Jackson Henry, Vinay Vattikuti, and Ryan Flynn

5th Hour AP Environmental Science

Mr. Lee
Forest Report
Introduction
Our group visited the Merwin Nature Preserve, a forest just outside of Bloomington, IL,
in order to determine whether or not it was a healthy forest. The forest is protected by the
Merwin Nature Preserve and located within the Mackinaw Valley Watershed, an area that was
previously in harmed by development and the use of surrounding lands, but now, thanks to
conservation efforts, the area has made a timely recovery (nature). Historically, this 11 acre area
has been relatively devoid of human interaction; the issues previously mentioned were a result of
outside conditions indirectly influencing the environment. The climate here is very diverse, with
several different conditions within it, including two forests, a savanna restoration, and a stream
with high mussel diversity (DNR). Part of the reason as to why it is so diverse is because of the
abundance of niches within the environment due to frequent fires, as well intermediate
disturbances, such as falling trees. The average temperature and precipitation are is consistent
with that of Bloomington, IL, and is shown in the graph below, courtesy of US Climate Data.

In order to determine whether or not the forest we visited was healthy, our group had to find a
way to perceive health. This was done by checking for evidence of animals, determining the
heights, DBH, and abundances of living trees, finding native and exotic species, as well as
identifying any specific niches in our area caused by intermediate disturbances. Most of all, the
forest should be able to sustain all of these biotic and abiotic interactions that occur within it.
This question was answered by determining if any of the factors that the environment needed to
continue were limited. This method of determining forest health is based on the guidelines
established by the North Carolina Forest Service, and provide objective ways to determine the
subjective opinion of forest health. The exact methods our group took to determine the health of
the forest will be explained in greater detail later; however, as a quick overview, our group
charted off a small 10 by 10 meter section of the forest that was consistent with the surrounding
areas and began to collect field data and record it into notebooks. This data would be used to
determine the health of the forest. We also collected any interesting organisms in our specimen
jar for further examination upon our return to school. This is how our group determined the
health of the Merwin Forest.
Methods

This study was carried out to determine whether or not the Merwin Forest is healthy or
not. Prior to leaving for the trip, our group, consisting of Jack, Vinay and Ryan, studied the
different types of trees and their specific leaves along with learning how to take the DBH of a
tree. DBH stands for diameter at breast height, this is just a way to classify and group trees

according to their size. All of this was studied in order to become adept at identifying trees in our
quadrant. Upon arrival, we had collected all of the materials that were going to be needed. This
included, a meter stick, specimen jar, umbrella, stakes, a hammer, yarn and a compass. The first
thing that our group did after arriving at the forest was hiking to the location that our group was
going to study. For our group this was just off the trail. Ryan and Jack set up a 10x10 meter box
by using the stakes and yarn that was provided, This quadrant would represent the area of study.
After determining the parameters for our study, we recorded several environmental factors,
including, cloud cover upon arrival and departure, canopy coverage in our quadrant, evidence of
humans, and evidence of animals. Our group determined the cloud cover by estimating and
consulting with the instructor and various other groups, this process was also used for
determining the cloud cover while leaving the forest. We then determined the canopy coverage in
our quadrant by estimating how much light was reaching the forest floor. Jack saw evidence of
humans through a Skittles wrapper hiking trails. The evidence of animals that Vinay found were
bite marks on the leaves, a burrow in our quadrant, and feces. Our group then proceeded to
record our data on a 20x20 grid on our paper. Ryan and Vinay then determined the DBH of every
tree within our quadrant and Jack made a tally representing different DBHs. Once our trees were
recorded into our notebooks, Jack recorded the different animals that we saw in our quadrant. We
then needed to determine the most abundant tree in our quadrant. We did so by identifying all of
the trees in our quadrant. We also determined the species name of the tallest tree and the tree
with the largest DBH, both of which were the same species. After returning to the school, all of
the groups in the class shared their data in order to find the biodiversity of the forest.

Tree Data

Tree Data Cont.

The data that we collected over the trees in our quadrant primarily consisted of trees with
a DBH between 10.1-20 cm. The class data showed similarities in data, with 12 of the 30 trees
that were recorded being between 10.1-20 cm. This is about 40% of the trees that were recorded.

Our group had 5 different tree DBHs, which was the widest variety in the class, with the
next closest being 4. This makes our group the most diverse group, which goes to say that our
quadrant was the healthiest.
Animal Data

Animal Data Cont.

The majority of the animals that our group were able to identify were
Ants/Flies/Bees/Mosquitoes. This made up for 65% of the animals that we identified, most of
which were ants and flies. Most of the other groups had similarities in data, including the overall
class dominance being 30.15%.

The second most abundant animal within our quadrant were Misc. Animals, these were
unidentifiable, most consisting of very small bugs, like gnats. Only one other group made note of
miscellaneous animals, and the class dominance for miscellaneous animals was 22.06% which
makes it the second most dominant animal at the Merwin Forest.
Lastly our group had 3 Spiders within our quadrant, none of with we were able to identify
specifically. The class dominance for spiders was 15.44% leaving it at the third most dominant
animal at the forest.

Conclusion
After studying the forest and conducting our research, we were able to determine that the forest
we were in is indeed a healthy forest.According to (NCFS) A healthy forest is a forest that
possesses the ability to sustain the unique species composition and processes that exist within
it.. This means that a forest must have a variety of species or species richness in order to be
classified as a healthy forest. The best way is to measure this is using the shannon biodiversity
index test which measures the species richness of an ecosystem. After using the class DBHs
collected from the forest, the shannon index score came up as 1.53. The higher the score is, the
more biodiverse the forest is considered to be. This allows us to determine that the forest is in
fact healthy. Another basic indicator would be the variety of DBH that we had in our quadrant.
The class data also had a variety of DBH s which also indicated that the forest is healthy. These
factors were able to show that the forest is in fact healthy. According to mortonarb different tree
species grow at different rates, so different DBHs indicate different species/ Thats why the

difference in DBHs shows us that the forest indeed is bio diverse. Especially in our groups data
as we had a wide variety of DBHs in our quadrant. These factors all indicate that the forest is in
fact healthy. However there were some errors in our research that could skew our results if
corrected. For example, the different groups in the class only looked at 10 by 10 quadrants that
did not represent the whole forest. Also the method of determining DBHs could have been
inaccurately determined, as the method the groups used was not very accurate. Another thing was
that our forest wasnt bio diverse at all when it came to animal species. Our quadrant only had
insect and arachnid species. However this may have been because of the loud noises we made
when we entered the forest. The bigger animals probably ran away and try to hide from us. The
class data also echoed some of the same things we had in our quadrant and most of the species
the other groups identified were insects.

Sources
http://www.nature.org/ourinitiatives/regions/northamerica/unitedstates/illinois/placesweprotect/th
e-mackinaw-river-watershed.xml
https://www.dnr.illinois.gov/INPC/Pages/Area5McLeanMerwinSavanna.aspx
http://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/bloomington/illinois/united-states/usil1523
http://ncforestservice.gov/forest_health/what_is_forest_health.htm
https://www.mortonarb.org/files/Find%20the%20Age%20of%20a%20Tree%20-%20middle
%20school.pdf
http://ncforestservice.gov/forest_health/what_is_forest_health.htm