Land-Use History (1730-1990) and Vegetation Dynamics in Central New England, USA

Author(s): David R. Foster

Source: Journal of Ecology, Vol. 80, No. 4 (Dec., 1992), pp. 753-771
Published by: British Ecological Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2260864 .
Accessed: 03/09/2013 11:30

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

British Ecological Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of
Ecology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 131.128.89.237 on Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:30:30 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Journal of
Ecology 1992,
Land-use history(1730-1990) and vegetation
80, 753-772
dynamicsin centralNew England,USA
DAVID R. FOSTER
Harvard Forest,Harvard University,
Petersham,MA 01366, USA

Summary
1. Historiesofchangingland use and vegetationof a 380-haforestedarea in central
Massachusetts(Prospect Hill tractof the Harvard Forest) were reconstructedto
investigate(i) theenvironmental controlsoverland ownershippatterns,agricultural
practice and loggingactivity,and (ii) the vegetationresponse to these land-use
factors.
2. Forest clearance and agriculturalexpansion parallel trendsfor central New
England: increasingratesof deforestationthroughthe late eighteenthcenturyled
to a peak in 1820-80 when more than 80% of the land was open. Reforestation
on abandoned fieldscommencedin 1850 and increasedprogressively throughthe
earlytwentiethcentury.
3. Ownershippatternsvaried temporallyin turnoverrate and size of individual
holdings.Twenty-five lots comprisingthe studyarea were sold an average of 13
timesin theperiod1730-1910. Land sales weregreatestin theperiodofspeculation
and low-intensity agriculture(1730-90), lowestduringthetransition to commercial
agricultureand small-scaleindustry(1790-1840), and high duringthe period of
agriculturaldecline in the mid to late 1800s.
4. Land use in the mid 1800s, includingwoodlot (13% of the studyarea), tilled
fields(16%), pasture (70%) and marsh (1%), formedan intricatepatternbest
explained by soil drainage and proximityto farmhousesand town roads. This
land-use pattern controlled the reforestationprocess: field abandonment and
reforestationproceeded outward from poorly drained pasture adjacent to the
continuouswoodlotsand eventuallyincludedproductivetilledland.
5. The consequences of 250 years of land-use activityvary at differentscales.
Regionally,the distribution of modernand pre-settlement foresttypesmatchwell
despitestructuralchangesand the loss of some tree species. At a landscape scale,
modernforestcharacteristics are stronglycontrolledby land use. Canonical corre-
spondenceanalysisindicatesthatcommunity variationis bestexplainedbyhistorical
factors(distinctionbetweenprimaryand secondarywoodlands,forestage, cutting
historyand timingof site abandonment)and site factors(slope positionand soil
drainage). Picea rubens and Tsuga canadensis forestsare restrictedto primary
woodlands, Pinus strobusand sproutsof Castanea dentataare largelyconfinedto
old pastures, and Betula populifolia, Populus spp. and Acer rubrumare most
abundantin cut-overold-fieldPinus stands.
6. Long-termforesttrendsin the twentiethcenturyinclude a decrease in the
importanceof Pinus strobusdue to loggingand the 1938 hurricane,a gradual
decline in early successionalhardwoods (Betula populifolia,Populus spp., Acer
rubrum),and increase in later successionalspecies (Quercus rubra, Q. velutina,
Acer saccharum). Tsuga and northern-hardwood species (Acer saccharum,Fagus
grandifolia)declineddramaticallythroughoutthe settlementperiod; however,the
major foresttrendover the past 100 yearshas been a continualincreasein Tsuga.
Key-words:agriculturalhistory,canonicalcorrespondenceanalysis,deforestation,
forestdynamics,humandisturbance
Journalof Ecology 1992,80, 753-772
753

This content downloaded from 131.128.89.237 on Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:30:30 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
754
Introduction
Land use and
vegetationhistory Despite the long traditionin north-western Europe
in New England of utilizingpalaeoecological and historicalmethods
to investigatehuman impactson the environment
and vegetation(Iversen 1973; Peterken & Game
1981; Peglar, Fritz & Birks 1988), there are few
comparable studies in NorthAmerica. This differ-
ence is oftenattributedto the shorterdurationof
intensivehumanimpactin much of NorthAmerica
versusEurope (c. 400 yearsvs. >5000 years) but is
nonethelessremarkablegiventhe intensity and geo-
graphicalextentof humanimpactin theNew World
and the ecological importanceof understanding this
history(Marsh 1864; Fisher1933; Ecological Society
of America 1991). Investigationsof land-usehistory
and vegetationchange provide:
1. a backgroundforunderstanding thedevelopment
of the modern vegetational landscape, which is
essentialforanyecologicalstudy(Christensen1989);
2. informationon the response of communities
to novel disturbanceprocesses or intensitiesthat
may be comparedwithstudiesof naturalprocesses
to evaluate the resistance or resilience of com-
munities to contrastingfactors (Houghton et al.
1983; Schoonmaker& Foster 1991);
3. perspectives thatmaybe usefulin thepreservation
of unique communitiesor managementof cultural
landscapes (Birks et al. 1988).
Conclusive studies linking human activityand
ecosystemchange require comprehensiveanalyses
ofland-usehistoryand long-term vegetationrecords.
The presentstudyseeks to evaluate thesetwo kinds
of information for a nearly400-ha forestedarea in
central Massachusetts(Prospect Hill tract of the
Harvard Forest) and for a period extendingfrom
the mid eighteenthcenturyto the present. The
studyhas three major objectives: (i) to document
spatial and temporal patternsof land-use and to
relate these to environmentalfactorsand cultural
conditions;(ii) to identifythe major environmental
and humanfactorsthatare responsibleforchanges
in the structureand compositionin the vegetation
duringthisperiod, and (iii) to documentlong-term
changesof the vegetationin thisstudyarea.
Although the forest investigatedis unusual in
having an extensively documented history, the
major patternsof land-use and change in forest
cover are representativeof broad upland areas of
the north-eastern USA (Bidwell 1916; McKinnon,
Hyde & Cline 1935; Black & Brinser1952). In order
to place the resultsof the research in a broader
geographicalframework,the study begins with a
descriptionof the early post-settlement vegetation
ofthetownshipofPetershamand WorcesterCounty,
Massachusetts.It thenexaminesthe specifichistory
and effectsof land-usepracticeson theProspectHill
tractof the HarvardForest in Petersham.
This content downloaded from 131.128.89.237 on Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:30:30 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Studyarea
PHYSICAL SETTING
Worcester County occupies 3900km2 in central
Massachusetts(Fig. 1). The westerntwo-thirdsof
the county formsan undulatingupland generally
exceeding 250 m a.s.l., whereas to the east and
south-eastthe land slopes to a prevailingaltitude
of 100m. Second-growthforest currentlycovers
approximately70% of the land area (MacConnell
& Niedzweidz 1974).
Petershamis located in north-western Worcester
Countyat an average altitudeof 275 m a.s.l. Relief
of c. lOOm encompasses a series of north-south
trendingridges and valleys. The soils are largely
acidic and derivedfromgranodioritesand gneisses.
The meanannualtemperature is 8 5 ?C, thefrost-free
season averages 5 monthsand the annual precipi-
tation is 105cm including150cm of snow (Rasche
1953). The townshipis 90% forested.
The Prospect Hill tract of the Harvard Forest
comprises380ha of the northern, highestportionof
the major ridgein Petersham.Altituderangesfrom
270 to 420m a.s.l., steep slopes occur towardsthe
westernand north-eastern marginsof the tract,and
mostof thearea is undulating(Fig. 2). Variabilityin
I
72 W
I I
680
46"N-
NorthernHardwoods .
and Spruce- Fir
TransitionHardwoods
420
""HARVARD FOREST
Pitch Pine-Oak
CentralHardwoods km
/
Fig. 1. Forest vegetationmap of New England showing
WorcesterCounty, Massachusetts(WC) extendingfrom
the Central Hardwood zone throughto the Northern
Hardwoodzone. The locationof theHarvardForestin
Petersham,Massachusettsin indicatedby the solid circle.
ModifiedfromWestveld(1956).
755
D.R. Foster (a) (b

PrspectHill 40

SA/I~~~~~

Sanderson Farmhouse
U

TanyardMillSite

(c)

i---'-~~~~~~~~~~~ l
---

, \/' ,rir ~
' ' ~ '~

Fig. 2. The Prospect Hill area of the Harvard Forest \ ',X1 , ,

showing (a) topography (5-m contours), (b) soil drainage ,-_ '', ,, - ,_,
(from very-well drained (light shading) to very-poorly L " 8 ,
drained (black) and (c) location of stonewalls and roads. ,' \ .'- s 5
The maps are at matchingscales and the outline of the L_ - '__ ,
soils map conformsto that of the studyarea boundary. '----- Stonewalls
Locations of the John Sanderson farmhouse, tanyard mill \~Roads
site and top of Prospect Hill are indicated on all maps.\

relief,depthto bedrock,and presenceof a fragipan population density (Figs 3 and 4; Torbert 1935;
create a highlydissected patternof soil drainage Pabst 1941; Barraclough1949). This historycan be
(Fig. 2b). divided intofivemajor periods:
1730-50 speculation;
1750-90 low-intensityagriculture;
CULTURAL SETTING
1790-1850 commercialagricultureand smallindustry;
Duringthe past 250 yearsthe centralMassachusetts 1850-1920 farmabandonmentand industrialization;
landscape has undergone several transformations 1920-90 residentialperiod
in response to changes in land-use practices and (Raup & Carlson 1941; Black & Wescott1959).

