship Montano et al (1980) pruned baial branches of 70 to 80-year old pinyons (8 to 10 m tall) to a height of 15 m and SUbsequently determined effects of this treatment on seed development They reported av~rage nut volumes from gruned and ungruned trees were 040 cm and 032 cm and the average nut weights were 033 g and 020 g respectively (see Fig3) Also pruned trees produced a greater percentage of filled nuts 99 as opposed to 84 The effects observed were related to the growth of nuts already developing in cones when the treatment was applied
Basal pruning reduced disease and insect injury of southern pnes (Wilson and Rudolph 1970) Also pruned wood could b sold for ~uelwood potentially offsetting the cost of the benefits anticipated Owing to its simplicity and overall benefits basal pruning appears to merit greater attention
(c) fertilization
Fertilization usually stimulates female cone production (Puritch 1972) More specifically the following trends become apparent when studies are reviewed collectively
(1) N stimulates cone production even when N is applied with other nutrients (Morris and Beers 1969) Also trees producing greater cone yields generally have higher levels of tisue N than low producers
(2) The presence of specific amino acids (especially arginine) is a more reliable predictor of fruitfulness than tissue N content per se For example nitrat N ana ammcinium N increased Douglasshyfir foliar N content and shoot growth similarly However only nitrate N significantly increased arginine content which was positively and quantitatively related to female flower proshyduction (Ebell and McMullin 1970) Following ichmidtlings (1974) explanation of fruit shyfulness fertilization shyespecially with nitrate N - could increase tis~ue organip Nand consequently flowering
(d) cultivation and irrigation
Supplemental water could increase growth reSUlting in greater crown density and iurface area In times of drought additional water could prevent premature abortion of immature cones Drip irrigaeion technology may be feaible for som~ sites However it seems more likely that less intensive ~ethods will prove to be practical Among these are land treatments that direct precipitation run-off to trees improve infiltration or remove weed competition
CHRISTMAS TREES
Pinyons are harvested from natural stands and comprise about 25 of all
Christmas trees sold in New Mexico Arizona Colorado Wyoming Utah and Nevada (Sowder 1965) Trimmed branches also are used for wreath manufacture In spite of their slow growth in native stands pinyons have many desirable Christmas tree attributes including dense foliage symmetrical shape green color natural fragrance good branch angle and limb strength and good needle retention Plantation trees can reach marketable size in about 11 years (Fisher and Fa~cher 1987)
Stand Thinning
Several techniques can be used to improve tree quality Stand thinning allows remaining trees to receive sufficient sunlight for limbs to develop uniformly on all sides During the thinning operation handles can be made on main stems by removing branches at the trees base to a height of 30 em
Removal of branches below a full whorl of branches will allow another tree to be culturedmiddotfrom the stump after harvest A year after the first tree is cut the remaining low branches will begin to turn up and all but one of these can be pruned to promote the growth of a new central leader
Pruning and Shearing
~he ideal pin~on Christmas tree resembles an inverted cone wide at the base and tapered uniformly tg the tip Accemiddotptable crown taper for pines is 40 to 90 but for spr~ces and firs is 40 to 70 Pruning and shearing will make native pinyons conform more closely to the ideal which improve marke tabi Ii ty
Pruning removes dead or unattractive branches Shearing is used to co~troi leader growth so the distance between whorls is not excessive increase the number of branches arising from branch buds and promote the pyramidal crown f~Im Because pinyon leader growth rarely exceeds 20 cm excessive distance between whorls is rarely a problem Pruning and shearing most often will be used to correct uneven o~oid and thia crowns
In pines eac~ needle bun~le ~ontains a dormant or axillary bud Removal of a branch terminal at the proper time promotes development of these dormant buds into short shoots improving crown density In singleshyneedled conifers such as spruces firs and Douglas-fir intermediate buds are produced along the terminal branch stem between each whorl For this reason they can be sheared during any season of the year and produce about the same number of branch buds However with pines the number and size of branch buds developed after shearing depends upon the physiological state of the tree when sheared
Pines respond best when sheared shortly after height growth is complete but before tissues in the new shoot becom~ woody S~oots prun~d at this time produce two to four times the number of buds found on unpruned trees Pinyon shoots elongata during late June but needles continue to elongatemiddotduring July and August after branches are fully elongated Buds are formed in late August
From studies conducted with other pine Christmas tree species the following course of treatments can be recommended for pinyons
1 Before spring growth begins prune all double and multiple leaders (eg bullbull April)
~ She~r when needles on new candles are 13 as long as last yeara needles (usually from June 15 to July 1)
3 Shape the tre~ from the top down by shearing the tips of lateral branches Pzomote a conical crown so thebase is no more than 90 as wide as the tree is tall Ideally taper should be 40-90 Avoid shearing back to woody tissue because this encourages multiple leaders
4 If the tree is oblong rather than tapered shear the top in June or eirly July and the sides in late summer fall or winter Growt~ of laterals will be reduced Repeat steps 2-4 yearly as needed
5 Avoid shearing the year the tree is ~o be marke~ed
20
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
22 I
20
11
I
I
20 110 611 1110012011101611130 middotIY_I
Figure 1 Age class distribution of aU pinyon pines on study areas
- 1511r bull 100
1 bull 05 ~ 11amp50 2 r bull 031 n bull zaz
22 11 111 _ 1HIICMIl
Figure 2bull Relationship betweenDBB and age of pinyon pine for all trees bull
RESPONSE TO DISTURBANCE (SECONDARY SUCCESSION)
Several successional models have been proposed for secondary succession followingmiddot disturbance that removes most of the trees (Arnold et a1 1964 Barney and Frischknecht 1974 and Erdman 1976) These general patterns alsomiddotapply to conditions in middotpinyon-juniper woodlands in central New Mexico (Dwyer and Pieper 1967 Rippel et al 1980 1983 Schott and Pieper 1986 1987a 1987b 1987C) Bowever specific patterns are influenced by the type of soils supporting the woodland vegetation (Schott arid Pieper 1986 1987a) Generally- soils that are fairly shallow and rocky have some seral stages poorly represented (Table 3) When sitesmiddot with these soils are treated mechanically shrubs such as wavy-leaf oak do not increase (Rippel et al 1983) On similar soils with few roek outarops grassforb and shrubgrass stages are common Response of Rocky Hountainpinyon
and singleseed juniper appear to be dependent on density and size of trees before treatment If
the stanpmiddot was near climax before cabling pinypnsrapidly become dominant on the site If the stand was in someseral stage there would be more junipers but theimiddotr relatively slow growth and time for uturation require more time before middotthey would dominate the site
RESEARCH NEEDS
Only limited research on pinyon-juniper ecology in northern and westernmiddot New Mexico has been conducted Informst~on is lacking on basic ecological relationship at both plant communitymiddot and individual species level lactors influencing distribution of these woodlands are poorly understood lor example in many situations pinyon-juniper appears to be moving uphill in elevation and encroaching on ponderosa pine forests Such situation have not been analyzed Success~onal patterns where alligator juniper is a major potenUal component of the vegetation have not been determined Analyses of these woodlands for several uses and products are needed for laUd unagament purposes
4 bull ~
Table 3 -- General pattern of succession on cabled pinyon-juniper wood1anda on two soil types (From Schott and Pieper 1986)
Sera1 Stages Climax 1 2 3
Original Conditions
General successional Annual forb Grassforb Shrubgrass Pinyon-juniper model
Lithic hapustoll Annuals and Perennial Shrubs dominant Pinyon and juniper perennials from grasses and shade conducive dominating Pinyon seeds which disshy forbs with to tree establishshy eventually dominant perse readily establishment ment surviving perenshy and spread of nials shrubs (esp
0 wavy-leaf oak)
Lithic hapusto11- Annuals and These stages absent or poorly represhy Pinyon dominating Rock outcrop complex perennials from sented Rock outcropsmiddotrestrict vegshy Climax with juniper bull
seed which disshy etative reproduction perse readily surviving perenshynials
fI
LITERATURE CITED
Armentrout S M and R D Pieper 1988 Plant distribution surrounding Rocky Mountain Pinyon and one seed juniper in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range Management 41 (In press) bull
Arnold J F bullbull D A Jameson and E H Reid 1964bull The pinyon~jun1per type of Arizona Effects of grazing fire and tree control US Department of Agriculture Production Research Report 84~
Barney MA and N C Frischknechtmiddot 1974 Vegetation change follOwing fire in the
pinyon-juniper type of west-central Utah Journal of Range Management 279~-96
Barrett J W 1962 Regional Silviculture of the United States The Ronald Press Co bullbull NY 610p
BetancourtJ L 1987 Paleoecology of pinyon-juniper woodlands summary In Everett R L (compiler) proceedings~ pinyon-juniper conference USDA For SerGen Techbull Rep INT-215~
Boeker E Lbullbull V E Scott H G Reynolds and B A Donaldson 1972~ Seasonal food habits of mule deer in southWestern Ne Mexicobull Journal of Wildlife Management 3656-63 bull
Erdman Jbull A 1970 Pinyon-juniper succession after natural fires in residual soils of MesaVerde Colorado Brigham Young University Science Bulletin Series 11 ~rovo Utah
Fowler J M R D Bowe BE Peacock KC McDanielT Garner-Hurt J R Gray and
M Cardenas 1974 Wood fiber production in pinyon-juniper woodlands on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico New MeXico State University Agricultural Experiment~tation Research Report NO~ 519
Francis R E and E bull F Alden 1983 Preliminary habitat types of a semiarid grassland In MOir W H and L Hendzel (Tech COQrdinatora) Proceeding of the workshop pn southwestern habitat types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Gehlbach F R 1967 Vegetation of the Guadalupe escarpment New Mexico-Texas Ecology 48404-419
Kennedy K L 1983 A habitat type classification of the p~yon-juniper woodlands of the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico In Moir W H and Leonard Hendzel (Tech-Coordinators) Proceedings of the workshop on southwestern habitat
types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Lanner bull R M 1975 Pinyon pines and junipers of the southwestern woodlandsmiddot In Gifford G F and 1 E Buspy The pinyonjunipr ecosystem a symposium Utah State Univ bullbull Logan
Lanner R Mmiddot1981 The pinyon pine a natural and cultural history Univ Nevada Press
Reno
Little E L bull 1950 Southwestern trees Amiddot guide to the native species of middotNew Mexico and Arizona US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Agricultural Handbook 9
Lymbery bull G A and R D Pieper 1983 Ecology of pinyon-juniper vegetation in the northern Sacramento Mountains New Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 698
Pieper R D 1~77 The southwestern pinyon-juniper ecosystem In Aldon Earl F and T J~ Loring (Tech Coord) US Departmentmiddot Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report RM-31
Pieper R D and G A Lymbery 1987 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegettion in south-central New Mexico In~ Everett Richard L (compiler) proceedings - pinyon-juniper conference US Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT-21S
Plumh-Mentjes M L and R D Pieper 1983 Diameter distribution and age class structure of pinyon pine (Pinus eduiis Engelm) in south-central~Mexico Abstract 36th annual meeting Society for Range Management Denver CO bull
Schmidt L j 1987 Present and future themes in ptnyon-juniper hydrology In ~verett R L (compiler) U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report 1NT-215
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1985 Influence of canoP1 characteristics of one-seed juniper on understory grasses Journal of Range Management 38328-331
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1986 Succession in pinyon-juniper vegetation in New Mexico Rangelands 8126-128
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987a Succession of pinyon-juniper communities a~ter mechanical disturbance in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range ~anagement 4088-94
1Q
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987bbull Water relationships of Quercus undulata ~ edulis and Juniperus monosperma in seral pinyon-juniper communities of south-central New Mexico In Everett R L (compiler) us Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT~215 bull
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987cbull bull Succession in tree pits following cabliD8
in pinyon-juniper c01lllllUt1ities Southwestern Naturalist 32399-402
~ Short H L t W Evans and E L Boeker 1977 The use of natural and modified pinyon pine-juniper wOodlands by deer and elk Journal of Wildlife Management 41543-559
Springfield H W 1976 Characteristics and management of southwestern pinyon-juniper ranges the status of our knowledge US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Res Pap RM-160
Tueller P T C D Beeson R J Tausch N E West and K HRea 1979 Pinyon-juniper woodlands of themiddotGreat Basin distribution flora vegetal cover U SbullDepartment of Agriculture Forest Service Research Paper INT~229
USDA 1941 Cltmate and man Yearbook of Agriculture U S Govt Printing Office Washington DC
Wasson G E 1987 The American Indian response to the pinyon-juniper conference In Everett R L(compller) USDA For Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Wells P V 1987 Systematics and distribution of pinyons in the late quarternary In Everett R Lbull (compiler) Proc - Pinyon-juniper Conference USDA For Sere Gen Tech Rep INT-215
West N E K H Rea and R J Tausch 1975 Basic Synecological relationahips in pinyon-juniper woodlands In Gifford G E and F E Busby (eds) ~e pinyon-juniper ecosystem A symposium Utah State University Logan
Woodin H E and A A Lindsey 1954 Juniper-pinyon east of the Continental Divide as analyzed by the line-strip metWod Ecology 35473-489
11
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES I CROP
bullJ
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH WOODLAND STA~D MANAGEMENT l
James T Fisher John G Me~al and Gregory C Phillips
Abstract-- New Mexicos native pinyon pines produce high-value crops including nuts Christmas trees and nursery or~amentals Crop values can be increased through more intensive stand management and more innovative marketing of such products as pinyon nuts and Christmas trees to compete with imported products Research needs pertaining to these crops are discussed
1 Ne~ Mexico State University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-II
2 Authors are re~pectively
Professor and Associate Professors Dept of Agronomy and Horticulture New
Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
13
INTRODUCTlON
Pinyons (pinon p~nes) ield diverse productsranging frolll valuable nuts ~nd landscape sp~cll11ens to fuelwood
Rowever littleforethought is give~ to crop illlprovelllentbeforecropsare ha~vested This paper addresses high-value pinyon products ~hat appear to justify at least modest levels omiddotf lIIanacelllent inputs to improve product quality quantity or avail- abilty Greater elllphasis on ~ntensive lIIanagelllentmiddot recognizes the nee~ for deriving economic benefits as well as the need for cu~todiai lIIanagelllent to pre~erve the
woodland type (Lanner 1977)
Pinyon and pinyon-juniper woodlands hav~ be~n the su~lect of severai symposia The reader iamp directed to proceedings of these lIIeetings providing several papers on the subject [~ee Gifford and Busby (19-75) Aldon and Loring (1977) Evrett (1987) and a fbrthcoming volume reporting a n~~ional lIIeeting held in Mexico in 1987]
This paper specifi~ally exalllines pinyon nut production including lIIarket developlllents that potentially threaten regional markets and the selective harvest of Christlllas trees and nursery or~alllentals Methods available t~ illlprove crop profitability will be discussed in addition to cuirent and future research
NUT BEARING PINES
Plant taxonomists recognize about 100 species in the falllily Pinaceae Alllongthese 12 to 26 species produce quality edible nuts (Rosengarten 1984 Lanner 1981) An edible nut is large middot(generallly les8 than 2200 seedkg) and has a thin shell that can be cracked with the teeth Pines producing edible nuts are found mostly in Europe Asia and western North middotAmerica Large ~dlblen~ts are found ~ostiyalllong the ~tone pines ~Sub8ection Celllbraa) nat~ve to Europe and ASia and the pinyon pines (Subsection Celllbroides) native to North Alllerica
Pinyons are dwarf trees nd shrubS 9f sellliarid regions of the southwestern Uni ted Sta tes and Mexico Because pinyons grow slowly it ismiddot difficult to lustify th~ cost of establishing and cultivatin~ p~aniations for nut production IncreaSingly nuts gathered
from the stone pines are imported f~om Asia and marketed at a lIIuch lower cost According to D~nielFox (pers C~IIII11) about 1000 ~tric tons of ~helled Asian pine nuts are imported each year Re also reports that abou~ 100 ton~ of ~ pinea nuts are illlported from Portugal and Spain
To protect pinyonnut m~rkets it lIIay becollle necessary to develop criteria that effectively distinguish pinyon nuts frolll illlported pine ~uts~ To exallline the feasibility of developing these criteria we will examine t~egeographic ranges and speclal characteristics of nut-producing pines under their respective subsections of the family Pinaceae proposed by Critchfield and Little (1966)
lli Subsec tiOn Celllbroides (Pinyons)
Pines classified und~i the subse~tion Ce~bi~ides (pinyons) have 1-5 needles in a fascicle Seeds are large wingl~ss a~d sOlllewhat oval in shape Lanner (1981) reported 11 species but a more recent treatlllent ofmiddot the alliance r~cognizes 15ta~a (Bailey and Ha~ksworth 1988) Eight species occur in the United States 12 in Mexico and 3 in New Mexico (P edulis I lIIonophylla and I~di-cOlor) The pinyon species discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988)include
Uni ted States
(l) Pinus edulis (pinyon) t 4200 seedkg
The predominant pinyon species of New Mexico Widespread in the southwestern United States lust
entering Wyollling and extending south through Utah Colorado and ~ew ~~xico to the western ~nd of Oklahollla~ west Texas and the northern border of Chihuahua extending west throughout lIIuch of Arizona to an outlier in eastern California Range ov~rlaps ~ith P celllbroides in south~rn New Mexico and Arizona and with P monophylla at the westerD edge of its range (southw~stern Utah northwestern Arizona and the New York Mountains o~ sOuthern California (Fig 1) Kay occa~ionally intergrade with P lIIonophylla
(2) monophylla lsingleleaf plny~n)
[ 2400 seed kg ] The pinyon pine ~fthe Great
14
bull P SAalNIANA bull P aMIIilOIOEl III Po OUAOIIIIOUA bull P MONOPttYLLA bull P eDULIS
Figure 1 Diatrlbution of pinyon pines in lJOuthwestern United States and northern Mexieo
Basin and Mohave Desert Com~onin Nevada and in parts of southern California and western Utah but also ex~ends acr~ss Arizona and southwestern Ke~ Mexico (ig~ 1)
United States and Mexico
(3) Pinus middotcellbroides (Mexican pinyon)
[ 2400 seedkg J Range widespread at low
elevations in the mountains bordering the arid plate~u of northern Mexico Ranges from southeastern Arizona southwestern Arizona southwestern New Mexico and western Texas through northern Mexico and south to Puebla and Mexico City (Fig 1) Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) middotrecognize three subspecies cembroides (northern Mexi~o) lagunae (Baja California) and orizabensis (Central Mexico) (Fig 1)
(4) P californiarum-
Subspecies californiarum
occurs in southern Californ~a and northern Baja California I californiarum subsp fallax (formerly P edulis var fallax) is-found in Arizona
(5) Pinus discolor (border pinyon)
Formerly P cembroides var bicolor~ Principal range lies along both sides of the intershynational boundary between Mexico and the United States extending about 120 miles into eac~ country Sp-ecifically occurs in southeast Arizona extreme southwest New Mexico northeas~ ~onora and northwest Chihuahua
( 6) quad r ifo11a (Parry pinyon) [ 2100 seedkg J
Confined to 10 elevations in the dry mountains of southern California from the San Jacinto Mountains south to the S~erra San Ped~o Martir Its range overlaps that of I monOphylla but no intermediates have been reported (Fig 1)middot
(7) Pinus remo ta (paper-shell pinyon also called
Texas pinyon) Formerly P cembroides var
remota Main range in Coahuila but reaches parts of adjacent Nuevo Leon southeastern Chihuahua and rexas (Bailey and Wendt 1979) Has thinnest shell among pinyons~
Local Endemics Found Exclusively in Mexico
(8) Pinus culminicola (Potosi pinyon)
Documented occurrence Cerro PotOSi Nuevo Leon Mexico
(9) johannis Li~ited r4nge in Mexico
(west of Concepcion del Oro Zacatecas
(10) Pin~s maximartinezii (Martinez pinyon)
Documented Occurrence Zacatecas Mexico
(11 ) Pinus nelsonii (Nelson pinyon)
Documented ocaurrence north- eastern Mexicobull
(12) ~pinceana (Pinca pinyon)
15
Documented occurrence northshy Grows at high elevations inth~ eastern and eastern Mexco Alps and the Carpathian ~ountains
(3) bullbull koraiensis S~eb amp Zucco ~ SUDsect PINEAE Shaw (Korean pine)
[ 1800 seedkg](n Pinuspinea L Rngebull through Korea and (Italian stone pine) eastern Manchuria into southeastern [ 1300 seedkg ] Siberia with outlirs ~ri t~e
Wide_pread in Spain and Japalliue islands of Honshu and Portugal and aiong the northern and Shikoku (Fig 2) eastern shores ~f the Mediterranean Sea including minor occurrences (4) P sibirica near the north coast of Turkey rSibe~ian ston~ pine(Fig 2) [ 4000 seedkg
Ranges from the Ural Mountains Pinus Subsect CEMBRAE through western and central ~iberia---(Stone Pines) to northern Mongolia with outliers
in northern Russia (Fig ~)(1) Pinus albicaulis Engelm~
(whitebark pine) Pinus Subsect GERARDIANAE [ 5700 seedk ] -- shy
Occurs at high eleyations fro~ (1) gerardian Wall~ central British Columbia sout~ to (Chilgoza pine)s~uthern Sierra Nevada of [ 400 seedkg J California the Ruby Mountain of Noted for large edible seed Nevada and the mOuntains of Confined to mountainous regions of northwestern Wyoming eastern Asia principally in
eastern Afgha~itan~ parts of (2) Pin~s cembra L Pakistan ~nd ~catt~red localities
(Swiss stone pine) in the dry inner valleys of the [ 4400 seedkg 1 north~rn Himalayas (Fig 2)
eocIIn_a _shyFigure 2 Distribution of edible pine nuts in Europe and
Asia
16
bull
Pinus Subsect SABINIANAE Loud Opportumiddotnities aay exist to separate pinyOn nuts other froa pine nuts Most
(I) Pinu~ ~abiniana Dougl pine nuts have a ridge where the (Digger pine) membranous wing is attached Also [ 1300 seed kg criteria based upon seed content could
Confined to California Found be applied when large vol~aes of in dry foothills of ihe Sierra imported pine nuts are suspected to be Nevada and the Coast Rangemiddot Ras aislabeled Tests aight exaine levels large edible but rather hard-shelled of starch fat or piotein or even seeds (Fig bull1) smiddotpecific enzyaes (Table 1)
(2) Pinus coulteri D Don (Coulter pine) New Mexico Pinyon Nut Crops ( 3100 seedkg]
Restr~cted to the coastal mountains of cen~ral and southern Pinyon nuts have been harvested California and northern Baja commercially for about 50 years California (Little 1938a) The nut crop averages
045 to 09 million kg (I to 2 million The preceding list makes clear that pounds) annually for New Mexico Arizona
many pinyon species are found in North and Colorado but one year exceeded 36 America with the greatest number found million kg (Little 1942) The more in Mexico Further it seems neither productive stands may yield 330 kglha practical nor necessary to develop (300 lbsac) during a good year market criteria to separate nut products (Springfield 1976) At a cur~ent found among these species Morphological retail value of $883 I kg value on a differences among pinyon nuts are per hectare basis would be $297000 generally so slight as ~o pre~lude (120000 lac) Fowler and Oliver (this practical field identification publication) provide additional Also most Mexican species occur as information on nut values rather isolated populations with local value but low export potential For New Mexico species criteria would have to recognize as genuinely natibullbull those Pinyon Reproductive Biology nuts produced by at least three pinyon species edulis monophylla and P di$color Again nut morphological Pinyons begin bearing nuts at about criteria would not separate these 25 years but crops do not reach pinyons from other species of the same commercial size until about 75 years subsection (Little 1941) Cones are borne
Table 1-- Composition of pine nuts and true nuts (Lanner 1981 Woodroof 1979) All values are expressed as percentages
Kernal H2O Protein Fat Carboshyhydrates
Ash
Pinyon nuts P edulisP monophIllaImiddot cembroides
58 31 14 10 19
60 23 60
18 54 14
3
Pine nuts P sabinianaP pineaImiddot sibirica P lerardiana
49 30 34 19 14
60 48 63 51
9 7
12 23
4
True nuts
Almond Pecan Pistacio Walnut Peanut
51 52
shy45
47 30
33
19 9
20 15 26
54 73 53 64 39
20 15 19 16 24
3 2 3 2
laterally ~n the a~il of a scale leaf near branch tips (jhaw~ 1914) although a r~re observation 01 termin~l cones b~s been reported (Lanner 1969) Developing cones can be ~een in the e~rliest stages as ovulate primordia in longitudinal sections of bu4s Within buds ovulate cone primordia are only at the tip of the bud an~have larger and broader bases than spur shoots (Little 1938-b)
ovuiate primordia are formed in buds in August and September and cones mature by October of the third year Because 3 years are required for seeds to mature treatments applied to stimulate nut quantity~il~ require 3 years before evaluation The first year must be especially suited to production of ovulate primordia and the second and third seaasons favorable to growth and maturation of cones and nuts(Li~tle 1938b)
The Periodicity of Bumper Crops
Pinyon ~ut crops are prodUCed at intervals of 3 to 7 years The periodicity of above-average cropshas been related to the dtain of nutrients required to produce the crop an~ the time required for nutrients to be replenished Developing cones act as food sinks for carbohydrate and nitrogen (N) reserves at the expense of vegetative structures (Pickmann and Kozlowski 1969 1970 ~ook and S~et 1971) Consequently large cone crops adversely affect vegetative tree growth
Forcella (1981) found cone production was inversely relate~ to temperatures during late-August to early September Maximum production in northern New Mexeio occurred when the mean maximum weekly temperature was below 24 degrees C Temperatures above 24 degrees C resulted in virtually no cone crops
However other environmental factors~ acting independently or inte~actinl with temperature caa be involved Rainfall is positively correia ted with the flowering of pines This is because photosynthat~ 9roduction is needed to develop carbohydrate reserves and this process is limited by ~lant water stres~ Also tree growth is determined by photosynthetic gain and the onset of abundant flowering is more directly rela~ed to tree siZe than
age (Schmidtling 1969) More speci1icallj nut ~roduction is e~osely
related to crown surface area
An exception to the adverse influen~e of wa~er ~tress is the positive roie stress plays in the initiat~on of ovula~e primordia Studies have shown that summer moisture
stress results in an above-average flower crop the following spring This suggests moisture stress at the time of ovulate primordia formation promotes reproductive rather than vegetative bull growth This view is supported by studies shOwing that branches exposed to full sun bore more female cones and had lower tissue moisture levels than partially shaded branches (Wareing~ 1958)
Water ~tress also can indirectly affect flowering thro~gh its interaction with tree nutrient status E~ell (1970) showd that nitrate fertili~ation or exposure to moisture stress caused similar tiowe~ing responses in Dougl~s-firaccompaniedby increases in total foliage N content and free amino
acids especially ~rgini~e Similarly Schmidtling (1974) suggested that water stress or N fertilization can increase flowering through the same metabolic intermediary namely arginine or some related N-containing substance~
Manipulation of Native Nut Crops
pespite the importance of coniferous nuts in many parts of th~
world only two pine species appear to be cultivated for their seed crops P
pinea in the Medi terranean and - sibirica in the Urals (Pravdin 1963) The pinyons of estern North America and Meiico ar mos~ly ignored in terma of cultiv~tion or domestication
Little (1140) was among the first to suggest that pinyon nu~ prQduction could be augme~ted tbtough the USe of simple cultutal practices However these received little attention and we have no grea~er und~rstanding of the effi~lcy or econoic feasibility of these treatments now than we did more than 40 ~ears ago Nev~rtheles~ with the present emphasis on wocidland management ~uch treatmenta seem worthy of serious attention
Ca) selective thinning
Some pibyonsapear to be
18
Nut sizes from pruned and unpruned Pinus edulis trees
19
consistently good nut producers (Little 1940) Heavy producers usually show immature and old cones on branches and cones are conspicuous b~neath them Selective thinning of unpr04uctive trees should increase flowering of those left standing (Little 1940)
(b) basal pruning
Theoretically low branches receiving partial sun light do not photosynthesize enough energy to offset energy losses to respiration It follows that low branches are energy sinks that potentially r~b nutrients from seed crops To test this relationship Montano et al (1980) pruned baial branches of 70 to 80-year old pinyons (8 to 10 m tall) to a height of 15 m and SUbsequently determined effects of this treatment on seed development They reported av~rage nut volumes from gruned and ungruned trees were 040 cm and 032 cm and the average nut weights were 033 g and 020 g respectively (see Fig3) Also pruned trees produced a greater percentage of filled nuts 99 as opposed to 84 The effects observed were related to the growth of nuts already developing in cones when the treatment was applied
Basal pruning reduced disease and insect injury of southern pnes (Wilson and Rudolph 1970) Also pruned wood could b sold for ~uelwood potentially offsetting the cost of the benefits anticipated Owing to its simplicity and overall benefits basal pruning appears to merit greater attention
(c) fertilization
Fertilization usually stimulates female cone production (Puritch 1972) More specifically the following trends become apparent when studies are reviewed collectively
(1) N stimulates cone production even when N is applied with other nutrients (Morris and Beers 1969) Also trees producing greater cone yields generally have higher levels of tisue N than low producers
(2) The presence of specific amino acids (especially arginine) is a more reliable predictor of fruitfulness than tissue N content per se For example nitrat N ana ammcinium N increased Douglasshyfir foliar N content and shoot growth similarly However only nitrate N significantly increased arginine content which was positively and quantitatively related to female flower proshyduction (Ebell and McMullin 1970) Following ichmidtlings (1974) explanation of fruit shyfulness fertilization shyespecially with nitrate N - could increase tis~ue organip Nand consequently flowering
(d) cultivation and irrigation
Supplemental water could increase growth reSUlting in greater crown density and iurface area In times of drought additional water could prevent premature abortion of immature cones Drip irrigaeion technology may be feaible for som~ sites However it seems more likely that less intensive ~ethods will prove to be practical Among these are land treatments that direct precipitation run-off to trees improve infiltration or remove weed competition
CHRISTMAS TREES
Pinyons are harvested from natural stands and comprise about 25 of all
Christmas trees sold in New Mexico Arizona Colorado Wyoming Utah and Nevada (Sowder 1965) Trimmed branches also are used for wreath manufacture In spite of their slow growth in native stands pinyons have many desirable Christmas tree attributes including dense foliage symmetrical shape green color natural fragrance good branch angle and limb strength and good needle retention Plantation trees can reach marketable size in about 11 years (Fisher and Fa~cher 1987)
Stand Thinning
Several techniques can be used to improve tree quality Stand thinning allows remaining trees to receive sufficient sunlight for limbs to develop uniformly on all sides During the thinning operation handles can be made on main stems by removing branches at the trees base to a height of 30 em
Removal of branches below a full whorl of branches will allow another tree to be culturedmiddotfrom the stump after harvest A year after the first tree is cut the remaining low branches will begin to turn up and all but one of these can be pruned to promote the growth of a new central leader
Pruning and Shearing
~he ideal pin~on Christmas tree resembles an inverted cone wide at the base and tapered uniformly tg the tip Accemiddotptable crown taper for pines is 40 to 90 but for spr~ces and firs is 40 to 70 Pruning and shearing will make native pinyons conform more closely to the ideal which improve marke tabi Ii ty
Pruning removes dead or unattractive branches Shearing is used to co~troi leader growth so the distance between whorls is not excessive increase the number of branches arising from branch buds and promote the pyramidal crown f~Im Because pinyon leader growth rarely exceeds 20 cm excessive distance between whorls is rarely a problem Pruning and shearing most often will be used to correct uneven o~oid and thia crowns
In pines eac~ needle bun~le ~ontains a dormant or axillary bud Removal of a branch terminal at the proper time promotes development of these dormant buds into short shoots improving crown density In singleshyneedled conifers such as spruces firs and Douglas-fir intermediate buds are produced along the terminal branch stem between each whorl For this reason they can be sheared during any season of the year and produce about the same number of branch buds However with pines the number and size of branch buds developed after shearing depends upon the physiological state of the tree when sheared
Pines respond best when sheared shortly after height growth is complete but before tissues in the new shoot becom~ woody S~oots prun~d at this time produce two to four times the number of buds found on unpruned trees Pinyon shoots elongata during late June but needles continue to elongatemiddotduring July and August after branches are fully elongated Buds are formed in late August
From studies conducted with other pine Christmas tree species the following course of treatments can be recommended for pinyons
1 Before spring growth begins prune all double and multiple leaders (eg bullbull April)
~ She~r when needles on new candles are 13 as long as last yeara needles (usually from June 15 to July 1)
3 Shape the tre~ from the top down by shearing the tips of lateral branches Pzomote a conical crown so thebase is no more than 90 as wide as the tree is tall Ideally taper should be 40-90 Avoid shearing back to woody tissue because this encourages multiple leaders
4 If the tree is oblong rather than tapered shear the top in June or eirly July and the sides in late summer fall or winter Growt~ of laterals will be reduced Repeat steps 2-4 yearly as needed
5 Avoid shearing the year the tree is ~o be marke~ed
20
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
4 bull ~
Table 3 -- General pattern of succession on cabled pinyon-juniper wood1anda on two soil types (From Schott and Pieper 1986)
Sera1 Stages Climax 1 2 3
Original Conditions
General successional Annual forb Grassforb Shrubgrass Pinyon-juniper model
Lithic hapustoll Annuals and Perennial Shrubs dominant Pinyon and juniper perennials from grasses and shade conducive dominating Pinyon seeds which disshy forbs with to tree establishshy eventually dominant perse readily establishment ment surviving perenshy and spread of nials shrubs (esp
0 wavy-leaf oak)
Lithic hapusto11- Annuals and These stages absent or poorly represhy Pinyon dominating Rock outcrop complex perennials from sented Rock outcropsmiddotrestrict vegshy Climax with juniper bull
seed which disshy etative reproduction perse readily surviving perenshynials
fI
LITERATURE CITED
Armentrout S M and R D Pieper 1988 Plant distribution surrounding Rocky Mountain Pinyon and one seed juniper in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range Management 41 (In press) bull
Arnold J F bullbull D A Jameson and E H Reid 1964bull The pinyon~jun1per type of Arizona Effects of grazing fire and tree control US Department of Agriculture Production Research Report 84~
Barney MA and N C Frischknechtmiddot 1974 Vegetation change follOwing fire in the
pinyon-juniper type of west-central Utah Journal of Range Management 279~-96
Barrett J W 1962 Regional Silviculture of the United States The Ronald Press Co bullbull NY 610p
BetancourtJ L 1987 Paleoecology of pinyon-juniper woodlands summary In Everett R L (compiler) proceedings~ pinyon-juniper conference USDA For SerGen Techbull Rep INT-215~
