Introduction 



A cooperative study of the economic feasibility and environmental impacts of 

 near complete harvesting of lodgepole pine (Pinus aontorta Dougl.) in the Union Pass 

 area, Teton National Forest, Wyoming, was begun in the summer of 1971. The coopera- 

 tors are the USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, 

 Intermountain Region; and Champion International. The logging was completed in the 

 fall of 1971. A report on the initial findings of this study was published in April 

 1972 as an Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station Research Note (USDA 

 Forest Service Research Note INT-160, "Utilization of Lodgepole Pine Logging Residues 

 in Wyoming Increases Fiber Yield") . It reported that fiber yields were increased by 

 35 percent using near complete harvesting standards. 



This report discusses the equipment, methods, and costs of logging in this stydy 

 area. The effects of these logging methods on regeneration, nutrient cycling, hydrol- 

 ogy, wildlife, esthetics, and overall costs and benefits will be reported as data 

 become available and are evaluated. 



Description of Logging Units 



Two blocks, each about 40 acres, were laid out in similar stands of lodgepole pine. 

 One half of each block, designated a cutting unit, was harvested to conventional clear- 

 cutting standards, the other half was harvested to "near complete" standards. The 

 cutting units, numbered 1 through 4, totaled approximately 80 acres (fig. 1). Conven- 

 tional harvesting called for the removal (as logs) of all merchantable trees to a 

 minimum top diameter of 6 inches. The near complete standards included, in addition 

 to removal of logs, the chipping of the tops and limbs of all merchantable trees, all 

 remaining live and standing sound dead trees 3 inches d.b.h. and larger, and all sound 

 down material over 6 inches in diameter at the large end and longer than 6 feet. As 

 previously reported, removal of this material increased fiber yield by 35 percent and 

 left the site ready for planting without additional cleanup, site preparation, or 

 burning to reduce fire hazards (fig. 2). 



1 



