The Experts below are selected from a list of 27480 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Robert L. James - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Effects of spring applications of dazomet on root diseases and performance of Douglas-fir and western white pine transplants USDA Forest Service Nursery, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho.
2002Co-Authors: Robert L. JamesAbstract:Tests were conducted at the USDA Forest Service Nursery, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho to evaluate effectiveness of spring fumigation with dazomet to improve survival and performance of Douglas-fir and western white pine transplants. Spring fumigation greatly reduced populations of potentially pathogenic Fusarium and Pythium spp. Disease levels of container (plug+1) and bare root (2+1) Douglas-fir transplants were very low, regardless of soil fumigation. Fumigation reduced disease on bare root (2+1) white pine transplants, but did not improve survival of container (plug+1) white pine transplants. Seedling height growth during the first year after transplanting was significantly improved by soil fumigation. Fusarium oxysporum was commonly isolated from soil and roots of diseased bare root transplants. Fusarium proliferatum was commonly isolated from the roots of container transplants. Soil fumigation may not necessarily improve survival and performance of all types of conifer transplants in nurseries.
-
Effects of preplant soil treatments on Fusarium and Trichoderma populations and fungal root colonization of 2-0 nondiseased western white pine seedlings - USDA Forest Service Nursery, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho
2002Co-Authors: Robert L. JamesAbstract:Preplant soil treatments were implemented to determine effects on populations of potentiallypathogenic Fusarium and potentially disease-suppressive Trichoderma spp. as well as root colonization by these and other selected fungi on healthy-appearing, bare root 2-0 western white pine seedlings at the USDA Forest Service Nursery, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho. Soil treatments included fumigation with dazomet, bare fallowing with periodic cultivation, steam treatment, fallowing with amendments of Trichoderma harzianum biocontrol agents (BioTrek® and University of Idaho isolates [UI]), and incorporation of two cultivars of winter Brassica cover crops followed by biocontrol amendments (UI). Soil Fusarium populations were significantly reduced by dazomet fumigation; fallowing with biocontrol amendments and incorporating winter mustard crops with biocontrol amendments resulted in significantly higher Fusarium populations. Trichoderma populations were significantly decreased by dazomet fumigation, bare fallowing and steam treatment. Incorporation of Brassica crops did not significantly affect soli Trichoderma populations. Level of Fusarium root colonization was significantly reduced by dazomet fumigation and steam treatment. High levels of root colonization by rhizosphere-inhabiting isolates of Cylindrocarpon were common in some treatments. Assaying root colonization by selected fungi may supplement other parameters to evaluate effectiveness of soil treatments implemented to reduce pathogen populations and improve conifer seedling production.
-
Effects of a 2-year fallow period on soil populations of Fusarium, Trichoderma and Pythium species after incorporating corn plant residues : USDA Forest Service Nursery, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho
2000Co-Authors: Robert L. JamesAbstract:Soil in Field 2 at the USDA Forest Service Nursery, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho was assayed six times over a 2- year fallow period for potentially pathogenic Fusarium and Pythium spp. following incorporation of a corn cover/green manure crop. Populations of potentially disease-antagonistic Trichoderma spp. were also assayed. Soil populations of Fusarium did not decrease over the fallow period and were at sufficient levels after two years to be of concern from a disease potential standpoint. Populations of Pythium were fairly low throughout the monitoring period. Trichoderma populations remained high, but were probably not sufficient to ameliorate Fusarium disease potential. Fusarium spp. readily colonized soil organic matter particularly roots of the previous conifer seedling crop; these fungi also frequently colonized corn organic debris. Fusarium oxysporum was the major potential pathogen colonizing soil and organic matter. When a corn cover/green manure crop is produced within fields destined for conifer seedling production, these fields will require soil fumigation prior to sowing seedling crops to reduce risk of Fusarium-associated diseases.
-
Diseases associated with whitebark pine seedling production, USDA Forest Service Nursery, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho
2000Co-Authors: Robert L. James, K. E. BurrAbstract:Whitebark pine is an important reForestation species in the northern Rocky Mountains for enhancement of wildlife habitat. Production of container-grown whitebark pine seedlings at the USDA Forest Service Nursery in Coeur d'Alene, Idaho has been increasing the past several years. Diseases continue to be an important limiting factor in seedling production. Recent evaluations implicated Fusarium solani and F. proliferatum as important pathogens of young germinants and seedlings. Both fungal species commonly contaminated whitebark pine seed prior to sowing. Pathogen spread during stratification resulted in very high levels of seed contamination. Fusarium spp. adversely affected seed germination as well as initiated high seedling disease levels. Not all seedlots were equally affected by diseases, even though most seeds were contaminated. Seedling vigor, probably related to seed germinative energy, may have been an important factor affecting disease severity. Efforts to reduce contamination by mechanical brushing or treatments with hydrogen peroxide or bleach solutions were ineffective. Seed-borne inoculum is important in disease epidemiology. Improved techniques to reduce level of pathogen contamination and spread during seed processing are required.