Boeker E Lbullbull V E Scott H G Reynolds and B A Donaldson 1972~ Seasonal food habits of mule deer in southWestern Ne Mexicobull Journal of Wildlife Management 3656-63 bull
Erdman Jbull A 1970 Pinyon-juniper succession after natural fires in residual soils of MesaVerde Colorado Brigham Young University Science Bulletin Series 11 ~rovo Utah
Fowler J M R D Bowe BE Peacock KC McDanielT Garner-Hurt J R Gray and
M Cardenas 1974 Wood fiber production in pinyon-juniper woodlands on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico New MeXico State University Agricultural Experiment~tation Research Report NO~ 519
Francis R E and E bull F Alden 1983 Preliminary habitat types of a semiarid grassland In MOir W H and L Hendzel (Tech COQrdinatora) Proceeding of the workshop pn southwestern habitat types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Gehlbach F R 1967 Vegetation of the Guadalupe escarpment New Mexico-Texas Ecology 48404-419
Kennedy K L 1983 A habitat type classification of the p~yon-juniper woodlands of the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico In Moir W H and Leonard Hendzel (Tech-Coordinators) Proceedings of the workshop on southwestern habitat
types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Lanner bull R M 1975 Pinyon pines and junipers of the southwestern woodlandsmiddot In Gifford G F and 1 E Buspy The pinyonjunipr ecosystem a symposium Utah State Univ bullbull Logan
Lanner R Mmiddot1981 The pinyon pine a natural and cultural history Univ Nevada Press
Reno
Little E L bull 1950 Southwestern trees Amiddot guide to the native species of middotNew Mexico and Arizona US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Agricultural Handbook 9
Lymbery bull G A and R D Pieper 1983 Ecology of pinyon-juniper vegetation in the northern Sacramento Mountains New Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 698
Pieper R D 1~77 The southwestern pinyon-juniper ecosystem In Aldon Earl F and T J~ Loring (Tech Coord) US Departmentmiddot Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report RM-31
Pieper R D and G A Lymbery 1987 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegettion in south-central New Mexico In~ Everett Richard L (compiler) proceedings - pinyon-juniper conference US Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT-21S
Plumh-Mentjes M L and R D Pieper 1983 Diameter distribution and age class structure of pinyon pine (Pinus eduiis Engelm) in south-central~Mexico Abstract 36th annual meeting Society for Range Management Denver CO bull
Schmidt L j 1987 Present and future themes in ptnyon-juniper hydrology In ~verett R L (compiler) U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report 1NT-215
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1985 Influence of canoP1 characteristics of one-seed juniper on understory grasses Journal of Range Management 38328-331
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1986 Succession in pinyon-juniper vegetation in New Mexico Rangelands 8126-128
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987a Succession of pinyon-juniper communities a~ter mechanical disturbance in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range ~anagement 4088-94
1Q
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987bbull Water relationships of Quercus undulata ~ edulis and Juniperus monosperma in seral pinyon-juniper communities of south-central New Mexico In Everett R L (compiler) us Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT~215 bull
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987cbull bull Succession in tree pits following cabliD8
in pinyon-juniper c01lllllUt1ities Southwestern Naturalist 32399-402
~ Short H L t W Evans and E L Boeker 1977 The use of natural and modified pinyon pine-juniper wOodlands by deer and elk Journal of Wildlife Management 41543-559
Springfield H W 1976 Characteristics and management of southwestern pinyon-juniper ranges the status of our knowledge US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Res Pap RM-160
Tueller P T C D Beeson R J Tausch N E West and K HRea 1979 Pinyon-juniper woodlands of themiddotGreat Basin distribution flora vegetal cover U SbullDepartment of Agriculture Forest Service Research Paper INT~229
USDA 1941 Cltmate and man Yearbook of Agriculture U S Govt Printing Office Washington DC
Wasson G E 1987 The American Indian response to the pinyon-juniper conference In Everett R L(compller) USDA For Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Wells P V 1987 Systematics and distribution of pinyons in the late quarternary In Everett R Lbull (compiler) Proc - Pinyon-juniper Conference USDA For Sere Gen Tech Rep INT-215
West N E K H Rea and R J Tausch 1975 Basic Synecological relationahips in pinyon-juniper woodlands In Gifford G E and F E Busby (eds) ~e pinyon-juniper ecosystem A symposium Utah State University Logan
Woodin H E and A A Lindsey 1954 Juniper-pinyon east of the Continental Divide as analyzed by the line-strip metWod Ecology 35473-489
11
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES I CROP
bullJ
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH WOODLAND STA~D MANAGEMENT l
James T Fisher John G Me~al and Gregory C Phillips
Abstract-- New Mexicos native pinyon pines produce high-value crops including nuts Christmas trees and nursery or~amentals Crop values can be increased through more intensive stand management and more innovative marketing of such products as pinyon nuts and Christmas trees to compete with imported products Research needs pertaining to these crops are discussed
1 Ne~ Mexico State University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-II
2 Authors are re~pectively
Professor and Associate Professors Dept of Agronomy and Horticulture New
Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
13
INTRODUCTlON
Pinyons (pinon p~nes) ield diverse productsranging frolll valuable nuts ~nd landscape sp~cll11ens to fuelwood
Rowever littleforethought is give~ to crop illlprovelllentbeforecropsare ha~vested This paper addresses high-value pinyon products ~hat appear to justify at least modest levels omiddotf lIIanacelllent inputs to improve product quality quantity or avail- abilty Greater elllphasis on ~ntensive lIIanagelllentmiddot recognizes the nee~ for deriving economic benefits as well as the need for cu~todiai lIIanagelllent to pre~erve the
woodland type (Lanner 1977)
Pinyon and pinyon-juniper woodlands hav~ be~n the su~lect of severai symposia The reader iamp directed to proceedings of these lIIeetings providing several papers on the subject [~ee Gifford and Busby (19-75) Aldon and Loring (1977) Evrett (1987) and a fbrthcoming volume reporting a n~~ional lIIeeting held in Mexico in 1987]
This paper specifi~ally exalllines pinyon nut production including lIIarket developlllents that potentially threaten regional markets and the selective harvest of Christlllas trees and nursery or~alllentals Methods available t~ illlprove crop profitability will be discussed in addition to cuirent and future research
NUT BEARING PINES
Plant taxonomists recognize about 100 species in the falllily Pinaceae Alllongthese 12 to 26 species produce quality edible nuts (Rosengarten 1984 Lanner 1981) An edible nut is large middot(generallly les8 than 2200 seedkg) and has a thin shell that can be cracked with the teeth Pines producing edible nuts are found mostly in Europe Asia and western North middotAmerica Large ~dlblen~ts are found ~ostiyalllong the ~tone pines ~Sub8ection Celllbraa) nat~ve to Europe and ASia and the pinyon pines (Subsection Celllbroides) native to North Alllerica
Pinyons are dwarf trees nd shrubS 9f sellliarid regions of the southwestern Uni ted Sta tes and Mexico Because pinyons grow slowly it ismiddot difficult to lustify th~ cost of establishing and cultivatin~ p~aniations for nut production IncreaSingly nuts gathered
from the stone pines are imported f~om Asia and marketed at a lIIuch lower cost According to D~nielFox (pers C~IIII11) about 1000 ~tric tons of ~helled Asian pine nuts are imported each year Re also reports that abou~ 100 ton~ of ~ pinea nuts are illlported from Portugal and Spain
To protect pinyonnut m~rkets it lIIay becollle necessary to develop criteria that effectively distinguish pinyon nuts frolll illlported pine ~uts~ To exallline the feasibility of developing these criteria we will examine t~egeographic ranges and speclal characteristics of nut-producing pines under their respective subsections of the family Pinaceae proposed by Critchfield and Little (1966)
lli Subsec tiOn Celllbroides (Pinyons)
Pines classified und~i the subse~tion Ce~bi~ides (pinyons) have 1-5 needles in a fascicle Seeds are large wingl~ss a~d sOlllewhat oval in shape Lanner (1981) reported 11 species but a more recent treatlllent ofmiddot the alliance r~cognizes 15ta~a (Bailey and Ha~ksworth 1988) Eight species occur in the United States 12 in Mexico and 3 in New Mexico (P edulis I lIIonophylla and I~di-cOlor) The pinyon species discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988)include
Uni ted States
(l) Pinus edulis (pinyon) t 4200 seedkg
The predominant pinyon species of New Mexico Widespread in the southwestern United States lust
entering Wyollling and extending south through Utah Colorado and ~ew ~~xico to the western ~nd of Oklahollla~ west Texas and the northern border of Chihuahua extending west throughout lIIuch of Arizona to an outlier in eastern California Range ov~rlaps ~ith P celllbroides in south~rn New Mexico and Arizona and with P monophylla at the westerD edge of its range (southw~stern Utah northwestern Arizona and the New York Mountains o~ sOuthern California (Fig 1) Kay occa~ionally intergrade with P lIIonophylla
(2) monophylla lsingleleaf plny~n)
[ 2400 seed kg ] The pinyon pine ~fthe Great
14
bull P SAalNIANA bull P aMIIilOIOEl III Po OUAOIIIIOUA bull P MONOPttYLLA bull P eDULIS
Figure 1 Diatrlbution of pinyon pines in lJOuthwestern United States and northern Mexieo
Basin and Mohave Desert Com~onin Nevada and in parts of southern California and western Utah but also ex~ends acr~ss Arizona and southwestern Ke~ Mexico (ig~ 1)
United States and Mexico
(3) Pinus middotcellbroides (Mexican pinyon)
[ 2400 seedkg J Range widespread at low
elevations in the mountains bordering the arid plate~u of northern Mexico Ranges from southeastern Arizona southwestern Arizona southwestern New Mexico and western Texas through northern Mexico and south to Puebla and Mexico City (Fig 1) Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) middotrecognize three subspecies cembroides (northern Mexi~o) lagunae (Baja California) and orizabensis (Central Mexico) (Fig 1)
(4) P californiarum-
Subspecies californiarum
occurs in southern Californ~a and northern Baja California I californiarum subsp fallax (formerly P edulis var fallax) is-found in Arizona
(5) Pinus discolor (border pinyon)
Formerly P cembroides var bicolor~ Principal range lies along both sides of the intershynational boundary between Mexico and the United States extending about 120 miles into eac~ country Sp-ecifically occurs in southeast Arizona extreme southwest New Mexico northeas~ ~onora and northwest Chihuahua
( 6) quad r ifo11a (Parry pinyon) [ 2100 seedkg J
Confined to 10 elevations in the dry mountains of southern California from the San Jacinto Mountains south to the S~erra San Ped~o Martir Its range overlaps that of I monOphylla but no intermediates have been reported (Fig 1)middot
(7) Pinus remo ta (paper-shell pinyon also called
Texas pinyon) Formerly P cembroides var
remota Main range in Coahuila but reaches parts of adjacent Nuevo Leon southeastern Chihuahua and rexas (Bailey and Wendt 1979) Has thinnest shell among pinyons~
Local Endemics Found Exclusively in Mexico
(8) Pinus culminicola (Potosi pinyon)
Documented occurrence Cerro PotOSi Nuevo Leon Mexico
(9) johannis Li~ited r4nge in Mexico
(west of Concepcion del Oro Zacatecas
(10) Pin~s maximartinezii (Martinez pinyon)
Documented Occurrence Zacatecas Mexico
(11 ) Pinus nelsonii (Nelson pinyon)
Documented ocaurrence north- eastern Mexicobull
(12) ~pinceana (Pinca pinyon)
15
Documented occurrence northshy Grows at high elevations inth~ eastern and eastern Mexco Alps and the Carpathian ~ountains
(3) bullbull koraiensis S~eb amp Zucco ~ SUDsect PINEAE Shaw (Korean pine)
[ 1800 seedkg](n Pinuspinea L Rngebull through Korea and (Italian stone pine) eastern Manchuria into southeastern [ 1300 seedkg ] Siberia with outlirs ~ri t~e
Wide_pread in Spain and Japalliue islands of Honshu and Portugal and aiong the northern and Shikoku (Fig 2) eastern shores ~f the Mediterranean Sea including minor occurrences (4) P sibirica near the north coast of Turkey rSibe~ian ston~ pine(Fig 2) [ 4000 seedkg
Ranges from the Ural Mountains Pinus Subsect CEMBRAE through western and central ~iberia---(Stone Pines) to northern Mongolia with outliers
in northern Russia (Fig ~)(1) Pinus albicaulis Engelm~
(whitebark pine) Pinus Subsect GERARDIANAE [ 5700 seedk ] -- shy
Occurs at high eleyations fro~ (1) gerardian Wall~ central British Columbia sout~ to (Chilgoza pine)s~uthern Sierra Nevada of [ 400 seedkg J California the Ruby Mountain of Noted for large edible seed Nevada and the mOuntains of Confined to mountainous regions of northwestern Wyoming eastern Asia principally in
eastern Afgha~itan~ parts of (2) Pin~s cembra L Pakistan ~nd ~catt~red localities
(Swiss stone pine) in the dry inner valleys of the [ 4400 seedkg 1 north~rn Himalayas (Fig 2)
eocIIn_a _shyFigure 2 Distribution of edible pine nuts in Europe and
Asia
16
bull
Pinus Subsect SABINIANAE Loud Opportumiddotnities aay exist to separate pinyOn nuts other froa pine nuts Most
(I) Pinu~ ~abiniana Dougl pine nuts have a ridge where the (Digger pine) membranous wing is attached Also [ 1300 seed kg criteria based upon seed content could
Confined to California Found be applied when large vol~aes of in dry foothills of ihe Sierra imported pine nuts are suspected to be Nevada and the Coast Rangemiddot Ras aislabeled Tests aight exaine levels large edible but rather hard-shelled of starch fat or piotein or even seeds (Fig bull1) smiddotpecific enzyaes (Table 1)
(2) Pinus coulteri D Don (Coulter pine) New Mexico Pinyon Nut Crops ( 3100 seedkg]
Restr~cted to the coastal mountains of cen~ral and southern Pinyon nuts have been harvested California and northern Baja commercially for about 50 years California (Little 1938a) The nut crop averages
045 to 09 million kg (I to 2 million The preceding list makes clear that pounds) annually for New Mexico Arizona
many pinyon species are found in North and Colorado but one year exceeded 36 America with the greatest number found million kg (Little 1942) The more in Mexico Further it seems neither productive stands may yield 330 kglha practical nor necessary to develop (300 lbsac) during a good year market criteria to separate nut products (Springfield 1976) At a cur~ent found among these species Morphological retail value of $883 I kg value on a differences among pinyon nuts are per hectare basis would be $297000 generally so slight as ~o pre~lude (120000 lac) Fowler and Oliver (this practical field identification publication) provide additional Also most Mexican species occur as information on nut values rather isolated populations with local value but low export potential For New Mexico species criteria would have to recognize as genuinely natibullbull those Pinyon Reproductive Biology nuts produced by at least three pinyon species edulis monophylla and P di$color Again nut morphological Pinyons begin bearing nuts at about criteria would not separate these 25 years but crops do not reach pinyons from other species of the same commercial size until about 75 years subsection (Little 1941) Cones are borne
Table 1-- Composition of pine nuts and true nuts (Lanner 1981 Woodroof 1979) All values are expressed as percentages
Kernal H2O Protein Fat Carboshyhydrates
Ash
Pinyon nuts P edulisP monophIllaImiddot cembroides
58 31 14 10 19
60 23 60
18 54 14
3
Pine nuts P sabinianaP pineaImiddot sibirica P lerardiana
49 30 34 19 14
60 48 63 51
9 7
12 23
4
True nuts
Almond Pecan Pistacio Walnut Peanut
51 52
shy45
47 30
33
19 9
20 15 26
54 73 53 64 39
20 15 19 16 24
3 2 3 2
laterally ~n the a~il of a scale leaf near branch tips (jhaw~ 1914) although a r~re observation 01 termin~l cones b~s been reported (Lanner 1969) Developing cones can be ~een in the e~rliest stages as ovulate primordia in longitudinal sections of bu4s Within buds ovulate cone primordia are only at the tip of the bud an~have larger and broader bases than spur shoots (Little 1938-b)
ovuiate primordia are formed in buds in August and September and cones mature by October of the third year Because 3 years are required for seeds to mature treatments applied to stimulate nut quantity~il~ require 3 years before evaluation The first year must be especially suited to production of ovulate primordia and the second and third seaasons favorable to growth and maturation of cones and nuts(Li~tle 1938b)
The Periodicity of Bumper Crops
Pinyon ~ut crops are prodUCed at intervals of 3 to 7 years The periodicity of above-average cropshas been related to the dtain of nutrients required to produce the crop an~ the time required for nutrients to be replenished Developing cones act as food sinks for carbohydrate and nitrogen (N) reserves at the expense of vegetative structures (Pickmann and Kozlowski 1969 1970 ~ook and S~et 1971) Consequently large cone crops adversely affect vegetative tree growth
Forcella (1981) found cone production was inversely relate~ to temperatures during late-August to early September Maximum production in northern New Mexeio occurred when the mean maximum weekly temperature was below 24 degrees C Temperatures above 24 degrees C resulted in virtually no cone crops
However other environmental factors~ acting independently or inte~actinl with temperature caa be involved Rainfall is positively correia ted with the flowering of pines This is because photosynthat~ 9roduction is needed to develop carbohydrate reserves and this process is limited by ~lant water stres~ Also tree growth is determined by photosynthetic gain and the onset of abundant flowering is more directly rela~ed to tree siZe than
age (Schmidtling 1969) More speci1icallj nut ~roduction is e~osely
related to crown surface area
An exception to the adverse influen~e of wa~er ~tress is the positive roie stress plays in the initiat~on of ovula~e primordia Studies have shown that summer moisture
stress results in an above-average flower crop the following spring This suggests moisture stress at the time of ovulate primordia formation promotes reproductive rather than vegetative bull growth This view is supported by studies shOwing that branches exposed to full sun bore more female cones and had lower tissue moisture levels than partially shaded branches (Wareing~ 1958)
Water ~tress also can indirectly affect flowering thro~gh its interaction with tree nutrient status E~ell (1970) showd that nitrate fertili~ation or exposure to moisture stress caused similar tiowe~ing responses in Dougl~s-firaccompaniedby increases in total foliage N content and free amino
acids especially ~rgini~e Similarly Schmidtling (1974) suggested that water stress or N fertilization can increase flowering through the same metabolic intermediary namely arginine or some related N-containing substance~
Manipulation of Native Nut Crops
pespite the importance of coniferous nuts in many parts of th~
world only two pine species appear to be cultivated for their seed crops P
pinea in the Medi terranean and - sibirica in the Urals (Pravdin 1963) The pinyons of estern North America and Meiico ar mos~ly ignored in terma of cultiv~tion or domestication
Little (1140) was among the first to suggest that pinyon nu~ prQduction could be augme~ted tbtough the USe of simple cultutal practices However these received little attention and we have no grea~er und~rstanding of the effi~lcy or econoic feasibility of these treatments now than we did more than 40 ~ears ago Nev~rtheles~ with the present emphasis on wocidland management ~uch treatmenta seem worthy of serious attention
Ca) selective thinning
Some pibyonsapear to be
18
Nut sizes from pruned and unpruned Pinus edulis trees
19
consistently good nut producers (Little 1940) Heavy producers usually show immature and old cones on branches and cones are conspicuous b~neath them Selective thinning of unpr04uctive trees should increase flowering of those left standing (Little 1940)
(b) basal pruning
Theoretically low branches receiving partial sun light do not photosynthesize enough energy to offset energy losses to respiration It follows that low branches are energy sinks that potentially r~b nutrients from seed crops To test this relationship Montano et al (1980) pruned baial branches of 70 to 80-year old pinyons (8 to 10 m tall) to a height of 15 m and SUbsequently determined effects of this treatment on seed development They reported av~rage nut volumes from gruned and ungruned trees were 040 cm and 032 cm and the average nut weights were 033 g and 020 g respectively (see Fig3) Also pruned trees produced a greater percentage of filled nuts 99 as opposed to 84 The effects observed were related to the growth of nuts already developing in cones when the treatment was applied
Basal pruning reduced disease and insect injury of southern pnes (Wilson and Rudolph 1970) Also pruned wood could b sold for ~uelwood potentially offsetting the cost of the benefits anticipated Owing to its simplicity and overall benefits basal pruning appears to merit greater attention
(c) fertilization
Fertilization usually stimulates female cone production (Puritch 1972) More specifically the following trends become apparent when studies are reviewed collectively
(1) N stimulates cone production even when N is applied with other nutrients (Morris and Beers 1969) Also trees producing greater cone yields generally have higher levels of tisue N than low producers
(2) The presence of specific amino acids (especially arginine) is a more reliable predictor of fruitfulness than tissue N content per se For example nitrat N ana ammcinium N increased Douglasshyfir foliar N content and shoot growth similarly However only nitrate N significantly increased arginine content which was positively and quantitatively related to female flower proshyduction (Ebell and McMullin 1970) Following ichmidtlings (1974) explanation of fruit shyfulness fertilization shyespecially with nitrate N - could increase tis~ue organip Nand consequently flowering
(d) cultivation and irrigation
Supplemental water could increase growth reSUlting in greater crown density and iurface area In times of drought additional water could prevent premature abortion of immature cones Drip irrigaeion technology may be feaible for som~ sites However it seems more likely that less intensive ~ethods will prove to be practical Among these are land treatments that direct precipitation run-off to trees improve infiltration or remove weed competition
CHRISTMAS TREES
Pinyons are harvested from natural stands and comprise about 25 of all
Christmas trees sold in New Mexico Arizona Colorado Wyoming Utah and Nevada (Sowder 1965) Trimmed branches also are used for wreath manufacture In spite of their slow growth in native stands pinyons have many desirable Christmas tree attributes including dense foliage symmetrical shape green color natural fragrance good branch angle and limb strength and good needle retention Plantation trees can reach marketable size in about 11 years (Fisher and Fa~cher 1987)
Stand Thinning
Several techniques can be used to improve tree quality Stand thinning allows remaining trees to receive sufficient sunlight for limbs to develop uniformly on all sides During the thinning operation handles can be made on main stems by removing branches at the trees base to a height of 30 em
Removal of branches below a full whorl of branches will allow another tree to be culturedmiddotfrom the stump after harvest A year after the first tree is cut the remaining low branches will begin to turn up and all but one of these can be pruned to promote the growth of a new central leader
Pruning and Shearing
~he ideal pin~on Christmas tree resembles an inverted cone wide at the base and tapered uniformly tg the tip Accemiddotptable crown taper for pines is 40 to 90 but for spr~ces and firs is 40 to 70 Pruning and shearing will make native pinyons conform more closely to the ideal which improve marke tabi Ii ty
Pruning removes dead or unattractive branches Shearing is used to co~troi leader growth so the distance between whorls is not excessive increase the number of branches arising from branch buds and promote the pyramidal crown f~Im Because pinyon leader growth rarely exceeds 20 cm excessive distance between whorls is rarely a problem Pruning and shearing most often will be used to correct uneven o~oid and thia crowns
In pines eac~ needle bun~le ~ontains a dormant or axillary bud Removal of a branch terminal at the proper time promotes development of these dormant buds into short shoots improving crown density In singleshyneedled conifers such as spruces firs and Douglas-fir intermediate buds are produced along the terminal branch stem between each whorl For this reason they can be sheared during any season of the year and produce about the same number of branch buds However with pines the number and size of branch buds developed after shearing depends upon the physiological state of the tree when sheared
Pines respond best when sheared shortly after height growth is complete but before tissues in the new shoot becom~ woody S~oots prun~d at this time produce two to four times the number of buds found on unpruned trees Pinyon shoots elongata during late June but needles continue to elongatemiddotduring July and August after branches are fully elongated Buds are formed in late August
From studies conducted with other pine Christmas tree species the following course of treatments can be recommended for pinyons
1 Before spring growth begins prune all double and multiple leaders (eg bullbull April)
~ She~r when needles on new candles are 13 as long as last yeara needles (usually from June 15 to July 1)
3 Shape the tre~ from the top down by shearing the tips of lateral branches Pzomote a conical crown so thebase is no more than 90 as wide as the tree is tall Ideally taper should be 40-90 Avoid shearing back to woody tissue because this encourages multiple leaders
4 If the tree is oblong rather than tapered shear the top in June or eirly July and the sides in late summer fall or winter Growt~ of laterals will be reduced Repeat steps 2-4 yearly as needed
5 Avoid shearing the year the tree is ~o be marke~ed
20
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
fI
LITERATURE CITED
Armentrout S M and R D Pieper 1988 Plant distribution surrounding Rocky Mountain Pinyon and one seed juniper in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range Management 41 (In press) bull
Arnold J F bullbull D A Jameson and E H Reid 1964bull The pinyon~jun1per type of Arizona Effects of grazing fire and tree control US Department of Agriculture Production Research Report 84~
Barney MA and N C Frischknechtmiddot 1974 Vegetation change follOwing fire in the
pinyon-juniper type of west-central Utah Journal of Range Management 279~-96
Barrett J W 1962 Regional Silviculture of the United States The Ronald Press Co bullbull NY 610p
BetancourtJ L 1987 Paleoecology of pinyon-juniper woodlands summary In Everett R L (compiler) proceedings~ pinyon-juniper conference USDA For SerGen Techbull Rep INT-215~
Boeker E Lbullbull V E Scott H G Reynolds and B A Donaldson 1972~ Seasonal food habits of mule deer in southWestern Ne Mexicobull Journal of Wildlife Management 3656-63 bull
Erdman Jbull A 1970 Pinyon-juniper succession after natural fires in residual soils of MesaVerde Colorado Brigham Young University Science Bulletin Series 11 ~rovo Utah
Fowler J M R D Bowe BE Peacock KC McDanielT Garner-Hurt J R Gray and
M Cardenas 1974 Wood fiber production in pinyon-juniper woodlands on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Mexico New MeXico State University Agricultural Experiment~tation Research Report NO~ 519
Francis R E and E bull F Alden 1983 Preliminary habitat types of a semiarid grassland In MOir W H and L Hendzel (Tech COQrdinatora) Proceeding of the workshop pn southwestern habitat types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Gehlbach F R 1967 Vegetation of the Guadalupe escarpment New Mexico-Texas Ecology 48404-419
Kennedy K L 1983 A habitat type classification of the p~yon-juniper woodlands of the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico In Moir W H and Leonard Hendzel (Tech-Coordinators) Proceedings of the workshop on southwestern habitat
types U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Albuquerque New Mexico
Lanner bull R M 1975 Pinyon pines and junipers of the southwestern woodlandsmiddot In Gifford G F and 1 E Buspy The pinyonjunipr ecosystem a symposium Utah State Univ bullbull Logan
Lanner R Mmiddot1981 The pinyon pine a natural and cultural history Univ Nevada Press
Reno
Little E L bull 1950 Southwestern trees Amiddot guide to the native species of middotNew Mexico and Arizona US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Agricultural Handbook 9
Lymbery bull G A and R D Pieper 1983 Ecology of pinyon-juniper vegetation in the northern Sacramento Mountains New Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 698
Pieper R D 1~77 The southwestern pinyon-juniper ecosystem In Aldon Earl F and T J~ Loring (Tech Coord) US Departmentmiddot Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report RM-31
Pieper R D and G A Lymbery 1987 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegettion in south-central New Mexico In~ Everett Richard L (compiler) proceedings - pinyon-juniper conference US Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT-21S
Plumh-Mentjes M L and R D Pieper 1983 Diameter distribution and age class structure of pinyon pine (Pinus eduiis Engelm) in south-central~Mexico Abstract 36th annual meeting Society for Range Management Denver CO bull
Schmidt L j 1987 Present and future themes in ptnyon-juniper hydrology In ~verett R L (compiler) U S Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report 1NT-215
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1985 Influence of canoP1 characteristics of one-seed juniper on understory grasses Journal of Range Management 38328-331
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1986 Succession in pinyon-juniper vegetation in New Mexico Rangelands 8126-128
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987a Succession of pinyon-juniper communities a~ter mechanical disturbance in south-central New Mexico Journal of Range ~anagement 4088-94
1Q
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987bbull Water relationships of Quercus undulata ~ edulis and Juniperus monosperma in seral pinyon-juniper communities of south-central New Mexico In Everett R L (compiler) us Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT~215 bull
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987cbull bull Succession in tree pits following cabliD8
in pinyon-juniper c01lllllUt1ities Southwestern Naturalist 32399-402
~ Short H L t W Evans and E L Boeker 1977 The use of natural and modified pinyon pine-juniper wOodlands by deer and elk Journal of Wildlife Management 41543-559
Springfield H W 1976 Characteristics and management of southwestern pinyon-juniper ranges the status of our knowledge US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Res Pap RM-160
Tueller P T C D Beeson R J Tausch N E West and K HRea 1979 Pinyon-juniper woodlands of themiddotGreat Basin distribution flora vegetal cover U SbullDepartment of Agriculture Forest Service Research Paper INT~229
USDA 1941 Cltmate and man Yearbook of Agriculture U S Govt Printing Office Washington DC
Wasson G E 1987 The American Indian response to the pinyon-juniper conference In Everett R L(compller) USDA For Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Wells P V 1987 Systematics and distribution of pinyons in the late quarternary In Everett R Lbull (compiler) Proc - Pinyon-juniper Conference USDA For Sere Gen Tech Rep INT-215
West N E K H Rea and R J Tausch 1975 Basic Synecological relationahips in pinyon-juniper woodlands In Gifford G E and F E Busby (eds) ~e pinyon-juniper ecosystem A symposium Utah State University Logan
Woodin H E and A A Lindsey 1954 Juniper-pinyon east of the Continental Divide as analyzed by the line-strip metWod Ecology 35473-489
11
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES I CROP
bullJ
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH WOODLAND STA~D MANAGEMENT l
James T Fisher John G Me~al and Gregory C Phillips
Abstract-- New Mexicos native pinyon pines produce high-value crops including nuts Christmas trees and nursery or~amentals Crop values can be increased through more intensive stand management and more innovative marketing of such products as pinyon nuts and Christmas trees to compete with imported products Research needs pertaining to these crops are discussed
1 Ne~ Mexico State University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-II
2 Authors are re~pectively
Professor and Associate Professors Dept of Agronomy and Horticulture New
Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
13
INTRODUCTlON
Pinyons (pinon p~nes) ield diverse productsranging frolll valuable nuts ~nd landscape sp~cll11ens to fuelwood
Rowever littleforethought is give~ to crop illlprovelllentbeforecropsare ha~vested This paper addresses high-value pinyon products ~hat appear to justify at least modest levels omiddotf lIIanacelllent inputs to improve product quality quantity or avail- abilty Greater elllphasis on ~ntensive lIIanagelllentmiddot recognizes the nee~ for deriving economic benefits as well as the need for cu~todiai lIIanagelllent to pre~erve the
woodland type (Lanner 1977)
Pinyon and pinyon-juniper woodlands hav~ be~n the su~lect of severai symposia The reader iamp directed to proceedings of these lIIeetings providing several papers on the subject [~ee Gifford and Busby (19-75) Aldon and Loring (1977) Evrett (1987) and a fbrthcoming volume reporting a n~~ional lIIeeting held in Mexico in 1987]
This paper specifi~ally exalllines pinyon nut production including lIIarket developlllents that potentially threaten regional markets and the selective harvest of Christlllas trees and nursery or~alllentals Methods available t~ illlprove crop profitability will be discussed in addition to cuirent and future research
NUT BEARING PINES
Plant taxonomists recognize about 100 species in the falllily Pinaceae Alllongthese 12 to 26 species produce quality edible nuts (Rosengarten 1984 Lanner 1981) An edible nut is large middot(generallly les8 than 2200 seedkg) and has a thin shell that can be cracked with the teeth Pines producing edible nuts are found mostly in Europe Asia and western North middotAmerica Large ~dlblen~ts are found ~ostiyalllong the ~tone pines ~Sub8ection Celllbraa) nat~ve to Europe and ASia and the pinyon pines (Subsection Celllbroides) native to North Alllerica
Pinyons are dwarf trees nd shrubS 9f sellliarid regions of the southwestern Uni ted Sta tes and Mexico Because pinyons grow slowly it ismiddot difficult to lustify th~ cost of establishing and cultivatin~ p~aniations for nut production IncreaSingly nuts gathered
from the stone pines are imported f~om Asia and marketed at a lIIuch lower cost According to D~nielFox (pers C~IIII11) about 1000 ~tric tons of ~helled Asian pine nuts are imported each year Re also reports that abou~ 100 ton~ of ~ pinea nuts are illlported from Portugal and Spain
To protect pinyonnut m~rkets it lIIay becollle necessary to develop criteria that effectively distinguish pinyon nuts frolll illlported pine ~uts~ To exallline the feasibility of developing these criteria we will examine t~egeographic ranges and speclal characteristics of nut-producing pines under their respective subsections of the family Pinaceae proposed by Critchfield and Little (1966)
lli Subsec tiOn Celllbroides (Pinyons)
Pines classified und~i the subse~tion Ce~bi~ides (pinyons) have 1-5 needles in a fascicle Seeds are large wingl~ss a~d sOlllewhat oval in shape Lanner (1981) reported 11 species but a more recent treatlllent ofmiddot the alliance r~cognizes 15ta~a (Bailey and Ha~ksworth 1988) Eight species occur in the United States 12 in Mexico and 3 in New Mexico (P edulis I lIIonophylla and I~di-cOlor) The pinyon species discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988)include
Uni ted States
(l) Pinus edulis (pinyon) t 4200 seedkg
The predominant pinyon species of New Mexico Widespread in the southwestern United States lust
entering Wyollling and extending south through Utah Colorado and ~ew ~~xico to the western ~nd of Oklahollla~ west Texas and the northern border of Chihuahua extending west throughout lIIuch of Arizona to an outlier in eastern California Range ov~rlaps ~ith P celllbroides in south~rn New Mexico and Arizona and with P monophylla at the westerD edge of its range (southw~stern Utah northwestern Arizona and the New York Mountains o~ sOuthern California (Fig 1) Kay occa~ionally intergrade with P lIIonophylla
(2) monophylla lsingleleaf plny~n)
[ 2400 seed kg ] The pinyon pine ~fthe Great
14
bull P SAalNIANA bull P aMIIilOIOEl III Po OUAOIIIIOUA bull P MONOPttYLLA bull P eDULIS
Figure 1 Diatrlbution of pinyon pines in lJOuthwestern United States and northern Mexieo
Basin and Mohave Desert Com~onin Nevada and in parts of southern California and western Utah but also ex~ends acr~ss Arizona and southwestern Ke~ Mexico (ig~ 1)
United States and Mexico
(3) Pinus middotcellbroides (Mexican pinyon)
[ 2400 seedkg J Range widespread at low
elevations in the mountains bordering the arid plate~u of northern Mexico Ranges from southeastern Arizona southwestern Arizona southwestern New Mexico and western Texas through northern Mexico and south to Puebla and Mexico City (Fig 1) Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) middotrecognize three subspecies cembroides (northern Mexi~o) lagunae (Baja California) and orizabensis (Central Mexico) (Fig 1)