This content downloaded from 131.128.89.237 on Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:30:30 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
756 The townshipof Petershamwas settledin 1733.
Land use and 100
With limited access to markets, the eighteenth-
vegetationhistory centuryrural economy was based on farmingand
in New England small-scalecommercialactivity(Coolige 1948; Pruitt
50 0
1981; Baker & Patterson 1986). Forest clearance
proceeded initiallyat a pace of 1-4% per year
~0 .
(Fig. 3). Improvedtransportation and increasedde-
mandforagricultural productsin the late eighteenth
1720 1760 1800 1840 1880 1920 1960
and earlynineteenthcenturiespromptedan increase
Year
in commercialfarmingand small-scaleindustryin
Fig. 3. Historicalchanges in forestcover forthe State of rural centralNew England (Pabst 1941; Thorbahn
Massachusetts(o), the townshipof Petersham(0), and & Mrozowski 1979; Rothenberg 1981). Forest
the ProspectHill tract(U). Sources of informationinclude clearance to provide pasture land for beef cattle
Dickson & McAfee (1988), MacConnell (1975), Rane and sheep resulted in an increase in open land
(1908) and Baldwin (1942) for Massachusetts,and Raup
fromapproximately50% of the townshipin 1800
& Carlson (1941), Anonymous (1959), MacConnell &
Niedzwiedz (1974), Averill, Averill & Stevens (1923), to nearly85% in 1850 (Figs 3 and 4). Remaining
Cook (1917) and Rane (1908) forPetersham.Estimatesof forestsoccupied steep and rockyslopes, wetlandsor
forestcover on the ProspectHill tractwere derivedfrom narrowvalleys and were cut for timber,fuelwood
land-use notes in deeds, Spurr (1950) and unpublished and tanbark and were often grazed (Cline et al.
sourcesin the HarvardForest Archives.
1938; Gould 1942; Spurr1950).

F s rv ( -)dro r l 19985;

Fig. 4. The townshipof Petershamdepictingforestedareas (black) and open land (white) in 1830, 1900, 1938 and 1985.
In the map for 1900 the stipplingindicatesformeragriculturalland abandoned fromc. 1870 to c. 1900 thatseeded into
old-fieldPinus strobus.Progressiveabandonmentof farmsled to a concentrationof non-forestedlands on north-south
ridges.Data were obtainedfromtheAtlas of WorcesterCounty(1830, unpublished),unpublishedmaps fromthe Harvard
Forest Archives(1935-39) and air-photograph analysis(1985; 1:24,000colour-infra-red).

This content downloaded from 131.128.89.237 on Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:30:30 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
757 V

D.R. Foster

(b)

Fig. 5. (a) Millstone,streamand retaining

wall of an abandoned mill on the Prospect
Hill tractoftheHarvardForestin Petersham,
Massachusetts. The mill was activelyused
from 1780 to 1850 to grindTsuga barkhs
fomrexetoffedsetndtrug and
forests~~
Castanea ~ to~produce
doiae
wood ~ acid
yQerutannicur,Aeforuse
in leathertanning.Providinga major source
of income supplementalto agriculturalac-
tivity, the mill exerteda pronouncedimpact
on thewoodlandsin theneighbouring region
rubrum
as they were
Betu)Mlasoe
cutpaprieram
frequentlyand
to provide
Freaxinungs
a
regularsource
wamerfcana of tannin.
asandhereatlo The
themodern
Hillforest
Prospecttrct
is comprisedofForest.Poorpsb
HltrcofteHarvard Acer saccharumandM.Fraxinus
Fluetsha)
americana established in the late 1800s.
(b) Broad-scale abandonmentof agricultural
land across New England in the mid to late
1800sgave rise to extensiveareas of second-
growth forest. Stone walls delimitingthe

This content downloaded from 131.128.89.237 on Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:30:30 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
758 Commencingin the mid 1800s the populationof
Land use and Petershamdeclined as youngerinhabitantsleftfor
vegetationhistory urbanjobs or agriculturalopportunitiesin the Mid-
in New England west (Fisher 1921; Black & Brinser 1952). Farms
wereabandonedand neglectedfieldswerereforested
(Fig. 5) (Munyon1978; Garrison1987). The modern
period has includeda nearlycompletecessation of
agriculturalactivity,broad-scaleregrowthof forest
cover and a conversionof the townto a residential
status.Since the 1930stherehas been an increasein
homes and a reversalin the downwardpopulation
of directhuman
trendbut a decrease in theintensity
impacton the land.
Methods
VEGETATION OF WORCESTER COUNTY
Data on the early post-settlement(c. 1770-90)
vegetationof WorcesterCountywere derivedfrom
Peter Whitney's (1793) account which includes
a geographical descriptionof each township,its
landscape and vegetation. Whitneytravelled the
countyextensivelywithin20-30 yearsof the date of
incorporationofmostofthetownshipsand described
the vegetationbefore extensivehuman alteration.
Whitney's data were analysed using detrended
correspondenceanalysis(Hill & Gauch 1980) with
species abundance assigned as either present or
abundant (see Table 1). Results of the samples
(townships)ordinationwere used to identifyforest
type groupingsand to develop a countyvegetation
map. A phytosociologicaltable was constructed
fromsamples and species output.The map of early
forestvegetationwas compared to recentregional
forest descriptions(Westveld 1956). Species' no-
menclaturefollowsFernald (1973).
LAND-USE AND VEGETATION HISTORY
The historyofland ownership(1738-present) ofthe
ProspectHill tractwas compiled fromproprietors'
grants, deeds and tax valuation lists. Complete
ownership chronologies were compiled for each
of the 25 propertylots that comprise the tract.
Turnoverrates in ownershipwere calculated on a
decadal basis as the percentageof the 25 lots that
had been sold out of a family.Land-use history
was derivedfromvarious sources. Deeds and sale
recordsprovideinformationon lot statusas either
wooded, pasture, mowingsor tilled field, and on
timber rightsheld on woodlots. For each forest
stand in the studyarea the followinginformation
had been reconstructed by earlierresearchersat the
Harvard Forest: date of clearance, agriculturaluse,
timing of abandonment, successional vegetation,
and historyof logging(Fisher1921; Raup & Carlson
1941; Spurr1950; Gould 1960).
This content downloaded from 131.128.89.237 on Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:30:30 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
The long-termimpact of land-use on present-
day forestcompositionwas analysed in two ways.
Using a GeographicInformationSystemthe spatial
overlap between soil drainage, land-use history
and foresttypes in 1908 was examined and tran-
sitions in forestcommunitiesbetween 1908, 1937
and 1986 were documented. Informationon soils
and vegetationwas derived fromHarvard Forest
(HF) Archives.Canonical correspondenceanalysis
(CANOCO, terBraak 1986) was thenused to evaluate
the relationshipbetween the vegetation and en-
vironmentalvariables (includingsite and historical
factors)forthe forestin 1937. The 1937 vegetation
was selected for intensiveanalysis because of the
availabilityof an extensive data set and the fact
that the 1937 vegetation representedthe maxi-
mum extentof secondarydevelopmentbefore the
1938 hurricane,when approximately75% of the
timber was windthrown(Foster 1988; Foster &
Boose 1992). Vegetational informationanalysed
in CANOCO, included 253 samples (approximately
0-04-haplots) and 105 species. Tree species abun-
dance was assigned on a five-factor scale based on
volume, whereas shrubs, herbs and mosses were
recordedas presentor absent.Sitevariablesanalysed
includedsoil drainage(fiveclasses; Spurr1950) and
slope position(fiveclasses). Historicaland land-use
variablesincludedstandage (derivedfromthe 1937
survey), time since agricultural abandonment,
presence/absenceof cuttingin the previous 100
years, historicalfrequencyof turnoverin owner-
ship, and the distinctionbetween primary(always
forested) and secondary (formerlycleared land)
woodlands (cf. Peterken1981).
Results
WORCESTER COUNTY - EARLY POST-
SETTLEMENT VEGETATION
On a regionalbasis the distributionof forestveg-
etationin the 1700s closely matchesthat of today.
Forest types includingCentral Hardwoods, Tran-
sitionHardwoodsand NorthernHardwoods (Fig. 6)
axis across
are arrangedon a south-eastto north-west
WorcesterCountyfollowingthe altitudinalgradient
(Figs 1 and 7, Table 1; Westveld 1956). Central
Hardwood forestswere dominatedby Quercusspp.,
Carya glabra, Castanea dentataand Pinus strobus.
Other species includedAcer rubrum,Pinus rigida,
Betula spp. and Fraxinus americana. Transition
Hardwoodforestsincludethesame species,withmore
Acer rubrum,Betula lenta and Fraxinusamericana
as well as Fagus grandifolia,Tsuga canadensisand
occasional Picea spp. and Larix laricina. In the
NorthernHardwood forest,Carya, Castanea and
Pinus rigida were minor components; additional
common species included Acer saccharum,Betula
alleghaniensisandB. papyrifera.In addition
tothese
759 Table 1. Forest compositionof the townshipsin WorcesterCounty,Massachusettsin the late 1700s as reportedin the
D.R. Foster journal of Peter Whitney(1793) and interpretedfromdetrendedcorrespondenceanalysis (Fig. 6). The townsin each
foresttypeare listedat the bottomof the table. Modal Value (MV) of abundance refersto Whitney'sdescriptionas (1)
occasional, scatteredor rare, and (2) commonor dominant.Frequencyis the percentageof townsin a forestregionin
whichthe species occurred