-
Effects of topical application of the biological control agent Biotrek on production of bareroot Douglas-fir and western white pine seedlings, USDA Forest Service Nursery, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho
2000Co-Authors: Robert L. JamesAbstract:A preliminary evaluation of the biological control formulation of Trichoderma harzianum marketed as BioTrek® was conducted on bareroot Douglasfir and western white pine seedlings at the USDA Forest Service Nursery, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho. The biocontrol material was applied topically on seed shortly after sowing and comparisons made between treated and untreated 1-0 and 2-0 seedlings. First-year Douglas-fir height and second-year white pine height and diameter were not affected by the treatment. BioTrek® significantly reduced white pine seedling root infection by Cylindrocarpon spp., but not by either Fusarium or Trichoderma spp. The major Fusarium species isolated from roots of nondiseased seedlings was F. oxysporum. Further tests of BioTrek® are underway at the nursery.
Lee K. Cerveny - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The role of discretion in recreation decision-making by resource professionals in the USDA Forest Service
Journal of Environmental Management, 2012Co-Authors: Teressa Trusty, Lee K. CervenyAbstract:This paper explores opportunities for administrative discretion in decision-making for natural resource management. We carried out an exploratory study in the USDA Forest Service to understand factors affecting administrative actions related to recreation use in riparian areas. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 27 resource professionals from a national Forest in the northwest region of the United States. Questions focused on professional judgments about recreation in riparian areas, administrative actions related to management of these activities, and the potential for personal values to influence decisions. We analyzed the transcribed interviews using Atlas.ti, coding the data for salient themes. In this paper, we discuss perceptions of resource professionals about the potential for personal values to influence administrative actions and decisions. We highlight four distinct realms in the planning process where expanded discretionary capacity exists and values may emerge. Finally, we suggest ways to reduce the potential influence of value-based judgments in decision-making.
-
Institutional, Individual, and Socio-Cultural Domains of Partnerships: A Typology of USDA Forest Service Recreation Partners
Environmental Management, 2011Co-Authors: Erin Seekamp, Lee K. Cerveny, Allie MccrearyAbstract:Federal land management agencies, such as the USDA Forest Service, have expanded the role of recreation partners reflecting constrained growth in appropriations and broader societal trends towards civic environmental governance. Partnerships with individual volunteers, Service groups, commercial outfitters, and other government agencies provide the USDA Forest Service with the resources necessary to complete projects and meet goals under fiscal constraints. Existing partnership typologies typically focus on collaborative or strategic alliances and highlight organizational dimensions (e.g., structure and process) defined by researchers. This paper presents a partner typology constructed from USDA Forest Service partnership practitioners’ conceptualizations of 35 common partner types. Multidimensional scaling of data from unconstrained pile sorts identified 3 distinct cultural dimensions of recreation partners—specifically, partnership character, partner impact, and partner motivations—that represent institutional, individual, and socio-cultural cognitive domains. A hierarchical agglomerative cluster analysis provides further insight into the various domains of agency personnel’s conceptualizations. While three dimensions with high reliability (RSQ = 0.83) and corresponding hierarchical clusters illustrate commonality between agency personnel’s partnership suppositions, this study also reveals variance in personnel’s familiarity and affinity for specific partnership types. This real-world perspective on partner types highlights that agency practitioners not only make strategic choices when selecting and cultivating partnerships to accomplish critical task, but also elect to work with partners for the primary purpose of providing public Service and fostering land stewardship.
-
Examining the Complexities of Partnership Administration: Insight into the Programmatic Capacity of the USDA Forest Service
2011Co-Authors: Erin Seekamp, Lee K. Cerveny, Allie MccrearyAbstract:Partnerships significantly augment the capacity of the USDA Forest Service to care for its lands and serve people using those lands. As part of the agency’s recreation program, partners perform diverse Services such as trail building, interpretive programming, grant writing, monitoring, and general maintenance. However, the increasingly formal nature of agency partnerships has added administrative complexity to relationships that were once solidified by handshakes. This paper explores the programmatic capacity of recreation partnerships using data from a multi-phased study conducted with agency personnel. The study found that dedicated leadership cultivates vibrant partnership programs. However, agency personnel expressed concern for declining programmatic capacity due to staff turnover, job compression, and outsourcing. Strategies for building programmatic capacity are discussed, including formalizing work with partnerships as an accountable job duty. As reliance on agency partnerships are predicted to increase, the implications section addresses the specific administrative challenges of partnering.