(4) P californiarum-
Subspecies californiarum
occurs in southern Californ~a and northern Baja California I californiarum subsp fallax (formerly P edulis var fallax) is-found in Arizona
(5) Pinus discolor (border pinyon)
Formerly P cembroides var bicolor~ Principal range lies along both sides of the intershynational boundary between Mexico and the United States extending about 120 miles into eac~ country Sp-ecifically occurs in southeast Arizona extreme southwest New Mexico northeas~ ~onora and northwest Chihuahua
( 6) quad r ifo11a (Parry pinyon) [ 2100 seedkg J
Confined to 10 elevations in the dry mountains of southern California from the San Jacinto Mountains south to the S~erra San Ped~o Martir Its range overlaps that of I monOphylla but no intermediates have been reported (Fig 1)middot
(7) Pinus remo ta (paper-shell pinyon also called
Texas pinyon) Formerly P cembroides var
remota Main range in Coahuila but reaches parts of adjacent Nuevo Leon southeastern Chihuahua and rexas (Bailey and Wendt 1979) Has thinnest shell among pinyons~
Local Endemics Found Exclusively in Mexico
(8) Pinus culminicola (Potosi pinyon)
Documented occurrence Cerro PotOSi Nuevo Leon Mexico
(9) johannis Li~ited r4nge in Mexico
(west of Concepcion del Oro Zacatecas
(10) Pin~s maximartinezii (Martinez pinyon)
Documented Occurrence Zacatecas Mexico
(11 ) Pinus nelsonii (Nelson pinyon)
Documented ocaurrence north- eastern Mexicobull
(12) ~pinceana (Pinca pinyon)
15
Documented occurrence northshy Grows at high elevations inth~ eastern and eastern Mexco Alps and the Carpathian ~ountains
(3) bullbull koraiensis S~eb amp Zucco ~ SUDsect PINEAE Shaw (Korean pine)
[ 1800 seedkg](n Pinuspinea L Rngebull through Korea and (Italian stone pine) eastern Manchuria into southeastern [ 1300 seedkg ] Siberia with outlirs ~ri t~e
Wide_pread in Spain and Japalliue islands of Honshu and Portugal and aiong the northern and Shikoku (Fig 2) eastern shores ~f the Mediterranean Sea including minor occurrences (4) P sibirica near the north coast of Turkey rSibe~ian ston~ pine(Fig 2) [ 4000 seedkg
Ranges from the Ural Mountains Pinus Subsect CEMBRAE through western and central ~iberia---(Stone Pines) to northern Mongolia with outliers
in northern Russia (Fig ~)(1) Pinus albicaulis Engelm~
(whitebark pine) Pinus Subsect GERARDIANAE [ 5700 seedk ] -- shy
Occurs at high eleyations fro~ (1) gerardian Wall~ central British Columbia sout~ to (Chilgoza pine)s~uthern Sierra Nevada of [ 400 seedkg J California the Ruby Mountain of Noted for large edible seed Nevada and the mOuntains of Confined to mountainous regions of northwestern Wyoming eastern Asia principally in
eastern Afgha~itan~ parts of (2) Pin~s cembra L Pakistan ~nd ~catt~red localities
(Swiss stone pine) in the dry inner valleys of the [ 4400 seedkg 1 north~rn Himalayas (Fig 2)
eocIIn_a _shyFigure 2 Distribution of edible pine nuts in Europe and
Asia
16
bull
Pinus Subsect SABINIANAE Loud Opportumiddotnities aay exist to separate pinyOn nuts other froa pine nuts Most
(I) Pinu~ ~abiniana Dougl pine nuts have a ridge where the (Digger pine) membranous wing is attached Also [ 1300 seed kg criteria based upon seed content could
Confined to California Found be applied when large vol~aes of in dry foothills of ihe Sierra imported pine nuts are suspected to be Nevada and the Coast Rangemiddot Ras aislabeled Tests aight exaine levels large edible but rather hard-shelled of starch fat or piotein or even seeds (Fig bull1) smiddotpecific enzyaes (Table 1)
(2) Pinus coulteri D Don (Coulter pine) New Mexico Pinyon Nut Crops ( 3100 seedkg]
Restr~cted to the coastal mountains of cen~ral and southern Pinyon nuts have been harvested California and northern Baja commercially for about 50 years California (Little 1938a) The nut crop averages
045 to 09 million kg (I to 2 million The preceding list makes clear that pounds) annually for New Mexico Arizona
many pinyon species are found in North and Colorado but one year exceeded 36 America with the greatest number found million kg (Little 1942) The more in Mexico Further it seems neither productive stands may yield 330 kglha practical nor necessary to develop (300 lbsac) during a good year market criteria to separate nut products (Springfield 1976) At a cur~ent found among these species Morphological retail value of $883 I kg value on a differences among pinyon nuts are per hectare basis would be $297000 generally so slight as ~o pre~lude (120000 lac) Fowler and Oliver (this practical field identification publication) provide additional Also most Mexican species occur as information on nut values rather isolated populations with local value but low export potential For New Mexico species criteria would have to recognize as genuinely natibullbull those Pinyon Reproductive Biology nuts produced by at least three pinyon species edulis monophylla and P di$color Again nut morphological Pinyons begin bearing nuts at about criteria would not separate these 25 years but crops do not reach pinyons from other species of the same commercial size until about 75 years subsection (Little 1941) Cones are borne
Table 1-- Composition of pine nuts and true nuts (Lanner 1981 Woodroof 1979) All values are expressed as percentages
Kernal H2O Protein Fat Carboshyhydrates
Ash
Pinyon nuts P edulisP monophIllaImiddot cembroides
58 31 14 10 19
60 23 60
18 54 14
3
Pine nuts P sabinianaP pineaImiddot sibirica P lerardiana
49 30 34 19 14
60 48 63 51
9 7
12 23
4
True nuts
Almond Pecan Pistacio Walnut Peanut
51 52
shy45
47 30
33
19 9
20 15 26
54 73 53 64 39
20 15 19 16 24
3 2 3 2
laterally ~n the a~il of a scale leaf near branch tips (jhaw~ 1914) although a r~re observation 01 termin~l cones b~s been reported (Lanner 1969) Developing cones can be ~een in the e~rliest stages as ovulate primordia in longitudinal sections of bu4s Within buds ovulate cone primordia are only at the tip of the bud an~have larger and broader bases than spur shoots (Little 1938-b)
ovuiate primordia are formed in buds in August and September and cones mature by October of the third year Because 3 years are required for seeds to mature treatments applied to stimulate nut quantity~il~ require 3 years before evaluation The first year must be especially suited to production of ovulate primordia and the second and third seaasons favorable to growth and maturation of cones and nuts(Li~tle 1938b)
The Periodicity of Bumper Crops
Pinyon ~ut crops are prodUCed at intervals of 3 to 7 years The periodicity of above-average cropshas been related to the dtain of nutrients required to produce the crop an~ the time required for nutrients to be replenished Developing cones act as food sinks for carbohydrate and nitrogen (N) reserves at the expense of vegetative structures (Pickmann and Kozlowski 1969 1970 ~ook and S~et 1971) Consequently large cone crops adversely affect vegetative tree growth
Forcella (1981) found cone production was inversely relate~ to temperatures during late-August to early September Maximum production in northern New Mexeio occurred when the mean maximum weekly temperature was below 24 degrees C Temperatures above 24 degrees C resulted in virtually no cone crops
However other environmental factors~ acting independently or inte~actinl with temperature caa be involved Rainfall is positively correia ted with the flowering of pines This is because photosynthat~ 9roduction is needed to develop carbohydrate reserves and this process is limited by ~lant water stres~ Also tree growth is determined by photosynthetic gain and the onset of abundant flowering is more directly rela~ed to tree siZe than
age (Schmidtling 1969) More speci1icallj nut ~roduction is e~osely
related to crown surface area
An exception to the adverse influen~e of wa~er ~tress is the positive roie stress plays in the initiat~on of ovula~e primordia Studies have shown that summer moisture
stress results in an above-average flower crop the following spring This suggests moisture stress at the time of ovulate primordia formation promotes reproductive rather than vegetative bull growth This view is supported by studies shOwing that branches exposed to full sun bore more female cones and had lower tissue moisture levels than partially shaded branches (Wareing~ 1958)
Water ~tress also can indirectly affect flowering thro~gh its interaction with tree nutrient status E~ell (1970) showd that nitrate fertili~ation or exposure to moisture stress caused similar tiowe~ing responses in Dougl~s-firaccompaniedby increases in total foliage N content and free amino
acids especially ~rgini~e Similarly Schmidtling (1974) suggested that water stress or N fertilization can increase flowering through the same metabolic intermediary namely arginine or some related N-containing substance~
Manipulation of Native Nut Crops
pespite the importance of coniferous nuts in many parts of th~
world only two pine species appear to be cultivated for their seed crops P
pinea in the Medi terranean and - sibirica in the Urals (Pravdin 1963) The pinyons of estern North America and Meiico ar mos~ly ignored in terma of cultiv~tion or domestication
Little (1140) was among the first to suggest that pinyon nu~ prQduction could be augme~ted tbtough the USe of simple cultutal practices However these received little attention and we have no grea~er und~rstanding of the effi~lcy or econoic feasibility of these treatments now than we did more than 40 ~ears ago Nev~rtheles~ with the present emphasis on wocidland management ~uch treatmenta seem worthy of serious attention
Ca) selective thinning
Some pibyonsapear to be
18
Nut sizes from pruned and unpruned Pinus edulis trees
19
consistently good nut producers (Little 1940) Heavy producers usually show immature and old cones on branches and cones are conspicuous b~neath them Selective thinning of unpr04uctive trees should increase flowering of those left standing (Little 1940)
(b) basal pruning
Theoretically low branches receiving partial sun light do not photosynthesize enough energy to offset energy losses to respiration It follows that low branches are energy sinks that potentially r~b nutrients from seed crops To test this relationship Montano et al (1980) pruned baial branches of 70 to 80-year old pinyons (8 to 10 m tall) to a height of 15 m and SUbsequently determined effects of this treatment on seed development They reported av~rage nut volumes from gruned and ungruned trees were 040 cm and 032 cm and the average nut weights were 033 g and 020 g respectively (see Fig3) Also pruned trees produced a greater percentage of filled nuts 99 as opposed to 84 The effects observed were related to the growth of nuts already developing in cones when the treatment was applied
Basal pruning reduced disease and insect injury of southern pnes (Wilson and Rudolph 1970) Also pruned wood could b sold for ~uelwood potentially offsetting the cost of the benefits anticipated Owing to its simplicity and overall benefits basal pruning appears to merit greater attention
(c) fertilization
Fertilization usually stimulates female cone production (Puritch 1972) More specifically the following trends become apparent when studies are reviewed collectively
(1) N stimulates cone production even when N is applied with other nutrients (Morris and Beers 1969) Also trees producing greater cone yields generally have higher levels of tisue N than low producers
(2) The presence of specific amino acids (especially arginine) is a more reliable predictor of fruitfulness than tissue N content per se For example nitrat N ana ammcinium N increased Douglasshyfir foliar N content and shoot growth similarly However only nitrate N significantly increased arginine content which was positively and quantitatively related to female flower proshyduction (Ebell and McMullin 1970) Following ichmidtlings (1974) explanation of fruit shyfulness fertilization shyespecially with nitrate N - could increase tis~ue organip Nand consequently flowering
(d) cultivation and irrigation
Supplemental water could increase growth reSUlting in greater crown density and iurface area In times of drought additional water could prevent premature abortion of immature cones Drip irrigaeion technology may be feaible for som~ sites However it seems more likely that less intensive ~ethods will prove to be practical Among these are land treatments that direct precipitation run-off to trees improve infiltration or remove weed competition
CHRISTMAS TREES
Pinyons are harvested from natural stands and comprise about 25 of all
Christmas trees sold in New Mexico Arizona Colorado Wyoming Utah and Nevada (Sowder 1965) Trimmed branches also are used for wreath manufacture In spite of their slow growth in native stands pinyons have many desirable Christmas tree attributes including dense foliage symmetrical shape green color natural fragrance good branch angle and limb strength and good needle retention Plantation trees can reach marketable size in about 11 years (Fisher and Fa~cher 1987)
Stand Thinning
Several techniques can be used to improve tree quality Stand thinning allows remaining trees to receive sufficient sunlight for limbs to develop uniformly on all sides During the thinning operation handles can be made on main stems by removing branches at the trees base to a height of 30 em
Removal of branches below a full whorl of branches will allow another tree to be culturedmiddotfrom the stump after harvest A year after the first tree is cut the remaining low branches will begin to turn up and all but one of these can be pruned to promote the growth of a new central leader
Pruning and Shearing
~he ideal pin~on Christmas tree resembles an inverted cone wide at the base and tapered uniformly tg the tip Accemiddotptable crown taper for pines is 40 to 90 but for spr~ces and firs is 40 to 70 Pruning and shearing will make native pinyons conform more closely to the ideal which improve marke tabi Ii ty
Pruning removes dead or unattractive branches Shearing is used to co~troi leader growth so the distance between whorls is not excessive increase the number of branches arising from branch buds and promote the pyramidal crown f~Im Because pinyon leader growth rarely exceeds 20 cm excessive distance between whorls is rarely a problem Pruning and shearing most often will be used to correct uneven o~oid and thia crowns
In pines eac~ needle bun~le ~ontains a dormant or axillary bud Removal of a branch terminal at the proper time promotes development of these dormant buds into short shoots improving crown density In singleshyneedled conifers such as spruces firs and Douglas-fir intermediate buds are produced along the terminal branch stem between each whorl For this reason they can be sheared during any season of the year and produce about the same number of branch buds However with pines the number and size of branch buds developed after shearing depends upon the physiological state of the tree when sheared
Pines respond best when sheared shortly after height growth is complete but before tissues in the new shoot becom~ woody S~oots prun~d at this time produce two to four times the number of buds found on unpruned trees Pinyon shoots elongata during late June but needles continue to elongatemiddotduring July and August after branches are fully elongated Buds are formed in late August
From studies conducted with other pine Christmas tree species the following course of treatments can be recommended for pinyons
1 Before spring growth begins prune all double and multiple leaders (eg bullbull April)
~ She~r when needles on new candles are 13 as long as last yeara needles (usually from June 15 to July 1)
3 Shape the tre~ from the top down by shearing the tips of lateral branches Pzomote a conical crown so thebase is no more than 90 as wide as the tree is tall Ideally taper should be 40-90 Avoid shearing back to woody tissue because this encourages multiple leaders
4 If the tree is oblong rather than tapered shear the top in June or eirly July and the sides in late summer fall or winter Growt~ of laterals will be reduced Repeat steps 2-4 yearly as needed
5 Avoid shearing the year the tree is ~o be marke~ed
20
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987bbull Water relationships of Quercus undulata ~ edulis and Juniperus monosperma in seral pinyon-juniper communities of south-central New Mexico In Everett R L (compiler) us Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT~215 bull
Schott M R and R D Pieper 1987cbull bull Succession in tree pits following cabliD8
in pinyon-juniper c01lllllUt1ities Southwestern Naturalist 32399-402
~ Short H L t W Evans and E L Boeker 1977 The use of natural and modified pinyon pine-juniper wOodlands by deer and elk Journal of Wildlife Management 41543-559
Springfield H W 1976 Characteristics and management of southwestern pinyon-juniper ranges the status of our knowledge US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Res Pap RM-160
Tueller P T C D Beeson R J Tausch N E West and K HRea 1979 Pinyon-juniper woodlands of themiddotGreat Basin distribution flora vegetal cover U SbullDepartment of Agriculture Forest Service Research Paper INT~229
USDA 1941 Cltmate and man Yearbook of Agriculture U S Govt Printing Office Washington DC
Wasson G E 1987 The American Indian response to the pinyon-juniper conference In Everett R L(compller) USDA For Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Wells P V 1987 Systematics and distribution of pinyons in the late quarternary In Everett R Lbull (compiler) Proc - Pinyon-juniper Conference USDA For Sere Gen Tech Rep INT-215
West N E K H Rea and R J Tausch 1975 Basic Synecological relationahips in pinyon-juniper woodlands In Gifford G E and F E Busby (eds) ~e pinyon-juniper ecosystem A symposium Utah State University Logan
Woodin H E and A A Lindsey 1954 Juniper-pinyon east of the Continental Divide as analyzed by the line-strip metWod Ecology 35473-489
11
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES I CROP
bullJ
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH WOODLAND STA~D MANAGEMENT l
James T Fisher John G Me~al and Gregory C Phillips
Abstract-- New Mexicos native pinyon pines produce high-value crops including nuts Christmas trees and nursery or~amentals Crop values can be increased through more intensive stand management and more innovative marketing of such products as pinyon nuts and Christmas trees to compete with imported products Research needs pertaining to these crops are discussed
1 Ne~ Mexico State University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-II
2 Authors are re~pectively
Professor and Associate Professors Dept of Agronomy and Horticulture New
Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
13
INTRODUCTlON
Pinyons (pinon p~nes) ield diverse productsranging frolll valuable nuts ~nd landscape sp~cll11ens to fuelwood
Rowever littleforethought is give~ to crop illlprovelllentbeforecropsare ha~vested This paper addresses high-value pinyon products ~hat appear to justify at least modest levels omiddotf lIIanacelllent inputs to improve product quality quantity or avail- abilty Greater elllphasis on ~ntensive lIIanagelllentmiddot recognizes the nee~ for deriving economic benefits as well as the need for cu~todiai lIIanagelllent to pre~erve the
woodland type (Lanner 1977)
Pinyon and pinyon-juniper woodlands hav~ be~n the su~lect of severai symposia The reader iamp directed to proceedings of these lIIeetings providing several papers on the subject [~ee Gifford and Busby (19-75) Aldon and Loring (1977) Evrett (1987) and a fbrthcoming volume reporting a n~~ional lIIeeting held in Mexico in 1987]
This paper specifi~ally exalllines pinyon nut production including lIIarket developlllents that potentially threaten regional markets and the selective harvest of Christlllas trees and nursery or~alllentals Methods available t~ illlprove crop profitability will be discussed in addition to cuirent and future research
NUT BEARING PINES
Plant taxonomists recognize about 100 species in the falllily Pinaceae Alllongthese 12 to 26 species produce quality edible nuts (Rosengarten 1984 Lanner 1981) An edible nut is large middot(generallly les8 than 2200 seedkg) and has a thin shell that can be cracked with the teeth Pines producing edible nuts are found mostly in Europe Asia and western North middotAmerica Large ~dlblen~ts are found ~ostiyalllong the ~tone pines ~Sub8ection Celllbraa) nat~ve to Europe and ASia and the pinyon pines (Subsection Celllbroides) native to North Alllerica
Pinyons are dwarf trees nd shrubS 9f sellliarid regions of the southwestern Uni ted Sta tes and Mexico Because pinyons grow slowly it ismiddot difficult to lustify th~ cost of establishing and cultivatin~ p~aniations for nut production IncreaSingly nuts gathered
from the stone pines are imported f~om Asia and marketed at a lIIuch lower cost According to D~nielFox (pers C~IIII11) about 1000 ~tric tons of ~helled Asian pine nuts are imported each year Re also reports that abou~ 100 ton~ of ~ pinea nuts are illlported from Portugal and Spain
To protect pinyonnut m~rkets it lIIay becollle necessary to develop criteria that effectively distinguish pinyon nuts frolll illlported pine ~uts~ To exallline the feasibility of developing these criteria we will examine t~egeographic ranges and speclal characteristics of nut-producing pines under their respective subsections of the family Pinaceae proposed by Critchfield and Little (1966)
lli Subsec tiOn Celllbroides (Pinyons)
Pines classified und~i the subse~tion Ce~bi~ides (pinyons) have 1-5 needles in a fascicle Seeds are large wingl~ss a~d sOlllewhat oval in shape Lanner (1981) reported 11 species but a more recent treatlllent ofmiddot the alliance r~cognizes 15ta~a (Bailey and Ha~ksworth 1988) Eight species occur in the United States 12 in Mexico and 3 in New Mexico (P edulis I lIIonophylla and I~di-cOlor) The pinyon species discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988)include
Uni ted States
(l) Pinus edulis (pinyon) t 4200 seedkg
The predominant pinyon species of New Mexico Widespread in the southwestern United States lust
entering Wyollling and extending south through Utah Colorado and ~ew ~~xico to the western ~nd of Oklahollla~ west Texas and the northern border of Chihuahua extending west throughout lIIuch of Arizona to an outlier in eastern California Range ov~rlaps ~ith P celllbroides in south~rn New Mexico and Arizona and with P monophylla at the westerD edge of its range (southw~stern Utah northwestern Arizona and the New York Mountains o~ sOuthern California (Fig 1) Kay occa~ionally intergrade with P lIIonophylla
(2) monophylla lsingleleaf plny~n)
[ 2400 seed kg ] The pinyon pine ~fthe Great
14
bull P SAalNIANA bull P aMIIilOIOEl III Po OUAOIIIIOUA bull P MONOPttYLLA bull P eDULIS
Figure 1 Diatrlbution of pinyon pines in lJOuthwestern United States and northern Mexieo
Basin and Mohave Desert Com~onin Nevada and in parts of southern California and western Utah but also ex~ends acr~ss Arizona and southwestern Ke~ Mexico (ig~ 1)
United States and Mexico
(3) Pinus middotcellbroides (Mexican pinyon)
[ 2400 seedkg J Range widespread at low
elevations in the mountains bordering the arid plate~u of northern Mexico Ranges from southeastern Arizona southwestern Arizona southwestern New Mexico and western Texas through northern Mexico and south to Puebla and Mexico City (Fig 1) Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) middotrecognize three subspecies cembroides (northern Mexi~o) lagunae (Baja California) and orizabensis (Central Mexico) (Fig 1)
(4) P californiarum-
Subspecies californiarum
occurs in southern Californ~a and northern Baja California I californiarum subsp fallax (formerly P edulis var fallax) is-found in Arizona
(5) Pinus discolor (border pinyon)
Formerly P cembroides var bicolor~ Principal range lies along both sides of the intershynational boundary between Mexico and the United States extending about 120 miles into eac~ country Sp-ecifically occurs in southeast Arizona extreme southwest New Mexico northeas~ ~onora and northwest Chihuahua
( 6) quad r ifo11a (Parry pinyon) [ 2100 seedkg J
Confined to 10 elevations in the dry mountains of southern California from the San Jacinto Mountains south to the S~erra San Ped~o Martir Its range overlaps that of I monOphylla but no intermediates have been reported (Fig 1)middot
(7) Pinus remo ta (paper-shell pinyon also called
Texas pinyon) Formerly P cembroides var
remota Main range in Coahuila but reaches parts of adjacent Nuevo Leon southeastern Chihuahua and rexas (Bailey and Wendt 1979) Has thinnest shell among pinyons~
Local Endemics Found Exclusively in Mexico
(8) Pinus culminicola (Potosi pinyon)
Documented occurrence Cerro PotOSi Nuevo Leon Mexico
(9) johannis Li~ited r4nge in Mexico
(west of Concepcion del Oro Zacatecas
(10) Pin~s maximartinezii (Martinez pinyon)
Documented Occurrence Zacatecas Mexico
(11 ) Pinus nelsonii (Nelson pinyon)
Documented ocaurrence north- eastern Mexicobull
(12) ~pinceana (Pinca pinyon)
15
Documented occurrence northshy Grows at high elevations inth~ eastern and eastern Mexco Alps and the Carpathian ~ountains
(3) bullbull koraiensis S~eb amp Zucco ~ SUDsect PINEAE Shaw (Korean pine)
[ 1800 seedkg](n Pinuspinea L Rngebull through Korea and (Italian stone pine) eastern Manchuria into southeastern [ 1300 seedkg ] Siberia with outlirs ~ri t~e
Wide_pread in Spain and Japalliue islands of Honshu and Portugal and aiong the northern and Shikoku (Fig 2) eastern shores ~f the Mediterranean Sea including minor occurrences (4) P sibirica near the north coast of Turkey rSibe~ian ston~ pine(Fig 2) [ 4000 seedkg
Ranges from the Ural Mountains Pinus Subsect CEMBRAE through western and central ~iberia---(Stone Pines) to northern Mongolia with outliers
in northern Russia (Fig ~)(1) Pinus albicaulis Engelm~
(whitebark pine) Pinus Subsect GERARDIANAE [ 5700 seedk ] -- shy
Occurs at high eleyations fro~ (1) gerardian Wall~ central British Columbia sout~ to (Chilgoza pine)s~uthern Sierra Nevada of [ 400 seedkg J California the Ruby Mountain of Noted for large edible seed Nevada and the mOuntains of Confined to mountainous regions of northwestern Wyoming eastern Asia principally in
eastern Afgha~itan~ parts of (2) Pin~s cembra L Pakistan ~nd ~catt~red localities
(Swiss stone pine) in the dry inner valleys of the [ 4400 seedkg 1 north~rn Himalayas (Fig 2)
eocIIn_a _shyFigure 2 Distribution of edible pine nuts in Europe and
Asia
16
bull
Pinus Subsect SABINIANAE Loud Opportumiddotnities aay exist to separate pinyOn nuts other froa pine nuts Most
(I) Pinu~ ~abiniana Dougl pine nuts have a ridge where the (Digger pine) membranous wing is attached Also [ 1300 seed kg criteria based upon seed content could
Confined to California Found be applied when large vol~aes of in dry foothills of ihe Sierra imported pine nuts are suspected to be Nevada and the Coast Rangemiddot Ras aislabeled Tests aight exaine levels large edible but rather hard-shelled of starch fat or piotein or even seeds (Fig bull1) smiddotpecific enzyaes (Table 1)
(2) Pinus coulteri D Don (Coulter pine) New Mexico Pinyon Nut Crops ( 3100 seedkg]
Restr~cted to the coastal mountains of cen~ral and southern Pinyon nuts have been harvested California and northern Baja commercially for about 50 years California (Little 1938a) The nut crop averages
045 to 09 million kg (I to 2 million The preceding list makes clear that pounds) annually for New Mexico Arizona
many pinyon species are found in North and Colorado but one year exceeded 36 America with the greatest number found million kg (Little 1942) The more in Mexico Further it seems neither productive stands may yield 330 kglha practical nor necessary to develop (300 lbsac) during a good year market criteria to separate nut products (Springfield 1976) At a cur~ent found among these species Morphological retail value of $883 I kg value on a differences among pinyon nuts are per hectare basis would be $297000 generally so slight as ~o pre~lude (120000 lac) Fowler and Oliver (this practical field identification publication) provide additional Also most Mexican species occur as information on nut values rather isolated populations with local value but low export potential For New Mexico species criteria would have to recognize as genuinely natibullbull those Pinyon Reproductive Biology nuts produced by at least three pinyon species edulis monophylla and P di$color Again nut morphological Pinyons begin bearing nuts at about criteria would not separate these 25 years but crops do not reach pinyons from other species of the same commercial size until about 75 years subsection (Little 1941) Cones are borne
Table 1-- Composition of pine nuts and true nuts (Lanner 1981 Woodroof 1979) All values are expressed as percentages
Kernal H2O Protein Fat Carboshyhydrates
Ash
Pinyon nuts P edulisP monophIllaImiddot cembroides
58 31 14 10 19
60 23 60
18 54 14
3
Pine nuts P sabinianaP pineaImiddot sibirica P lerardiana
49 30 34 19 14
60 48 63 51
9 7
12 23
4
True nuts
Almond Pecan Pistacio Walnut Peanut
51 52
shy45
47 30
33
19 9
20 15 26
54 73 53 64 39
20 15 19 16 24
3 2 3 2
laterally ~n the a~il of a scale leaf near branch tips (jhaw~ 1914) although a r~re observation 01 termin~l cones b~s been reported (Lanner 1969) Developing cones can be ~een in the e~rliest stages as ovulate primordia in longitudinal sections of bu4s Within buds ovulate cone primordia are only at the tip of the bud an~have larger and broader bases than spur shoots (Little 1938-b)
ovuiate primordia are formed in buds in August and September and cones mature by October of the third year Because 3 years are required for seeds to mature treatments applied to stimulate nut quantity~il~ require 3 years before evaluation The first year must be especially suited to production of ovulate primordia and the second and third seaasons favorable to growth and maturation of cones and nuts(Li~tle 1938b)
The Periodicity of Bumper Crops
Pinyon ~ut crops are prodUCed at intervals of 3 to 7 years The periodicity of above-average cropshas been related to the dtain of nutrients required to produce the crop an~ the time required for nutrients to be replenished Developing cones act as food sinks for carbohydrate and nitrogen (N) reserves at the expense of vegetative structures (Pickmann and Kozlowski 1969 1970 ~ook and S~et 1971) Consequently large cone crops adversely affect vegetative tree growth
Forcella (1981) found cone production was inversely relate~ to temperatures during late-August to early September Maximum production in northern New Mexeio occurred when the mean maximum weekly temperature was below 24 degrees C Temperatures above 24 degrees C resulted in virtually no cone crops
However other environmental factors~ acting independently or inte~actinl with temperature caa be involved Rainfall is positively correia ted with the flowering of pines This is because photosynthat~ 9roduction is needed to develop carbohydrate reserves and this process is limited by ~lant water stres~ Also tree growth is determined by photosynthetic gain and the onset of abundant flowering is more directly rela~ed to tree siZe than
age (Schmidtling 1969) More speci1icallj nut ~roduction is e~osely
related to crown surface area
An exception to the adverse influen~e of wa~er ~tress is the positive roie stress plays in the initiat~on of ovula~e primordia Studies have shown that summer moisture
stress results in an above-average flower crop the following spring This suggests moisture stress at the time of ovulate primordia formation promotes reproductive rather than vegetative bull growth This view is supported by studies shOwing that branches exposed to full sun bore more female cones and had lower tissue moisture levels than partially shaded branches (Wareing~ 1958)
Water ~tress also can indirectly affect flowering thro~gh its interaction with tree nutrient status E~ell (1970) showd that nitrate fertili~ation or exposure to moisture stress caused similar tiowe~ing responses in Dougl~s-firaccompaniedby increases in total foliage N content and free amino
acids especially ~rgini~e Similarly Schmidtling (1974) suggested that water stress or N fertilization can increase flowering through the same metabolic intermediary namely arginine or some related N-containing substance~
Manipulation of Native Nut Crops
pespite the importance of coniferous nuts in many parts of th~
world only two pine species appear to be cultivated for their seed crops P
pinea in the Medi terranean and - sibirica in the Urals (Pravdin 1963) The pinyons of estern North America and Meiico ar mos~ly ignored in terma of cultiv~tion or domestication
Little (1140) was among the first to suggest that pinyon nu~ prQduction could be augme~ted tbtough the USe of simple cultutal practices However these received little attention and we have no grea~er und~rstanding of the effi~lcy or econoic feasibility of these treatments now than we did more than 40 ~ears ago Nev~rtheles~ with the present emphasis on wocidland management ~uch treatmenta seem worthy of serious attention
Ca) selective thinning
Some pibyonsapear to be
18
Nut sizes from pruned and unpruned Pinus edulis trees
19
consistently good nut producers (Little 1940) Heavy producers usually show immature and old cones on branches and cones are conspicuous b~neath them Selective thinning of unpr04uctive trees should increase flowering of those left standing (Little 1940)
(b) basal pruning
Theoretically low branches receiving partial sun light do not photosynthesize enough energy to offset energy losses to respiration It follows that low branches are energy sinks that potentially r~b nutrients from seed crops To test this relationship Montano et al (1980) pruned baial branches of 70 to 80-year old pinyons (8 to 10 m tall) to a height of 15 m and SUbsequently determined effects of this treatment on seed development They reported av~rage nut volumes from gruned and ungruned trees were 040 cm and 032 cm and the average nut weights were 033 g and 020 g respectively (see Fig3) Also pruned trees produced a greater percentage of filled nuts 99 as opposed to 84 The effects observed were related to the growth of nuts already developing in cones when the treatment was applied
Basal pruning reduced disease and insect injury of southern pnes (Wilson and Rudolph 1970) Also pruned wood could b sold for ~uelwood potentially offsetting the cost of the benefits anticipated Owing to its simplicity and overall benefits basal pruning appears to merit greater attention
(c) fertilization
Fertilization usually stimulates female cone production (Puritch 1972) More specifically the following trends become apparent when studies are reviewed collectively
(1) N stimulates cone production even when N is applied with other nutrients (Morris and Beers 1969) Also trees producing greater cone yields generally have higher levels of tisue N than low producers
(2) The presence of specific amino acids (especially arginine) is a more reliable predictor of fruitfulness than tissue N content per se For example nitrat N ana ammcinium N increased Douglasshyfir foliar N content and shoot growth similarly However only nitrate N significantly increased arginine content which was positively and quantitatively related to female flower proshyduction (Ebell and McMullin 1970) Following ichmidtlings (1974) explanation of fruit shyfulness fertilization shyespecially with nitrate N - could increase tis~ue organip Nand consequently flowering
(d) cultivation and irrigation
Supplemental water could increase growth reSUlting in greater crown density and iurface area In times of drought additional water could prevent premature abortion of immature cones Drip irrigaeion technology may be feaible for som~ sites However it seems more likely that less intensive ~ethods will prove to be practical Among these are land treatments that direct precipitation run-off to trees improve infiltration or remove weed competition
CHRISTMAS TREES
Pinyons are harvested from natural stands and comprise about 25 of all
Christmas trees sold in New Mexico Arizona Colorado Wyoming Utah and Nevada (Sowder 1965) Trimmed branches also are used for wreath manufacture In spite of their slow growth in native stands pinyons have many desirable Christmas tree attributes including dense foliage symmetrical shape green color natural fragrance good branch angle and limb strength and good needle retention Plantation trees can reach marketable size in about 11 years (Fisher and Fa~cher 1987)
Stand Thinning
Several techniques can be used to improve tree quality Stand thinning allows remaining trees to receive sufficient sunlight for limbs to develop uniformly on all sides During the thinning operation handles can be made on main stems by removing branches at the trees base to a height of 30 em
Removal of branches below a full whorl of branches will allow another tree to be culturedmiddotfrom the stump after harvest A year after the first tree is cut the remaining low branches will begin to turn up and all but one of these can be pruned to promote the growth of a new central leader
Pruning and Shearing
~he ideal pin~on Christmas tree resembles an inverted cone wide at the base and tapered uniformly tg the tip Accemiddotptable crown taper for pines is 40 to 90 but for spr~ces and firs is 40 to 70 Pruning and shearing will make native pinyons conform more closely to the ideal which improve marke tabi Ii ty
Pruning removes dead or unattractive branches Shearing is used to co~troi leader growth so the distance between whorls is not excessive increase the number of branches arising from branch buds and promote the pyramidal crown f~Im Because pinyon leader growth rarely exceeds 20 cm excessive distance between whorls is rarely a problem Pruning and shearing most often will be used to correct uneven o~oid and thia crowns
In pines eac~ needle bun~le ~ontains a dormant or axillary bud Removal of a branch terminal at the proper time promotes development of these dormant buds into short shoots improving crown density In singleshyneedled conifers such as spruces firs and Douglas-fir intermediate buds are produced along the terminal branch stem between each whorl For this reason they can be sheared during any season of the year and produce about the same number of branch buds However with pines the number and size of branch buds developed after shearing depends upon the physiological state of the tree when sheared