Central TransitionHardwoods Transition Northern

Hardwoods Pine and Flood Plains Hardwoods Hardwoods

MV Frequency MV Frequency MV Frequency MV Frequency

Carya ovata 2 0-50

Juglanscinerea 2 1-00
Platanusoccidentalis 1 0-83 1 0-04
Ulmusamericana 2 0-66 2 0-24
Sassafrasalbidum 1 0-33 1 0-04
Quercusprinus 2 0-17 2 0-04
Chamaecyparisthyoides 1 0-45 1 0 04
Carya glabra 2 1-00 2 1-00 2 0-92 1 0-20
Pinus rigida 2 0-45 2 0-83 1 0-48 2 0-60
Castanea dentata 2 1-00 2 1-00 2 0-96 2 0-80
Quercusspp. 2 1-00 2 1-00 2 1-00 2 1-00
Pinus strobus 1 0-91 1 0-83 2 0-76 2 1-00
Acer rubrum 2 0-36 2 0-33 2 0-72 2 0-60
Pinus resinosa 1 0-09 1 0-16 2 0-20
Betula spp. 2 0-27 1 0-66 2 0-80 2 1-00
Fraxinusamericana 2 0 18 1 0-66 2 0-80 2 0-80
Fagus grandifolia 2 0-17 2 0-48 2 0-80
Tsuga canadensis 1 0-17 2 0-40 2 0-80
Picea spp. 1 0-17 1 0-08 2 0-40
Larix laricina 1 0-04 2 0 40
Fraxinusspp. 1 0-17 2 0 04 2 0-40
Betula lenta 2 0-08 2 0-60
Acer saccharum 1 0-04 2 1.00
Betulapapyrifera 2 0-40
Betula alleghaniensis 2 0-60
Tilia americana 2 0-20

Forest region Townships

CentralHardwoods Northbridge,Oxford,Southborough,
Douglas, Dudley, Mendon, Milford,Northborough,
Upton, Uxbridge,Webster,Westborough
TransitionHardwoods Grafton,Harvard,Lancaster,Leominster,Sutton,West Boylston
withPlains
TransitionHardwoods Athol, Barre, Bolton, Charlton,Fitchburg,Hardwick,Holden, Hubbardston,New
Braintree,Northbridge,Paxton, Petersham,Phillipston,Princeton,Oakham, Rutland,
Shrewsbury, Spencer, Sterling,Sturbridge,Templeton,Westminster,West Brookfield,
Worcester
NorthernHardwoods Ashburnham,Gardner,Lunenburg,Royalston,Winchendon
No information Berlin,Clinton,Leicester

major foresttypes,in the easternhalfof the county
on floodplainsand sandyoutwashthereoccurreda
distinct assemblage of trees including Platanus
occidentalis, Ulmus americana, Carya ovata and
Juglanscinerea.
PETERSHAM - EARLY VEGETATION AND
FOREST CHANGE
Peter Whitney(1793) described the original veg-
etation of Petersham as predominantlyQuercus
on the uplands and Betula, Fagus grandifolia,
Acer rubrum,Fraxinus, Ulmus and Tsuga in the
lowlands. Castanea and CaryalJuglanswere noted
as increasingfollowingsettlement.Changesin forest
cover throughtimeforPetershamparallel those for
other townshipsin Worcester County (Black &
Wescott 1959), but were more rapid and greater
thanforthestateofMassachusetts as a whole(Fig. 3).
At the heightof agriculturalactivity(mid 1800s),
the Petersham landscape was a mosaic of small
fields(indicatedby thepatternof stonewalls;Figs 2c
and 5b) and isolated woodlands (Fig. 4). Reforest-
ation proceeded outwardfromthe forestremnants,
leaving progressivelysmaller areas of open land
along the ridgetops (Fig. 4). One major patternof

This content downloaded from 131.128.89.237 on Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:30:30 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
760 200 (a) *Rut
Rt
Pinus rigida Plains
Land use and *Sut and Flood Plains
%% 0~~~~~~~
Lan
vegetationhistory *Gar WB
Roya
4 rAsh@ *Hub *Petersham * WBo
in New England
Northern WBWesmHa WrEa
150 HardwoodsAth
DHardwoods NBr
N *Stu "Upt
Win PaBar %
L_nh *Pri/Har *te/Pil *Spe G
Ste Cha *Gra %
NBro@ ?l-Worh
100
Transition *oxf
Hardwoods
*WBo *NBo
*Dud/Fit
50 _ SBo/Uxb
Waro * NBri
Men/Oako
Central
Hardwoods
O \Mil, I
cm
2A
x

(b) * Sas alb

400 -

* Larlar * p * Jugcin
* Pic SPP. Ulmame * Car ova
Pla 0cc
* Tsu can
Fag gra* Betspp
200 Betpap* *Ace rubFraspp # * Ace sac * Pinrig

* Fraame Pinres ** Pinstr

* Betlut Que spp. *C * r gla
Oo *Betlen
0 Bet len *~~~~~~~0Cas
den

-200

* Cha thy

-400
-200 0 200 400
Axis1

Fig. 6. Sampletownships (a) and species(b) plotsforPeterWhitney's(1793) descriptionof theforestvegetationof Worcester

County,Massachusettsdisplayedon the firsttwo DECORANA axes. Townshippoints(a) are groupedintomajor vegetation
types (NorthernHardwoods, TransitionHardwoods and Central Hardwoods). The Pinus rigida plain and flood plain
variantoftheTransitionHardwoodsis indicatedbysquaresymbolsand separatedbya brokenline.Town namesare provided
in Table 1. Townshipabbreviationsuse the firstthreeor fourlettersof the name. Species abbreviations(b) are based on
the firstthreelettersof the genusand species: Acer rubrum,Acer saccharum,Betula lenta,Betula lutea,Betulapapyrifera,
Betula spp., Caryaglabra, Carya ovata, Castanea dentata,Chamaecyparisthyoides,Fagus grandifolia,Fraxinusamericana,
Fraxinusspp., Juglanscinerea,Larix laricina,Picea spp., Pinus strobus,Pinus rigida,Pinus resinosa,Platanusoccidentalis,
Quercus spp., Sassafrasalbidum, Tsuga canandensisand Ulmusamericana.

naturalreforestationincludedestablishmentofPinus
strobuson abandoned pastures and fields (Fisher
1918). An alternativepatterninvolvedsuccessional
hardwood species, including Betula populifolia,
Populus spp., Acer rubrumand Prunus spp. Over
time, as eitherthe Pinus strobuswas harvestedor
the successionalhardwoodsdied, the modernforest
of Quercus, Acer rubrum,Pinus strobus,Fraxinus
americana,Betulalentaand B. alleghaniensis
emerged
(Fisher 1933).
PROSPECT HILL TRACT
Historyof land ownershipand development
Historicalchangesin the size and durationof indivi-
duals holdings reflectthe type and intensityof
land-use and indicate ongoing modificationof the
forestlandscape. Duringthe 160-yearperiodbefore
acquisitionby Harvard Universityin 1907 each of
the 25 lots comprisingthe Prospect Hill tractwas

This content downloaded from 131.128.89.237 on Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:30:30 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
761 400 -

D.R Foster NorthernHardwoods

Gar Ash
0

Hub Phi Roy Win

300-
300 *
Pax *
Rut * *~~~~~~~~
Pri Wes... Tern
Oak Bar Pet
E * *
Cha W Br N Br Hard
.oS Spe *HoI Ath
< Stu Transition Hardwoods *
200 Fit
ou Wor WBoy Ste Leo
tDud~~ Of Sut /

"Plains"'
Uxb Men NBri Gra WBo NBo Har Bol L
Mil Upt Lan
100 \BaS Bo
\4Cenral ardwoods g

0 42?00' 42?10' 42020' 42030' 42040'

Latitude North

Fig. 7. Location of the townshipsof WorcesterCounty, Massachusettson altitudinaland latitudinalgradients.Major

vegetationaltypesare indicated.CentralHardwoodsvegetationis foundpredominantly at low altitudein thesouth-eastern
cornerof the county,whereasthe townshipsin the elevated north-westernarea are characterizedby NorthernHardwood
forests.Townshipsin the Pinus rigidaand floodplain subtypeof TransitionHardwoods are markedby square symbols.
Townshipabbreviationsuse the firstthreeor fourlettersof the name.