-
Examining USDA Forest Service recreation partnerships: institutional and relational interactions
Journal of park and recreation administration, 2010Co-Authors: Erin Seekamp, Lee K. CervenyAbstract:Since 2002, the USDA Forest Service budget for recreation, wilderness, and heritage programs has experienced limited growth compared to the rest of the agency. Downsizing and outsourcing characterize the agency’s response to constrained appropriations. The agency increasingly works with partners to meet targets that otherwise could not be achieved. Partnerships may take many structural forms (e.g., memorandums of understanding, joint venture agreements, and contracts) and have become part of the agency’s organizational norms. Despite this growing emphasis on partnerships, little is known about the ways partners interact with agency personnel or the implications of partnership reliance for agency programs and Services. Existing research on recreation partnerships has focused primarily on steps to build successful partnerships, while research from public administration and organizational management has focused on the determinants of partnership synergy. The majority of this research focuses on collaborative alliances that characterize process-as-outcome partnerships. To build on this knowledge base and develop a conceptual framework of recreation partnerships where products (e.g., visitor Services) are the typical outcome, 21 key informant interviews were conducted with agency personnel and partners. Participants were purposively selected from multiple regions, a range of management levels, and a variety of recreation work performed. In this paper, two aspects of partnership interactions (i.e., institutional and relational interactions) are presented to specifically incorporate both institutional and actor perspectives on recreation partnerships, examine the similarities to past research on partnership success (e.g., synergy), and explore the relationship between interactions and administrative barriers. Institutional interactions refer to the reasons that the agency seeks partnerships and the requirements to engage in partnerships. Key characteristics of institutional interaction include: duty, necessity, commitment, and effort. Relational interactions are informed by the actor perspective and describe the needs of both partners and agency personnel to maintain formal and informal agreements. Key characteristics of relational interactions include: interdependence, synergy, power, trust, linkages, and communication. Better understanding of the institutional and relational interactions of partnerships may further the agency’s capacity to provide recreation opportunities and foster stewardship. Two important risks to partnership management were identified: (a) the assumption that partners constitute a source of free labor and require minimal time or energy to administer threatens institutional capacity to manage partnerships, and (b) personnel turnover constrains maintaining partnerships and developing positive community relations, as these relationships often depend on the individual connections that are cultivated. This research helps resource managers understand partnership interactions, recognize the individual champions who invest in these relationships, and assess the institutional mechanisms that enhance management capacity.
Erin Seekamp - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Institutional, Individual, and Socio-Cultural Domains of Partnerships: A Typology of USDA Forest Service Recreation Partners
Environmental Management, 2011Co-Authors: Erin Seekamp, Lee K. Cerveny, Allie MccrearyAbstract:Federal land management agencies, such as the USDA Forest Service, have expanded the role of recreation partners reflecting constrained growth in appropriations and broader societal trends towards civic environmental governance. Partnerships with individual volunteers, Service groups, commercial outfitters, and other government agencies provide the USDA Forest Service with the resources necessary to complete projects and meet goals under fiscal constraints. Existing partnership typologies typically focus on collaborative or strategic alliances and highlight organizational dimensions (e.g., structure and process) defined by researchers. This paper presents a partner typology constructed from USDA Forest Service partnership practitioners’ conceptualizations of 35 common partner types. Multidimensional scaling of data from unconstrained pile sorts identified 3 distinct cultural dimensions of recreation partners—specifically, partnership character, partner impact, and partner motivations—that represent institutional, individual, and socio-cultural cognitive domains. A hierarchical agglomerative cluster analysis provides further insight into the various domains of agency personnel’s conceptualizations. While three dimensions with high reliability (RSQ = 0.83) and corresponding hierarchical clusters illustrate commonality between agency personnel’s partnership suppositions, this study also reveals variance in personnel’s familiarity and affinity for specific partnership types. This real-world perspective on partner types highlights that agency practitioners not only make strategic choices when selecting and cultivating partnerships to accomplish critical task, but also elect to work with partners for the primary purpose of providing public Service and fostering land stewardship.