Pines respond best when sheared shortly after height growth is complete but before tissues in the new shoot becom~ woody S~oots prun~d at this time produce two to four times the number of buds found on unpruned trees Pinyon shoots elongata during late June but needles continue to elongatemiddotduring July and August after branches are fully elongated Buds are formed in late August
From studies conducted with other pine Christmas tree species the following course of treatments can be recommended for pinyons
1 Before spring growth begins prune all double and multiple leaders (eg bullbull April)
~ She~r when needles on new candles are 13 as long as last yeara needles (usually from June 15 to July 1)
3 Shape the tre~ from the top down by shearing the tips of lateral branches Pzomote a conical crown so thebase is no more than 90 as wide as the tree is tall Ideally taper should be 40-90 Avoid shearing back to woody tissue because this encourages multiple leaders
4 If the tree is oblong rather than tapered shear the top in June or eirly July and the sides in late summer fall or winter Growt~ of laterals will be reduced Repeat steps 2-4 yearly as needed
5 Avoid shearing the year the tree is ~o be marke~ed
20
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES I CROP
bullJ
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH WOODLAND STA~D MANAGEMENT l
James T Fisher John G Me~al and Gregory C Phillips
Abstract-- New Mexicos native pinyon pines produce high-value crops including nuts Christmas trees and nursery or~amentals Crop values can be increased through more intensive stand management and more innovative marketing of such products as pinyon nuts and Christmas trees to compete with imported products Research needs pertaining to these crops are discussed
1 Ne~ Mexico State University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-II
2 Authors are re~pectively
Professor and Associate Professors Dept of Agronomy and Horticulture New
Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
13
INTRODUCTlON
Pinyons (pinon p~nes) ield diverse productsranging frolll valuable nuts ~nd landscape sp~cll11ens to fuelwood
Rowever littleforethought is give~ to crop illlprovelllentbeforecropsare ha~vested This paper addresses high-value pinyon products ~hat appear to justify at least modest levels omiddotf lIIanacelllent inputs to improve product quality quantity or avail- abilty Greater elllphasis on ~ntensive lIIanagelllentmiddot recognizes the nee~ for deriving economic benefits as well as the need for cu~todiai lIIanagelllent to pre~erve the
woodland type (Lanner 1977)
Pinyon and pinyon-juniper woodlands hav~ be~n the su~lect of severai symposia The reader iamp directed to proceedings of these lIIeetings providing several papers on the subject [~ee Gifford and Busby (19-75) Aldon and Loring (1977) Evrett (1987) and a fbrthcoming volume reporting a n~~ional lIIeeting held in Mexico in 1987]
This paper specifi~ally exalllines pinyon nut production including lIIarket developlllents that potentially threaten regional markets and the selective harvest of Christlllas trees and nursery or~alllentals Methods available t~ illlprove crop profitability will be discussed in addition to cuirent and future research
NUT BEARING PINES
Plant taxonomists recognize about 100 species in the falllily Pinaceae Alllongthese 12 to 26 species produce quality edible nuts (Rosengarten 1984 Lanner 1981) An edible nut is large middot(generallly les8 than 2200 seedkg) and has a thin shell that can be cracked with the teeth Pines producing edible nuts are found mostly in Europe Asia and western North middotAmerica Large ~dlblen~ts are found ~ostiyalllong the ~tone pines ~Sub8ection Celllbraa) nat~ve to Europe and ASia and the pinyon pines (Subsection Celllbroides) native to North Alllerica
Pinyons are dwarf trees nd shrubS 9f sellliarid regions of the southwestern Uni ted Sta tes and Mexico Because pinyons grow slowly it ismiddot difficult to lustify th~ cost of establishing and cultivatin~ p~aniations for nut production IncreaSingly nuts gathered
from the stone pines are imported f~om Asia and marketed at a lIIuch lower cost According to D~nielFox (pers C~IIII11) about 1000 ~tric tons of ~helled Asian pine nuts are imported each year Re also reports that abou~ 100 ton~ of ~ pinea nuts are illlported from Portugal and Spain
To protect pinyonnut m~rkets it lIIay becollle necessary to develop criteria that effectively distinguish pinyon nuts frolll illlported pine ~uts~ To exallline the feasibility of developing these criteria we will examine t~egeographic ranges and speclal characteristics of nut-producing pines under their respective subsections of the family Pinaceae proposed by Critchfield and Little (1966)
lli Subsec tiOn Celllbroides (Pinyons)
Pines classified und~i the subse~tion Ce~bi~ides (pinyons) have 1-5 needles in a fascicle Seeds are large wingl~ss a~d sOlllewhat oval in shape Lanner (1981) reported 11 species but a more recent treatlllent ofmiddot the alliance r~cognizes 15ta~a (Bailey and Ha~ksworth 1988) Eight species occur in the United States 12 in Mexico and 3 in New Mexico (P edulis I lIIonophylla and I~di-cOlor) The pinyon species discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988)include
Uni ted States
(l) Pinus edulis (pinyon) t 4200 seedkg
The predominant pinyon species of New Mexico Widespread in the southwestern United States lust
entering Wyollling and extending south through Utah Colorado and ~ew ~~xico to the western ~nd of Oklahollla~ west Texas and the northern border of Chihuahua extending west throughout lIIuch of Arizona to an outlier in eastern California Range ov~rlaps ~ith P celllbroides in south~rn New Mexico and Arizona and with P monophylla at the westerD edge of its range (southw~stern Utah northwestern Arizona and the New York Mountains o~ sOuthern California (Fig 1) Kay occa~ionally intergrade with P lIIonophylla
(2) monophylla lsingleleaf plny~n)
[ 2400 seed kg ] The pinyon pine ~fthe Great
14
bull P SAalNIANA bull P aMIIilOIOEl III Po OUAOIIIIOUA bull P MONOPttYLLA bull P eDULIS
Figure 1 Diatrlbution of pinyon pines in lJOuthwestern United States and northern Mexieo
Basin and Mohave Desert Com~onin Nevada and in parts of southern California and western Utah but also ex~ends acr~ss Arizona and southwestern Ke~ Mexico (ig~ 1)
United States and Mexico
(3) Pinus middotcellbroides (Mexican pinyon)
[ 2400 seedkg J Range widespread at low
elevations in the mountains bordering the arid plate~u of northern Mexico Ranges from southeastern Arizona southwestern Arizona southwestern New Mexico and western Texas through northern Mexico and south to Puebla and Mexico City (Fig 1) Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) middotrecognize three subspecies cembroides (northern Mexi~o) lagunae (Baja California) and orizabensis (Central Mexico) (Fig 1)
(4) P californiarum-
Subspecies californiarum
occurs in southern Californ~a and northern Baja California I californiarum subsp fallax (formerly P edulis var fallax) is-found in Arizona
(5) Pinus discolor (border pinyon)
Formerly P cembroides var bicolor~ Principal range lies along both sides of the intershynational boundary between Mexico and the United States extending about 120 miles into eac~ country Sp-ecifically occurs in southeast Arizona extreme southwest New Mexico northeas~ ~onora and northwest Chihuahua
( 6) quad r ifo11a (Parry pinyon) [ 2100 seedkg J
Confined to 10 elevations in the dry mountains of southern California from the San Jacinto Mountains south to the S~erra San Ped~o Martir Its range overlaps that of I monOphylla but no intermediates have been reported (Fig 1)middot
(7) Pinus remo ta (paper-shell pinyon also called
Texas pinyon) Formerly P cembroides var
remota Main range in Coahuila but reaches parts of adjacent Nuevo Leon southeastern Chihuahua and rexas (Bailey and Wendt 1979) Has thinnest shell among pinyons~
Local Endemics Found Exclusively in Mexico
(8) Pinus culminicola (Potosi pinyon)
Documented occurrence Cerro PotOSi Nuevo Leon Mexico
(9) johannis Li~ited r4nge in Mexico
(west of Concepcion del Oro Zacatecas
(10) Pin~s maximartinezii (Martinez pinyon)
Documented Occurrence Zacatecas Mexico
(11 ) Pinus nelsonii (Nelson pinyon)
Documented ocaurrence north- eastern Mexicobull
(12) ~pinceana (Pinca pinyon)
15
Documented occurrence northshy Grows at high elevations inth~ eastern and eastern Mexco Alps and the Carpathian ~ountains
(3) bullbull koraiensis S~eb amp Zucco ~ SUDsect PINEAE Shaw (Korean pine)
[ 1800 seedkg](n Pinuspinea L Rngebull through Korea and (Italian stone pine) eastern Manchuria into southeastern [ 1300 seedkg ] Siberia with outlirs ~ri t~e
Wide_pread in Spain and Japalliue islands of Honshu and Portugal and aiong the northern and Shikoku (Fig 2) eastern shores ~f the Mediterranean Sea including minor occurrences (4) P sibirica near the north coast of Turkey rSibe~ian ston~ pine(Fig 2) [ 4000 seedkg
Ranges from the Ural Mountains Pinus Subsect CEMBRAE through western and central ~iberia---(Stone Pines) to northern Mongolia with outliers
in northern Russia (Fig ~)(1) Pinus albicaulis Engelm~
(whitebark pine) Pinus Subsect GERARDIANAE [ 5700 seedk ] -- shy
Occurs at high eleyations fro~ (1) gerardian Wall~ central British Columbia sout~ to (Chilgoza pine)s~uthern Sierra Nevada of [ 400 seedkg J California the Ruby Mountain of Noted for large edible seed Nevada and the mOuntains of Confined to mountainous regions of northwestern Wyoming eastern Asia principally in
eastern Afgha~itan~ parts of (2) Pin~s cembra L Pakistan ~nd ~catt~red localities
(Swiss stone pine) in the dry inner valleys of the [ 4400 seedkg 1 north~rn Himalayas (Fig 2)
eocIIn_a _shyFigure 2 Distribution of edible pine nuts in Europe and
Asia
16
bull
Pinus Subsect SABINIANAE Loud Opportumiddotnities aay exist to separate pinyOn nuts other froa pine nuts Most
(I) Pinu~ ~abiniana Dougl pine nuts have a ridge where the (Digger pine) membranous wing is attached Also [ 1300 seed kg criteria based upon seed content could
Confined to California Found be applied when large vol~aes of in dry foothills of ihe Sierra imported pine nuts are suspected to be Nevada and the Coast Rangemiddot Ras aislabeled Tests aight exaine levels large edible but rather hard-shelled of starch fat or piotein or even seeds (Fig bull1) smiddotpecific enzyaes (Table 1)
(2) Pinus coulteri D Don (Coulter pine) New Mexico Pinyon Nut Crops ( 3100 seedkg]
Restr~cted to the coastal mountains of cen~ral and southern Pinyon nuts have been harvested California and northern Baja commercially for about 50 years California (Little 1938a) The nut crop averages
045 to 09 million kg (I to 2 million The preceding list makes clear that pounds) annually for New Mexico Arizona
many pinyon species are found in North and Colorado but one year exceeded 36 America with the greatest number found million kg (Little 1942) The more in Mexico Further it seems neither productive stands may yield 330 kglha practical nor necessary to develop (300 lbsac) during a good year market criteria to separate nut products (Springfield 1976) At a cur~ent found among these species Morphological retail value of $883 I kg value on a differences among pinyon nuts are per hectare basis would be $297000 generally so slight as ~o pre~lude (120000 lac) Fowler and Oliver (this practical field identification publication) provide additional Also most Mexican species occur as information on nut values rather isolated populations with local value but low export potential For New Mexico species criteria would have to recognize as genuinely natibullbull those Pinyon Reproductive Biology nuts produced by at least three pinyon species edulis monophylla and P di$color Again nut morphological Pinyons begin bearing nuts at about criteria would not separate these 25 years but crops do not reach pinyons from other species of the same commercial size until about 75 years subsection (Little 1941) Cones are borne
Table 1-- Composition of pine nuts and true nuts (Lanner 1981 Woodroof 1979) All values are expressed as percentages
Kernal H2O Protein Fat Carboshyhydrates
Ash
Pinyon nuts P edulisP monophIllaImiddot cembroides
58 31 14 10 19
60 23 60
18 54 14
3
Pine nuts P sabinianaP pineaImiddot sibirica P lerardiana
49 30 34 19 14
60 48 63 51
9 7
12 23
4
True nuts
Almond Pecan Pistacio Walnut Peanut
51 52
shy45
47 30
33
19 9
20 15 26
54 73 53 64 39
20 15 19 16 24
3 2 3 2
laterally ~n the a~il of a scale leaf near branch tips (jhaw~ 1914) although a r~re observation 01 termin~l cones b~s been reported (Lanner 1969) Developing cones can be ~een in the e~rliest stages as ovulate primordia in longitudinal sections of bu4s Within buds ovulate cone primordia are only at the tip of the bud an~have larger and broader bases than spur shoots (Little 1938-b)
ovuiate primordia are formed in buds in August and September and cones mature by October of the third year Because 3 years are required for seeds to mature treatments applied to stimulate nut quantity~il~ require 3 years before evaluation The first year must be especially suited to production of ovulate primordia and the second and third seaasons favorable to growth and maturation of cones and nuts(Li~tle 1938b)
The Periodicity of Bumper Crops
Pinyon ~ut crops are prodUCed at intervals of 3 to 7 years The periodicity of above-average cropshas been related to the dtain of nutrients required to produce the crop an~ the time required for nutrients to be replenished Developing cones act as food sinks for carbohydrate and nitrogen (N) reserves at the expense of vegetative structures (Pickmann and Kozlowski 1969 1970 ~ook and S~et 1971) Consequently large cone crops adversely affect vegetative tree growth
Forcella (1981) found cone production was inversely relate~ to temperatures during late-August to early September Maximum production in northern New Mexeio occurred when the mean maximum weekly temperature was below 24 degrees C Temperatures above 24 degrees C resulted in virtually no cone crops
However other environmental factors~ acting independently or inte~actinl with temperature caa be involved Rainfall is positively correia ted with the flowering of pines This is because photosynthat~ 9roduction is needed to develop carbohydrate reserves and this process is limited by ~lant water stres~ Also tree growth is determined by photosynthetic gain and the onset of abundant flowering is more directly rela~ed to tree siZe than
age (Schmidtling 1969) More speci1icallj nut ~roduction is e~osely
related to crown surface area
An exception to the adverse influen~e of wa~er ~tress is the positive roie stress plays in the initiat~on of ovula~e primordia Studies have shown that summer moisture
stress results in an above-average flower crop the following spring This suggests moisture stress at the time of ovulate primordia formation promotes reproductive rather than vegetative bull growth This view is supported by studies shOwing that branches exposed to full sun bore more female cones and had lower tissue moisture levels than partially shaded branches (Wareing~ 1958)
Water ~tress also can indirectly affect flowering thro~gh its interaction with tree nutrient status E~ell (1970) showd that nitrate fertili~ation or exposure to moisture stress caused similar tiowe~ing responses in Dougl~s-firaccompaniedby increases in total foliage N content and free amino
acids especially ~rgini~e Similarly Schmidtling (1974) suggested that water stress or N fertilization can increase flowering through the same metabolic intermediary namely arginine or some related N-containing substance~
Manipulation of Native Nut Crops
pespite the importance of coniferous nuts in many parts of th~
world only two pine species appear to be cultivated for their seed crops P
pinea in the Medi terranean and - sibirica in the Urals (Pravdin 1963) The pinyons of estern North America and Meiico ar mos~ly ignored in terma of cultiv~tion or domestication
Little (1140) was among the first to suggest that pinyon nu~ prQduction could be augme~ted tbtough the USe of simple cultutal practices However these received little attention and we have no grea~er und~rstanding of the effi~lcy or econoic feasibility of these treatments now than we did more than 40 ~ears ago Nev~rtheles~ with the present emphasis on wocidland management ~uch treatmenta seem worthy of serious attention
Ca) selective thinning
Some pibyonsapear to be
18
Nut sizes from pruned and unpruned Pinus edulis trees
19
consistently good nut producers (Little 1940) Heavy producers usually show immature and old cones on branches and cones are conspicuous b~neath them Selective thinning of unpr04uctive trees should increase flowering of those left standing (Little 1940)
(b) basal pruning
Theoretically low branches receiving partial sun light do not photosynthesize enough energy to offset energy losses to respiration It follows that low branches are energy sinks that potentially r~b nutrients from seed crops To test this relationship Montano et al (1980) pruned baial branches of 70 to 80-year old pinyons (8 to 10 m tall) to a height of 15 m and SUbsequently determined effects of this treatment on seed development They reported av~rage nut volumes from gruned and ungruned trees were 040 cm and 032 cm and the average nut weights were 033 g and 020 g respectively (see Fig3) Also pruned trees produced a greater percentage of filled nuts 99 as opposed to 84 The effects observed were related to the growth of nuts already developing in cones when the treatment was applied
Basal pruning reduced disease and insect injury of southern pnes (Wilson and Rudolph 1970) Also pruned wood could b sold for ~uelwood potentially offsetting the cost of the benefits anticipated Owing to its simplicity and overall benefits basal pruning appears to merit greater attention
(c) fertilization
Fertilization usually stimulates female cone production (Puritch 1972) More specifically the following trends become apparent when studies are reviewed collectively
(1) N stimulates cone production even when N is applied with other nutrients (Morris and Beers 1969) Also trees producing greater cone yields generally have higher levels of tisue N than low producers
(2) The presence of specific amino acids (especially arginine) is a more reliable predictor of fruitfulness than tissue N content per se For example nitrat N ana ammcinium N increased Douglasshyfir foliar N content and shoot growth similarly However only nitrate N significantly increased arginine content which was positively and quantitatively related to female flower proshyduction (Ebell and McMullin 1970) Following ichmidtlings (1974) explanation of fruit shyfulness fertilization shyespecially with nitrate N - could increase tis~ue organip Nand consequently flowering
(d) cultivation and irrigation
Supplemental water could increase growth reSUlting in greater crown density and iurface area In times of drought additional water could prevent premature abortion of immature cones Drip irrigaeion technology may be feaible for som~ sites However it seems more likely that less intensive ~ethods will prove to be practical Among these are land treatments that direct precipitation run-off to trees improve infiltration or remove weed competition
CHRISTMAS TREES
Pinyons are harvested from natural stands and comprise about 25 of all
Christmas trees sold in New Mexico Arizona Colorado Wyoming Utah and Nevada (Sowder 1965) Trimmed branches also are used for wreath manufacture In spite of their slow growth in native stands pinyons have many desirable Christmas tree attributes including dense foliage symmetrical shape green color natural fragrance good branch angle and limb strength and good needle retention Plantation trees can reach marketable size in about 11 years (Fisher and Fa~cher 1987)
Stand Thinning
Several techniques can be used to improve tree quality Stand thinning allows remaining trees to receive sufficient sunlight for limbs to develop uniformly on all sides During the thinning operation handles can be made on main stems by removing branches at the trees base to a height of 30 em
Removal of branches below a full whorl of branches will allow another tree to be culturedmiddotfrom the stump after harvest A year after the first tree is cut the remaining low branches will begin to turn up and all but one of these can be pruned to promote the growth of a new central leader
Pruning and Shearing
~he ideal pin~on Christmas tree resembles an inverted cone wide at the base and tapered uniformly tg the tip Accemiddotptable crown taper for pines is 40 to 90 but for spr~ces and firs is 40 to 70 Pruning and shearing will make native pinyons conform more closely to the ideal which improve marke tabi Ii ty
Pruning removes dead or unattractive branches Shearing is used to co~troi leader growth so the distance between whorls is not excessive increase the number of branches arising from branch buds and promote the pyramidal crown f~Im Because pinyon leader growth rarely exceeds 20 cm excessive distance between whorls is rarely a problem Pruning and shearing most often will be used to correct uneven o~oid and thia crowns
In pines eac~ needle bun~le ~ontains a dormant or axillary bud Removal of a branch terminal at the proper time promotes development of these dormant buds into short shoots improving crown density In singleshyneedled conifers such as spruces firs and Douglas-fir intermediate buds are produced along the terminal branch stem between each whorl For this reason they can be sheared during any season of the year and produce about the same number of branch buds However with pines the number and size of branch buds developed after shearing depends upon the physiological state of the tree when sheared
Pines respond best when sheared shortly after height growth is complete but before tissues in the new shoot becom~ woody S~oots prun~d at this time produce two to four times the number of buds found on unpruned trees Pinyon shoots elongata during late June but needles continue to elongatemiddotduring July and August after branches are fully elongated Buds are formed in late August
From studies conducted with other pine Christmas tree species the following course of treatments can be recommended for pinyons
1 Before spring growth begins prune all double and multiple leaders (eg bullbull April)
~ She~r when needles on new candles are 13 as long as last yeara needles (usually from June 15 to July 1)
3 Shape the tre~ from the top down by shearing the tips of lateral branches Pzomote a conical crown so thebase is no more than 90 as wide as the tree is tall Ideally taper should be 40-90 Avoid shearing back to woody tissue because this encourages multiple leaders
4 If the tree is oblong rather than tapered shear the top in June or eirly July and the sides in late summer fall or winter Growt~ of laterals will be reduced Repeat steps 2-4 yearly as needed
5 Avoid shearing the year the tree is ~o be marke~ed
20
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
INTRODUCTlON
Pinyons (pinon p~nes) ield diverse productsranging frolll valuable nuts ~nd landscape sp~cll11ens to fuelwood
Rowever littleforethought is give~ to crop illlprovelllentbeforecropsare ha~vested This paper addresses high-value pinyon products ~hat appear to justify at least modest levels omiddotf lIIanacelllent inputs to improve product quality quantity or avail- abilty Greater elllphasis on ~ntensive lIIanagelllentmiddot recognizes the nee~ for deriving economic benefits as well as the need for cu~todiai lIIanagelllent to pre~erve the
woodland type (Lanner 1977)
Pinyon and pinyon-juniper woodlands hav~ be~n the su~lect of severai symposia The reader iamp directed to proceedings of these lIIeetings providing several papers on the subject [~ee Gifford and Busby (19-75) Aldon and Loring (1977) Evrett (1987) and a fbrthcoming volume reporting a n~~ional lIIeeting held in Mexico in 1987]
This paper specifi~ally exalllines pinyon nut production including lIIarket developlllents that potentially threaten regional markets and the selective harvest of Christlllas trees and nursery or~alllentals Methods available t~ illlprove crop profitability will be discussed in addition to cuirent and future research
NUT BEARING PINES
Plant taxonomists recognize about 100 species in the falllily Pinaceae Alllongthese 12 to 26 species produce quality edible nuts (Rosengarten 1984 Lanner 1981) An edible nut is large middot(generallly les8 than 2200 seedkg) and has a thin shell that can be cracked with the teeth Pines producing edible nuts are found mostly in Europe Asia and western North middotAmerica Large ~dlblen~ts are found ~ostiyalllong the ~tone pines ~Sub8ection Celllbraa) nat~ve to Europe and ASia and the pinyon pines (Subsection Celllbroides) native to North Alllerica
Pinyons are dwarf trees nd shrubS 9f sellliarid regions of the southwestern Uni ted Sta tes and Mexico Because pinyons grow slowly it ismiddot difficult to lustify th~ cost of establishing and cultivatin~ p~aniations for nut production IncreaSingly nuts gathered
from the stone pines are imported f~om Asia and marketed at a lIIuch lower cost According to D~nielFox (pers C~IIII11) about 1000 ~tric tons of ~helled Asian pine nuts are imported each year Re also reports that abou~ 100 ton~ of ~ pinea nuts are illlported from Portugal and Spain
To protect pinyonnut m~rkets it lIIay becollle necessary to develop criteria that effectively distinguish pinyon nuts frolll illlported pine ~uts~ To exallline the feasibility of developing these criteria we will examine t~egeographic ranges and speclal characteristics of nut-producing pines under their respective subsections of the family Pinaceae proposed by Critchfield and Little (1966)
lli Subsec tiOn Celllbroides (Pinyons)
Pines classified und~i the subse~tion Ce~bi~ides (pinyons) have 1-5 needles in a fascicle Seeds are large wingl~ss a~d sOlllewhat oval in shape Lanner (1981) reported 11 species but a more recent treatlllent ofmiddot the alliance r~cognizes 15ta~a (Bailey and Ha~ksworth 1988) Eight species occur in the United States 12 in Mexico and 3 in New Mexico (P edulis I lIIonophylla and I~di-cOlor) The pinyon species discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988)include
Uni ted States
(l) Pinus edulis (pinyon) t 4200 seedkg
The predominant pinyon species of New Mexico Widespread in the southwestern United States lust
entering Wyollling and extending south through Utah Colorado and ~ew ~~xico to the western ~nd of Oklahollla~ west Texas and the northern border of Chihuahua extending west throughout lIIuch of Arizona to an outlier in eastern California Range ov~rlaps ~ith P celllbroides in south~rn New Mexico and Arizona and with P monophylla at the westerD edge of its range (southw~stern Utah northwestern Arizona and the New York Mountains o~ sOuthern California (Fig 1) Kay occa~ionally intergrade with P lIIonophylla
(2) monophylla lsingleleaf plny~n)
[ 2400 seed kg ] The pinyon pine ~fthe Great
14
bull P SAalNIANA bull P aMIIilOIOEl III Po OUAOIIIIOUA bull P MONOPttYLLA bull P eDULIS
Figure 1 Diatrlbution of pinyon pines in lJOuthwestern United States and northern Mexieo
Basin and Mohave Desert Com~onin Nevada and in parts of southern California and western Utah but also ex~ends acr~ss Arizona and southwestern Ke~ Mexico (ig~ 1)
United States and Mexico
(3) Pinus middotcellbroides (Mexican pinyon)
[ 2400 seedkg J Range widespread at low
elevations in the mountains bordering the arid plate~u of northern Mexico Ranges from southeastern Arizona southwestern Arizona southwestern New Mexico and western Texas through northern Mexico and south to Puebla and Mexico City (Fig 1) Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) middotrecognize three subspecies cembroides (northern Mexi~o) lagunae (Baja California) and orizabensis (Central Mexico) (Fig 1)
(4) P californiarum-
Subspecies californiarum
occurs in southern Californ~a and northern Baja California I californiarum subsp fallax (formerly P edulis var fallax) is-found in Arizona
(5) Pinus discolor (border pinyon)
Formerly P cembroides var bicolor~ Principal range lies along both sides of the intershynational boundary between Mexico and the United States extending about 120 miles into eac~ country Sp-ecifically occurs in southeast Arizona extreme southwest New Mexico northeas~ ~onora and northwest Chihuahua
( 6) quad r ifo11a (Parry pinyon) [ 2100 seedkg J
Confined to 10 elevations in the dry mountains of southern California from the San Jacinto Mountains south to the S~erra San Ped~o Martir Its range overlaps that of I monOphylla but no intermediates have been reported (Fig 1)middot
(7) Pinus remo ta (paper-shell pinyon also called
Texas pinyon) Formerly P cembroides var
remota Main range in Coahuila but reaches parts of adjacent Nuevo Leon southeastern Chihuahua and rexas (Bailey and Wendt 1979) Has thinnest shell among pinyons~
Local Endemics Found Exclusively in Mexico
(8) Pinus culminicola (Potosi pinyon)
Documented occurrence Cerro PotOSi Nuevo Leon Mexico
(9) johannis Li~ited r4nge in Mexico
(west of Concepcion del Oro Zacatecas
(10) Pin~s maximartinezii (Martinez pinyon)
Documented Occurrence Zacatecas Mexico
(11 ) Pinus nelsonii (Nelson pinyon)
Documented ocaurrence north- eastern Mexicobull
(12) ~pinceana (Pinca pinyon)
15
Documented occurrence northshy Grows at high elevations inth~ eastern and eastern Mexco Alps and the Carpathian ~ountains
(3) bullbull koraiensis S~eb amp Zucco ~ SUDsect PINEAE Shaw (Korean pine)
[ 1800 seedkg](n Pinuspinea L Rngebull through Korea and (Italian stone pine) eastern Manchuria into southeastern [ 1300 seedkg ] Siberia with outlirs ~ri t~e
Wide_pread in Spain and Japalliue islands of Honshu and Portugal and aiong the northern and Shikoku (Fig 2) eastern shores ~f the Mediterranean Sea including minor occurrences (4) P sibirica near the north coast of Turkey rSibe~ian ston~ pine(Fig 2) [ 4000 seedkg
Ranges from the Ural Mountains Pinus Subsect CEMBRAE through western and central ~iberia---(Stone Pines) to northern Mongolia with outliers
in northern Russia (Fig ~)(1) Pinus albicaulis Engelm~
(whitebark pine) Pinus Subsect GERARDIANAE [ 5700 seedk ] -- shy
Occurs at high eleyations fro~ (1) gerardian Wall~ central British Columbia sout~ to (Chilgoza pine)s~uthern Sierra Nevada of [ 400 seedkg J California the Ruby Mountain of Noted for large edible seed Nevada and the mOuntains of Confined to mountainous regions of northwestern Wyoming eastern Asia principally in
eastern Afgha~itan~ parts of (2) Pin~s cembra L Pakistan ~nd ~catt~red localities
(Swiss stone pine) in the dry inner valleys of the [ 4400 seedkg 1 north~rn Himalayas (Fig 2)
eocIIn_a _shyFigure 2 Distribution of edible pine nuts in Europe and
Asia
16
bull
Pinus Subsect SABINIANAE Loud Opportumiddotnities aay exist to separate pinyOn nuts other froa pine nuts Most
(I) Pinu~ ~abiniana Dougl pine nuts have a ridge where the (Digger pine) membranous wing is attached Also [ 1300 seed kg criteria based upon seed content could
Confined to California Found be applied when large vol~aes of in dry foothills of ihe Sierra imported pine nuts are suspected to be Nevada and the Coast Rangemiddot Ras aislabeled Tests aight exaine levels large edible but rather hard-shelled of starch fat or piotein or even seeds (Fig bull1) smiddotpecific enzyaes (Table 1)
(2) Pinus coulteri D Don (Coulter pine) New Mexico Pinyon Nut Crops ( 3100 seedkg]
Restr~cted to the coastal mountains of cen~ral and southern Pinyon nuts have been harvested California and northern Baja commercially for about 50 years California (Little 1938a) The nut crop averages
045 to 09 million kg (I to 2 million The preceding list makes clear that pounds) annually for New Mexico Arizona
many pinyon species are found in North and Colorado but one year exceeded 36 America with the greatest number found million kg (Little 1942) The more in Mexico Further it seems neither productive stands may yield 330 kglha practical nor necessary to develop (300 lbsac) during a good year market criteria to separate nut products (Springfield 1976) At a cur~ent found among these species Morphological retail value of $883 I kg value on a differences among pinyon nuts are per hectare basis would be $297000 generally so slight as ~o pre~lude (120000 lac) Fowler and Oliver (this practical field identification publication) provide additional Also most Mexican species occur as information on nut values rather isolated populations with local value but low export potential For New Mexico species criteria would have to recognize as genuinely natibullbull those Pinyon Reproductive Biology nuts produced by at least three pinyon species edulis monophylla and P di$color Again nut morphological Pinyons begin bearing nuts at about criteria would not separate these 25 years but crops do not reach pinyons from other species of the same commercial size until about 75 years subsection (Little 1941) Cones are borne
Table 1-- Composition of pine nuts and true nuts (Lanner 1981 Woodroof 1979) All values are expressed as percentages
Kernal H2O Protein Fat Carboshyhydrates
Ash
Pinyon nuts P edulisP monophIllaImiddot cembroides
58 31 14 10 19
60 23 60
18 54 14
3
Pine nuts P sabinianaP pineaImiddot sibirica P lerardiana
49 30 34 19 14
60 48 63 51
9 7
12 23
4
True nuts
Almond Pecan Pistacio Walnut Peanut
51 52
shy45
47 30
33
19 9
20 15 26
54 73 53 64 39
20 15 19 16 24
3 2 3 2
laterally ~n the a~il of a scale leaf near branch tips (jhaw~ 1914) although a r~re observation 01 termin~l cones b~s been reported (Lanner 1969) Developing cones can be ~een in the e~rliest stages as ovulate primordia in longitudinal sections of bu4s Within buds ovulate cone primordia are only at the tip of the bud an~have larger and broader bases than spur shoots (Little 1938-b)
ovuiate primordia are formed in buds in August and September and cones mature by October of the third year Because 3 years are required for seeds to mature treatments applied to stimulate nut quantity~il~ require 3 years before evaluation The first year must be especially suited to production of ovulate primordia and the second and third seaasons favorable to growth and maturation of cones and nuts(Li~tle 1938b)
The Periodicity of Bumper Crops
Pinyon ~ut crops are prodUCed at intervals of 3 to 7 years The periodicity of above-average cropshas been related to the dtain of nutrients required to produce the crop an~ the time required for nutrients to be replenished Developing cones act as food sinks for carbohydrate and nitrogen (N) reserves at the expense of vegetative structures (Pickmann and Kozlowski 1969 1970 ~ook and S~et 1971) Consequently large cone crops adversely affect vegetative tree growth
Forcella (1981) found cone production was inversely relate~ to temperatures during late-August to early September Maximum production in northern New Mexeio occurred when the mean maximum weekly temperature was below 24 degrees C Temperatures above 24 degrees C resulted in virtually no cone crops
However other environmental factors~ acting independently or inte~actinl with temperature caa be involved Rainfall is positively correia ted with the flowering of pines This is because photosynthat~ 9roduction is needed to develop carbohydrate reserves and this process is limited by ~lant water stres~ Also tree growth is determined by photosynthetic gain and the onset of abundant flowering is more directly rela~ed to tree siZe than
age (Schmidtling 1969) More speci1icallj nut ~roduction is e~osely
related to crown surface area
An exception to the adverse influen~e of wa~er ~tress is the positive roie stress plays in the initiat~on of ovula~e primordia Studies have shown that summer moisture
stress results in an above-average flower crop the following spring This suggests moisture stress at the time of ovulate primordia formation promotes reproductive rather than vegetative bull growth This view is supported by studies shOwing that branches exposed to full sun bore more female cones and had lower tissue moisture levels than partially shaded branches (Wareing~ 1958)
Water ~tress also can indirectly affect flowering thro~gh its interaction with tree nutrient status E~ell (1970) showd that nitrate fertili~ation or exposure to moisture stress caused similar tiowe~ing responses in Dougl~s-firaccompaniedby increases in total foliage N content and free amino
acids especially ~rgini~e Similarly Schmidtling (1974) suggested that water stress or N fertilization can increase flowering through the same metabolic intermediary namely arginine or some related N-containing substance~
Manipulation of Native Nut Crops
pespite the importance of coniferous nuts in many parts of th~
world only two pine species appear to be cultivated for their seed crops P
pinea in the Medi terranean and - sibirica in the Urals (Pravdin 1963) The pinyons of estern North America and Meiico ar mos~ly ignored in terma of cultiv~tion or domestication
Little (1140) was among the first to suggest that pinyon nu~ prQduction could be augme~ted tbtough the USe of simple cultutal practices However these received little attention and we have no grea~er und~rstanding of the effi~lcy or econoic feasibility of these treatments now than we did more than 40 ~ears ago Nev~rtheles~ with the present emphasis on wocidland management ~uch treatmenta seem worthy of serious attention
Ca) selective thinning
Some pibyonsapear to be
18
Nut sizes from pruned and unpruned Pinus edulis trees
19
consistently good nut producers (Little 1940) Heavy producers usually show immature and old cones on branches and cones are conspicuous b~neath them Selective thinning of unpr04uctive trees should increase flowering of those left standing (Little 1940)
(b) basal pruning
Theoretically low branches receiving partial sun light do not photosynthesize enough energy to offset energy losses to respiration It follows that low branches are energy sinks that potentially r~b nutrients from seed crops To test this relationship Montano et al (1980) pruned baial branches of 70 to 80-year old pinyons (8 to 10 m tall) to a height of 15 m and SUbsequently determined effects of this treatment on seed development They reported av~rage nut volumes from gruned and ungruned trees were 040 cm and 032 cm and the average nut weights were 033 g and 020 g respectively (see Fig3) Also pruned trees produced a greater percentage of filled nuts 99 as opposed to 84 The effects observed were related to the growth of nuts already developing in cones when the treatment was applied