Proprietors'grants
Harvard Forest->
100100~~~~~~~~~~
.-.
III IV Jonathan Sanderson
firstpurchase

8080 /
/ \Adonai
Shomo

60
Sandersonprobate

o 40-
-j

20 - Lots transferredto descendants

I *''I I I I I " p I I_

1740 1760 1800 1840 1880 1920 1960

Date

Fig. 8. Historicalchanges in ownershipturnoverforthe ProspectHill tract,HarvardForest. The graphdepictsthe per-

centageof lots in the tractthatwere sold in the precedingdecade. The percentageof lots transferred
to directdescendants
(generallysons) is indicatedby the brokenline and largersolid dots.

sold an averageof 13 times.From 1733to 1770turn- holdings throughacquisition of adjoining parcels

over exceeded 80% on a decadal basis as absentee (Fig. 9). After1840 and coincidentwiththe begin-
ownersspeculatedon land grantsand sold theirlots ningof farmlandabandonment,ownershipturnover
to the firstsettlers(Fig. 8). During the commercial increased markedly; owners often held parcels
agriculturalperiod through the mid 1800s, the for only 4-12 years between sales. A temporary
lowest level of turnoveroccurred (10-40% on decline in land sales occurredduringthe economi-
a decadal basis) as families retained their land, cally depressed period of the American Civil War
worked it intensivelyand graduallyexpanded their (1861-65; Coolidge 1948).

This content downloaded from 131.128.89.237 on Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:30:30 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
762
Land use and 1770 1780
1760
vegetationhistory
in New England

3
Farnsworth Farnsworth
2 4 / f Willson McClellan McClellan
Goddard
Knapp Goddard
Chandler

1790 1800 1810

/oi :.
t; ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.....
Farnsworth arn aswo rson
McClellan Sa~~~~nderson Farnsworth
Wcllard McClellan McClellan

1820 . ~ 1830 1840

anderson anderson Sanderson

Pierce Ward Ward
Ward Pierce Pierce

1870
1850 . ~~~~~~1860

Briggs eta!.
Mann ~~~~~~Spooner
Pierce /Spooner Spoonerd
Ward Sanderson r

1880 1890 1900

nai Shomo Adonai Shomo Leonard

Ado(o AdonaiShomo ~Russell Stone
Hodges Marsh
X Marsh / M h -

Fig. 9. Ownershipmaps at 10-yearintervalsfor the period 1760-1900 on the ProspectHill tract,Harvard Forest. The
propertiesof the threelargestlandownersforeach decade are indicatedas (1) black, (2) diagonal lines, (3) shaded. The
names of theownersof theseareas are listedto thebottomrightof themap in descendingorderof propertyarea. Growth
in the size of the largerfarmsis indicatedby the Sandersonfarmfrom1800 until1840.

This content downloaded from 131.128.89.237 on Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:30:30 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
763 and (iv) Harvard Forest management. Different
Farm development
D.R. Foster objectives on the part of the landowners led to
Agricultural historyon theProspectHill tractclosely varyingeffectsduring these periods. Once agri-
paralleled that of the township.Forest clearance culturallandwas cleared,deeds fromthenineteenth-
commenced c. 1750, proceeded at a slow pace centuryindicatethat the remnantwoodlands were
through 1780, and abruptlyincreased thereafter a valuable source of Castanea and Tsuga for fuel
until 1840-50 when open land peaked at nearly wood, timberand tan bark. Forest reconstructions
80% (Fig. 3; Fisher 1933; Raup & Carlson 1941; indicatethatwoodlotswere cut repeatedlyforpole-
HF Archives). During the period 1820-80 there sized trees afterthe initial removal of the virgin
was relativestabilityin the patternof open land and timberin the mid to late 1700s (E.P. Stephens &
forest. S. Spurr,HF Archives;Fig. 11).
The geographic distributionof land-use types
relatescloselyto the physiographic and soil charac-
teristicsof the area, and to the distancefrommajor
roads and dwellings(Table 2; Figs 2b and 10). The
earliest areas to be settled and developed were
adjacent to roads and houses. Nearly 50% of this
accessible land was tilled (Fig. 10), whereas across
the entire tract approximately70% of the area
was cleared for pasture, 17% was tilled, 13% was
continuously wooded and slightly morethan1% was I
N > \/tdWoodlot

marsh (Table 2). Permanentwoodland comprised

threewooded swampsin the centreof the tractcon- Pasture
nectedalong poorlydrainedseepages and adjoining and Mowing ?

steep or rockysites (Figs 2b and 10). Tilled land Tilled Land

primarilyoccupied well-drained and imperfectly

drainedsoils whereaspasturecovered the broadest
range of drainage conditionsincludingall of the
verywell drained soils, 75% of the poorlydrained Open Marsh
sites, and nearly70% of the well and imperfectly
drainedsoils (Table 3). The processof closelyfitting
tillageareas to soil drainageled to irregularlyshaped
and small fields(Figs 2c and 10).
Fig. 10. Land-use historymap forthe ProspectHill tract,
HarvardForestdepictingpastureand mowing,woodland,
Logginghistory tillageand marshat the timeof mostintensiveland-usein
the mid 1800s. Althoughland use changedover time,this
The history of logging includes four periods:
map showsthecontinuouswoodlandarea and all sitesthat
(i) land clearance; (ii) woodlot cuttingduringthe were ever tilled.ModifiedfromSpurr(1950) and Harvard
agriculturalperiod; (iii) commercialharvestingof Forest Archives.
old-fieldPinus strobusand old woodlots(1885-95);

of the ProspectHill tract,Harvard Forest. Land-use typesdescribe

Table 2. Soil drainageand land-use characteristics
the primaryuse of the land duringthe heightof agriculturalactivityin the mid 1800s (Spurr 1950; HF Archives) with
areas givenin hectares.In the modernlandscape all of the area is forested.All values were calculatedon a Geographic
Information Systemand are roundedto the nearestinteger

Land use (ha)

Soils Pasture Tilled Woodlot Marsh Totals

Very well drained 14 - - - 14

Well drained 150 49 14 - 213
Imperfectlydrained 27 9 4 - 40
Poorlydrained 45 2 13 - 60
Verypoorlydrained 3 - 14 4 21
Totals 239 60 45 4

This content downloaded from 131.128.89.237 on Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:30:30 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
764 Table 3. Weightedcorrelationmatrixforenvironmental variables,environmental axes and species axes in the canonical
Land use and correspondenceanalysisof 1937 data fromthe ProspectHill tract,HarvardForest. Environmentalvariablesincludestand
primary/secondary
age, soil drainage,slope position,pasture/tillage, woodland, cuttinghistory,and abandonmentdate.
vegetationhistory
Env Ax x representsthe sample scores on the xth ordinationaxis, whichare linear combinationsof the environmental
in New England variables. Spec Ax x representsthe sample scores on the xth ordinationaxis whichare derivedfromthe species scores
by weightedaveraging

Cut Abandonment
Age Soil Slope Pasture Primary old field date

Age 1-00
Soil 0-21 1.00
Slope 0-28 0-44 1.00
Pasture -0-21 -0-16 -0-34 1-00
Primary 0-47 0-34 0-53 -0-68 1.00
Cut old field -0-31 0.01 -0-17 0-31 -0-29 1.00
Abandonmentdate 0-47 0-34 0-49 -0-46 0-84 -0-01 1-00
Env Ax 1 0-79 0-54 0-57 -0-46 0-85 -0-23 0-84
Env Ax 2 0-37 -0-68 -0-51 -0-08 0-02 -0-25 0 09
Spec Ax 1 065 045 047 -039 0-71 -0-19 0-70
Spec Ax 2 0-25 -0-46 -0 34 -0-05 0.01 -0-17 0-06

From 1885 to 1895, essentiallyall of the mer-

chantabletimberon the ProspectHill tractwas cut
often followed by burningof the slash (Fig. 11)
(Fisher 1921; HF Archives).This timbercame from
woodlots that were cut for Tsuga, Castanea and
Quercus and from former pastures abandoned
between 1845 and 1865 and then dominated by
Pinus strobus.