-
Examining the Complexities of Partnership Administration: Insight into the Programmatic Capacity of the USDA Forest Service
2011Co-Authors: Erin Seekamp, Lee K. Cerveny, Allie MccrearyAbstract:Partnerships significantly augment the capacity of the USDA Forest Service to care for its lands and serve people using those lands. As part of the agency’s recreation program, partners perform diverse Services such as trail building, interpretive programming, grant writing, monitoring, and general maintenance. However, the increasingly formal nature of agency partnerships has added administrative complexity to relationships that were once solidified by handshakes. This paper explores the programmatic capacity of recreation partnerships using data from a multi-phased study conducted with agency personnel. The study found that dedicated leadership cultivates vibrant partnership programs. However, agency personnel expressed concern for declining programmatic capacity due to staff turnover, job compression, and outsourcing. Strategies for building programmatic capacity are discussed, including formalizing work with partnerships as an accountable job duty. As reliance on agency partnerships are predicted to increase, the implications section addresses the specific administrative challenges of partnering.
-
Examining USDA Forest Service recreation partnerships: institutional and relational interactions
Journal of park and recreation administration, 2010Co-Authors: Erin Seekamp, Lee K. CervenyAbstract:Since 2002, the USDA Forest Service budget for recreation, wilderness, and heritage programs has experienced limited growth compared to the rest of the agency. Downsizing and outsourcing characterize the agency’s response to constrained appropriations. The agency increasingly works with partners to meet targets that otherwise could not be achieved. Partnerships may take many structural forms (e.g., memorandums of understanding, joint venture agreements, and contracts) and have become part of the agency’s organizational norms. Despite this growing emphasis on partnerships, little is known about the ways partners interact with agency personnel or the implications of partnership reliance for agency programs and Services. Existing research on recreation partnerships has focused primarily on steps to build successful partnerships, while research from public administration and organizational management has focused on the determinants of partnership synergy. The majority of this research focuses on collaborative alliances that characterize process-as-outcome partnerships. To build on this knowledge base and develop a conceptual framework of recreation partnerships where products (e.g., visitor Services) are the typical outcome, 21 key informant interviews were conducted with agency personnel and partners. Participants were purposively selected from multiple regions, a range of management levels, and a variety of recreation work performed. In this paper, two aspects of partnership interactions (i.e., institutional and relational interactions) are presented to specifically incorporate both institutional and actor perspectives on recreation partnerships, examine the similarities to past research on partnership success (e.g., synergy), and explore the relationship between interactions and administrative barriers. Institutional interactions refer to the reasons that the agency seeks partnerships and the requirements to engage in partnerships. Key characteristics of institutional interaction include: duty, necessity, commitment, and effort. Relational interactions are informed by the actor perspective and describe the needs of both partners and agency personnel to maintain formal and informal agreements. Key characteristics of relational interactions include: interdependence, synergy, power, trust, linkages, and communication. Better understanding of the institutional and relational interactions of partnerships may further the agency’s capacity to provide recreation opportunities and foster stewardship. Two important risks to partnership management were identified: (a) the assumption that partners constitute a source of free labor and require minimal time or energy to administer threatens institutional capacity to manage partnerships, and (b) personnel turnover constrains maintaining partnerships and developing positive community relations, as these relationships often depend on the individual connections that are cultivated. This research helps resource managers understand partnership interactions, recognize the individual champions who invest in these relationships, and assess the institutional mechanisms that enhance management capacity.
Allie Mccreary - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Institutional, Individual, and Socio-Cultural Domains of Partnerships: A Typology of USDA Forest Service Recreation Partners
Environmental Management, 2011Co-Authors: Erin Seekamp, Lee K. Cerveny, Allie MccrearyAbstract:Federal land management agencies, such as the USDA Forest Service, have expanded the role of recreation partners reflecting constrained growth in appropriations and broader societal trends towards civic environmental governance. Partnerships with individual volunteers, Service groups, commercial outfitters, and other government agencies provide the USDA Forest Service with the resources necessary to complete projects and meet goals under fiscal constraints. Existing partnership typologies typically focus on collaborative or strategic alliances and highlight organizational dimensions (e.g., structure and process) defined by researchers. This paper presents a partner typology constructed from USDA Forest Service partnership practitioners’ conceptualizations of 35 common partner types. Multidimensional scaling of data from unconstrained pile sorts identified 3 distinct cultural dimensions of recreation partners—specifically, partnership character, partner impact, and partner motivations—that represent institutional, individual, and socio-cultural cognitive domains. A hierarchical agglomerative cluster analysis provides further insight into the various domains of agency personnel’s conceptualizations. While three dimensions with high reliability (RSQ = 0.83) and corresponding hierarchical clusters illustrate commonality between agency personnel’s partnership suppositions, this study also reveals variance in personnel’s familiarity and affinity for specific partnership types. This real-world perspective on partner types highlights that agency practitioners not only make strategic choices when selecting and cultivating partnerships to accomplish critical task, but also elect to work with partners for the primary purpose of providing public Service and fostering land stewardship.