Basal pruning reduced disease and insect injury of southern pnes (Wilson and Rudolph 1970) Also pruned wood could b sold for ~uelwood potentially offsetting the cost of the benefits anticipated Owing to its simplicity and overall benefits basal pruning appears to merit greater attention
(c) fertilization
Fertilization usually stimulates female cone production (Puritch 1972) More specifically the following trends become apparent when studies are reviewed collectively
(1) N stimulates cone production even when N is applied with other nutrients (Morris and Beers 1969) Also trees producing greater cone yields generally have higher levels of tisue N than low producers
(2) The presence of specific amino acids (especially arginine) is a more reliable predictor of fruitfulness than tissue N content per se For example nitrat N ana ammcinium N increased Douglasshyfir foliar N content and shoot growth similarly However only nitrate N significantly increased arginine content which was positively and quantitatively related to female flower proshyduction (Ebell and McMullin 1970) Following ichmidtlings (1974) explanation of fruit shyfulness fertilization shyespecially with nitrate N - could increase tis~ue organip Nand consequently flowering
(d) cultivation and irrigation
Supplemental water could increase growth reSUlting in greater crown density and iurface area In times of drought additional water could prevent premature abortion of immature cones Drip irrigaeion technology may be feaible for som~ sites However it seems more likely that less intensive ~ethods will prove to be practical Among these are land treatments that direct precipitation run-off to trees improve infiltration or remove weed competition
CHRISTMAS TREES
Pinyons are harvested from natural stands and comprise about 25 of all
Christmas trees sold in New Mexico Arizona Colorado Wyoming Utah and Nevada (Sowder 1965) Trimmed branches also are used for wreath manufacture In spite of their slow growth in native stands pinyons have many desirable Christmas tree attributes including dense foliage symmetrical shape green color natural fragrance good branch angle and limb strength and good needle retention Plantation trees can reach marketable size in about 11 years (Fisher and Fa~cher 1987)
Stand Thinning
Several techniques can be used to improve tree quality Stand thinning allows remaining trees to receive sufficient sunlight for limbs to develop uniformly on all sides During the thinning operation handles can be made on main stems by removing branches at the trees base to a height of 30 em
Removal of branches below a full whorl of branches will allow another tree to be culturedmiddotfrom the stump after harvest A year after the first tree is cut the remaining low branches will begin to turn up and all but one of these can be pruned to promote the growth of a new central leader
Pruning and Shearing
~he ideal pin~on Christmas tree resembles an inverted cone wide at the base and tapered uniformly tg the tip Accemiddotptable crown taper for pines is 40 to 90 but for spr~ces and firs is 40 to 70 Pruning and shearing will make native pinyons conform more closely to the ideal which improve marke tabi Ii ty
Pruning removes dead or unattractive branches Shearing is used to co~troi leader growth so the distance between whorls is not excessive increase the number of branches arising from branch buds and promote the pyramidal crown f~Im Because pinyon leader growth rarely exceeds 20 cm excessive distance between whorls is rarely a problem Pruning and shearing most often will be used to correct uneven o~oid and thia crowns
In pines eac~ needle bun~le ~ontains a dormant or axillary bud Removal of a branch terminal at the proper time promotes development of these dormant buds into short shoots improving crown density In singleshyneedled conifers such as spruces firs and Douglas-fir intermediate buds are produced along the terminal branch stem between each whorl For this reason they can be sheared during any season of the year and produce about the same number of branch buds However with pines the number and size of branch buds developed after shearing depends upon the physiological state of the tree when sheared
Pines respond best when sheared shortly after height growth is complete but before tissues in the new shoot becom~ woody S~oots prun~d at this time produce two to four times the number of buds found on unpruned trees Pinyon shoots elongata during late June but needles continue to elongatemiddotduring July and August after branches are fully elongated Buds are formed in late August
From studies conducted with other pine Christmas tree species the following course of treatments can be recommended for pinyons
1 Before spring growth begins prune all double and multiple leaders (eg bullbull April)
~ She~r when needles on new candles are 13 as long as last yeara needles (usually from June 15 to July 1)
3 Shape the tre~ from the top down by shearing the tips of lateral branches Pzomote a conical crown so thebase is no more than 90 as wide as the tree is tall Ideally taper should be 40-90 Avoid shearing back to woody tissue because this encourages multiple leaders
4 If the tree is oblong rather than tapered shear the top in June or eirly July and the sides in late summer fall or winter Growt~ of laterals will be reduced Repeat steps 2-4 yearly as needed
5 Avoid shearing the year the tree is ~o be marke~ed
20
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
bull P SAalNIANA bull P aMIIilOIOEl III Po OUAOIIIIOUA bull P MONOPttYLLA bull P eDULIS
Figure 1 Diatrlbution of pinyon pines in lJOuthwestern United States and northern Mexieo
Basin and Mohave Desert Com~onin Nevada and in parts of southern California and western Utah but also ex~ends acr~ss Arizona and southwestern Ke~ Mexico (ig~ 1)
United States and Mexico
(3) Pinus middotcellbroides (Mexican pinyon)
[ 2400 seedkg J Range widespread at low
elevations in the mountains bordering the arid plate~u of northern Mexico Ranges from southeastern Arizona southwestern Arizona southwestern New Mexico and western Texas through northern Mexico and south to Puebla and Mexico City (Fig 1) Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) middotrecognize three subspecies cembroides (northern Mexi~o) lagunae (Baja California) and orizabensis (Central Mexico) (Fig 1)
(4) P californiarum-
Subspecies californiarum
occurs in southern Californ~a and northern Baja California I californiarum subsp fallax (formerly P edulis var fallax) is-found in Arizona
(5) Pinus discolor (border pinyon)
Formerly P cembroides var bicolor~ Principal range lies along both sides of the intershynational boundary between Mexico and the United States extending about 120 miles into eac~ country Sp-ecifically occurs in southeast Arizona extreme southwest New Mexico northeas~ ~onora and northwest Chihuahua
( 6) quad r ifo11a (Parry pinyon) [ 2100 seedkg J
Confined to 10 elevations in the dry mountains of southern California from the San Jacinto Mountains south to the S~erra San Ped~o Martir Its range overlaps that of I monOphylla but no intermediates have been reported (Fig 1)middot
(7) Pinus remo ta (paper-shell pinyon also called
Texas pinyon) Formerly P cembroides var
remota Main range in Coahuila but reaches parts of adjacent Nuevo Leon southeastern Chihuahua and rexas (Bailey and Wendt 1979) Has thinnest shell among pinyons~
Local Endemics Found Exclusively in Mexico
(8) Pinus culminicola (Potosi pinyon)
Documented occurrence Cerro PotOSi Nuevo Leon Mexico
(9) johannis Li~ited r4nge in Mexico
(west of Concepcion del Oro Zacatecas
(10) Pin~s maximartinezii (Martinez pinyon)
Documented Occurrence Zacatecas Mexico
(11 ) Pinus nelsonii (Nelson pinyon)
Documented ocaurrence north- eastern Mexicobull
(12) ~pinceana (Pinca pinyon)
15
Documented occurrence northshy Grows at high elevations inth~ eastern and eastern Mexco Alps and the Carpathian ~ountains
(3) bullbull koraiensis S~eb amp Zucco ~ SUDsect PINEAE Shaw (Korean pine)
[ 1800 seedkg](n Pinuspinea L Rngebull through Korea and (Italian stone pine) eastern Manchuria into southeastern [ 1300 seedkg ] Siberia with outlirs ~ri t~e
Wide_pread in Spain and Japalliue islands of Honshu and Portugal and aiong the northern and Shikoku (Fig 2) eastern shores ~f the Mediterranean Sea including minor occurrences (4) P sibirica near the north coast of Turkey rSibe~ian ston~ pine(Fig 2) [ 4000 seedkg
Ranges from the Ural Mountains Pinus Subsect CEMBRAE through western and central ~iberia---(Stone Pines) to northern Mongolia with outliers
in northern Russia (Fig ~)(1) Pinus albicaulis Engelm~
(whitebark pine) Pinus Subsect GERARDIANAE [ 5700 seedk ] -- shy
Occurs at high eleyations fro~ (1) gerardian Wall~ central British Columbia sout~ to (Chilgoza pine)s~uthern Sierra Nevada of [ 400 seedkg J California the Ruby Mountain of Noted for large edible seed Nevada and the mOuntains of Confined to mountainous regions of northwestern Wyoming eastern Asia principally in
eastern Afgha~itan~ parts of (2) Pin~s cembra L Pakistan ~nd ~catt~red localities
(Swiss stone pine) in the dry inner valleys of the [ 4400 seedkg 1 north~rn Himalayas (Fig 2)
eocIIn_a _shyFigure 2 Distribution of edible pine nuts in Europe and
Asia
16
bull
Pinus Subsect SABINIANAE Loud Opportumiddotnities aay exist to separate pinyOn nuts other froa pine nuts Most
(I) Pinu~ ~abiniana Dougl pine nuts have a ridge where the (Digger pine) membranous wing is attached Also [ 1300 seed kg criteria based upon seed content could
Confined to California Found be applied when large vol~aes of in dry foothills of ihe Sierra imported pine nuts are suspected to be Nevada and the Coast Rangemiddot Ras aislabeled Tests aight exaine levels large edible but rather hard-shelled of starch fat or piotein or even seeds (Fig bull1) smiddotpecific enzyaes (Table 1)
(2) Pinus coulteri D Don (Coulter pine) New Mexico Pinyon Nut Crops ( 3100 seedkg]
Restr~cted to the coastal mountains of cen~ral and southern Pinyon nuts have been harvested California and northern Baja commercially for about 50 years California (Little 1938a) The nut crop averages
045 to 09 million kg (I to 2 million The preceding list makes clear that pounds) annually for New Mexico Arizona
many pinyon species are found in North and Colorado but one year exceeded 36 America with the greatest number found million kg (Little 1942) The more in Mexico Further it seems neither productive stands may yield 330 kglha practical nor necessary to develop (300 lbsac) during a good year market criteria to separate nut products (Springfield 1976) At a cur~ent found among these species Morphological retail value of $883 I kg value on a differences among pinyon nuts are per hectare basis would be $297000 generally so slight as ~o pre~lude (120000 lac) Fowler and Oliver (this practical field identification publication) provide additional Also most Mexican species occur as information on nut values rather isolated populations with local value but low export potential For New Mexico species criteria would have to recognize as genuinely natibullbull those Pinyon Reproductive Biology nuts produced by at least three pinyon species edulis monophylla and P di$color Again nut morphological Pinyons begin bearing nuts at about criteria would not separate these 25 years but crops do not reach pinyons from other species of the same commercial size until about 75 years subsection (Little 1941) Cones are borne
Table 1-- Composition of pine nuts and true nuts (Lanner 1981 Woodroof 1979) All values are expressed as percentages
Kernal H2O Protein Fat Carboshyhydrates
Ash
Pinyon nuts P edulisP monophIllaImiddot cembroides
58 31 14 10 19
60 23 60
18 54 14
3
Pine nuts P sabinianaP pineaImiddot sibirica P lerardiana
49 30 34 19 14
60 48 63 51
9 7
12 23
4
True nuts
Almond Pecan Pistacio Walnut Peanut
51 52
shy45
47 30
33
19 9
20 15 26
54 73 53 64 39
20 15 19 16 24
3 2 3 2
laterally ~n the a~il of a scale leaf near branch tips (jhaw~ 1914) although a r~re observation 01 termin~l cones b~s been reported (Lanner 1969) Developing cones can be ~een in the e~rliest stages as ovulate primordia in longitudinal sections of bu4s Within buds ovulate cone primordia are only at the tip of the bud an~have larger and broader bases than spur shoots (Little 1938-b)
ovuiate primordia are formed in buds in August and September and cones mature by October of the third year Because 3 years are required for seeds to mature treatments applied to stimulate nut quantity~il~ require 3 years before evaluation The first year must be especially suited to production of ovulate primordia and the second and third seaasons favorable to growth and maturation of cones and nuts(Li~tle 1938b)
The Periodicity of Bumper Crops
Pinyon ~ut crops are prodUCed at intervals of 3 to 7 years The periodicity of above-average cropshas been related to the dtain of nutrients required to produce the crop an~ the time required for nutrients to be replenished Developing cones act as food sinks for carbohydrate and nitrogen (N) reserves at the expense of vegetative structures (Pickmann and Kozlowski 1969 1970 ~ook and S~et 1971) Consequently large cone crops adversely affect vegetative tree growth
Forcella (1981) found cone production was inversely relate~ to temperatures during late-August to early September Maximum production in northern New Mexeio occurred when the mean maximum weekly temperature was below 24 degrees C Temperatures above 24 degrees C resulted in virtually no cone crops
However other environmental factors~ acting independently or inte~actinl with temperature caa be involved Rainfall is positively correia ted with the flowering of pines This is because photosynthat~ 9roduction is needed to develop carbohydrate reserves and this process is limited by ~lant water stres~ Also tree growth is determined by photosynthetic gain and the onset of abundant flowering is more directly rela~ed to tree siZe than
age (Schmidtling 1969) More speci1icallj nut ~roduction is e~osely
related to crown surface area
An exception to the adverse influen~e of wa~er ~tress is the positive roie stress plays in the initiat~on of ovula~e primordia Studies have shown that summer moisture
stress results in an above-average flower crop the following spring This suggests moisture stress at the time of ovulate primordia formation promotes reproductive rather than vegetative bull growth This view is supported by studies shOwing that branches exposed to full sun bore more female cones and had lower tissue moisture levels than partially shaded branches (Wareing~ 1958)
Water ~tress also can indirectly affect flowering thro~gh its interaction with tree nutrient status E~ell (1970) showd that nitrate fertili~ation or exposure to moisture stress caused similar tiowe~ing responses in Dougl~s-firaccompaniedby increases in total foliage N content and free amino
acids especially ~rgini~e Similarly Schmidtling (1974) suggested that water stress or N fertilization can increase flowering through the same metabolic intermediary namely arginine or some related N-containing substance~
Manipulation of Native Nut Crops
pespite the importance of coniferous nuts in many parts of th~
world only two pine species appear to be cultivated for their seed crops P
pinea in the Medi terranean and - sibirica in the Urals (Pravdin 1963) The pinyons of estern North America and Meiico ar mos~ly ignored in terma of cultiv~tion or domestication
Little (1140) was among the first to suggest that pinyon nu~ prQduction could be augme~ted tbtough the USe of simple cultutal practices However these received little attention and we have no grea~er und~rstanding of the effi~lcy or econoic feasibility of these treatments now than we did more than 40 ~ears ago Nev~rtheles~ with the present emphasis on wocidland management ~uch treatmenta seem worthy of serious attention
Ca) selective thinning
Some pibyonsapear to be
18
Nut sizes from pruned and unpruned Pinus edulis trees
19
consistently good nut producers (Little 1940) Heavy producers usually show immature and old cones on branches and cones are conspicuous b~neath them Selective thinning of unpr04uctive trees should increase flowering of those left standing (Little 1940)
(b) basal pruning
Theoretically low branches receiving partial sun light do not photosynthesize enough energy to offset energy losses to respiration It follows that low branches are energy sinks that potentially r~b nutrients from seed crops To test this relationship Montano et al (1980) pruned baial branches of 70 to 80-year old pinyons (8 to 10 m tall) to a height of 15 m and SUbsequently determined effects of this treatment on seed development They reported av~rage nut volumes from gruned and ungruned trees were 040 cm and 032 cm and the average nut weights were 033 g and 020 g respectively (see Fig3) Also pruned trees produced a greater percentage of filled nuts 99 as opposed to 84 The effects observed were related to the growth of nuts already developing in cones when the treatment was applied
Basal pruning reduced disease and insect injury of southern pnes (Wilson and Rudolph 1970) Also pruned wood could b sold for ~uelwood potentially offsetting the cost of the benefits anticipated Owing to its simplicity and overall benefits basal pruning appears to merit greater attention
(c) fertilization
Fertilization usually stimulates female cone production (Puritch 1972) More specifically the following trends become apparent when studies are reviewed collectively
(1) N stimulates cone production even when N is applied with other nutrients (Morris and Beers 1969) Also trees producing greater cone yields generally have higher levels of tisue N than low producers
(2) The presence of specific amino acids (especially arginine) is a more reliable predictor of fruitfulness than tissue N content per se For example nitrat N ana ammcinium N increased Douglasshyfir foliar N content and shoot growth similarly However only nitrate N significantly increased arginine content which was positively and quantitatively related to female flower proshyduction (Ebell and McMullin 1970) Following ichmidtlings (1974) explanation of fruit shyfulness fertilization shyespecially with nitrate N - could increase tis~ue organip Nand consequently flowering
(d) cultivation and irrigation
Supplemental water could increase growth reSUlting in greater crown density and iurface area In times of drought additional water could prevent premature abortion of immature cones Drip irrigaeion technology may be feaible for som~ sites However it seems more likely that less intensive ~ethods will prove to be practical Among these are land treatments that direct precipitation run-off to trees improve infiltration or remove weed competition
CHRISTMAS TREES
Pinyons are harvested from natural stands and comprise about 25 of all
Christmas trees sold in New Mexico Arizona Colorado Wyoming Utah and Nevada (Sowder 1965) Trimmed branches also are used for wreath manufacture In spite of their slow growth in native stands pinyons have many desirable Christmas tree attributes including dense foliage symmetrical shape green color natural fragrance good branch angle and limb strength and good needle retention Plantation trees can reach marketable size in about 11 years (Fisher and Fa~cher 1987)
Stand Thinning
Several techniques can be used to improve tree quality Stand thinning allows remaining trees to receive sufficient sunlight for limbs to develop uniformly on all sides During the thinning operation handles can be made on main stems by removing branches at the trees base to a height of 30 em
Removal of branches below a full whorl of branches will allow another tree to be culturedmiddotfrom the stump after harvest A year after the first tree is cut the remaining low branches will begin to turn up and all but one of these can be pruned to promote the growth of a new central leader
Pruning and Shearing
~he ideal pin~on Christmas tree resembles an inverted cone wide at the base and tapered uniformly tg the tip Accemiddotptable crown taper for pines is 40 to 90 but for spr~ces and firs is 40 to 70 Pruning and shearing will make native pinyons conform more closely to the ideal which improve marke tabi Ii ty
Pruning removes dead or unattractive branches Shearing is used to co~troi leader growth so the distance between whorls is not excessive increase the number of branches arising from branch buds and promote the pyramidal crown f~Im Because pinyon leader growth rarely exceeds 20 cm excessive distance between whorls is rarely a problem Pruning and shearing most often will be used to correct uneven o~oid and thia crowns
In pines eac~ needle bun~le ~ontains a dormant or axillary bud Removal of a branch terminal at the proper time promotes development of these dormant buds into short shoots improving crown density In singleshyneedled conifers such as spruces firs and Douglas-fir intermediate buds are produced along the terminal branch stem between each whorl For this reason they can be sheared during any season of the year and produce about the same number of branch buds However with pines the number and size of branch buds developed after shearing depends upon the physiological state of the tree when sheared
Pines respond best when sheared shortly after height growth is complete but before tissues in the new shoot becom~ woody S~oots prun~d at this time produce two to four times the number of buds found on unpruned trees Pinyon shoots elongata during late June but needles continue to elongatemiddotduring July and August after branches are fully elongated Buds are formed in late August
From studies conducted with other pine Christmas tree species the following course of treatments can be recommended for pinyons
1 Before spring growth begins prune all double and multiple leaders (eg bullbull April)
~ She~r when needles on new candles are 13 as long as last yeara needles (usually from June 15 to July 1)
3 Shape the tre~ from the top down by shearing the tips of lateral branches Pzomote a conical crown so thebase is no more than 90 as wide as the tree is tall Ideally taper should be 40-90 Avoid shearing back to woody tissue because this encourages multiple leaders
4 If the tree is oblong rather than tapered shear the top in June or eirly July and the sides in late summer fall or winter Growt~ of laterals will be reduced Repeat steps 2-4 yearly as needed
5 Avoid shearing the year the tree is ~o be marke~ed
20
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
Documented occurrence northshy Grows at high elevations inth~ eastern and eastern Mexco Alps and the Carpathian ~ountains
(3) bullbull koraiensis S~eb amp Zucco ~ SUDsect PINEAE Shaw (Korean pine)
[ 1800 seedkg](n Pinuspinea L Rngebull through Korea and (Italian stone pine) eastern Manchuria into southeastern [ 1300 seedkg ] Siberia with outlirs ~ri t~e
Wide_pread in Spain and Japalliue islands of Honshu and Portugal and aiong the northern and Shikoku (Fig 2) eastern shores ~f the Mediterranean Sea including minor occurrences (4) P sibirica near the north coast of Turkey rSibe~ian ston~ pine(Fig 2) [ 4000 seedkg
Ranges from the Ural Mountains Pinus Subsect CEMBRAE through western and central ~iberia---(Stone Pines) to northern Mongolia with outliers
in northern Russia (Fig ~)(1) Pinus albicaulis Engelm~
(whitebark pine) Pinus Subsect GERARDIANAE [ 5700 seedk ] -- shy
Occurs at high eleyations fro~ (1) gerardian Wall~ central British Columbia sout~ to (Chilgoza pine)s~uthern Sierra Nevada of [ 400 seedkg J California the Ruby Mountain of Noted for large edible seed Nevada and the mOuntains of Confined to mountainous regions of northwestern Wyoming eastern Asia principally in
eastern Afgha~itan~ parts of (2) Pin~s cembra L Pakistan ~nd ~catt~red localities
(Swiss stone pine) in the dry inner valleys of the [ 4400 seedkg 1 north~rn Himalayas (Fig 2)
eocIIn_a _shyFigure 2 Distribution of edible pine nuts in Europe and
Asia
16
bull
Pinus Subsect SABINIANAE Loud Opportumiddotnities aay exist to separate pinyOn nuts other froa pine nuts Most
(I) Pinu~ ~abiniana Dougl pine nuts have a ridge where the (Digger pine) membranous wing is attached Also [ 1300 seed kg criteria based upon seed content could
Confined to California Found be applied when large vol~aes of in dry foothills of ihe Sierra imported pine nuts are suspected to be Nevada and the Coast Rangemiddot Ras aislabeled Tests aight exaine levels large edible but rather hard-shelled of starch fat or piotein or even seeds (Fig bull1) smiddotpecific enzyaes (Table 1)
(2) Pinus coulteri D Don (Coulter pine) New Mexico Pinyon Nut Crops ( 3100 seedkg]
Restr~cted to the coastal mountains of cen~ral and southern Pinyon nuts have been harvested California and northern Baja commercially for about 50 years California (Little 1938a) The nut crop averages
045 to 09 million kg (I to 2 million The preceding list makes clear that pounds) annually for New Mexico Arizona
many pinyon species are found in North and Colorado but one year exceeded 36 America with the greatest number found million kg (Little 1942) The more in Mexico Further it seems neither productive stands may yield 330 kglha practical nor necessary to develop (300 lbsac) during a good year market criteria to separate nut products (Springfield 1976) At a cur~ent found among these species Morphological retail value of $883 I kg value on a differences among pinyon nuts are per hectare basis would be $297000 generally so slight as ~o pre~lude (120000 lac) Fowler and Oliver (this practical field identification publication) provide additional Also most Mexican species occur as information on nut values rather isolated populations with local value but low export potential For New Mexico species criteria would have to recognize as genuinely natibullbull those Pinyon Reproductive Biology nuts produced by at least three pinyon species edulis monophylla and P di$color Again nut morphological Pinyons begin bearing nuts at about criteria would not separate these 25 years but crops do not reach pinyons from other species of the same commercial size until about 75 years subsection (Little 1941) Cones are borne
Table 1-- Composition of pine nuts and true nuts (Lanner 1981 Woodroof 1979) All values are expressed as percentages
Kernal H2O Protein Fat Carboshyhydrates
Ash
Pinyon nuts P edulisP monophIllaImiddot cembroides
58 31 14 10 19
60 23 60
18 54 14
3
Pine nuts P sabinianaP pineaImiddot sibirica P lerardiana
49 30 34 19 14
60 48 63 51
9 7
12 23
4
True nuts
Almond Pecan Pistacio Walnut Peanut
51 52
shy45
47 30
33
19 9
20 15 26
54 73 53 64 39
20 15 19 16 24
3 2 3 2
laterally ~n the a~il of a scale leaf near branch tips (jhaw~ 1914) although a r~re observation 01 termin~l cones b~s been reported (Lanner 1969) Developing cones can be ~een in the e~rliest stages as ovulate primordia in longitudinal sections of bu4s Within buds ovulate cone primordia are only at the tip of the bud an~have larger and broader bases than spur shoots (Little 1938-b)
ovuiate primordia are formed in buds in August and September and cones mature by October of the third year Because 3 years are required for seeds to mature treatments applied to stimulate nut quantity~il~ require 3 years before evaluation The first year must be especially suited to production of ovulate primordia and the second and third seaasons favorable to growth and maturation of cones and nuts(Li~tle 1938b)
The Periodicity of Bumper Crops
Pinyon ~ut crops are prodUCed at intervals of 3 to 7 years The periodicity of above-average cropshas been related to the dtain of nutrients required to produce the crop an~ the time required for nutrients to be replenished Developing cones act as food sinks for carbohydrate and nitrogen (N) reserves at the expense of vegetative structures (Pickmann and Kozlowski 1969 1970 ~ook and S~et 1971) Consequently large cone crops adversely affect vegetative tree growth
Forcella (1981) found cone production was inversely relate~ to temperatures during late-August to early September Maximum production in northern New Mexeio occurred when the mean maximum weekly temperature was below 24 degrees C Temperatures above 24 degrees C resulted in virtually no cone crops
However other environmental factors~ acting independently or inte~actinl with temperature caa be involved Rainfall is positively correia ted with the flowering of pines This is because photosynthat~ 9roduction is needed to develop carbohydrate reserves and this process is limited by ~lant water stres~ Also tree growth is determined by photosynthetic gain and the onset of abundant flowering is more directly rela~ed to tree siZe than
age (Schmidtling 1969) More speci1icallj nut ~roduction is e~osely
related to crown surface area
An exception to the adverse influen~e of wa~er ~tress is the positive roie stress plays in the initiat~on of ovula~e primordia Studies have shown that summer moisture
stress results in an above-average flower crop the following spring This suggests moisture stress at the time of ovulate primordia formation promotes reproductive rather than vegetative bull growth This view is supported by studies shOwing that branches exposed to full sun bore more female cones and had lower tissue moisture levels than partially shaded branches (Wareing~ 1958)
Water ~tress also can indirectly affect flowering thro~gh its interaction with tree nutrient status E~ell (1970) showd that nitrate fertili~ation or exposure to moisture stress caused similar tiowe~ing responses in Dougl~s-firaccompaniedby increases in total foliage N content and free amino
acids especially ~rgini~e Similarly Schmidtling (1974) suggested that water stress or N fertilization can increase flowering through the same metabolic intermediary namely arginine or some related N-containing substance~
Manipulation of Native Nut Crops
pespite the importance of coniferous nuts in many parts of th~
world only two pine species appear to be cultivated for their seed crops P
pinea in the Medi terranean and - sibirica in the Urals (Pravdin 1963) The pinyons of estern North America and Meiico ar mos~ly ignored in terma of cultiv~tion or domestication
Little (1140) was among the first to suggest that pinyon nu~ prQduction could be augme~ted tbtough the USe of simple cultutal practices However these received little attention and we have no grea~er und~rstanding of the effi~lcy or econoic feasibility of these treatments now than we did more than 40 ~ears ago Nev~rtheles~ with the present emphasis on wocidland management ~uch treatmenta seem worthy of serious attention
Ca) selective thinning
Some pibyonsapear to be
18
Nut sizes from pruned and unpruned Pinus edulis trees
19
consistently good nut producers (Little 1940) Heavy producers usually show immature and old cones on branches and cones are conspicuous b~neath them Selective thinning of unpr04uctive trees should increase flowering of those left standing (Little 1940)
(b) basal pruning
Theoretically low branches receiving partial sun light do not photosynthesize enough energy to offset energy losses to respiration It follows that low branches are energy sinks that potentially r~b nutrients from seed crops To test this relationship Montano et al (1980) pruned baial branches of 70 to 80-year old pinyons (8 to 10 m tall) to a height of 15 m and SUbsequently determined effects of this treatment on seed development They reported av~rage nut volumes from gruned and ungruned trees were 040 cm and 032 cm and the average nut weights were 033 g and 020 g respectively (see Fig3) Also pruned trees produced a greater percentage of filled nuts 99 as opposed to 84 The effects observed were related to the growth of nuts already developing in cones when the treatment was applied
Basal pruning reduced disease and insect injury of southern pnes (Wilson and Rudolph 1970) Also pruned wood could b sold for ~uelwood potentially offsetting the cost of the benefits anticipated Owing to its simplicity and overall benefits basal pruning appears to merit greater attention
(c) fertilization
Fertilization usually stimulates female cone production (Puritch 1972) More specifically the following trends become apparent when studies are reviewed collectively
(1) N stimulates cone production even when N is applied with other nutrients (Morris and Beers 1969) Also trees producing greater cone yields generally have higher levels of tisue N than low producers
(2) The presence of specific amino acids (especially arginine) is a more reliable predictor of fruitfulness than tissue N content per se For example nitrat N ana ammcinium N increased Douglasshyfir foliar N content and shoot growth similarly However only nitrate N significantly increased arginine content which was positively and quantitatively related to female flower proshyduction (Ebell and McMullin 1970) Following ichmidtlings (1974) explanation of fruit shyfulness fertilization shyespecially with nitrate N - could increase tis~ue organip Nand consequently flowering
(d) cultivation and irrigation
Supplemental water could increase growth reSUlting in greater crown density and iurface area In times of drought additional water could prevent premature abortion of immature cones Drip irrigaeion technology may be feaible for som~ sites However it seems more likely that less intensive ~ethods will prove to be practical Among these are land treatments that direct precipitation run-off to trees improve infiltration or remove weed competition
CHRISTMAS TREES
Pinyons are harvested from natural stands and comprise about 25 of all
Christmas trees sold in New Mexico Arizona Colorado Wyoming Utah and Nevada (Sowder 1965) Trimmed branches also are used for wreath manufacture In spite of their slow growth in native stands pinyons have many desirable Christmas tree attributes including dense foliage symmetrical shape green color natural fragrance good branch angle and limb strength and good needle retention Plantation trees can reach marketable size in about 11 years (Fisher and Fa~cher 1987)
Stand Thinning
Several techniques can be used to improve tree quality Stand thinning allows remaining trees to receive sufficient sunlight for limbs to develop uniformly on all sides During the thinning operation handles can be made on main stems by removing branches at the trees base to a height of 30 em
Removal of branches below a full whorl of branches will allow another tree to be culturedmiddotfrom the stump after harvest A year after the first tree is cut the remaining low branches will begin to turn up and all but one of these can be pruned to promote the growth of a new central leader
Pruning and Shearing
~he ideal pin~on Christmas tree resembles an inverted cone wide at the base and tapered uniformly tg the tip Accemiddotptable crown taper for pines is 40 to 90 but for spr~ces and firs is 40 to 70 Pruning and shearing will make native pinyons conform more closely to the ideal which improve marke tabi Ii ty
Pruning removes dead or unattractive branches Shearing is used to co~troi leader growth so the distance between whorls is not excessive increase the number of branches arising from branch buds and promote the pyramidal crown f~Im Because pinyon leader growth rarely exceeds 20 cm excessive distance between whorls is rarely a problem Pruning and shearing most often will be used to correct uneven o~oid and thia crowns
In pines eac~ needle bun~le ~ontains a dormant or axillary bud Removal of a branch terminal at the proper time promotes development of these dormant buds into short shoots improving crown density In singleshyneedled conifers such as spruces firs and Douglas-fir intermediate buds are produced along the terminal branch stem between each whorl For this reason they can be sheared during any season of the year and produce about the same number of branch buds However with pines the number and size of branch buds developed after shearing depends upon the physiological state of the tree when sheared
Pines respond best when sheared shortly after height growth is complete but before tissues in the new shoot becom~ woody S~oots prun~d at this time produce two to four times the number of buds found on unpruned trees Pinyon shoots elongata during late June but needles continue to elongatemiddotduring July and August after branches are fully elongated Buds are formed in late August
From studies conducted with other pine Christmas tree species the following course of treatments can be recommended for pinyons
1 Before spring growth begins prune all double and multiple leaders (eg bullbull April)
~ She~r when needles on new candles are 13 as long as last yeara needles (usually from June 15 to July 1)
3 Shape the tre~ from the top down by shearing the tips of lateral branches Pzomote a conical crown so thebase is no more than 90 as wide as the tree is tall Ideally taper should be 40-90 Avoid shearing back to woody tissue because this encourages multiple leaders
4 If the tree is oblong rather than tapered shear the top in June or eirly July and the sides in late summer fall or winter Growt~ of laterals will be reduced Repeat steps 2-4 yearly as needed
5 Avoid shearing the year the tree is ~o be marke~ed
20
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
bull
Pinus Subsect SABINIANAE Loud Opportumiddotnities aay exist to separate pinyOn nuts other froa pine nuts Most
(I) Pinu~ ~abiniana Dougl pine nuts have a ridge where the (Digger pine) membranous wing is attached Also [ 1300 seed kg criteria based upon seed content could
Confined to California Found be applied when large vol~aes of in dry foothills of ihe Sierra imported pine nuts are suspected to be Nevada and the Coast Rangemiddot Ras aislabeled Tests aight exaine levels large edible but rather hard-shelled of starch fat or piotein or even seeds (Fig bull1) smiddotpecific enzyaes (Table 1)
(2) Pinus coulteri D Don (Coulter pine) New Mexico Pinyon Nut Crops ( 3100 seedkg]
Restr~cted to the coastal mountains of cen~ral and southern Pinyon nuts have been harvested California and northern Baja commercially for about 50 years California (Little 1938a) The nut crop averages