j 4 1830 ^ ~~~
~~~18
70"a.'

vegetationdevelopment
Post-agricultural
Followingthe heightof forestclearance (1820-80),
reduced agriculturalactivityresulted in rapid re-
forestation(Fisher1921;HF Archives).Today, essen- 2 F 1881~~~~~88 i

tiallythe entirestudyarea is covered by maturing

forest(Fig. 12; Gould 1960). The modern forest
historyis best understoodby examiningthe pattern
Forest <20 years old In 1907
of land-abandonmentand subsequent vegetation
development. Open land in 1908

Fig.11. Cutting
historyoftheProspectHilltract,
Harvard
Forestin the periodbeforeHarvardForestownership
Patternand rateof land abandonment
theyear(s)ofcutting.
(1907).Datesinwhiteareasindicate
On theProspectHill tractand in centralNew England Shaded areas werein immature forest(<20 yearsold)
and blackareaswerein openfieldor scrubin 1907.Data
in general, farm abandonment and reforestation
werederivedfromhistorical
maps,notesandforest recon-
commenced slowly in the mid nineteenthcentury storedin theHarvardForestArchives.
structions Muchof
and subsequentlyincreasedgreatlyinto the 1900s. thewhiteareacontained merchantabletimberin 1907.
By 1880 slightlymorethan25% of the ProspectHill
tractwas forested,whereasthisfigureincreasedto
85% by 1937(Figs 3 and 12). The geographicpattern area formeda continuousstand withsmall pasture
of field abandonmentwas complex, controlledin in-holdings(Fig. 12). Open areas were limitedto
part by an individualfarmer'seconomic situation 25% of the area in 1900,and followingthe transfer
and land holdings.However, the generalprocess is of the land to Harvard Forest,the remainingfields
consistent:abandonmentfirstof poorlydrainedand were abandoned or plantedwithconifers.
low-lyingpastureareas adjacentto the intactwood-
land, followed later by well-drainedand arable
fromfarmabandonment
Vegetationdevelopment
lands (Fig. 12). From 1840 to 1875 only pastures
to present
were abandoned, whereasthe firsttilledfieldswere
abandoned in the late 1870s. By 1880 the forested Maps and forest-wide
inventories
fromthetwentieth

This content downloaded from 131.128.89.237 on Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:30:30 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
765

44
D.R. Foster 1840 1840-59 1860-79

1880-99 1900-19
1920-present

~~0 ~~~ 500

m

Fig. 12. The historyof land abandonmentforthe ProspectHill tract,HarvardForest at 20-yearintervalsstartingat the
peak of land clearance in 1840. Areas in forestduringthe previous20-yearperiod are depictedin black. For each period
abandoned pastureland is shaded, whereasabandoned tilledfieldsare indicatedby diagonallines. Data werederivedfrom
historicalreconstructionsstoredin Harvard ForestArchives.

century(in 1908, 1937 and 1986 - HF Archives)
depictstriking relationshipsbetweenvegetationand
land-use patternsand dynamicsin the vegetation
resultingfrom forest development, management
and the 1938 hurricane.In 1908 Picea forestsand
the limitedarea of Tsuga forestwere confinedto
formerwoodlots (Fig. 13). One-thirdof the former
woodlot area was classified as hardwood forest
(Quercus spp., Acer rubrumand Betula spp.) with
scattered Tsuga understorey. Former pastures
were forestedwithPinus (Pinus strobusand Pinus
strobus-Tsuga canadensis forest) or successional
stands of Betula populifolia, Acer rubrum and
Populus spp. Approximately40% of this pasture-
hardwoodarea had supportedPinus strobus,which
was cut in the 1890s. Only 21% of the one-time
pasture land was still open in 1908, whereas 53%
of the tilledfieldswas open.
Major changes from 1908 to 1937 occurredas a
resultof standdevelopmentand silviculture(Fig. 13).
Nearly 100ha of conifer plantationswere estab-
lished on fields(42%), clear-cutPinus strobusland
(28%) and successional hardwood areas (12%).
The majorityof the plantations(81%) were es-
tablishedon well-drainedsoils; approximately75%
on formerpastures and 25% on tilled fields.The
mortalityof Castanea in 1913-16 due to blight
(Cryphonectriaparasitica; Kittredge 1913; Spurr
1950) led to the naturalconversionof formerCasta-
nea stands to Tsuga (84%) or hardwood (16%)
forest.Overall, hardwoodforestwas reduced from
135ha to 75 ha between 1908 and 1937. However,
stands of long-livedspecies (Quercus, Betula lenta,
B. alleghaniensis,Fraxinus, Fagus and Acer sac-
charum) increased from 40 ha to 56 ha, whereas
successional hardwood forest (Betula populifolia,
Populus and Prunus) decreased greatly (95 ha
to 19ha; McKinnon, Hyde & Cline 1935). The
reduction in successional species resulted from
clearingfor plantationsand selective management
for longer-livedspecies (Cline & Lockhard 1925;
Gould 1960). Increases in Tsuga (<1ha to 16ha)
and Pinus strobus-Tsuga canadensis (12 to 27ha)
forestsfrom1908to 1937were largelydue to devel-
opmentof foreststhathad a substantialcomponent
of Tsuga in the understoreyand perhaps due to a
reductionin post-loggingburning(Marshall 1927;
Spurr 1956).
Withina year of completionof the 1937 forest
survey,the forestlandscape was completelyaltered

This content downloaded from 131.128.89.237 on Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:30:30 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Soil drainage Landuse by the 1938 hurricane(Foster & Boose 1992). Co-
(4 ha)
incidentally,the management objectives of the
?S - - - -88%- 'Marsh/Swamp
Verypoor 66?b 831% < Woodlot(45 ha) Harvard Forest shifted to favour natural stand
Poor .19% * development rather than timber production of
t75 conifers(Gould 1960). The changes wroughtby
Verygood 100% 6% Pasture(239 ha)
natural disturbance and forest development are
Imperfect67% ------------- - r62% Tle(6h)
22%Y------------------1%- Ild(0a reflectedin major changes in forest composition
GoodF .23% --
from 1937 to 1986 (Fig. 13). Overall there was a
major increasein hardwoodstands(75 ha to 188ha)
resultingfrom preferentialhurricane damage to
Landuse 1908 Foresttype plantations(reduced from96 to 35ha) and Pinus
Marsh/Swamp(4 ha) Lt56%-
strobusforests(56ha to 25 ha), cuttingof conifers,
3-
Tilled3(XOha) ** 37% Open (87 ha) and old-fieldsuccession (Spurr 1956; Foster 1988;
Foster & Boose 1992). Open areas were reduced
( Acer rubrum(33 ha) by65%, Acer rubrumforestdoubled (17 ha to 35 ha)
a%ia
2A% and Tsuga forestscontinued to increase through
standdevelopment.Nearly35% of the Tsuga stands
Pasture( 239 ha) -2% 79,%<- Pinusstrobus(64 ha) developed following hurricane damage, cutting
Castanea (4 ha) and natural succession in hardwood stands, 41%
fromhurricane-damagedPinus strobusand Pinus
Hardwoods(135 ha)
8?0.% strobus-Tsuga canadensis stands and 20% from
-
Pinusstrobus-Tsuga( 12ha) hardwood stands, includingAcer rubrumswamps
3' (HF Archives).
Woodlot (45 ha) 4-23X___Tsuga(<lha)
-23%
2%*--__ ---- 96%-m- Tsuga( <I ha)
---'87%- Plcea(12 ha) LAND-USE HISTORY AND FOREST

COMPOSITION

1908 Vegetation 1937 Vegetation Canonicalcorrespondenceanalysisofthe 1937forest

42%- -28%.sI Plantation(96 ha) data identifiesconsiderablevariationin stand com-
Pinusstrobus(64 ha) 39%- s4 s
- *
Pinus strobus(56 ha) positionthatmay be explainedusinga combination
11% --. ..-
of historicaland site factors.A minimalset of vari-
ables thatbest explainsthe data was identified using
Open (87 ha) .7 Open (49 ha)
ji% ~~~~~~11% theoptionofforwardselectionofvariableswitheach
Acer rubrum(33 ha) 1-216%49*l variabletestedand an overalltestapplieldby means
rubrum 349%3hI
A2ce% Acer rubrum(17ha) of a Monte Carlo permutation test(terBraak 1986).
Hardwoods(135 ha) V44%
14%
- 78%-*4 Hardwoods(75 ha)
------------------- Site factorsselectedincludedsoil drainageand slope
position, whereas important historical variables
Pinusstrobtis-
Tsuga (12ha) 2 = = 927%.74.%r~k Plnusstrobus-Tsuga(27 ha)
included: primary/secondarywoodland, cutting
history,abandonmentdate, and pasture/cultivation.
Tsuga(< Iha) i 93%.3% Tsuga(16 ha) This model was significant at the0-01level. The first
Castanea (4 ha) ,-84% 21%-1
two CCA axes (Fig. 14) account for 62% of the
Plcea (I 2 ha) 87%...................................-96% .. - P/cea(I I ha)
species-environmentrelations.
Samples separate out clearly along the land-
1937Vegetation 1986 Vegetation use and soil-drainagegradients(Fig. 15). Primary
Plantation (96 ha) t33%- - 90%-)-i Plantation (35 ha) woodlands are concentratedon the intermediateto