-
Examining the Complexities of Partnership Administration: Insight into the Programmatic Capacity of the USDA Forest Service
2011Co-Authors: Erin Seekamp, Lee K. Cerveny, Allie MccrearyAbstract:Partnerships significantly augment the capacity of the USDA Forest Service to care for its lands and serve people using those lands. As part of the agency’s recreation program, partners perform diverse Services such as trail building, interpretive programming, grant writing, monitoring, and general maintenance. However, the increasingly formal nature of agency partnerships has added administrative complexity to relationships that were once solidified by handshakes. This paper explores the programmatic capacity of recreation partnerships using data from a multi-phased study conducted with agency personnel. The study found that dedicated leadership cultivates vibrant partnership programs. However, agency personnel expressed concern for declining programmatic capacity due to staff turnover, job compression, and outsourcing. Strategies for building programmatic capacity are discussed, including formalizing work with partnerships as an accountable job duty. As reliance on agency partnerships are predicted to increase, the implications section addresses the specific administrative challenges of partnering.
Steven R. Shook - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Capacity for utilization of USDA Forest Service, Region I small-diameter timber
Forest Products Journal, 2005Co-Authors: Charles E. Keegan, Todd A. Morgan, Francis G. Wagner, Patricia J. Cohn, Keith A. Blatner, Timothy P. Spoelma, Steven R. ShookAbstract:The need to treat millions of acres in the western United States for fire hazard and ecosystem restoration has been identified as a high priority by the USDA Forest Service. These treatments may require removing increased volumes of timber- including small-diameter trees - from National Forests and other ownerships. The goal of this research was to provide estimates of the Forest products industry's capacity to utilize trees of various sizes from the USDA Forest Service Region 1 timber-processing area. The major sources of industry timber-processing capacity data were surveys and telephone interviews with mill managers. Within the USDA Forest Service Region 1 timber-processing area, there were 298 timber-processing facilities in operation as of August 30, 2003: 110 sawmills, 101 house log /log home facilities, 42 post and small pole producers, 23 manufacturers of log furniture, 12 cedar products producers, 7 plywood and veneer plants, and 3 utility pole producers. Annual capacity to process timber within the timber-processing area was 576 million cubic feet (16.3 million cubic meters) excluding pulpwood. Mills utilized 79 percent of their capacity during the 12 months prior to August 30, 2003. Over 91 percent of the timber processed was from trees ≥ 10 inches (25.4 cm) in diameter at breast height (DBH), slightly more than 7 percent from trees 7- to 9.9-inches (17.8 to 25.1-cm) DBH, and only 1 percent from trees
-
capacity for utilization of USDA Forest Service region i small diameter timber
Forest Products Journal, 2005Co-Authors: Charles E. Keegan, Todd A. Morgan, Francis G. Wagner, Patricia J. Cohn, Keith A. Blatner, Timothy P. Spoelma, Steven R. ShookAbstract:The need to treat millions of acres in the western United States for fire hazard and ecosystem restoration has been identified as a high priority by the USDA Forest Service. These treatments may require removing increased volumes of timber- including small-diameter trees - from National Forests and other ownerships. The goal of this research was to provide estimates of the Forest products industry's capacity to utilize trees of various sizes from the USDA Forest Service Region 1 timber-processing area. The major sources of industry timber-processing capacity data were surveys and telephone interviews with mill managers. Within the USDA Forest Service Region 1 timber-processing area, there were 298 timber-processing facilities in operation as of August 30, 2003: 110 sawmills, 101 house log /log home facilities, 42 post and small pole producers, 23 manufacturers of log furniture, 12 cedar products producers, 7 plywood and veneer plants, and 3 utility pole producers. Annual capacity to process timber within the timber-processing area was 576 million cubic feet (16.3 million cubic meters) excluding pulpwood. Mills utilized 79 percent of their capacity during the 12 months prior to August 30, 2003. Over 91 percent of the timber processed was from trees ≥ 10 inches (25.4 cm) in diameter at breast height (DBH), slightly more than 7 percent from trees 7- to 9.9-inches (17.8 to 25.1-cm) DBH, and only 1 percent from trees<7-inches(17.8cm)DBH. More than 71 percent of the industry capacity could not operate efficiently on trees < 10-inches (25.4 cm) DBH, and only 2 percent of the capacity could utilize trees < 7-inches (17.8 cm) DBH.