045 to 09 million kg (I to 2 million The preceding list makes clear that pounds) annually for New Mexico Arizona
many pinyon species are found in North and Colorado but one year exceeded 36 America with the greatest number found million kg (Little 1942) The more in Mexico Further it seems neither productive stands may yield 330 kglha practical nor necessary to develop (300 lbsac) during a good year market criteria to separate nut products (Springfield 1976) At a cur~ent found among these species Morphological retail value of $883 I kg value on a differences among pinyon nuts are per hectare basis would be $297000 generally so slight as ~o pre~lude (120000 lac) Fowler and Oliver (this practical field identification publication) provide additional Also most Mexican species occur as information on nut values rather isolated populations with local value but low export potential For New Mexico species criteria would have to recognize as genuinely natibullbull those Pinyon Reproductive Biology nuts produced by at least three pinyon species edulis monophylla and P di$color Again nut morphological Pinyons begin bearing nuts at about criteria would not separate these 25 years but crops do not reach pinyons from other species of the same commercial size until about 75 years subsection (Little 1941) Cones are borne
Table 1-- Composition of pine nuts and true nuts (Lanner 1981 Woodroof 1979) All values are expressed as percentages
Kernal H2O Protein Fat Carboshyhydrates
Ash
Pinyon nuts P edulisP monophIllaImiddot cembroides
58 31 14 10 19
60 23 60
18 54 14
3
Pine nuts P sabinianaP pineaImiddot sibirica P lerardiana
49 30 34 19 14
60 48 63 51
9 7
12 23
4
True nuts
Almond Pecan Pistacio Walnut Peanut
51 52
shy45
47 30
33
19 9
20 15 26
54 73 53 64 39
20 15 19 16 24
3 2 3 2
laterally ~n the a~il of a scale leaf near branch tips (jhaw~ 1914) although a r~re observation 01 termin~l cones b~s been reported (Lanner 1969) Developing cones can be ~een in the e~rliest stages as ovulate primordia in longitudinal sections of bu4s Within buds ovulate cone primordia are only at the tip of the bud an~have larger and broader bases than spur shoots (Little 1938-b)
ovuiate primordia are formed in buds in August and September and cones mature by October of the third year Because 3 years are required for seeds to mature treatments applied to stimulate nut quantity~il~ require 3 years before evaluation The first year must be especially suited to production of ovulate primordia and the second and third seaasons favorable to growth and maturation of cones and nuts(Li~tle 1938b)
The Periodicity of Bumper Crops
Pinyon ~ut crops are prodUCed at intervals of 3 to 7 years The periodicity of above-average cropshas been related to the dtain of nutrients required to produce the crop an~ the time required for nutrients to be replenished Developing cones act as food sinks for carbohydrate and nitrogen (N) reserves at the expense of vegetative structures (Pickmann and Kozlowski 1969 1970 ~ook and S~et 1971) Consequently large cone crops adversely affect vegetative tree growth
Forcella (1981) found cone production was inversely relate~ to temperatures during late-August to early September Maximum production in northern New Mexeio occurred when the mean maximum weekly temperature was below 24 degrees C Temperatures above 24 degrees C resulted in virtually no cone crops
However other environmental factors~ acting independently or inte~actinl with temperature caa be involved Rainfall is positively correia ted with the flowering of pines This is because photosynthat~ 9roduction is needed to develop carbohydrate reserves and this process is limited by ~lant water stres~ Also tree growth is determined by photosynthetic gain and the onset of abundant flowering is more directly rela~ed to tree siZe than
age (Schmidtling 1969) More speci1icallj nut ~roduction is e~osely
related to crown surface area
An exception to the adverse influen~e of wa~er ~tress is the positive roie stress plays in the initiat~on of ovula~e primordia Studies have shown that summer moisture
stress results in an above-average flower crop the following spring This suggests moisture stress at the time of ovulate primordia formation promotes reproductive rather than vegetative bull growth This view is supported by studies shOwing that branches exposed to full sun bore more female cones and had lower tissue moisture levels than partially shaded branches (Wareing~ 1958)
Water ~tress also can indirectly affect flowering thro~gh its interaction with tree nutrient status E~ell (1970) showd that nitrate fertili~ation or exposure to moisture stress caused similar tiowe~ing responses in Dougl~s-firaccompaniedby increases in total foliage N content and free amino
acids especially ~rgini~e Similarly Schmidtling (1974) suggested that water stress or N fertilization can increase flowering through the same metabolic intermediary namely arginine or some related N-containing substance~
Manipulation of Native Nut Crops
pespite the importance of coniferous nuts in many parts of th~
world only two pine species appear to be cultivated for their seed crops P
pinea in the Medi terranean and - sibirica in the Urals (Pravdin 1963) The pinyons of estern North America and Meiico ar mos~ly ignored in terma of cultiv~tion or domestication
Little (1140) was among the first to suggest that pinyon nu~ prQduction could be augme~ted tbtough the USe of simple cultutal practices However these received little attention and we have no grea~er und~rstanding of the effi~lcy or econoic feasibility of these treatments now than we did more than 40 ~ears ago Nev~rtheles~ with the present emphasis on wocidland management ~uch treatmenta seem worthy of serious attention
Ca) selective thinning
Some pibyonsapear to be
18
Nut sizes from pruned and unpruned Pinus edulis trees
19
consistently good nut producers (Little 1940) Heavy producers usually show immature and old cones on branches and cones are conspicuous b~neath them Selective thinning of unpr04uctive trees should increase flowering of those left standing (Little 1940)
(b) basal pruning
Theoretically low branches receiving partial sun light do not photosynthesize enough energy to offset energy losses to respiration It follows that low branches are energy sinks that potentially r~b nutrients from seed crops To test this relationship Montano et al (1980) pruned baial branches of 70 to 80-year old pinyons (8 to 10 m tall) to a height of 15 m and SUbsequently determined effects of this treatment on seed development They reported av~rage nut volumes from gruned and ungruned trees were 040 cm and 032 cm and the average nut weights were 033 g and 020 g respectively (see Fig3) Also pruned trees produced a greater percentage of filled nuts 99 as opposed to 84 The effects observed were related to the growth of nuts already developing in cones when the treatment was applied
Basal pruning reduced disease and insect injury of southern pnes (Wilson and Rudolph 1970) Also pruned wood could b sold for ~uelwood potentially offsetting the cost of the benefits anticipated Owing to its simplicity and overall benefits basal pruning appears to merit greater attention
(c) fertilization
Fertilization usually stimulates female cone production (Puritch 1972) More specifically the following trends become apparent when studies are reviewed collectively
(1) N stimulates cone production even when N is applied with other nutrients (Morris and Beers 1969) Also trees producing greater cone yields generally have higher levels of tisue N than low producers
(2) The presence of specific amino acids (especially arginine) is a more reliable predictor of fruitfulness than tissue N content per se For example nitrat N ana ammcinium N increased Douglasshyfir foliar N content and shoot growth similarly However only nitrate N significantly increased arginine content which was positively and quantitatively related to female flower proshyduction (Ebell and McMullin 1970) Following ichmidtlings (1974) explanation of fruit shyfulness fertilization shyespecially with nitrate N - could increase tis~ue organip Nand consequently flowering
(d) cultivation and irrigation
Supplemental water could increase growth reSUlting in greater crown density and iurface area In times of drought additional water could prevent premature abortion of immature cones Drip irrigaeion technology may be feaible for som~ sites However it seems more likely that less intensive ~ethods will prove to be practical Among these are land treatments that direct precipitation run-off to trees improve infiltration or remove weed competition
CHRISTMAS TREES
Pinyons are harvested from natural stands and comprise about 25 of all
Christmas trees sold in New Mexico Arizona Colorado Wyoming Utah and Nevada (Sowder 1965) Trimmed branches also are used for wreath manufacture In spite of their slow growth in native stands pinyons have many desirable Christmas tree attributes including dense foliage symmetrical shape green color natural fragrance good branch angle and limb strength and good needle retention Plantation trees can reach marketable size in about 11 years (Fisher and Fa~cher 1987)
Stand Thinning
Several techniques can be used to improve tree quality Stand thinning allows remaining trees to receive sufficient sunlight for limbs to develop uniformly on all sides During the thinning operation handles can be made on main stems by removing branches at the trees base to a height of 30 em
Removal of branches below a full whorl of branches will allow another tree to be culturedmiddotfrom the stump after harvest A year after the first tree is cut the remaining low branches will begin to turn up and all but one of these can be pruned to promote the growth of a new central leader
Pruning and Shearing
~he ideal pin~on Christmas tree resembles an inverted cone wide at the base and tapered uniformly tg the tip Accemiddotptable crown taper for pines is 40 to 90 but for spr~ces and firs is 40 to 70 Pruning and shearing will make native pinyons conform more closely to the ideal which improve marke tabi Ii ty
Pruning removes dead or unattractive branches Shearing is used to co~troi leader growth so the distance between whorls is not excessive increase the number of branches arising from branch buds and promote the pyramidal crown f~Im Because pinyon leader growth rarely exceeds 20 cm excessive distance between whorls is rarely a problem Pruning and shearing most often will be used to correct uneven o~oid and thia crowns
In pines eac~ needle bun~le ~ontains a dormant or axillary bud Removal of a branch terminal at the proper time promotes development of these dormant buds into short shoots improving crown density In singleshyneedled conifers such as spruces firs and Douglas-fir intermediate buds are produced along the terminal branch stem between each whorl For this reason they can be sheared during any season of the year and produce about the same number of branch buds However with pines the number and size of branch buds developed after shearing depends upon the physiological state of the tree when sheared
Pines respond best when sheared shortly after height growth is complete but before tissues in the new shoot becom~ woody S~oots prun~d at this time produce two to four times the number of buds found on unpruned trees Pinyon shoots elongata during late June but needles continue to elongatemiddotduring July and August after branches are fully elongated Buds are formed in late August
From studies conducted with other pine Christmas tree species the following course of treatments can be recommended for pinyons
1 Before spring growth begins prune all double and multiple leaders (eg bullbull April)
~ She~r when needles on new candles are 13 as long as last yeara needles (usually from June 15 to July 1)
3 Shape the tre~ from the top down by shearing the tips of lateral branches Pzomote a conical crown so thebase is no more than 90 as wide as the tree is tall Ideally taper should be 40-90 Avoid shearing back to woody tissue because this encourages multiple leaders
4 If the tree is oblong rather than tapered shear the top in June or eirly July and the sides in late summer fall or winter Growt~ of laterals will be reduced Repeat steps 2-4 yearly as needed
5 Avoid shearing the year the tree is ~o be marke~ed
20
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
laterally ~n the a~il of a scale leaf near branch tips (jhaw~ 1914) although a r~re observation 01 termin~l cones b~s been reported (Lanner 1969) Developing cones can be ~een in the e~rliest stages as ovulate primordia in longitudinal sections of bu4s Within buds ovulate cone primordia are only at the tip of the bud an~have larger and broader bases than spur shoots (Little 1938-b)
ovuiate primordia are formed in buds in August and September and cones mature by October of the third year Because 3 years are required for seeds to mature treatments applied to stimulate nut quantity~il~ require 3 years before evaluation The first year must be especially suited to production of ovulate primordia and the second and third seaasons favorable to growth and maturation of cones and nuts(Li~tle 1938b)
The Periodicity of Bumper Crops
Pinyon ~ut crops are prodUCed at intervals of 3 to 7 years The periodicity of above-average cropshas been related to the dtain of nutrients required to produce the crop an~ the time required for nutrients to be replenished Developing cones act as food sinks for carbohydrate and nitrogen (N) reserves at the expense of vegetative structures (Pickmann and Kozlowski 1969 1970 ~ook and S~et 1971) Consequently large cone crops adversely affect vegetative tree growth
Forcella (1981) found cone production was inversely relate~ to temperatures during late-August to early September Maximum production in northern New Mexeio occurred when the mean maximum weekly temperature was below 24 degrees C Temperatures above 24 degrees C resulted in virtually no cone crops
However other environmental factors~ acting independently or inte~actinl with temperature caa be involved Rainfall is positively correia ted with the flowering of pines This is because photosynthat~ 9roduction is needed to develop carbohydrate reserves and this process is limited by ~lant water stres~ Also tree growth is determined by photosynthetic gain and the onset of abundant flowering is more directly rela~ed to tree siZe than
age (Schmidtling 1969) More speci1icallj nut ~roduction is e~osely
related to crown surface area
An exception to the adverse influen~e of wa~er ~tress is the positive roie stress plays in the initiat~on of ovula~e primordia Studies have shown that summer moisture
stress results in an above-average flower crop the following spring This suggests moisture stress at the time of ovulate primordia formation promotes reproductive rather than vegetative bull growth This view is supported by studies shOwing that branches exposed to full sun bore more female cones and had lower tissue moisture levels than partially shaded branches (Wareing~ 1958)
Water ~tress also can indirectly affect flowering thro~gh its interaction with tree nutrient status E~ell (1970) showd that nitrate fertili~ation or exposure to moisture stress caused similar tiowe~ing responses in Dougl~s-firaccompaniedby increases in total foliage N content and free amino
acids especially ~rgini~e Similarly Schmidtling (1974) suggested that water stress or N fertilization can increase flowering through the same metabolic intermediary namely arginine or some related N-containing substance~
Manipulation of Native Nut Crops
pespite the importance of coniferous nuts in many parts of th~
world only two pine species appear to be cultivated for their seed crops P
pinea in the Medi terranean and - sibirica in the Urals (Pravdin 1963) The pinyons of estern North America and Meiico ar mos~ly ignored in terma of cultiv~tion or domestication
Little (1140) was among the first to suggest that pinyon nu~ prQduction could be augme~ted tbtough the USe of simple cultutal practices However these received little attention and we have no grea~er und~rstanding of the effi~lcy or econoic feasibility of these treatments now than we did more than 40 ~ears ago Nev~rtheles~ with the present emphasis on wocidland management ~uch treatmenta seem worthy of serious attention
Ca) selective thinning
Some pibyonsapear to be
18
Nut sizes from pruned and unpruned Pinus edulis trees
19
consistently good nut producers (Little 1940) Heavy producers usually show immature and old cones on branches and cones are conspicuous b~neath them Selective thinning of unpr04uctive trees should increase flowering of those left standing (Little 1940)
(b) basal pruning
Theoretically low branches receiving partial sun light do not photosynthesize enough energy to offset energy losses to respiration It follows that low branches are energy sinks that potentially r~b nutrients from seed crops To test this relationship Montano et al (1980) pruned baial branches of 70 to 80-year old pinyons (8 to 10 m tall) to a height of 15 m and SUbsequently determined effects of this treatment on seed development They reported av~rage nut volumes from gruned and ungruned trees were 040 cm and 032 cm and the average nut weights were 033 g and 020 g respectively (see Fig3) Also pruned trees produced a greater percentage of filled nuts 99 as opposed to 84 The effects observed were related to the growth of nuts already developing in cones when the treatment was applied
Basal pruning reduced disease and insect injury of southern pnes (Wilson and Rudolph 1970) Also pruned wood could b sold for ~uelwood potentially offsetting the cost of the benefits anticipated Owing to its simplicity and overall benefits basal pruning appears to merit greater attention
(c) fertilization
Fertilization usually stimulates female cone production (Puritch 1972) More specifically the following trends become apparent when studies are reviewed collectively
(1) N stimulates cone production even when N is applied with other nutrients (Morris and Beers 1969) Also trees producing greater cone yields generally have higher levels of tisue N than low producers
(2) The presence of specific amino acids (especially arginine) is a more reliable predictor of fruitfulness than tissue N content per se For example nitrat N ana ammcinium N increased Douglasshyfir foliar N content and shoot growth similarly However only nitrate N significantly increased arginine content which was positively and quantitatively related to female flower proshyduction (Ebell and McMullin 1970) Following ichmidtlings (1974) explanation of fruit shyfulness fertilization shyespecially with nitrate N - could increase tis~ue organip Nand consequently flowering
(d) cultivation and irrigation
Supplemental water could increase growth reSUlting in greater crown density and iurface area In times of drought additional water could prevent premature abortion of immature cones Drip irrigaeion technology may be feaible for som~ sites However it seems more likely that less intensive ~ethods will prove to be practical Among these are land treatments that direct precipitation run-off to trees improve infiltration or remove weed competition
CHRISTMAS TREES
Pinyons are harvested from natural stands and comprise about 25 of all
Christmas trees sold in New Mexico Arizona Colorado Wyoming Utah and Nevada (Sowder 1965) Trimmed branches also are used for wreath manufacture In spite of their slow growth in native stands pinyons have many desirable Christmas tree attributes including dense foliage symmetrical shape green color natural fragrance good branch angle and limb strength and good needle retention Plantation trees can reach marketable size in about 11 years (Fisher and Fa~cher 1987)
Stand Thinning
Several techniques can be used to improve tree quality Stand thinning allows remaining trees to receive sufficient sunlight for limbs to develop uniformly on all sides During the thinning operation handles can be made on main stems by removing branches at the trees base to a height of 30 em
Removal of branches below a full whorl of branches will allow another tree to be culturedmiddotfrom the stump after harvest A year after the first tree is cut the remaining low branches will begin to turn up and all but one of these can be pruned to promote the growth of a new central leader
Pruning and Shearing
~he ideal pin~on Christmas tree resembles an inverted cone wide at the base and tapered uniformly tg the tip Accemiddotptable crown taper for pines is 40 to 90 but for spr~ces and firs is 40 to 70 Pruning and shearing will make native pinyons conform more closely to the ideal which improve marke tabi Ii ty
Pruning removes dead or unattractive branches Shearing is used to co~troi leader growth so the distance between whorls is not excessive increase the number of branches arising from branch buds and promote the pyramidal crown f~Im Because pinyon leader growth rarely exceeds 20 cm excessive distance between whorls is rarely a problem Pruning and shearing most often will be used to correct uneven o~oid and thia crowns
In pines eac~ needle bun~le ~ontains a dormant or axillary bud Removal of a branch terminal at the proper time promotes development of these dormant buds into short shoots improving crown density In singleshyneedled conifers such as spruces firs and Douglas-fir intermediate buds are produced along the terminal branch stem between each whorl For this reason they can be sheared during any season of the year and produce about the same number of branch buds However with pines the number and size of branch buds developed after shearing depends upon the physiological state of the tree when sheared
Pines respond best when sheared shortly after height growth is complete but before tissues in the new shoot becom~ woody S~oots prun~d at this time produce two to four times the number of buds found on unpruned trees Pinyon shoots elongata during late June but needles continue to elongatemiddotduring July and August after branches are fully elongated Buds are formed in late August
From studies conducted with other pine Christmas tree species the following course of treatments can be recommended for pinyons
1 Before spring growth begins prune all double and multiple leaders (eg bullbull April)
~ She~r when needles on new candles are 13 as long as last yeara needles (usually from June 15 to July 1)
3 Shape the tre~ from the top down by shearing the tips of lateral branches Pzomote a conical crown so thebase is no more than 90 as wide as the tree is tall Ideally taper should be 40-90 Avoid shearing back to woody tissue because this encourages multiple leaders
4 If the tree is oblong rather than tapered shear the top in June or eirly July and the sides in late summer fall or winter Growt~ of laterals will be reduced Repeat steps 2-4 yearly as needed
5 Avoid shearing the year the tree is ~o be marke~ed
20
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
Nut sizes from pruned and unpruned Pinus edulis trees
19
consistently good nut producers (Little 1940) Heavy producers usually show immature and old cones on branches and cones are conspicuous b~neath them Selective thinning of unpr04uctive trees should increase flowering of those left standing (Little 1940)
(b) basal pruning
Theoretically low branches receiving partial sun light do not photosynthesize enough energy to offset energy losses to respiration It follows that low branches are energy sinks that potentially r~b nutrients from seed crops To test this relationship Montano et al (1980) pruned baial branches of 70 to 80-year old pinyons (8 to 10 m tall) to a height of 15 m and SUbsequently determined effects of this treatment on seed development They reported av~rage nut volumes from gruned and ungruned trees were 040 cm and 032 cm and the average nut weights were 033 g and 020 g respectively (see Fig3) Also pruned trees produced a greater percentage of filled nuts 99 as opposed to 84 The effects observed were related to the growth of nuts already developing in cones when the treatment was applied
Basal pruning reduced disease and insect injury of southern pnes (Wilson and Rudolph 1970) Also pruned wood could b sold for ~uelwood potentially offsetting the cost of the benefits anticipated Owing to its simplicity and overall benefits basal pruning appears to merit greater attention
(c) fertilization
Fertilization usually stimulates female cone production (Puritch 1972) More specifically the following trends become apparent when studies are reviewed collectively
(1) N stimulates cone production even when N is applied with other nutrients (Morris and Beers 1969) Also trees producing greater cone yields generally have higher levels of tisue N than low producers
(2) The presence of specific amino acids (especially arginine) is a more reliable predictor of fruitfulness than tissue N content per se For example nitrat N ana ammcinium N increased Douglasshyfir foliar N content and shoot growth similarly However only nitrate N significantly increased arginine content which was positively and quantitatively related to female flower proshyduction (Ebell and McMullin 1970) Following ichmidtlings (1974) explanation of fruit shyfulness fertilization shyespecially with nitrate N - could increase tis~ue organip Nand consequently flowering
(d) cultivation and irrigation
Supplemental water could increase growth reSUlting in greater crown density and iurface area In times of drought additional water could prevent premature abortion of immature cones Drip irrigaeion technology may be feaible for som~ sites However it seems more likely that less intensive ~ethods will prove to be practical Among these are land treatments that direct precipitation run-off to trees improve infiltration or remove weed competition
CHRISTMAS TREES
Pinyons are harvested from natural stands and comprise about 25 of all
Christmas trees sold in New Mexico Arizona Colorado Wyoming Utah and Nevada (Sowder 1965) Trimmed branches also are used for wreath manufacture In spite of their slow growth in native stands pinyons have many desirable Christmas tree attributes including dense foliage symmetrical shape green color natural fragrance good branch angle and limb strength and good needle retention Plantation trees can reach marketable size in about 11 years (Fisher and Fa~cher 1987)
Stand Thinning
Several techniques can be used to improve tree quality Stand thinning allows remaining trees to receive sufficient sunlight for limbs to develop uniformly on all sides During the thinning operation handles can be made on main stems by removing branches at the trees base to a height of 30 em
Removal of branches below a full whorl of branches will allow another tree to be culturedmiddotfrom the stump after harvest A year after the first tree is cut the remaining low branches will begin to turn up and all but one of these can be pruned to promote the growth of a new central leader
Pruning and Shearing
~he ideal pin~on Christmas tree resembles an inverted cone wide at the base and tapered uniformly tg the tip Accemiddotptable crown taper for pines is 40 to 90 but for spr~ces and firs is 40 to 70 Pruning and shearing will make native pinyons conform more closely to the ideal which improve marke tabi Ii ty
Pruning removes dead or unattractive branches Shearing is used to co~troi leader growth so the distance between whorls is not excessive increase the number of branches arising from branch buds and promote the pyramidal crown f~Im Because pinyon leader growth rarely exceeds 20 cm excessive distance between whorls is rarely a problem Pruning and shearing most often will be used to correct uneven o~oid and thia crowns
In pines eac~ needle bun~le ~ontains a dormant or axillary bud Removal of a branch terminal at the proper time promotes development of these dormant buds into short shoots improving crown density In singleshyneedled conifers such as spruces firs and Douglas-fir intermediate buds are produced along the terminal branch stem between each whorl For this reason they can be sheared during any season of the year and produce about the same number of branch buds However with pines the number and size of branch buds developed after shearing depends upon the physiological state of the tree when sheared
Pines respond best when sheared shortly after height growth is complete but before tissues in the new shoot becom~ woody S~oots prun~d at this time produce two to four times the number of buds found on unpruned trees Pinyon shoots elongata during late June but needles continue to elongatemiddotduring July and August after branches are fully elongated Buds are formed in late August
From studies conducted with other pine Christmas tree species the following course of treatments can be recommended for pinyons
1 Before spring growth begins prune all double and multiple leaders (eg bullbull April)
~ She~r when needles on new candles are 13 as long as last yeara needles (usually from June 15 to July 1)
3 Shape the tre~ from the top down by shearing the tips of lateral branches Pzomote a conical crown so thebase is no more than 90 as wide as the tree is tall Ideally taper should be 40-90 Avoid shearing back to woody tissue because this encourages multiple leaders
4 If the tree is oblong rather than tapered shear the top in June or eirly July and the sides in late summer fall or winter Growt~ of laterals will be reduced Repeat steps 2-4 yearly as needed
5 Avoid shearing the year the tree is ~o be marke~ed
20
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
Christmas trees sold in New Mexico Arizona Colorado Wyoming Utah and Nevada (Sowder 1965) Trimmed branches also are used for wreath manufacture In spite of their slow growth in native stands pinyons have many desirable Christmas tree attributes including dense foliage symmetrical shape green color natural fragrance good branch angle and limb strength and good needle retention Plantation trees can reach marketable size in about 11 years (Fisher and Fa~cher 1987)
Stand Thinning
Several techniques can be used to improve tree quality Stand thinning allows remaining trees to receive sufficient sunlight for limbs to develop uniformly on all sides During the thinning operation handles can be made on main stems by removing branches at the trees base to a height of 30 em
Removal of branches below a full whorl of branches will allow another tree to be culturedmiddotfrom the stump after harvest A year after the first tree is cut the remaining low branches will begin to turn up and all but one of these can be pruned to promote the growth of a new central leader
Pruning and Shearing
~he ideal pin~on Christmas tree resembles an inverted cone wide at the base and tapered uniformly tg the tip Accemiddotptable crown taper for pines is 40 to 90 but for spr~ces and firs is 40 to 70 Pruning and shearing will make native pinyons conform more closely to the ideal which improve marke tabi Ii ty
Pruning removes dead or unattractive branches Shearing is used to co~troi leader growth so the distance between whorls is not excessive increase the number of branches arising from branch buds and promote the pyramidal crown f~Im Because pinyon leader growth rarely exceeds 20 cm excessive distance between whorls is rarely a problem Pruning and shearing most often will be used to correct uneven o~oid and thia crowns
In pines eac~ needle bun~le ~ontains a dormant or axillary bud Removal of a branch terminal at the proper time promotes development of these dormant buds into short shoots improving crown density In singleshyneedled conifers such as spruces firs and Douglas-fir intermediate buds are produced along the terminal branch stem between each whorl For this reason they can be sheared during any season of the year and produce about the same number of branch buds However with pines the number and size of branch buds developed after shearing depends upon the physiological state of the tree when sheared
Pines respond best when sheared shortly after height growth is complete but before tissues in the new shoot becom~ woody S~oots prun~d at this time produce two to four times the number of buds found on unpruned trees Pinyon shoots elongata during late June but needles continue to elongatemiddotduring July and August after branches are fully elongated Buds are formed in late August
From studies conducted with other pine Christmas tree species the following course of treatments can be recommended for pinyons
1 Before spring growth begins prune all double and multiple leaders (eg bullbull April)
~ She~r when needles on new candles are 13 as long as last yeara needles (usually from June 15 to July 1)
3 Shape the tre~ from the top down by shearing the tips of lateral branches Pzomote a conical crown so thebase is no more than 90 as wide as the tree is tall Ideally taper should be 40-90 Avoid shearing back to woody tissue because this encourages multiple leaders
4 If the tree is oblong rather than tapered shear the top in June or eirly July and the sides in late summer fall or winter Growt~ of laterals will be reduced Repeat steps 2-4 yearly as needed
5 Avoid shearing the year the tree is ~o be marke~ed
20
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
Christmas Tree Grading
The USDA ~hristmas tree grading system favors conifer species tending naturally t~ have ~aper~d ~rowns usually more slender than pinyon For this reason Kearns et al(1962) prepared standards foi pinyon Cbr~stmas trees that allow more ovoid crown fors ~ith this system pi~yons that would be culled by the standard USDA method are graded acceptable The pinyon syste includes four classes of equal acceptabi li ty tape red tr iangular oblong and round Within each class~ trees can be graded on the bases of color density symmetry anddefority
NURSERY STOCK
Alessi (1968) proposed that the sale of pinyon ornamentals could offest the cost of convertin~ woodlands to rangelands We would argue for econoaie reasons ilone some sites are better suited to sustained harvest of ornamentals (compare product values discussed by Fowler and Oliver in this publi~aiio~)
Pinyons are ideal for landscapes requiring slow growing or droughtshytolerant conifers Iamature pinyons gr~ing in deep soils free of large rocks are coamonly dug for nursery Trees are usually dug when dormant late September to April in aost areas The most popular s~ze for transplanting is 15 to 25 m because expensive equipment is not needed to handle the root ball The methods used to improve the quality of pinyon Christmas trees can be used for nursery stock bqt the irregular forms are usually highly valued
We believe these products can be harvested on a sustained basis without compromising species composition or aite stabiiity However intensive harvesting will reduce future harvests beca~se natural growth is slow Christmas trees and nursery stock may require 25 years to reacbmarketable size Fowler and Oliver (this fublication) suggest 50 trees could be harves~edannually
NMSU RESEARCH
Research at Mora Research Center or administered through NMSUs main
campus programs has produced considerable inform_tion on pinyon management including man-made pl~ntations (Fisher and Fancher 1986) Woodland ecology and multiple uses have been subjects of long-term studies (in this pUblication see Pieper et ale andmiddot Fowler et al) NMSUs advances in woodland revegetationmiddot and reforestation have been reported in nUmerous publications on seedling technololY and seedlinl establishment Efforts have included disturbed sites for wbich plant establishment techniques have been successfully developed (Fisher et al 1986) Nut research dates back to work on nut nutritional composition (Botkin and Shires~ 1948) More recently basal pruning was shown to increase nut size (Montan~ et al 1980)
Current research is addressing genetic differences among and within provenances (seed sources) and stands The aim is to select for growth and form to improve reforestation stock and trees used for ornamentala and Christmas ~rees Superior trees will be propagated by seed rooted cuttings grafting or tisaue culture as necessary to meet research program objectives These efforts are being coordinated with the biotechnology research underway (see Phillips et al bullbull thia publication) Assessments of genetic variability also will assist development of gene conservation strategies
FUTURE RESEARCH
Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of native stand cultural practices such as feTtilization and run-off control Also deserving attention are the timing of atuTati~n insect control and the interaction between harvest date and seed rancidity
A critical concern is the identifica~ion and multiplica~Lon of high-yield nut producers The importation of cheaper nut products clearly is viewed as an economic threat Resear~hmust atand ready to assist efforts aimed at fair and responsible marketing practices
The 15 diverse pinyon taxa recently discussed by Bailey and Hawksworth (1988) may provide superior genetic
21
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
trai~s for improving New Mexicos pinyons Resear~h efforts to capture
Benetic resobrces for pinyon improvement from Mexico middots species should be considered befoie some ~lant populations are lost to o~ei-expl~~~ation NMSU presently iaeks sufficient resources to address this woik and other aspects of
stand managemen~ io improve nut production
CONCLUSIONS
Native pinyons are bull valuable but
undomesticatedreso~rce tDo oft~n taken for granted~ ~ig~ value crops fit the conce~t of cuatodial management and constitute a category that justifies reater management ~nputs Sc~entists a~d the public must work closely to preserve and deveiop the economic benefits derived from the resource~ New Mexico~ pinyons and ot~er pinyons of Nor~h ~merica collectively represent a pool of genotypes from which products
may be improved Greater resources will be needed for scientists to develop the latter
LITERATURE CITED
Aldon EP ~nd Loring TJ 1977 Ec~logi~ Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proe March 24-25 1977 Wo~kshop~ Albuquerque NM USDA Forest Ser~ice Gen~ Tech Rept RM-39
Alessi JJ 1968 Pinon-jun1per sales pay for clmiddotearing Soil Ct)nserv 33 137