poorlydrainedsites,whereas secondarywoodlands
Open(49ha) 1.68%t%~-~~ Open(16ha)
occurmorewidelyon all buttheverypoorlydrained
soils(Fig. 15). There are strongcorrelationsbetween
'9T~
2%-p.- Hardwoods(188ha)
manyof the environmental variables,e.g. between
(75 ha)t8>X%_,,,,-685%
Haurdwoods
primarywoodland and abandonmentdate, forest
-----
- 70% --
Plnus strobus (56 ha) 15%----------- 4 Pnus strobus (25 ha)

5ce r r ~~'~----
-- ;Acer rubrum(35 ha)
bu(17h)t%-
Fig. 13. Transitiondiagrams depictingrelationshipsbe-
Tsuga(lG6ha)| 365%. ******34%..<j Tsuga(3Oha ) tweenland-use,soilsand vegetationin 1908,1937and 1986.
The areal extentof each categoryor vegetationtype is
Pinus strobus-Tsuga(27 ha) 55% - 5%::I Hardwoods(188ha) indicatednextto it. Percentagesreferto the contribution
to percentagesof the adjacentcategoryor typeand do not
Pccea (1I ha)' 83%_.
17.- . .,, ,_,. equal 100% forsome typesas onlymajor relationshipsare
depictedforclarity.

This content downloaded from 131.128.89.237 on Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:30:30 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
767 age and slope position,and between slope and soil
D.R. Foster drainage(Table 3). These correlationsare apparent
on the species and stand biplots as axes for the
environmentalvariables lie closely and parallel to
each otherand can be used to interpretstanddistri-
bution.The distribution ofprimarywoodlandstands
along the firstaxis is largelyexplainedby variation
in age of the forestas controlledby cuttinghistory.
A numberoftreeand shrubspecieshave an affinity
for the primarywoodland and swamp sites; these
include: Tsuga canadensis, Picea rubens,Fraxinus
nigra,Nyssasylvatica,Viburnumalnifolium,Kalmia
latifolia,Hamamelis virginiana,llex verticillata
and
Nemopanthusmucronata(Fig. 14). The Tsuga and
swamp forestson primarysites generallysupport
littleherbaceousgrowthdue to deep shade; conse-
quently,the herbdistribution on the CCA does not
showanyspecieswithan affinity forprimaryforests.
The secondary forestsare characterizedby early
successionalspeciesand speciesofricher,driersites.

Pru pen
0.3 Trees Age

Cor cor.

Til ame.
AceAcec
sac
. -Fra ame Abandonment
Que . Bet len Date
Ulm ame !. t Fag gra Tsu can . Pic rub p
Pruser Oron ;Bet pop * Primary
-0.3 Pop tre * . Bet lut 0.5
Pasture Ace rub
Ace spi
cut..s .
Fig. 14. Species and environmental variable Pl Bet poP
bi-ploton the firsttwo CCA axes for 1937 a p . Fra nig
vegetationdata fromthe ProspectHill tract, Nys syl.
Harvard Forest. Species plots are separated
bygrowthformintotrees,shrubsand ground-
cover. Species abbreviationsare based on the Slope
firstthree lettersof the genus and species:
Trees - Acer rubrum,Acersaccharum,Acer --0.4 Soil
spicatum,Betula lenta, Betula lutea, Betula
papyrifera, Betula populifolia, Corylus
cornuta, Fagus grandifolia, Fraxinus -0.2
americana, Fraxinus nigra, Nyssa sylvatica, Shrubs
Picea rubens,Pinus strobus,Plantationspp., Craspp
Populus tremuloides,Prunus pensylvanica, Vibaln
Prunusserotina,Quercusrubra,Quercusspp. Vib ace * Kal lat
Tilia americana, Tsuga canadensis, Ulmus _0 I I . I
americana;Shrubs - Azalea spp., Crataegus Aza spp Hamvir
spp., Hamamelis virginiana, Ilex verticillata, Rub all . Vac cor. I* le vir
Kalmia latifolia,Nemopanthusmucronata, Vibden
Ostrya virginiana, Rubus allegheniensis, * Nem muc
Rubus hispida, Vaccinium corymbosum,
Vacciniumpensylvanicum,Viburnumaceri-
folium, Viburnum alnifolium, Viburnum
cassinoides, Viburnumdentatum;Herbs -
Aralia nudicaulis,Asterspp., Athyrium
filix- o
femina, Cypripedium acaule, Clintonia -0.4
borealis, Coptis groenlandicum, Cornus
canadensis, Dennstaedtia punctilobula,
Fragaria virginiana,Gaultheriaprocumbens, Herbs
Gramineae, Lycopodium complanatum,
Lycopodium obscurum, Lycopodium luci- T0.2
dulum, Maianthemumcanadense, Mitchella DCypaca
repens,Monotropa uniflora,Onoclea sensi- Lyccom.jLyc luc
bilis, Osmunda cinnamomea,Parthenocissus Mon
Mnuni
Pteaqu* Tri
Mal
bor
Smi-rai Ican
quinquefolia, Pteridiumaquilinum, Pyrola Gra spp Pyrrot . Lycobs
rotundifolia, Rhus radicans, Smilacina -0r3 Gau pro. Rhurad o!s
racemosa, Solidago spp., Sphagnum spp., Sol spp. .Astsppprqui CorCan
Ara nud
Trientalisborealis,Viola spp. Environmental Athfil . Osm cin
variables are labelled on the tree plot, with Vio Spp * Ono sen
the centroids of nominal variables (primary/ * Copgro
secondary woodland, pasture/cultivation, S
cuttinghistory)indicatedby a large square, * Sphapp
and ordinal variables (age, abandonment -0.4
date, soil drainage, and slope position)
indicatedby arrows.

This content downloaded from 131.128.89.237 on Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:30:30 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
768 Secondaryforests forests
Primary
Land use and
vegetationhistory
in New England

wel drainy
Very porydrie

Porydri ~~
/~~~
Fig 1. amle isriutonfor25 pot o th frs CA xes Te ivsio btwenprmar ad ecndry orst aon
Axs1 siniatdbytevetca roe ln. oldriag lass r eprte y oidwvylns.Otles ihi h
~
drainage~Alse ar niae ~~~
ydfeetsmos fa sml eog otenx re oltp ti ersneya
open~~~~~~
dotifi eog otenx ose ol yei sidctdb rage

extentof forestclearingin Petershamare greater

Discussion
One major conclusionderived fromthis historical
analysis is that at any scale - forest,township,
countyor state- land-usepracticesand theresulting
vegetation patterns have changed continuously
(Bradshaw & Miller 1988; Fosteret al. 1992). Over
the past 250 years there have been few periods of
stabilityin whicheven the extentof forestvs. open
land was relativelyconstant (Fig. 3). Population
density, the agricultural,forestryand industrial
practices,and the geographicalpatternof land use
were all highlyvariable. The changingqualityand
intensityof human activityresultedin the dynamic
vegetationcharacteristicof thisperiod.
LAND-USE HISTORY
Across centralNew England there has been great
similarityin the regional pattern of land use in
terms of the extent and timingof deforestation,
major agriculturaluses, and the historyof farm
abandonment and reforestation(Bogart 1948;
Gates 1978; Taylor 1982; Garrison 1985). The
ProspectHill tractof the Harvard Forest is clearly
representativeof thetownshipof Petershamin these
(Figs 3, 4 and 12). WorcesterCounty,
characteristics
in general,was more agriculturally orientatedthan
westernparts of the state, and thus the rate and
than state averages. However, temporal shiftsin
land use followedthesame generalmode throughout
upland areas: land clearance and gradual depletion
of thetimberresourcewas followedby low-intensity
agriculture,commercial agricultureand industry,
and subsequently by population migration and
farmabandonment(Bidwell 1916; Garrison 1985;
Williams1989). In the modernperiod,utilizationof
the land fornaturalresourcesis at a historicallow,
but pressurefor housingand commercialdevelop-
mentis leadingto a minorsecond wave of clearance,
and a concernforforestpreservation(Anonymous
1940; Black & Wescott 1959; Bickford& Dyman
1990). In thispattern,Petershamparallelsthetrends
of manyupland townships(MacConnell 1975).
The land-usepatternthatemergeson examination
of the Prospect Hill tract is exceedinglycomplex
and variable in scale and intensityover time. Each
of the individualparcels comprisingthe tractwas
ownedbyan averageof 13 individualsin the160-year
period. These owners differedin the size of their
holdings,durationofownership,and undoubtedlyin
theireconomicand social perspective(e.g. Garrison
1985). Althoughthe details vary,each foreststand
was cut repeatedly,mostwere cleared, and all were
subjected to varying agriculturaluse, including
grazing (Graves & Fisher 1903; Barraclough &
Gould 1955).

This content downloaded from 131.128.89.237 on Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:30:30 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
769 In the determination of the geographicpatternof
D.R. Foster land use there were strong interactionsbetween
environment,spatial relationships and land-use
quality. Each land-use activitytriggeredvarious
vegetationalchangesthataffectedsubsequentland-
use decisionsup to thepresent.Agricultural use was
stronglycontrolledby site conditions(undoubtedly
includingthe original vegetation; cf. Lord 1973)
and distancefromthe road or farm.Sites adjacent