Bailey DK and Hawksworth FG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonollly o~ the pinyon pines (Pi~us subsection Cembroides)~ In-PrOc Silllposio Naeional Sobre-Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6~8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Mexico (in press)
Bailey nK and Hawksworth FG bull 1979 Pinyons of the Chihuahuan Desert region Phytologia 44129-13~
Bailey DK and Wendt T1979 New pinyon recordsfopr northern Mexico Southwest Natur 24389-390
Botkin CW and Shires L~B 19~8 The composition and value of pinon nuts NM Agric Exp Stn Bul 344
Critchfield WB and Ll~tle EL~ Jr 1966 Geographic distribution of the ~ines pf the world USDA Porest SerVice Misc Pub 991 bull
Di~kmann Dt bull and Kozlowski TT 1969 Seasonal changes in the lIlacro- and micronutrient composition of ovulate strobili and seeds ot ~ resinosa Can~ J Bot 47 1547-1554
Dickmann DI and Kozlowski TT~ 1970 Mobilizati~n ~nd licorporation of photoassimilated C by growing vegetativ and reproductive tissue~
of adult Pinus resinosa Ai~ trees Plant Physrr7 45284-288
Ebell LF 1970~ Physiology and biochemistry of flowering inmiddot Douglas-firIri Proc IUFRO Sec middot22 Working Group on Sexual Re~roduction of Porest Trees Finland
Eb~ll LF~ and McMullan EE 1970 Nitrogenous substances associated with differential cone responses of Douglas-fir to ammonium and nitrate fertilization Can J Bot 482169-2177
Everett RL (Compiler) 1987 Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf Jan 13-16 Reno NV Gen Tech Rept INT-215 Ogden OT USDA For Serv Intecmt Res Stn~ 581 p
Fisher JT and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selection for Nmiddotew Mexico Christmas tree production p 1-13 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp~ NMSU Sept 30 - Oct 1 198amp Las Cruces HM
Fisher JT Fa-neher GA aud Neumann RW 198amp Sur~ival4nd growih of bontainer1zed native juniper (Juniperus monosperma on surface-mined lands middot1n New Mexico
Por~ Ecol and H~mt 16291-299 P1shet JT and Montano JM 1977
Ma~agemeni of pinyon for ornamentals Christmas trees ani nut produ~tionp 35-40 In Aldon EP and LoringT (Eds) Ecology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc March 24-25 1977 Workshop Albuquerque NM USDA Foresmiddott Servic~ Gen~ Tech Rept~ R~-39
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
Forcella F 1981 Ovulatecone Rook DA and Sweet GB 1971 production in pinyon Negative Photosynthesis and photosynthateexponential relaiionship with late distribution in Douglas-fir subullbuller teperature Ecology strobili grafted to young62488-491 seedlings~ Can J~ Bot 4913-17
Gifford GE and FE Busby (Eds) Rosengarten F Jr 1984 Pine nuts p 975 The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosyste~ 309-315 In The Book of Edible A Syposiubullbull Utah Agr Exp Stn Nuts Walker and Co bullbull New York Logan Utah loss SD and Pharis RP 1985
aowell Joseph Jr 1941 Pinon and Prootion of flowering in tree jbnipet woodlands of the Southwest crops differentmiddot echanias and J For 39542-545 techniques with special reference Jensen KE 1971 Pinyon-juniper to conif_rs p 383 In KGR
woodland anageent for ultiple Cannel and JEmiddot Jackson (eds) us benefit~ J lane Kgt Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Inst 25231-234 Terrestrial Ecol Nat Environ
Kearns~ FW bullbull KcClain a bullbull and aunt lese Coun bullbull ijuntington UK JD 1962 Grading pinyon pine for SChidtli~g aC 1969 Reproductive Christas trees Utah State Univ aturity related to height of Ext Leaflet 91 loblolly pine USDA For Servo Res
Lanner RK 1981 The pinon tree a Note 50-94 2 p South For Exp natural and cultural hi~tory lena Stn New Orleans Louisiana Nevada University of Nevada Press Schidt1ing RC 1974 Fruitfulness in
Lanner RK 1977 The eradication of conifers ni trogen carbohydrate pinyon-juniper woodland has the and genetic dontrol Proe 3rd progra Ii legi tia te purpose North Aer ~orBiology Work$hop Western Wildlands (Sprinamp)12~17 p 148-164 Colorado State Univ bullbull
Lanner RK 1979 Natural hybridiaation For~ ~ollins Colorado between Pinus edulis ~nd Pinus Shaw G R 1914 The genus Pinus Arnold onoPhylTa1ii the Aericanshy Arboretu Pub 5 JaaICiPlains Southwest Silvae Genetica Kass 23108-116 Sowder AK 1965 The 1964 Chr~stas
Lanner RK 1969~ Terinal tree data J For 63776-778 egasporangiate cones in pinyon Springfield JW 1976 Characteristics pine Aer J Bot 47259-260 and anageent of southwester~
Lanner RK 1985 Soe attributes of pinyori~juniper ranges The status nut-bearing trees of teperate of our knowledge USDA For Servo fGrest origin p 426-437 In Res Pap RK-160 32 p Rocky Kt KGR Cannel and JE Jackson For and lange Exp Stn Fort (eds) Trees as Crop Plants 592 p Collins Colorado Inst Terrestrial Ecol Nat Wareing PF 1958 Reproductive Environ Res Coun Huntington developent in ~ sylvestrisIn UK KV Thiann (ed) Physiology of
Little ELbullbull Jr 1938a Profit in pinon Forest Trees P 643~654 Ronald nuts New Kexico Kag 1612-13 Press New York
Little EL Jr 1938b The earliest Wilson LF and Rudolph V~J 1970 stages of pinon cones Southwest Early basal pruning to control For and Range Exp Stn lese Note pests J For 68i632~63~ 46 4 p Tucson Arizonbullbull Woodroof JG 1979 Tree Nuts (2nd
Little EL Jr 1941 Kanaging ed) AVI Publ Co bullbull Inc Westport Woodlands for pinon nuts Chron Conn 731p Bot 16 348-349
Kontano JK Fisher JT and Goez RE 1980 ~ncreaseof pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
Pravdin LF 1963 The selecti~n and seed production of the Siberian stone pine p 1-20 In AP Shianyuk (Ed) Fruiting of the Siberin Stone Pine in East Siberia Israel Progra for SCientific Transla~ion (Trans bull
fro Rus sian) bull Puritch GS 1972 Cone production in
conifers Can For Servo Inf~ Rep BC-C-65 94 ()
23
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
GROWTH AND MANAGEMENT OF PINYONl
John Fowler and Charles 0liver2
-------------------------------~---------------------------------Abstract -- When managed colle~tively the multiple products obtained from New Mexicots pinyon-juniper (P-J) woodlands represent a significant economic asset Therefore the conversion of P-J to grassland no longer seems justified as a blanket prescription to re~ove a vegetation type once perceived to be a liability Case ~tudies supporting these conclusionS are discussed The relationship between two of these potential products fuel wood and forage was examined at four sites in New Mexico Four pinyon-juniper canopy treatments were ini~iated Treatments with ratios of 0 33 67 and 100 of net crown cover were replicated three times Under each canopy treatment half of the plot was seedeQ through random selection Herbage p~oduction data for both seeded and non-seeded portions were evaluated with respect to forage and fiber growth Total herbage production showed a steady increase from the 0 treatment to the 67 treatme~t This suggests a 67 treatment can be more cost effective than a clear cut
lNew Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station SR 730III
2Authors are respectively Assoc Professor and Graduate Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Economics and Bu~iness New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003
25
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
INTRODUCTION
Among the southwestern statesmiddotNew Mexico has ~he largest area of pinyonshyjuniper woodlands (P-JJ an estimated 23 million acres (Fowleret al 1984) Federal and state agencies estimate nearly 10 million acres or 14 of the states totalland area are occupied by manageable P-J stock (Little 1971) P-J woodlands consti~ute an important economic resource because they provide a variety of products including fuelwood fence posts Christmas trees landscape ornamentals and p1nyon nuts Additionall~ woodlands provide wildlife habitat and
livestock forage
Because of the diverse products P-J management strat~gie~ are being
revised as demands for woodland products and benefits create conflicts for resource managers For exampleurban 4evelopment has forced ranchers to seek alternative sources for forage tooffaet woodlands lostto development This along with increased populari ty of P-J tor fuelwood ilnd landscaping places added pressure on an already diminishing resource This paper will report techniques being developed th~se conflicts while also ~stimating the significance of woodlands and values of its produc ts
middotOWNERSHIP OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS
P-J acreage has been estimated to be bet~een 14 and 265 of the state land total ( Aldon and Brown 1971 Pieper 1977) An officialinv~ntory of P-J in Ne~ Mexico including spatial location and ownership was not readily available for useinthis study Most P-J inventory figures were obtained tbroughpermiddotsonal correspondence with Forest Service (USFS) Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and New Mexico State Land Office personnel Compilations obtained by these agencies show 9964000 acres or 14 of the states total land area contains acceSSible P-J stock Only 29 of the 32 counties in New Mexico were included in the land base De Baca Lea and Roosevelt counties contain no P-J (Table 1)
An estimated 6195688 acres or 62 of thamp total P-J area are readily ac~essible for fuelwood fence posts and other uses Accessible areas are defined as those with aslopeiess than 30 Accessible pinyon-juniper acreage were obtained for USFS andBLM lands from these agenc1es Accessible
acreage for the state and private lands we~~ esti~ated based on surrounding USFS ~nd BLM perceritag~s (Figure 1)
Private
There are 2881000 total acres 29) of privately owned lands ~ontairiing pinyon-jriniper resources making it the largest owne~ahip category Approximately 22 million acres of the total are accessible (Tabh 2)
Fores t Service (USFS)
USFS lands account for 2252000 acres (23) of the total pinYOn-juniper land area with 15 million accessible acres (Table 3) The five national forests in New Mexico are the Gila Lincoln Cihola Santa Fe and Carson The majority of the USFS P-J tYPe is dominated by pinyon with the exception of the far eastern portion of the state w~ich is dominated by Juniper
cJ usn tn4lu to IiliI IUC wq
fIliiil St 111 ~
Flg rinyon-lunlper ere by owniInidp In Nw Mexico
Th lunlpltt 10_ In Dona Alia County II too small and lcattere d to Ih_on the map
$iluna Unltad StatllS Departmllnt of Agriculture Soil COIlSIIrvltion Sarvl Potsntlal Natural Vagatatlon Map N_ MexiCO New Mexico Interagancv Range Committee Report No middot11 and Unltad StatllS DipltltmeA of tile Interior Bur of
Land Manapment State of New MexiCO Land Status Map 1979Unlt4d StatllS Gcwarrunant Printing Office 1981L
26
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
1
Table 1 Summary of total pinyon-juniper acreages for the five ownership categories by county 1980
Total pJ Total County Private USFS BLM IndianI State Land Area Land Area
-------------------------------------------- acres ---------------------------------------------- Bernalillo Catron
31874 363243
0 425419
27000 213888
53132 0
middot600 137224
112606 1139774
748160 4414720
Chaves 7205 7102 middot34000 0 1176 49483 3900800 Colfax 104887 0 0 0 6522 111409 2413440 CurryDona Ami Eddy Grant Guadalupe HardingHidalgo Lincoln
3285 30
4223 71597
205013 27028 8846
149521
0 0
71023 314543
0 0
2773 306099
0 0 0 0 00
23275 0 0 0
0 0 1225 0 40000 0
993 8957 8608
47911 13114 23849
838 40611
4278 8987
83854 457326 218127 50877 13682
536231
898560 2434560 2675200 2540800 1919360 1368320 2206080 3109760
Los Alamos 0 2862 0 0 0 2862 69120 Luna 2600 0 0 0 3900 6500 1892480 McKinley Mora
409208 105777
22146 0
30000 1400
644265 0
117052 12876
1222671 120053
3495040 1244160
Otero 35283 124011 21875 43565 21275 246009 4248320 QuaymiddotRio Arriba
5000 113860
0 306211
0 260440
0 198881
12109 36764
17109 916156
1845120 3765120
Sandoval 141559 69851 109686 187351 15640 524087 2378880 San Juan San Miguel Santa Fe
5973 19624
270451
0 88533 47010
314477 14000 28000
150619 0
40745
53964 954
19965
525033 123111 406171
3530240 3050880 1221760
Sierra 22198 32230 40625 0 8210 103263 2700160 Socorro 329140 276778 502015 30445 146316 1284694 4240640 Taos 48235 126372 42000 12394 3916 232917 1444480 Torrance 163420 0 45000 11091 88909 308420 2147200 Union 52532 0 0 0 53778 106310 2442880 Valenciamiddot 179640 29529 142592 409250 273792 1034803 3595710 Totals 2881252 2252492 1891498 1781738 1159823 9966803 719419501
Figures for some areas obtained directly from correspondence with each respective reservation Figure exclude acreage for DeBacamp Lea and Roosevelt counties for which there are no pinyon-juniper woodlands Source New Mexico Statistical Abstract 1979-80 Biennial Edition
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
Table 2 Total area of pinyon-juniper on private lands by county and accessibility
AreaCouritI Accessible Inaccessible Total
------~-----_-~--- acres ---fII----------------~Area One
McKinley 828274 85984 409208 Santa Fe 240701 29750 270451
r
Torrance 1148941 49026 163420 Sandoval 1118321 29727 141559
Rio Aniba 92227 21633 113860 Mora 74044 81783 105777 Colfu 73421 81466 104887 Union 36772 15760 52532 Taos 39070 9165 48235 Bernalillo 223121 9562 31874 Harding 24325 2703 27028 San Miguel 16092 3532 19624 San Juan 4181 1792 5973
Total 1172645 321783 1494428 Area Two
Socorro 253438 75702 329140 Catronmiddot middot207049 156194 363243 Valencia 143916 35724 179640 Total 604403 267620 872023
Area Three Grant 44390 27207 71597Otero 22405 12878 35283Sierra 4440 17758 22198Hidalgo 7165 1681 8846Luna 2080 520 2600Dona Ana 21 9 30 Total 80501 60053 140554
Area Four Guadalupe 184512 20501 205013
Lincoln 67284 82237 149521 Chaves 6485 720 7205 Quay 4500 500 5000 Eddy 3801 422 4223 Curiy 3121 164 3285 Total 269703 104544 374247
Total for State 2127252 754000 2881252 JAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less and were estimated with
the assistance of the forest Service and the BLM Jlnterview with Nancy NeskSuskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 131981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Miguel Santa Fe Colfax Rio Arriba amp Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INT~16 1718 and 21 Ogden Utah 1~75
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora counties~ New Mexico Departshyment of StateForestry TR-I Releases 1 and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs InventorymiddotStatistical Report State Soll and WaterCoilservatio~ Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1966-67
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Chris tmas Trees
There are 1891000 (18) total acres of P-J under the BLM jurisdiction (Table 3) The four districts in New Mexico are Albuquerque Socorro~ Las Cruces and Roswell A total of 13 million acres are designated as accessible juniper dominates in the eastern and western
bull sections and pinyon dominates most of the centr~l portion of the state
Indian
There are 1782~000 total acres (18) of P-J located on Indian lands Because reservations are accessible only to tribal members P-J on Indian lands was considered inaccessible for this study (Table 4)
State
State-owned lands comprise the smallest total P-J land area with 1157000 acres (12 of the total pinyon-juniper land base of which ~8 million acres are accessible (Table 5) Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
MAJOR PRODUCTS OF P-J
Fuelwood
Average per-acre cord yields over the rotation length for the P-J vegetatio~ type were obtained for different areas throughout the state The woodland type is estimated to grow at the annual rate of 007 cords per acre per year over the rotation length Through a statewide nursery interview
a price of $ 95 per ~ord was determined This annual gross revenue on a sustained basis for fuelwood is $666 per acre
Fenceposts
Average per-acre post yields were determined for each of the ownership areas of New Mexico A sustained annual yield of 64 posts per acre was derived Through a statewide nursery nterview a price of $375 was determined for a pinyon-juniper post with a4 inch top and an 8-foot length This annual gross reVenue on a sustained basis was calcultedto be $240 per acre
Each year pinyon-juniper woodlands yield 10 live Christmas trees per acre on a sustained basis (Sauerwein1976) The average market height for pott~d trees is 6 feet Ag~in by a state wide nursery interview a price of $957 ~er foot was determined result~ng in an ~nnual gross revenue of $574 per acre
Wlldlings
P-J woodlands also have a yield of 10 wildlings per acre The balled and burlaped wildlings have the same average price per foot as Christmas trees However thlit average height per wildling varied depending on area An average of 75 feet was obtained with a value of $957 per foot The annual gross revenue on a sustained basis is calculated to be $119 per acre
Pinyon Nuts
Sustained revenues from pinyon nu ts are based on frequency price per pound and location of a good crop which is described as cinethat produces 250 pounds per acre of pinyon nuts (Dodge 1955) Depending on the area substantial nut production intervals have been reported to be 3 to 7 years (Perry 1922) and price per pound for raw nuts in the shell is $175 (Little 1971) For an area where a good crop of 250 pounds per acre is ~roduced a value of $43750 per acre was computed for that year On a sustained yield basis this translates to $14583 per acre per year gross revenue
Forage
To express the data in dol~ar units per acre certain transformations were required ie beef cows were valued as breeding stock inventory Using this method the ~nformation allowed the derivation of a long-run income stream consistent wit6 the sustained yields computed for the other prodUcts
Animal unit values were obtained and divided by 12 to get the gross value pf production per animal unit month For different ownership areas grazing capacitiell ranged from 08 to 21 AUM per acre (Stucky and Henderson 1969) For example in the Gila National Forest the gross revenue per unit of beef cows is $438 (Gray
29
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
Table 3 Total area of pinyon~junipel on forcst service land by county and accessibility
ForestJCounty Accessible Inaccessible Total -----~--------------- acresmiddot --------------------shy
Gila Grant 193838 120705 314543 Catron 120670 182646 303316 Sierra 5348middot 26882 32230 Hidalgo 2552 221 2773 Total 322408 330454 65~862
Lincoln Eddymiddot 64159 6864 71023
Otero 7$729 45 i 282 124011Chaves 6416 686 7102 Lincoln 138036 168063 306099 Total 287340 220899 508235
Cibola Socorro 213379 63399 276778 Catron 75152 46951 122103 Valencia 23357 6172 29529McKinle 17517 4629 22146SandovI 5839 1543 7382 Totalmiddot 335244 122694 457938
Santa Fe Santa Fe 41972 5038 47010SanMi~el 81407 7126 88533Rio Arriba 79944 36710 116654Sandovalmiddot 46162 16307 62469Los Alamos 2182 680 2862 Total 251667 65861 317528
Carson Rio Arriba 153541 36016 189557Taos 102362 24010 126372 Total 255903 60026 315929
Total for State 1452562middot 799930 2252492 IAccessible areas are those which have a slope of 30 or less based on percentagemiddot
estimates by the Timber Staff Officers of their respective forest acorrespondence with Kenne~ C SCoggin Forest Supervisor Gila National Forest
January 21 1981 Correspondencewith Tom Goodish Timber Staff Officer LIncoln Nationnl Forest
December 2 1980 4Q)rrespondence wi~ Jerry TGoon Timber Staff Officer Cibola National Fo~est May
28 1980 Correspondence with Bob Steinhoff Timber Staff Officer Santa Fe National F~restmiddot
September 25 1980 Correspondence with PaulR NordwalI Acting Forest Supervisor Carson Nationalmiddot
Forest April 1 1980
lt
30
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
Table 4 Total area of pinyon-juniper within the Bureau of Land Management districts by county and accessibility
bull
-~
DistrictCountr Accessible- Inaccessible Total --------------------- acres -------------------- shy
Albuquerque San Juan 283029 31448 314477 Rio Arriba Sandoval
234396 98717
26044 10969
260440 109686
Torrance 40500 4500 middot45000 Taos 37800 4200 42000 McKinleySanta Fe
27000 25200
3000 2800
30000 28000
Bernalillo 24300 2700 27000 San MiguelMora
12600 1260
1400 140middot
14000 1400
Total 784802 87201 872003 Socorro
Socorro Catron Valencia
451813 192499 128333
50202 21389 14259
502015 213888 142592
Total 772645 85850 858495 Las Crucesmiddot
Sierra Grant Otero Hidalgo
36562 20947 19687 1102
4063 2328 2188
123
40625 23275 21875
1225 Total 78298 8702 87000
Roswell Lincoln Chaves
36000 30600
4000 3400
40000 34000
Total 66600 7400 74000 Total for State 1702345 189153 1891498
IAccessible 8IEas are those which have a slope of 30 01 less based on percentage estimates determined by each BLM District Officer
JCorrespondence with Malcolm Huckleberry Natural Resource Specialist New Mexico BLM Albuquerque District September 23 1980
Interview with Ben Ortiz Forester New Mexico BLM Socorro District January 13 1981
4CQrrespondence with Daniel C B Rathbun Acting District Manager New Mexlco BLM Las Cruces District January 17 1980
Correspondence with James H OConnor District Manager New Mexico BLM Roswell District January 16 1980
31
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
Table 5 Total area of pinyon-juniper on state landsmiddotby county and accessibllty
ArealCountz Accessible Inaccessible T(fal -----~------------ acres ----111--------------shy
Area One McKinleyTorrance San Juan Union Rio Arriba Hardin~Santa e Sandoval Mora Colfax Taos San~lBern omiddot Total
Area Two Valencia Socorro Catron Total
Area Three Grant Otero Dona Ina Sierra Luna Hidalgo Total
Area Four IJncoIn Guadalupe ~ay
ddy Chaves Curry Total
Total for State
92471 62236 87775
37645 21941
21464 15099 11261 9013 4565 2976
878 420
323144
20amp344 108214
78218 391836
31621 13616 1166 3695 3120 middot679
59897
18~275 9180
10898 7747 1058
894 48052
825529
24581 26673 16189 16133 992-8 2385 1866 4379 a863 1957
940 76
180 108045
68448 38042 59006
165496
16290 7659 1791 4515
780 159
31194
22336 3934 1211
861 118
99 28559
333294
117052 S8909 53964 53778 36764 23849 16965 15640 12876 6522 3916
954 600
431789
273792 14middot6316 137224 557332
47911 21275 8957 8210 3900
middot838 91091
40611middot I
13114 12109 ~608 1176
993 76611
1 1156823 I Accessible areas are thosemiddot which Itave a slope of 30 or less and were determined by
estimation with the assistance of the Forest Service and theBLM IInterview with Nancy Neskauskas Timber Staff Forester New Mexico State Forestry
Santa Fe January 31 1981
Sources Forest Area and Timber Resource Statistics for San Migu~l Santa P~ CoHax Rio Arriba and Taos counties USDA Forest Service Bulletins INTmiddot18 17 IS and 21 Ogden Utah 197~
State and Private Resources for Catron and Mora countiesbull New Mexico Department of State ForestryTRI Releases i and 2 Santa Fe New Mexico 1970
New Mexico Conservation Needs Inventory-StatistIcal Report State son arid Water Conservation Needs Committee Santa Fe New Mexico 1965s7
32
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
Jonesand Fowler1978) This figure divided by 12 yields a figure of 53650 (animal unit revenue per month) that multiplied by average grazing capacity of the Gila Forest (08) results in an annual gross revenue on a sustained yield basis ofS292
Prices were evaluated on an annual pe~-acre yield basis and prices obtained for product-s were based on retail market prices for the products (Fowler Peacock and Schaber 1985)
FORAGE RESPONSE
Four experimental sites in New Mexico were establish~d to determine the relationships between P-J crown cover and growth versus forage understory growth The first (Taos site) is 15 miles northeast of Taos off highway 3 on private land This site was established in 1981
The second (Clo~dc~oft site) is 10 miles west of Cloudcroft at Pig Ridge on Forest Service land This site was also established in 1981
The third (Cebolla site) is 25 miles south of Tierra Amarilla 5 miles west of highway 84 on BLM land This site was established in 1982
The fourth (Gila site) is in the Mimbres Ranger District off highway 61 on North Star Mesa on Forest service land This site was established in 1983 (Figure 2)
Each site consists of 12 14 acre plots Each site was randomly assigned
iiigt Gilo-tlimbres Ranger dlstrict off Hwy61 on North Star tlesa (Forest Service)
bull n Amarilla-25 mi South of TIerra Amarillo West of Hwy84 (SUI)
bull Cloudcroft- t 0 mi West of Cloudcroft on Pig Ridge (Forest Service)
Taos-1Q mi North of Taos 5 mi east of Hwy 3
(Private)
FIGIJI 2
a thinning treatment of either 33 67 100 or control There are three repetitions of each treatment based on the densiti of the trees
After plots were thinned grass seeding treatments were randomly assigned to each half plot Seeding mixtures and rates were predetermined by BLM and Forest Service personnel Mixture application rates are unique to each site
There was little change in forage production in the control plots for the first 3 years In the fourth and fifth years production increased Howeve~ this was used mostly by above average Precipitation in those years
On the 33 treatmentresults were similar to those of the control with little change for the first 3 years and a slight increase in the fourth and fifth years again used mostly by above average precipitation
On the 67 treatment production increased each successive ye-ar with the exception of 1983 when there was a decrease Increases more than douhled in ~he last 2 years(Table ~)
In the 100 ~reatment production increased similar to the 67 treatment the difference being the higher rate of increase in production in the fourth and fifth year
This set of data came from the Cloudcroft- study site This is representative of the other sites with the exception of the magnitude of the increase in the fourth a-nd fifth year
SAN JUAN
CATRON
COLFAX UNION
bull EDDY
LEA OTERO
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
1
Table 6 Cloudcroft forage growth characteristics 1981-1985
Yield (lbacre) Thinning Treatments ()
Year Forafe Sampled Type 0 33 67 100
1981 Native 99 16 108 26 Seeded 1 1 0 6 Total 100 17 115 52
1982 middotNative 81 13 73 46 Seeded 0 0 8 69 Total 87 22 middot156 202
1983 Native 73 10 72 20 Seeded 1 9 6 13 Total 75 20 87 middot47
1984 Native 158 42 90 249 Seeded 1 17 128 947 Total 180 101 268 1418
1985 Native 374 87 365 2796 Seeded 6 18 1244 4333 Total 471 234 2536 7913
1 Total forage included native grasses seededgrasses and forbs
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
In some instances production in the 67 treatments in other sites did exceed that of the 100 treatment
I
F+BER RESPONSE
The trees in all stands were remeasured to obtain growth patterns Comparisons to original values were made A positive relationship was expected between growth rates of individual trees and the intensity of the thinnibg treatment however analysis did not support this expectation This analysis may be premature considering the brief time the slQw-grow1ng trees have had to respond
In August and September 1987 seedlings on all sites were counted and Tecorded They were measured on the same basis as the trees height maximum ~nd minimum crown diameter and a quality rating These seedlings will be monitored to measure species compositlon and growth
Before the thinning treatments the composition of trees in all plots averaged approximately 30 pinyon and 70 jumiddotniper The composition of seedlings coming back is about 99 pinyon and 1 junipe~ on all sites except in the Oila site where
composition is about 90 pinyon and ~O juniper As expected the higher percentages of juniper are being found on the clear cut sites This is because juniper seedling are more sun tolerant as opposed to pinyon seedlings being more shade tolerant
ECONOMETRIC OROWTR MODELS
A standard computer regression package was used to generate and evaluate econometric models relating easily obtained physical parameters to volume
Net crown cover is an easily obtainable variable for P-J woodland using an econometric model A relationship between net crown cover and gross crown cover was determined allowing an accurate estimation of gross crown cover to be obtained Crom an aerial photograph This will greatly facilitate large-scale volume estimations to be determined without expensive ground surveys
The fuelwood volume in each tree is difficult to predict techniques that require an age determination are not feasible because of the denity of the juniper wood ~nd the multi-stemmed form Destructive sampling at the four sites enabled models to be developed to
determine individual tree ~olume using variables that were easily measured such as diameter and height These tables provide quick reference to determine the volume of a standing tree
Modeling Approaches
Three different models were considered to optimize resource allocations The models were designed to include the interactions among potential products from the P-J woodland type
The first approach evaluated was linear programming a method of allocating resources to optimize a specific objective function With linear programming a feasible solution is assured if the requirements specified by the analyst and the constrai~ts imposed by the environment are all met and are mutually consistent However even if there is a feasible solut~on linear programming is limited to single dimensional optimization In this study linear programming ~as used only as a basis for comparison
The second approach evaluated was goal programming this method attempted to achieve a set of simultaneously unobtainable goals This approach was deterained to be appropriate because it minimized the differences between a solution and the management goals However the data requirements for goal programming are much more extensive
The third approach multiple objective linear programming (MOLP) allows simultaneous maximization oC several linear objectives and permits subjective weighting of the importance of each goal to be achieved With such a wide array of products and ownership types to consider MOLP and linear ~rogramming were used because of their compatible set of assumptions accounting opportunities and optimization of alternative objectives
The purpose of the models is to aid in determining the optimal use of the P-J woodlands With the array oC products available optimal use in an area may not include the utilization oC one or more ~roducts In additi~n a model that works for one site may not be the best for another site~ At the time the models were developed the
objective was to determine an optimal use for the P-J woodland type
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
All data collected have not been correlated but trends show forage
35
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
prciduction in the ~7 treatment to equal o~ exceed that in the 100 treatment An optimum thinning rate will be determined by the objective of the thin For instance if the objective is to produce Christmas trees it will require a different thinning level than if the obJ~ctive is to produce forage or fuel wood For multiple use c~n~iderations a 67 thinning offers the greatest benetits~
On 67 and 100 thinning seeding showed a significant increase in forage production Seeding nicely comp~ements the m6re intensive thinning treatments Forage production was generally increas~d and eros ibn was controlled Annual revenues derived from P~J woodland products were in~reased through complementary sales of forage from the thinned areas (Table7)
Research Needs
a) Additional studies on soils and soil condi tion are necessary to determine erosion and water quality effects of thinning in the pJ woodlands
b)Additional~esearch is needed in thinning treatments slightly below and above a 67 thinning Of treatments currently being studied the 67 thinning has shown more deSirable results compared to the other treatments 6dditional thinning treatments of 50 and 75 will narrow the range of study and offer a better insight as to what an optimal thinning rate would be for a sustained yield of a multitude of products while maintaining and improving the P-J woodlands
c) Additional effort is needed to isolate net per-acre revenues for each potential p~oduct of the ~~J woodlancl type This will require individual budgets to be developed for each possible enterprise Net income gain or loss estimates from each use of the woodland type is necessary asa baSis for resource allocation decisions
d) Many questions have been raised as to the effect of the thinning treatments on wildlife Unfortunately the magnitude of our study is not sufficient to thoroughiy evaluate thewil~life situation It is the opinion of moit wildlife specialists that the study site would need to be about our times the present size or about 12 acres L to ~ffectively evaluate wild lire use on the study plots
These are just few of the unanswered questions about the p-~ woodlands To develop effective management practices these and many more questions must be addressed
CONCLUSION
The P-J woodland type provides a 1 1
number ofmarketable products Rather than being the liability it has been considered to be in the past the P-J woodland type has the potential to be a valuable asset However this renewable natural resource requires more rigorous management pTacticesin to fully capture its potential values and benefits Further studies must be conducted on the P-J woodland type to determine the optimal use of this resource
36
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
-------------------------------~------ shy
Table 7 Cloudcroft economic analysis of thinning treatments 1985
) Thinning treatments 0 33 67 100
---------1985 Value per acre---------shy
Value of initial thinning 000 4320 6668 11700
Value of increased forage 82 23 00 18 30
Value of increased forage 83 15 00 02 00
Value of increased forage 84 35 00 17 239
Value of inc-reased forage 85 ~91 00 398 1435
Value of 4 year ftielwood growth 05 03 10 00
Total -169 4323 7113 13404
37
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
LITERATURE CITED middotPieper Rex D_ 1977 The
Aldon Earl F and H Gassaway Brown III 1971 ~Geologic Soil
Groupings for the Pinyon-Juniper Type on National Forests in New Mexico USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-197 4p
Chojnacky David C 1985 Pinyoll-shyJuniper Volume Equations for the Central Rocky Mountain States Research Paper INT-339 OgdenUtah US Department or Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station 27p
Dodge Natt N March 1955bull Pinyon-shy Pigmy of the Pines Arizona
Highways p 32-38
Fowler John M R D Bowe B E Peacock K C McDaniel T G~rner-Hurt~ JR~ GraYi and M Cardenas March 1984 Wood Fiber Production onPinyon-Juniper
Woodlands in New Mexico Agri~ult~ral Experiment Sta~ion NMSU ResearchReport No 519 3middot2p
Fowler John M B E Peacock and M J Schaber October 1985 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Type in New Mexico Assei or Liability Agricultural Experiment Station NMSU 65p
Gray James R middotMichael Lmiddot Jones and John M Fowler 1980 ~Cattle Ranches in Centraf NewMexico 1987 Agricultural Experiment Station NewMexic6 State Oniversity Bulletin 678 36~
Gray J R J M Fowler and M A Bray January 1982 Free-Use Fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory Exhaustion and Energy Equations Journal of Forestry Vol 80 No 1 p 23-26
Little Elbert L Jr 1971 Atlas of United States Trees Volume 1
Con~fersand Important Hardwoods USDA Miscellaneous Publication 1146 9 p
tittle Elbert 1 Jr 1977 Res~archin the Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands It Ecoiogy Uses and Management of Pinyon~Juniper Woodlands USDA Fore~t Service General Technical Report RM-39 p8-1g
S6uthwestern Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem EcologyUses and Managem~nt 6f Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Forest Servi~e General Technical Report RM-39 p1-3
Sauerwein Iilliam J August 1986 Management and Harvesting of
Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Noter 5p
Stucky H R and Donald C Hendmiddoterson 1969 Grazing Capacities and Selected Factors Affecting Pub~ic Land Use Agricultural Experimental Station New Mexico State Uni~ersity Research Report158 20p2
38
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
-- -__----------------------------------------------- shy
HIGH VALUE CROPS FROM NEW MEXICO PINYON PINES II CROP
IMPROVEMENT THROUGH BIOTECHNOLOGyl
Gregory C Phillips) James i Fisher and John G Mexal
Abstract--Pinyons and their products can be improved as new biotechnologies are integrated wi th more t radi tiona 1 me t hods of b reeding and propagating conifers The techniques discussed can theoretically produce genetically elite pinyon plantlets masse to i~prove trai ts related to tree products growth pest resistance and environmental adaptation Most needed are methods to recover viable plantl~ts from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the selection of superior genotypes created by somoclonal variation or protoplast fusion Biotecbnology costs m~re than traditional plant research but the rewards can bedisproport~onatelymiddotgreater as well Most notable is the opportunity to bypass problem~ related to the pinyon pines slow growth and delayed reproductive maturity Micropropagation is among the methods that will likely prova most cost effective in the foreseeable future
1 New Mexico Stat~ University
Agricultural Experiment Station SR73middotIV
2 Associate professor professor and associateprofesso~ respectively Department of Agronomy and Horticulture New Mexico State University Las Cruces NM 88003-0003
39
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
INTRODUCTION
Advances in biotechriology have altered our expectations of what can be a~hieved through agriculture and forestry research Trees and their products can beilllproved as technical innovations are integrated with more traditional lIlethods of breeding and propagating conifers (Haissig et al bullbull 1987) Among the exciting possiblliti~s expected to elllerge frolll biotechnology are trees that ate beiter suited ~o
intensive culture bullbull lIlarglnal lands or climate and production of specific products More specif~cally it will become increasingly poss~bie to obtain ~enot~pes disallowed by natural breeding barriers and t~ ~educe signi~lcantly the most formidable limitation to genetic impro~ement of trees the extensive time required for trees to reach ~eproduc~ive maturity
Biotechnology can provide benefits of im~ediate importance A specific shyexample is the use of iSozyme analysis to identify the oriti~ ~f nuts m~ke~ed as New Mexico pinyon nuts (see preceeding papermiddot by Fisher et at) The same technique can determine genetic distances among the many pinyon taxa p~esentl~ re~~gnized (Bailey and HawkSworth 1988) including geographic races A working knowledge of genetic variability is essential f6r breedi~g and gene conservation programs
Biotechnology ultimately will enmiddotable scientists to bypass problems particulary eviden~ in pinyon~ delayed reproductive maturity and slow growth~ The mass production of selected superior genotypes andmiddot species hybrids created novo will complement conventional tree improvement prograllls
There a~e sev~n specific techniq~es employed in plant bio-technology that can be drawn upon to a-ehieve major breakthroughs in pinyon improvement The first four are examples of cell b(otechnology and the last three are example~ of di~ect gene transfer
CELL BIOTECHNOLmiddotOGY
Clonal Mi~ropropagation
Clonal propagati~n techniques can produce large numbers of genetically identical plants from e~lte trees The lIlicropropagatlon of plaritiets in tissue
c~ltur~s (see Fig l~ ~oute A-B-D~E-F) typically involves the induction ~f adventitious shoots frolll cultured juvenile t~ssues f~llowed by root induction (Thorpe and Biondi 1984) This process has been hampered in routine applications because of incomplete development of rooted shoots limited numbers of usable plantlets and llmitedsuecess 10 date in using mature tree tissue sources Other approaches o~ interest include adventivesomatic embryogenesis (Raissig et ali 187)~
becaus it ma~ yield greater numbers of whole plantll
4_~_~~~~ EXPLANTmiddot SHOOTS A B 0
CALLUS
SOMA11C C~ C I
fi-reg f-~ ~ ROOTING
PROTOPLASSXE OF ~ SOMACLONE
TO SPEC F
FlIJUZ8 1 RouteS for propagation and genetic manipulation of pinyons through biotechnOlogy (Adapted from the North Central Forest Experiment Station)
Gymnosperms such as pinyons generally are less amenable than angiospe~ms to micropropagation and other cell manipulations in vitro (Thorpe and Biondi 1984)-middot~ces wi th gymnosperms therefore ~ lag considerably behind similar achievements reprirted lor dicots bull Rowever some effortS~have been fruitful in recent years and a~out 20 conif~r species have ben suc~essfullj multiplied in vitro Soon mas t comillercially valuiibl-e--shyconifers will be r~generateden lIIasse as tissue cultured plantlets~ The --shyprincipal purpose will be to multiply elite or desir~le genotypes giving rise to reforestation or ornamental nursery growing stockmiddot
The preceding paper (Fisher et tl 1987discussed numerous pine species that produce edible nuts Among these
are severalmiddot speeies thllt have received
40
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
aitention from biotechnologists Multiple shoot buds were report~din tissue cultures of pinea (Ginzburg and Reinhold 1966) and P coulteri (Patel and Berlyn 1982) Multiple buds from tissue cultures may have use in developing rapid vegetative pr~p~gation procedures Callus tissues but not regenerated plants were obtained from P cembra (Salmia 1975) and P~ albicaulis (Harvey and Grashai 1969) Protoplasts wer isolated and cultured to the r~eovery of ealius colonies but ndt to regenerated plants r from P
eoulteri (Patel et al 198~) i few roots and shoot buds but not complete plants were obtained from callus and cell suspension cultures of P gerardiaha (Konar~ 1974 1971 Gerwal and Koul 1983) Recen tly P eduli s has been placed in tissue cuTture following the protoeols for P eldarica
(Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley et a1 1987) Pre1iminary results have been encouraging 1Gladfelter et al Unpub )
Somoclonal Variation
Cells grown in cultures of morphologically unorganized masses can exhibit a high degree of genetic disruption leading to the accumulation of gentic mutationa over time Eventually these mutations ar~ expressed as somoelonmiddotal variation wh1ch introduces new genetic variation into populations of regenerated plants (Reisch 1983) Althoug~ somoclonal variation adversely affects clonal propagation programs it can provide new ~notypes that can potentially prove superior in genetic screening and breeding trials
Benefits from somoelonal variation have not been realized in conifers because it has not been possible to recover conifer plantlets from long-ter eall~s tissues or cell cultures (see Fig I route A-B-C-D-E-r) However recent advances at NMSU with eldarica suggest a routine method can be developed to regenerate conifers from long-term callus and cell cultures (Gladfelter and Phillips 1987 Wagley t al~ 1987)
Somatic Hybrids via Protoplast FUSion
Successful regen~rationof cotfer plantlets from long-term callus cultures
will improve tti~ likelihood that plants will be regnerated from cultures containing thousands of single-celied protoplasts Because their cell walls have been digested away protoplast~ are bound only by a cell membrane and are comparatively easy to manipulate physically Therefore with appropriate
techniques protoplasts can be indueed to fuseto form hybrid cells A typic~l cell wall is subsequently formed Ultimately a plant can be rege~erated from cell masses arising from mitotic di~isions of the original somatic cell hybrid (see Fig 1 route of Protoplasts of Species A and XshyAX-C-D-E-F)
New interspecific and intergenerie hybrids can be produced by protoplast fusion that are not found in nature or cannot be created through conventional artificial sexual hybridization (Evans 1983) Therefore the deslrable traits of two conifer species or genera can be combined that are otherwise removed from one another by reproductive isolation Additionally somatic cell hybrids are amphidiploid and can contain the organellar genomes of either or in rare eases both of the parental lines Thus somatic hybrids are genetically unique compared to sexual hybrids (Gleba and Evans 1983)
Resistance Traits via Cell Selection
Genetic mutations resulting from somaelonal variation can be explotted by positive selection schemes imposed at the cllular level (at steps AX or C of Figl)followed by regeneration of plants from the selected cells Known as cell selection this process has been used to obtain overproduction of targeted amino aCids herbicide tolerance resistance to pathotoxins salt tolerance and-other traits in the regenerated plant~ (Flick 1983) This approach provides opportunities to improve herbicide ~~lerance and dis~ase resistance in conifers bull Other trait~ 8ueh ~8 tolerances to drought or extreme temp~ratures aa be aaenable to cell selection approaches in the future~ provided appropriate selection criteria can be deterainedthat correlate expression o~ the targeted trait in cells and whole plants
DIRECT GENE TRANSFER
Recombinant DNA techniques are being developed for transferring genes
41
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
~n severalplani genera Dicrit plan~ speciej are generallythe most ~~~nable to these techniques but notable successes have been achieved with certainmonocot~peciesmiddot and recent p~ogre8s in gymnosperm species has been reported (Sederoff et al 198amp)~ Singlemiddot genes c-II be isolated from plantsmiddot as discrete segments of the DA molecule excised with specific excision or restriction enzymes The gene as a segment of DNA molecule contains a ~odin~ sequence that ca~be transcribed and translated into thmiddote resulting protein or enzyme responsible middotfor the des~red trait Also conta~ned are regulatbry sequences that control the expression of the coding sequenc~ in time~ location andquaritity
These regulatory sequences usuallymiddot need to be modified for appropriate expression in the targeted host plant The gene molecule can be spliced into the targeted ~lant cell Asmill number of host cells will incorporate this new gene into its own chromosomes forming the basi~ for no~mal i~heritance of the new gene within the host plant following regeneration A sirategy is often built into th~ gene transfer procedure that assures deselection of cells or regenerated plants that do not contain the new gene splice Obviously such techniques ate complicated but eventually they will be developed for conifers (Haissig et al ~987) The following are examples of desirable traits that could benefit pinyons using these te~hniques
Disease and Pe~t Resistance
Genes coding for disease or pest resistance will be among th~middotfirst tD be transferred into conifer~ using direct gene transfer techniques Various endotoxin genes of Bacillus thuringiensis specifically attack certain orders of insect pests without harming beneficial insects These genes are being isolatedmiddot engineered and transferred into various dioot pl~nts with expression ~fmiddotthe endotoxin proteins (Fischhoff et al 1987) bull Such genes can prOvide control ~f conifer tip moths and other seriou~ pests~ Geries potentially impaiting resistance to nematodes and plant pathogens are also being researched (Kemp et al 1987)
Seed Protein Quality
The gene coding for seed ~torag~
protein phaseolin of middotbean was among tllefirst successfullyused i~ direct gene transfer studies (Sengupta-Gopalan at al 1985) Theoret~cally the gene transfer approach could I)middote used to improve the nutrient quality of pinyon nUts by compleme~tlng amin~ acids foun~ naturallt within the seed with otbers of
high value Similarly flavor and rancidity could be altered through gene transfer
Environmental Adaptatio~
Specific enzy~e systems recently have been identified that confer tolerance to environmental stress For e~ampie c~tton plant heat tolerance i~ a highly heritable trait that a~parentlt is cont~olled by one or two dominant or semi-dominane genes (aodrigue~-Garay~ middot1985) Similarly ~wo unique protein~ appear to be associatea with peat tolerance in cowpe~ (Heti~s-Laaosa et al~ 1987) Efforts are underway to correlate the presence of specific genes t~ ~pecLfic bioche~ical mechanisms of tolerance and to evaluate thmiddote relatioriship of the heat tolerance mechanimiddotsm to drought tolerance mechani~ms (Rodriguez-Garay et al 1987) bullIn both cases stress appears to induce an unusual biochemical pathway in toletan~ lines but not in susce~tible lines and two enzyme~ in the pathway seem pivotal Isolation of the enzymes in question and the genes coding for them ultimately will enabie scientists to transfer directly genes conferring stress tolerance It may soon become possible tomiddot engineer conifers and specifically pinyons that are adapted to particular environments
NMSU RESERCH ANTICIPATED
1) Develop micropropagation methods suited to large-scale produciion of elite conifer selections
2) Develop me~hods t6 regener~e pinyon plantlets from long-term callus and cell cultures permitting the evaluation of som~clonal variation cell sel~ctiori or protoplas~ fusiontechnologie for pinyon genetic improvement
3) Develop procedutes for the ieoshylatiori culture and fusion of pinyon protoplasts with other coniferssuch 4S the eldarica pine
42
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
aa a means to develop new and faster techniques for conifers which wo~ldgrowing hybrid varletiebullbull be suited to pinyon _enetic
improvement4) Develop direct gene transfer
LI TERATURE CITED
8ailey DK and Hawksworth PG 1988 Phytogeography and taxonoy of the pines (Pinus subsection Cembroide8) InProc Siposio Nacional Sobre Pinos Pinonceros held Aug 6-8 1987 Nuevo Laredo Kexico (inpress)i
EVans DA 1983 Protoplast fUSion In Evans DA Sharp WR AmiratO
PV and Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Cultu~e Vol I p 291-321 Kacmillan New York
Pischhoff DA Bowdish~ KS Perlak PJ Karrone PG KcCorick SK Niedermeyer JG Dean DA Kusano-Kretzer K Kayer EJ Rochester DE Rogers SG a~d Praley RT 1987 Insect tolerant transgenic toato plants 8iotechnolo~y 5807-813
Flick CE 1983 Isolation of utants from cell culture In Evsns DA Sharp WR AmmiratO PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 393-441 Kacmillan New Yor~
Gerwal S and Koul S 198~ Shoot induction in tissue cultures of ~ gerardiana Wall Nat Acad Sci Lett 69-11
Ginzburg KW and Reinhold L 1966 The development omiddotf techniques for the vegetative propagation of pine trees by means of needle fascicles Tech Co~p Rept Proj bullNo AIO-PS-S The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem Israel
GladfelterHJ and Phillips GC 1987 bull ~ shoot organogenesis of Pinus eldarica Kedw in vitro 1 Reproducible regeneration from long-term callus cultures Plant Cell Reports 6~163-166
Gleba YY and Evans DA 1983 Genetic analysis of somatic hybrid plants In Evans DA Sharp WR Amiirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture Vol I p 322-357~ Kacillan New York
Haissig BE Nelson ND snd Kidd GH 1987 Trends in the use of tissue culture in forest improvement 8iotechnology 5 52-56 59
Harvey AE and Grasham JL 1969 Procedures and media for obtaining tissue cultures of 12 conifer species Cn J 80t 47547-549
Heuss-LaRosa K Kayer RR and Cherry JH 1987 Synthesis of
only two heat shock proteins is required for thermo adaptation in cultured cowpes cells Plant Physiol~ 854-7
Kemp JD KcAbee-Lammers K and Phillips GC 1987 Plant Genetic Engineering for Desert Adaptation 1986-1987 Annual Report 50 p Rio Grande Research Corridor New Kexico State University Las Cruces
Konar RN 1974 In vitro studies on Pinus 1 EstampblIiiiiUnt and growth OfCallus Plant Physiol 32 193-197
Konar Rl 1975 In vitro studies on Pinus 11 Thegrth and morphogenesis of cell cultures from ~ gerardiana Phytomorphology 25 55-59 bullbull
Patel XR and Berlyn GP 1982 Genetic instability of multiple buds of Pinus coulteri regenerated from tisU-Culture Can J For Res 1293-101
43
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
Patel K~R Shekhawa~ NS Berl~n~ GP and Thorpe Tbullbullbull 1984 Isolation and ~ulture of protoplas~s fro~ cotyledons of Pinus c~ulteri Dw Don Plant Cell T1iiSiie Organ Culture 385-90
Reisch B 1983 Genetic variability in regerieratedplants In Evans DA Sharp WR A~~iratopv and Ya~ada Y (Eds)Handbook of Plan~ Cell Culture~ ~olI pp 748-769 Mac~illan New York
Rodriguez-Garay B 1985~ Pollen expressed heat toJeranc~ ~nd its
cortelat~on to drought and salt 1
tolerance in cot~on celi cultures PhD Dissertation 69 p New Hexico StateUniv~rsity Las Cruces
Rodriguez-Garay B Lovatt CJ Currie~i CGi Kuehn GD and PhillipsGC 1987 Bioche~ical indi~es of tOlerance and susceptibtlity in leaf tissues of drotight-stiessed alfa~1as and ~eat-stresed cottons AgTon Abstr 198799
Sal~ia MA 1975 Cytological studles on tissue culture of Pinus ce~bra
Physiol Plant33 58=rr shySederoff R Sto~p AM bullbull Chilton W bull s~
and Moore LW 1986 Gene transfer into loblolly pine by Agrobc~e~iu~ tu~efaciens Biotechnology 4647-649
Sengupta-Gopalan C Reichert NA Barker RF Hall TC and Kemp JD 1985 Developmentally regulated expression of t~e bean beta-phaseolin gene in tobacco seed Proc Nat Acad Sci 82 3 320-33 2 4 bull
Thorpe tA and Biondi S 1984 Conifers _ In Sharp WR Evans DA A~mirato PV and Yamada Y (Eds) Handbook of ~lant Cell Culture Vol 2 p 435-470 bull Macmillan New York
Wagley LM ~ladfelter Hi and PhillipsGC 1987 B ~ shoot organo~enesis of Pinus eldarica Hedw in vitro rx-iampcro- and mlcro-ph~tographic evidence of de novo regeneration Plant Cell Reports 6167-171
44
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
lIMPORTANCE OF PINYON-JUNIPER WOODLANDS TO WILDLIFE
2Volney W Howard Jr bull
Abstract-- Pinyon-juniper woodlands provide wildlife habitat for a wide variety of game and non-game species The economic values associated with recreation sport hunting and hunting-related activities are significant to New Mexicos economy To mo~e fully understand P-J wildlife for economic and conservation purposes research should be extended to include more geographic areas and faunal species Research on most non-game species is nonexistent
lNew Mexico State Un~versity Agricultural Experiment Station SR73-V
2 Professor Department of Fishery and Wildlife Sciences New Mexic~ State University Las Cruces NM 88003
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
INTRODUCTION
The pinyon-juniper type provides yearl~ng or seasonal habitat for a variety of birds and mammals both game and non-game species This habitat type with its variety of gra_ses forbes and b~owse has a variety offoods available including leaves stems seeds and fruits Cover is provided for nesting loafing escaping enellies and seeking shelter from extreme weather conditions
Many large game mammals such as mule deer (Ddocoileus he~ionus) elk (Cervus elaphus) and Coues whitetail deer (Q virginianus couesii) utilize this type yearlong Black bear (Ursus americana) can be found in the typeshyduring early spring green-up and whenever pinyon nuts juni~er berries
and acorns are readily available Cougars(Felisconcolor) are present whenever prey species are aburidant enough to providean adequate food supply
Numerous non-game mammals commonlr are present Ln pinyon-juniper habitats These include several specie~ of rodents rabbi ts smali carnivores sueh as badge-r (Taxidea ) greyfox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) striped skunk Mephitis mephitis) hognose skunk (Conepatus leuconotus) and spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) and larger ca~nivores likemiddot coyote (Canis latrans) and bobcat (Lynx rufus)--- shy
Game birds commonly found in pinyon-juniper habitats include the Merriams turkey (Melealris gallopavo merriami) band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata)~ Harlequin quail (Cyrtonyx montezumae) and mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) These birds use this type both year-long and seasonally depending upon the species and availability of food Other game bird such as migratory water fowl and shorebirds can be seen near water during spring and fall migration peri6ds
Numerous species of songbirds jays ravens hawk~ and owls u~e the pinyon-juniper type Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and turkey vulture (Cathartes ) are common during sprblg and summer The endangered bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus can
be found occasionally but they are usually transient and do not depend upon this type to provide their needs during much of the year
ECONOKIC RETURN TO NEW MskICD
A maj~r portion of the big game hunting ~ especi cally for mule deer occurs in the pinyon-juniper habitat
Hunting fbr elk pronghorn black bear cougarturkey Harlequin quail and turkey also occur in this type but to a lesser degree than far mule deer The Sacramento and Guadalupe Mountains two of New Me~ico~s better deer ranges containmany thousands of acres of this habitat The piny~n-juniper type also occurs in l~rge acreage~ throughou~ other mid-elevation areas of the state Sport hunting and hunting- related activities added an estimated $66 million to Ne~ Mexicos economy in 19amp0 The most sought spec1es was mule deer therefore the piny~n-juniper type is very important to New Mexico
Estimates of the economic return from furs taken fromthe pinyon-juniper type are not available iowe~er it is commmon knowledge that sizeable numbers of coyotes foxes and bobcats are removed anQually from this habitat L~cal fur prices for 1986-1987 were c~yotes $30-80 foxes $28 to $35 ~obcats $125 to $285 If only a few thousand pelts were taken from this type this would have generated $02 to $04 million or ~ore
The absolute dollar value of o~her outdoor ricreational actiities is difficult to document accurately Thousands of New Mexico residents spent tens of thousands of days in the pinyon-juniper type Their activities include but were not limited to camping backpacking bird~watching and picnicing The value of these r
activities has be~n ~stimated infor~ally to generate several million dollars to jew MeXicos economy each year
SUMMARY
Researchers at New Mexico Sta~e University have concentrated on mule deer and vegetative manipulation in the pinyon-juniper type Mo~t of this
46
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
l
research has been limited to various areas within the Sacramento Mountairis with a major emphasis on the Fort Stanton Experimental Raneh There has been limited ~eseareh on both desert and Rocky Mountain bighorn sbeep (Ovis canadensis mexicana O e caniideiisis) in the San Andres M~uiitarns and along the San Francisco River respectively (see Appendices A and B) Some beh~vorial and population research has
been conducted with pronghorns within the pinyon-juniper type Research on non-game species is nonexi~tentexcept middot for some work with coyotes desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audoboni) and black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californ1cus)
Research is needed on additional species both game and non-game and on additional atudy areas Some emphasis has reeently been shifted to the Gila Na~ional Forest but an expanded effort is needed there as well as in more northern pinyon-juniper habitats The resources are virtuallyuntapped when it comes to data needed to make sound manage~ent decisions for wildlife species on a statewide basis in the pinyon-juniper type
47
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
SUMMARY
This publication ~oints to orie inescapable fact numerous and div~rse ~-J (pinyoQ-juniper) products contribute significantly to Ne Mexicos economy For a fully accessible P-J land unit the potehtialvalue 4btained from combined forage fib~r food and ornamental products is $3555hayr ($1451acreyr) Income derived from recreational and hunting activities would drive the potential value even higher
Clearly all P-J land units do not have the same productive capacity and they are not equally accessible for product harvest Also market demands for spe~ific prbducts aremiddot variable among regions It follows that the actual value of all pl~nt products obtained from New Mexicos P-J w06dlands is well below potential The current actualvalue is about $14 million witb the greate~t value being derived from forage prodriction It is likely that this figure could be doubled if the mor~ productive woodlands were managed more intens~vely
At present managers generally do trot have sufficierit information to optimize benefits ribtained from more than one product Itmiddotmust also be recognizd that an absence of critical knowledge in some cases can p~rmit o~ershyexploitation of a single product resulting in adverse possibly irreversible damag~ to other products or uses
Effective management plans will requir~ more data Specifically P-J growth data must be obiained from more geograp~ic areas and from plots receiving a wider range of treatment conditions (eg thinnin~ levels) Also more plant and animal species must be factored into models that predict effects of management decisions~ For ex~mple manag$ment impacts on rion-game species are pres~ntly ignored because research data have been restricted to the most economically important game species Larger research plots will be needed to assess effects of thinning practices on wildlife
Other information voids include areliable estimate of the amount of landoccupied b~ the P-J type hydrological and soil erosi~n impac~s associated with specific manag~ment practices economic importanceof hrinting and recreatiorial
48
bull
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
activities and cultural and marketing strategies for high value crops especially pinyon nuts
As research needs are evaluated the return to taxpayers on research investments should be considered Research designed to mutually assist profit taking and resource preservation deserves a high rank among research goals Low risk can be assigned to investments in short-term research on high-value P-J products and uses Slow growth of the P-J type reduces the probability that long-term high-risk research programs will yield a significan~ return on investment
Through biotechnology scientists one day will circumvent problems limiting traditional breeding methods The d~verse pinyo~s found in Mexico and western North America appear to provide a genetically diverse pool from which superior genotypes can be developed Scientists in the Agronomy and Horticulture Department and Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory at NMSU have already developed an innovative tissue culture system for conifers Consequently wotk has eommenced on the first stage necessary to genetically alter the pinyon Understandably the fruits of such efforts may not be forthcoming for a decade or more
Experiment Station researchers will continue to devalop new significant information on P-J resources as reflected in their publJcations Also we will continue to work closely with our counterparts within federal and state agencies and with research advisory committees to identify the most pressing problems Some problems will prove soluble through NMSU or cooperative multi-agency programs However many issues J some of major economic importance will remain unresolved without additional support for P-J research
James T Fish~r
John G Mexal and Rex D Pieper
P-J Manuscript Coordinating Committee
49
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
APPENDIX A
PINYON-JUNIPER PUBLICATIONS middotBY THE AUTHORS
FURLWOOD
Gray JR MA Bray and JM Fowler 1981 EconQmic chara~teris~~cs Qf fr~e-use fuelwood harve~ting in New Mxico NM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 441
Gray JRbullbull MA Bray and JM Fowler 1979 Vood~- A popular fuel in New Mekico New Mexico lusinesbullbull 3211
Gray JR J~ Fowler and MA Bray 1982 Free-use fuelwood in New Mexico Inventory exhaustion and energy equationsbull J Forestry 8023-26
HIGH-VALUE CROPS
Fisher JT~ and Fancher GA 1986 Site evaluation and species selectshyion ~or New Mexico Christmas tree production p~ 1-(3 In Proc Afghan Pine and Christmas Tree Symp bullbull NMIU S~Pt 30 - Oct I 1986 Las Cruces NM
Fisher JT and Montano JM 1977 Management of pinyon for ornll shymentals Christmas trees and nut production p 35-40 in Aldon EF and LoringT(Coords) E~ology~ Uies and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands Proc~
~arch 24-25 1977 Work~ho~ AlbuquerqueNM bSDA Forest ServiceGen Tech ReptRM-39
Montano JM JT Fisher and RE~ Gomez 1980 Increase omiddotf pinon nut size by basal pruning HortScience 15727-728
LIVESTOCK
Howard VmiddotW Jr bull al1d TW bull Booth 1981 Domestic sheep mortality in southeastern New Mexico RM Agric Exp Sia Bul 683
RECREATION
Gray JR and JM Fowler 1981 Road and trail preferences in the Lincoln National Forest New Mexico RM State Unlv AgrExp Sta Res Rep 508
REVEGETATION
Ftsher JT GA Fancher and RW Neumann 1987 Germination and field eS~abliBhment of juniper in the Southwest p 293~299 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf~ USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT~215
Fishrmiddot JT GA Fancher and R~ Neumann 1~86 Survival and growth of containerized native juniper (Juniperus monosp~rma on surface~mined lands in New Mexico For Ecol amp Mgmt 16291-299
Fisher JT JB McCrae and EF bull Aldon 1983 Methods for stabshyli~hi~~ containerized native juniper on ~urface-disturbed sites in the Southwest p 76-88 In PE Pope (ed) Proc 3rd Annu Better Reclamation with Trees Conf June 2-3~ 1983 T~rra Haute Ind
WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION
Fowler JM and JM Witte 1987 Growth characteiistics ~nd thinning response for the ~inyon-juniper woodland type in New Mexico p 266-272 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Fowler JM bullbull RD Bowe BE peacock KC McDaniel T Garner-Hurt JR Gray and M Cardenas 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in New Me~ico RM State Uniy Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
Fowler JM BE Peacock and M~J Schaber 1985 Pinyon-juniper woodshyland type in New Mexico asset or liability RM State Univ~ Agr Exp Sta Bul 718
Fowler ~t al 1984 Wood fiber production on pinyon-juniper woodlands in Rew ~exico NM State Univ Agr Exp Sta Res Rep 519
VEGETATION ECOLOGY
Armentrout SM and RD Pieper Plant distributionsurrQunding ~inyon
pine and one-seed juniper in southcentral Rew Mexico J Range Mgmt (in press)
50
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
Dwyer DD and RD~ Pieper 1961~ Fire effects on blUe~grama-pinyonshyjuniper grassland sites in southshycen~ral New Mexico J R~nge Mgmt20 359~362
Gamougoun ND bullbull RP Smith MK Wood and RD Pieper 1984 Soil vegetation and hydrological reaponses to grazing management at Fort Stanton New Mexico J Range Mgmt 31538-541
Groc V~ and RD Pieper 1961 Cover herbage production and botanical composition of ~oothill rang~ sites in southcentral N~w MeXico NM State Univ Air Exp Sta Res Rep 128
Lymbery GA and RD Pieper 1983 Ecology of Pinyon-juniper vegetation in the Northeren Sacramento Mountains NM State Udv Agr Exp Sta Bul 698 bull
McDaniel Ki~k Cbullbull R~D Pieper and GB Donart 1982 Grass reponse followshying thinning of broom snakeweed J Range Mgmt 35219-223
Mahgoub EF bullbull RD Pieper JL~ Holechek JD Wright and V~W Howard Jr 1981 Botanical content of mule deer diets in southcentral New Mexico New Mex J Sei 2121-21
Pfister JA~ GB Donart RD Pieper~ JD Wallace and BE Parker 1984 Cattle diets under continuous and four- past~re on~~herd graz~ng systems in southcentral New Mexico JRange Mgmt 3150-54
Pieper RD 1983 Overstory-understory relationship pinyon-juniper and juniper woodlanda p 35-~1 In Bartlett ET and DRBette~ (Eds) Overstory-understory relationships in western forests West Reg Publ No1 Colo State Univ Exp Sta bullbull Fort Collins
Pieper RD 1911~ The soutb~estern pinyon-juniper ecoslstemi p 1-6 Aldon EF and TJ Loring (Coords) Eeology Uses and Management of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands U~S Dept Agr~ For Gen Tech~ Rep RM-39
Pieper RD 1910 Species utilization and botanieal compOSition of cattle diets on pinyon-juniper grassland NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Bul 566
Pieper RD 1968 Comparisons of vegetaCion on grazed and ungrazed pinyon-juniper grassland sites in Soutbcentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 2151-53
Pieper RD and GB Donart 1918 Response of fourwing saltbush to periods of protection J Range Mgmt 31314-311
pieper RD bullbull GB Donart BF Parker and JD Wallace 19j8~ Livestock and vegetation responses to continuous and four-pasture one-herd grazing aystem in New Mexico USA In Proc First Inter RangelandCong 1560-562
Pieper RD and GAtymbery 1981 Influence of topographic features on pinyon-juniper vegetation in southcentr~l New MeXico p 53-51 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA POr servbullGen Tech Rep INT-215
Pieper RD_ JR Montoya and VL Groce1911 Site characteristics on pinyon-Juniper and blue grama ranges in ~outhcentral New Mexico NK State Unlv Agr Exp Sta Res Bul 513
Rippel PB RD Pieper and GA Limbery 1980 Short-term vegetational re~ponse to two-way cabling in pinyon-juniper vegetation NM State Univ Agr Exp S~a Res Rep 410
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in tree pits following cabling in pinyon-juniper com~unities~ Southwestern Natur 32399-402shy
Schott MR and RD ~iper 1981 Water relationships of Quercus undulata Pinus edulis and Juniperus iOiOSperma in several pinyo~~ juniper communities in southcentral New Mexico p 429-434 Iu Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDAFor Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-21S
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 Succession in pinyon~juniper communities after mechanical disturbance in southeentral New Mexico J Range Mgmt 4088-94
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1985 Inshyfluence of canopy characteristics of one-seed juniper on ~nderstory grasses J Range Mgmt 38328shy331
Schott MR and RD Pieper 1981 OVers tory-understory interactions in southwestern pinyon-juniper veget~tion p 461-464 In Proc Pinyon-j~niper Conf USDX-For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215~
WILDLIFE
Anderson BL bullbull RD Pieper and VW Howard Jr 1914 Growth response and deer utilizatioa of fertilized browseJ Wild Mgmt~ 38525shy530
Beasom SL bullbull L LaPlan~ and VW Howard Jr 1982 Fecal pH of pronghorn and sheep as relat~d to diet J~ Wild gmt 461101-1104
51
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
DeLorenzo DG and VWHoward Jr 1977 Evaluation of ~heeplosses on bull range iambi~g operation in sou~heast~rn New Mexico~ NM A~ric bull Exp Sta Re~ Rep 341
DeL~renzo DG and VW Howard Jr~ 1975 Evaluation of sheep losses on a rang~ iambing operation without predator control on southeastern New Mexico Progrels Rep~ 9 p (multiiith)middot
Ho~ard VWJr 196~ Identi(ying fecal groups )y JH analysis J Wild1 Mgmt 31 190-191
Howard VW Jr 1966 An ob~etvati~n of parturi tion in tmiddothe pronghorn antelope J MammaL 47708~709
Howard VWJr KB Cheap~ R~H Hier TG Thompson and iA Dimas 1986 Effects of cabling pinyonshyjuniper on mule deet and iagomorph use p 552~557 In Proc Pinyon-Juniper Conf USDA For Servo Gen Tech Rep INT-215
Howard~ VW Jr KM Cheap RH HierTG Thompson and JA Dimas 1986 Effectaof cablirig pinyon-junmiddotiper on m~le deer anmiddotd lagomorph useamp Wildl Soc Bul 15242-247
HowardVW Jr JR~ Cox and GM SOQthward 1980 Response of wavy leaf oa~ to nitr~gen fertilizatiori J Range Mgmt 33~457-459
Howard~ VW bullbull Jr and DG DeLorenzo 1975 Vegetation and foodmiddot habits of Mexican bighorn sheep i~ the Game-COin Enclosure-near Red Rock NM Agric Exp Sta Res Rep 303
Howard VW Jr~ and DG DeLorebzo 1914 Specific dilferentiation of herbivore pellet groulls by pH J Wildl Mgmt 38948-949
Ho~~rd VW Jr and TA Eicher 1985 Morphological characteristic and age of mule deei bucks in the Sacramento Mountains middotNew Mexico p55-61 In PF Fennessy andmiddotKR Drew (Eds) Biology of Deer Production~The Royalmiddot Soc of New Zealand Bul 22
Howarmiddotd VW bullbull Jr and TA Eicher 1984 Hunting pressuure morphological ~haracteristics and ages of mule deer bucks in the Sacramento Moumiddotntains New Mexicomiddot p 26-34 In P Krausman and N Smith (Eds) De~r of the Souihwest - A woikshobullbull Univ of Arizona
Howard J middot VW Jr and CT Engelking 1974 Methods of trapping mule deerNM Agric Exp St~ Res~
Rep 292 Howard VW Jr and R~E Shaw 1978 Preiiminary assessment of predator
damage to the sheep industry in
~outheastern New Mexico N~M Agric Exp middotStaRes Rep 356
Howard VW J~ and DH Sutcliffe 1972 Tht Ladron Mou~tains as a release site for Sib~rian ibex NMAgrlc Expw S~ bullbull Res Rep 236
Wood JE bullbull TS Bickle W lvans JC G~r~any and VW Howard Jr~ 1970
The Fort Stanto~ mule deer herd middot(some ecological and life history chatacteristics with special emphasiS onmiddot the use of watmiddoter) Nbull M Agric Exp Sta Bul 567~
52
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53
--------------- APPENDIX B
GRADUATE THESES ON PINYON-JUNIPER
SUPERVISED BY FISHERY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTHENT FACULTY
(1963-1986)
i
Augsburger JG 1970 Behavior of Hexican bighorn sheep in the San Andres HountainsNe Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 54 p
Barnitz JA Jr 1986 Vegetation mUle deer and cottontail responaes to two-way Cabl1ng i~
pinyon-juniper woodland of south-central New Hexico HS Thesia NH St Un1v bullbull Laa Cruces 160 p
BiCkle TS 1969 Water developments and their effects oft mule deer on the Fort Stanton Ranga HS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Cruces 41 pp
Carter JG III 1968Ec~logy of mountainmiddot mahogany in the San Andres
Hountaina HS Theaia NK middotSt Univ Las Crucea 36 p
Cheap KH 1981bullEffects of two-way cabling on seasonal use of pinyon-juniper woodlands by mule deer and rabbita in louthcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruc~s 50 p bull
Cox JR 1974 Growth responae of fertilized wavyl~af oak HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 43 p
Dimas JAS 1981 Ecological responae to mechanical treatment of the
pinyon-juniper ecoayatem of southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Crucea 112 p
Eicher T~A 1978 Some lif history characteristics and habiCat use of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 74 p
Engelking CT 1969 The behavior of pronghorn-antelope in southcentral New Hexico HS Thesis NH St Univ Laa Cruces 67 p bull
Evans W 1968 Analysis of the mule deer population on Fort Stanton bull New Hexico HS Theaibullbull N~H St Univ bullbull La Crucea 60 p
Fosteri RC 1968 Reprodu~tive patterns of the desert cottontail of Fort Stanton New Hexico HS Theaia NH St Univ Las Cruces 29 p
Gmiddotermany Jc 1969 Hule deer habitat preference on the pinyon-juniper ranges of ~ort Stanton New Hexic~ HS Thesis NH St~ Univ bullbull Laa Cruces 2S p
Itayes JA 1982 Distribution and habitat selection of Rocky Hountain bighorn sheep (Ovia canadenais canadensia) along the San Franciaco River canyon in New Hexico HS Theas NH St Univ bullbull Laa Crucea 74 p
Hier RH 1981 Hule deer and rabbit uae of natural and cabled pinyon-juniper WOOdland at Fort Stanton New HexicoHS Theaia NH St Univ Laa Crucea 43 p
Howard VW Jr 1966 Hule deer denaity in relation to habitat on the Fort Stanton Range HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 31 p
Hulsey ED 1976 ReapoGaeof wvyleaf oak to nitrogen fertilization KS TheSis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
Hunt DL 1978 Diet and habitat use of tame mule deer in a pinyon-junipeT woodland HS TheSis NH~ St Univ Laa Cruces 82 p
Humphreya 10 III 1977 Hunter selectivity of mule deer harvesied durinl the San Andrea special seaaon hunts 1973-19~6 HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 22 p
Larsen PA 1963 Lens weight aa a criterion for aging desert mule deer HS Thesis NH St Univ bullbull Las Cruces 28 p
HcDonald FW 1974 Response of one-seed juniper to nitrogen fertilization HS Thesis NH St Univ Las Cruces 40 p
Hello VH 1977 Density trenda some life history charactaristica and morphology of mule deer in the Sacramento Hountains HS Thesis NH St Univj Las C~uces 49 p
Hosha GT 1976 Estimates of mule deer densities and browse conditions in the Sacramento Hountains bull M S Theais NH St Univ Las Cruces 48 p bull
Ruahing CK 1977 Growth reaponae of one-seed juniper to three levels of nitrogen fertilization HS Thesia HH Stj Univ bullbull Las Crucea 39 p
thompsonTG 1979 Wildlife uamiddote of cabled and natural pinyon-juniper woodland at Fort Stanton New Hexico bullbullbull 5 Thesis H~H St Uni~~ Laa Cruces 31 p
53