to farmsand roads were cleared first,used most
intensivelyand abandoned last (Figs 2c and 10).
Soil moisturestronglycontrolleduse, withwet sites
used as woodlots, mesic sites tilled for cultivation
and extremelydryor moistsitespastured(Table 2).
WithinPetershama similaroverall patternof use
based on distance and soil conditionsappears to
hold (Fig. 4) (Raup & Carlson 1941).
The quality and timingof land-use determined
the subsequent vegetation,which in turn affects
later human activityand the impactof naturaldis-
turbance processes. For example, the extensive
loggingenterprisein the late 1800s and early 1900s
was controlledby the timingand placementof field
abandonmentin the mid 1800s. Similarly,decisions
concerningthe placement of conifer plantations
were determinedby the distribution of open fields
or early successional vegetation(formerfields) in
theperiod 1910-40. In termsof naturalprocesses,it
is clear that the effectof the 1938 hurricanewas
controlledby the structure,compositionand spatial
distribution of the vegetationthatresultedfrom200
yearsof humanactivity(Foster & Boose 1992). The
Pinus strobusand plantationson formerfieldswere
particularlysusceptible to wind damage and are
largelyresponsibleforthegreatextentof damage to
the landscape of centralNew England (Rowlands
1941).
VEGETATION RESPONSE TO LAND USE
Evaluation of the effectof cumulativeland use on
the vegetationis stronglyscale-dependent.Across
the region (i.e. Worcester County) the effectis
subtle and suggeststhat the vegetationis resilient
to disturbance(Raup 1966). Species assemblages
sorted out in the 1700s along climatic gradients
definedby latitude and altitude much as they do
today (Westveld 1956). However, shifts in the
abundanceofspeciesare notable,primarily a general
increase in successionaland sproutingspecies (e.g.
Betulapopulifolia,Acer rubrum,Quercusspp.) and
declinein long-livedtolerantspecies (Fagus, Tsuga,
Acer saccharum) (Cook 1917; Dickson & McAfee
1988). Pathogenshave also reduced the abundance
of Castanea, Fagus and Ulmus (Gravatt & Parker
1949; Hirt 1956; Karnosky1979; Paillet 1982).
At a local scale withina forestthe effectsof land
use are compelling(Foster & Zebryk 1993). The
pattern of vegetation is clearly abrupt and dis-
This content downloaded from 131.128.89.237 on Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:30:30 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
continuousin compositionand structure;gradients
are steep. Structurallythe forestsare young and
even-aged. In additionto structuralcharacteristics,
major compositionaltrendscan be tied to land use.
Picea rubensand Tsuga are largelyconfinedto the
areas of permanentwoodlot(Fig. 13; cf.Smith1950;
Kelty 1984), and a few tree and shrubspecies (e.g.
Viburnumalnifolium,Kalmia latifolia,Hamamelis
virginiana, llex verticillata,Fraxinus nigra, Nyssa
sylvatica)are associated withthese primaryforests
(Fig. 14). In contrast,pastureareas are dominated
by Pinus strobus,Pinus strobus-Tsuga canadensis,
Castaneaand poor hardwoodforestsof Betulapopu-
lifoliaand Acer rubrum(Figs 13 and 14).
Duringthe periodof reforestation, compositional
changesin thevegetationhave accompaniedchanges
in the totalcover, and increasesin mean heightand
age. Until the 1938 hurricane,hardwoodsdeclined
as a result of increases in Tsuga from advanced
regeneration,conversionof successionalhardwood
foreststo Pinus strobus,and silviculturalmanage-
ment of mixed stands to increase Pinus strobus
and Tsuga. Followingthe hurricane,whichgreatly
damaged plantations and Pinus strobus stands,
and subsequent salvage logging, hardwood cover
increased greatly.Hardwoods continuedto estab-
lish in manyopen areas as active managementfor
conifersceased. One major trendacross thisperiod
is the increasein Tsuga as a major cover type;20%
of the Tsuga forestderives from succession and
advance regenerationin hardwood stands, 35%
from hurricane-damagedhardwoods and 41%
fromhurricane-damagedPinus strobus and Pinus
strobus-Tsuga canadensisforest.
One major questionnot addressedby the current
study but warrantingadditional investigationis
the longevityof these land-use impacts in terms
of forest communitycomposition and structure.
Analysis of the 1937 vegetation defines striking
relationshipsbetween composition and historical
variables, including primary/secondaryforest,
age, and timingof abandonment,and site factors
(cf. Whitney& Foster1988). Analysisof themodern
vegetation,approximately 55 yearslaterwillenable
us to see if additionaltime forforestdevelopment
and species dispersal and the impact of the 1938
hurricanehave reducedthe imprintof the historyof
land-useon vegetationpatterns.
Conclusion
The continuallydynamicnature of the vegetation
patternin centralNew England is one of the most
remarkableaspectsofthepost-settlement landscape.
A completetransformation occurredin the regional
and local landscape from1770 to the presentas the
countryside farmedand subsequently
was deforested,
reforested.Withina landscape such as that of the
Harvard Forest, thishistoryof use was dependent
770 on originalsite factorsand has greatlyaffectedsub-
Land use and sequentvegetationcharacteristics. These effectsare
long-lastingas they continue to control the way
vegetationhistory
in New England in which humans use sites and the ways in which
naturalprocesses affectthem. The ramifications of
this historyin terms of contemporaryecological
processesare too greatto be dismissedby modern-
day ecologists.
Acknowledgments
Ernest M. Gould, Jrand Hugh M. Raup provided
valuable insightinto the land-usehistoryof central
New England and the HarvardForest. G. Whitney
offeredinnumerable suggestions on historicalsources
and references.A. Lezberg assistedwithfieldwork
and GIS analysis, and G. Carlton, M. Fluet, F.
Gerhardt,S. Hamburg,C. Mabry,G. Motzkin,W.
Niering,R. Peet, G. Peterkenand P. Schoonmaker
offeredconstructivecommentson the manuscript,
typedby D. Smith.This studyis part of the Long
Term Ecological Research Programat the Harvard
Forest and was supported by the U.S. National
Science Foundationand A.W. Mellon Foundation.
References
Anonymous (1940) A PreliminaryCountryLife Report
for the Town of Petersham.Publishedby the Town of
Petersham,Mass.
Anonymous (1959) Classificationof Land Cover Types
by Towns in WorcesterCounty,Massachusetts.Cooper-
ative Extension Service, Universityof Massachusetts,
Amherst,Mass.
Averill, R.C., Averill, W.B. & Stevens, W.I. (1923)
A statisticalforestsurvey of seven towns in central
Massachusetts.HarvardForestBulletin,6, 1-39.
Baker,A.H. & Patterson,H.I. (1986) Farmers'adaptations
to marketsin earlynineteenth-century Massachusetts.
Baldwin, H.I. (1942) Forestryin New England. National
Resources PlanningBoard, Publication70, Boston.
Barraclough,S.L. (1949) Forest land ownershipin New
England. PhD thesis,HarvardUniversity.
Barraclough,S.L. & Gould, E.M. (1955) Economic ana-
lysis of farm forest operating units. Harvard Forest
Bulletin,26, 1-145.
Bickford,W.E. & Dyman, U.J. (1990) An Atlas of Mas-
sachusettsRiver Systems- EnvironmentalDesigns for
theFuture.University of MassachusettsPress,Amherst,
Mass.
Bidwell, P. (1916) Rural economy of New England at
the beginningof the 19th century.Transactionsof the
Connecticut Academyof Artsand Sciences,New Haven.
Birks,H.H., Birks,H.J., Kaland, P.E. & Moe, D. (1988)
The Cultural Landscape - Past, Presentand Future.
CambridgeUniversityPress, Cambridge.
Black, J.D. & Brinser,A. (1952) PlanningOne Town -
Petersham- A Hill Town in Massachusetts.Harvard
UniversityPress, Cambridge,Mass.
Black, J.D. & Wescott, G.W. (1959) Rural Planningof
One County,Worcester County,Massachusetts.Harvard
UniversityPress, Cambridge,Mass.
Bogart,E.L. (1948) Peacham: theStoryof a VermontHill
Town. VermontHistoricalSociety,Montpelier,Vt.
This content downloaded from 131.128.89.237 on Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:30:30 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
terBraak, C.J.F. (1986) Canonicalcorrespondence analysis:
a new eigenvectortechnique for multivariatedirect
gradientanalysis.Ecology, 67, 1167-1179.
Bradshaw,R.W.H. & Miller,N.G. (1988) Recent succes-
sional processesinvestigatedby pollen analysisof closed
canopy forestedsites. Vegetatio,76, 45-54.
Christensen,N.L. (1989) Landscape historyand ecological
change. Journalof ForestHistory,33, 116-124.
Cline, A.C. & Lockard, C.R. (1925) Mixed white pine
and hardwood.HarvardForestBulletin,8, 1-67.
Cline, A.C., Munster,N.L., Lutz, R.J. & Raymond,M.E.
(1938) The Farm Woodlands of the Town of Hard-
wick, Massachusetts. Worcester County Land Use
PlanningProject. LittauerSchool, Harvard University,
Cambridge,Mass.
Cook, H. (1917) The Forestsof WorcesterCounty. The
Resultsof a ForestSurveyof theFifty-nine Townsin the
Countyand a Studyof TheirLumber Industry.Wright
and Potter,Boston, Mass.
Coolidge, M.C. (1948) The Historyof Petersham,Mas-
sachusetts.Powell Press, Hudson, Mass.
Dickson, D.R. & McAfee, C.L. (1988) Forest statistics
for Massachusetts - 1972 and 1985. USDA Forest
Service,Northeastern ForestExperiment StationResource
Bulletin,NE-106.
Ecological Society of America (1991) The sustainable
biosphere initiative: an ecological research agenda,
Ecology, 72, 371-412.
Femald, M.L. (1973) Gray'sManual of Botany.Dioscorides
Press, Portland,Ore.
Fisher, R.T. (1918) Second-growthwhitepine as related
to the formeruses of the land. Journalof Forestry,
16, 493-506.
Fisher, R.T. (1921) The managementof the Harvard
Forest, 1909-1919. Harvard ForestBulletin,1, 1-27.
Fisher, R.T. (1933) New England's forests: biological
factors.New England's Prospect.AmericanGeographi-
cal SocietySpecial Publication,16, 213-223.
Foster, D.R. (1988) Species and stand response to cata-
strophicwind in centralNew England, U.S.A. Journal
of Ecology, 76, 135-151.
Foster, D.R. & Boose, E.R. (1992) Patternsof forest
damage resultingfromcatastrophicwindin centralNew
England, USA. Journalof Ecology, 80, 79-98.
Foster, D.R. & Zebryk,T. (1992) Long-termvegetation
dynamicsand disturbancehistoryof a Tsuga-dominated
forestin centralNew England. Ecology, in press.
Foster,D.R., Zebryk,T., Schoonmaker,P. & Lezberg,A.
(1992) Post-settlement historyof human land-use and
vegetationdynamicsof a hemlock woodlot in central
New England. Journalof Ecology, 80, 773-786.
Garrison,J.R. (1985) Survivingstrategies:commercializa-
tion of life in rural Massachusetts,1790-1860. PhD
thesis,Universityof Pennsylvania,Philadelphia.
Garrison, J.R. (1987) Farm dynamicsand regional ex-
changes:the ConnecticutValley beef trade,1670-1850.
AgriculturalHistory,61, 11-17.
Gates, P.W. (1978) Two hundred years of farmingin
Gilsum. HistoricalNew Hampshire,23, 1-24.
Gould, E.M. (1942) A budgetaryanalysismethodforfarm
woodlands.MFS thesis,Harvard University.
Gould, E.M. (1960) Fiftyyears of managementat the
HarvardForest. HarvardForestBulletin,29, 1-29.
Gravatt, G.F. & Parker, D.E. (1949) Introduced tree
diseases and insects. USDA Yearbook of Agriculture,
1949, 446-496.
Graves, H.S. & Fisher,R.T. (1903) The Woodlot: a hand-
book forownersofwoodlandsin southernNew England.
USDA Bureau of ForestryBulletin,42.
Hill, M.O. & Gauch, H.G., Jr (1980) Detrended corre-
771 spondence analysis:an improvedordinationtechnique.
D.R. Foster Vegetatio,42, 47-58.
Hirt, R.R. (1956) Fiftyyearsof whitepine blisterrustin
the northeast.Journalof Forestry,54, 435-438.
Houghton,R.A., Hobbie, J.E., Melillo, J.M., Moore, B.,
Peterson,B.J., Shaver,G.R. & Woodwell,G.M. (1983)
Changes in the carbon contentof terrestrialbiota and
soils between1860 and 1980: a net release of CO2 to the
atmosphere.Ecological Monographs,53, 235-262.
Iversen,J. (1973) The developmentof Denmark's nature
sincethelastglacial.DanmarksgeologiskeUnders0gelse,
Series V, 7-C, 1-117.
Karnosky,D. (1979) Dutch elm disease: a reviewof the
history,environmental implication,controland research
needs. EnvironmentalConservation,6, 311-322.
Kelty, M.J. (1984) The developmentand productivity of
hemlock-hardwoodforestsin southernNew England.
PhD thesis,Yale University.
Kittredge,J. (1913) Notes on the chestnutbark disease
in Petersham, Massachusetts. Harvard ForestryClub
Bulletin,2, 13-22.
Lord, G.T. (ed.) (1973) JeremyBelknap'sNew Hampshire
- An Account of the State in 1792. Peter E. Randall,
Hampton,N.H.
MacConnell, W.P. (1975) Remote sensing 20 years of
change in Massachusetts. MassachusettsAgricultural
Experiment of Massachusetts,
Station,University Amherst,
Bulletin,630.
MacConnell, W.P. & Niedzwiedz, W. (1974) Remote
sensing20 years of change in WorcesterCounty,Mas-
sachusetts, 1951-1971. Massachusetts Agricultural
Experiment Station, University of Massachusetts,
Amherst,Mass.
Marsh, G.P. (1864) Man and Nature; or Physical Geo-
graphyas Modifiedby Human Action.Charles Scribner,
New York.
Marshall,R. (1927) The growthof hemlockbeforeand after
the release fromsuppression.Harvard Forest Bulletin,
11, 1-43.
McKinnon, F.S., Hyde, G.R. & Cline, A.C. (1935) Cut-
over old field pine lands in central New England: a
regional studyof the compositionand stockingof the
ensuing volunteer stands. Harvard Forest Bulletin,
18, 1-80.
Munyon, P.G. (1978) A Reassessmentof New England
Agriculturein the Last ThirtyYears of the Nineteenth
Century:New Hampshire,a Case Study. Arno Press,
New York.
Pabst, M.R. (1941) Agriculturaltrendsin the Connecticut
Valley region of Massachusetts, 1800-1900. Smith
College Studesin History,26, 1-138.
Paillet, F. (1982) Ecological significanceof American
chestnutin theHolocene forestsof Connecticut.Bulletin
of the TorreyBotanical Club, 109, 457-473.
Peglar,S.M., Fritz,S.C. & Birks,H.J.B. (1988) Vegetation
and land-usehistoryof Diss, Norfolk,England. Journal
of Ecology, 76, 203-222.
Peterken,G.F. (1981) Woodland Conservationand Man-
agement.Chapman and Hall, London.
Peterken, G.F. & Game, M. (1981) Historical factors
affectingthe numberand distribution of vascularplant
This content downloaded from 131.128.89.237 on Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:30:30 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
speciesin thewoodlandsofcentralLincolnshire.Journal
of Ecology, 72, 155-182.
Pruitt,B.H. (1981) Agriculture and societyin thetownsof
Massachusetts,1771: a statisticalanalysis. PhD thesis,
Boston University.
Rane, F.W. (1908) Fourth Annual Report of the State
Foresterof Massachusetts for theyear 1907. Wrightand
Potter,Boston, Mass.
Rasche, H.H. (1953) Temperature differences in the Har-
vard Forestand theirsignificance.PhD thesis,Harvard
University.
Raup, H.M. (1966) The viewfromJohnSanderson'sFarm.
ForestHistory,10, 2-11.
Raup, H.M. & Carlson, E. (1941) The historyof land
use in the Harvard Forest. Harvard Forest Bulletin,
20, 1-64.
Rothenberg,W.B. (1981) The marketand Massachusetts
farmers, 1750-1855. Journal of Economic History,
41, 283-314.
Rowlands, W.R. (1941) Damage to even-aged stands
in Petersham,Massachusettsby the 1938 hurricaneas
influencedby stand condition. MFS thesis, Harvard
University.
Schoonmaker,P.K. & Foster, D.R. (1991) Some impli-
cations of paleoecology for contemporaryecology.
BotanicalReview,57, 204-245.
Smith,E.E. (1950) Easternhemlock:itsrelationship to the
silviculturalpolicy of the Harvard Forest. MFS thesis,
HarvardUniversity.
Spurr, S.H. (1950) Stand compositionin the Harvard
Forest.PhD thesis,Yale University.
Spurr, S.H. (1956) Forest associations in the Harvard
Forest. Ecological Monographs,26, 245-262.
Taylor, W.L. (1982) The nineteenthcenturyhill town:
images and reality. Historical New Hampshire, 37,
283-309.
Thorbahn,P. & Mrozowski,S. (1979) Ecological dynamics
and rural New England historical sites. Ecological
Anthropologyof the Middle ConnecticutRiver Valley
(ed. R. Paynter),pp. 129-140. ResearchReportNo. 18.
Departmentof Anthropology,Universityof Massachu-
setts,Amherst,Mass.
Torbert, E.N. (1935) The evolution of land utilization
in Lebanon, New Hampshire. Geographical Review,
25, 209-230.
Westveld, M. (1956) Natural forestvegetationzones of
New England. Journalof Forestry,54, 332-338.
Whitney,P. (1793) WorcesterCounty: America's First
Frontier.Isaiah Thomas, Worcester,Mass.
Whitney,G.G. & Foster, D.R. (1988) Overstoreycom-
position and age as determinantsof the understorey
florain centralNew Englandwoods. Journalof Ecology,
76, 867-876.
Williams, M. (1989) Americansand Their Forests - A
Historical Geography. Cambridge University Press,
Camridge.
Woolsey, J.M. (1929) Address on the 175thAnniversary
of Petersham.Published by the Town of Petersham,
Massachusetts.
Received15 January1992; revisionreceived8 May 1992