• Sherri L. Johnson - Principal Investigator
  US Forest Service ;Pacific NW Research Station ;3200 SW Jefferson Way, Corvallis, OR, 97331, USA
  Phone: 541-758-7771
  Email: sherri.johnson2@usda.gov, sherri.johnson@oregonstate.edu
  URL: https://www.fs.fed.us/research/people/profile.php?alias=sherrijohnson
• Julia A. Jones - Principal Investigator
  Oregon State University;Department of Geosciences; Wilkinson Hall 104, Corvallis, OR, 97331-5506, USA
  Phone: (541) 737-1224
  Email: Julia.Jones@oregonstate.edu, geojulia@comcast.net
  URL: http://ceoas.oregonstate.edu/profile/jones/
  ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9429-8925
• Matthew G Betts - Principal Investigator
  Department of Forest Ecosystems and Society; 201E Richardson Hall; College of Forestry; Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, 97331
  Phone: (541) 737-3841
  Email: matt.betts@oregonstate.edu
  URL: http://www.fsl.orst.edu/flel/index.htm
• Michael P. Nelson - Principal Investigator
  Department of Forest Ecosystems and Society; 201K Richarson Hall; College of Forestry; Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, 97331
  Phone: 541-737-9221
  Email: mpnelson@oregonstate.edu
  URL: http://www.michaelpnelson.com
  ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6917-4752
• David Bell - Principal Investigator
  Email: david.bell@usda.gov, david.bell@oregonstate.edu
  URL: https://lemma.forestry.oregonstate.edu/about/david-bell

• The H.J. Andrews Experimental Forest is a living laboratory that provides unparalleled opportunities for the study of forest and stream ecosystems in the central Cascade Range of Oregon. Since 1980, as a part of the National Science Foundation Long Term Ecological Research (NSF-LTER) program, the Andrews Experimental Forest has become a leader in the analysis of forest and stream ecosystem dynamics.
• Long-term field experiments and measurement programs have focused on climate dynamics, streamflow, water quality, and vegetation succession. Currently researchers are working to develop concepts and tools needed to predict effects of natural disturbance, land use, and climate change on ecosystem structure, function, and species composition.
• The Andrews Experimental Forest is administered cooperatively by the USDA Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station, Oregon State University and the Willamette National Forest. Funding for the research program comes from the National Science Foundation (NSF), US Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station, Oregon State University, and other sources.

Data were provided by the HJ Andrews Experimental Forest research program, funded by the National Science Foundation's Long-Term Ecological Research Program (DEB 2025755), US Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station, and Oregon State University. National Science Foundation: DEB1440409

• Long-Term Ecological Research
  The Andrews Forest is situated in the western Cascade Range of Oregon, and covers the entire 15,800-acre (6400-ha) drainage basin of Lookout Creek. Elevation ranges from 1350 to 5340 feet (410 to 1630 m). Broadly representative of the rugged mountainous landscape of the Pacific Northwest, the Andrews Forest contains excellent examples of the region's conifer forests and associated wildlife and stream ecosystems. These forests are among the tallest and most productive in the world, with tree heights of often greater than 250 ft (75 m). Streams are steep, cold and clean, providing habitat for numerous aquatic organisms.

• We located stand types described above from aerial photos. Most stands were within the Blue River watershed, however some stands were located outside of the watershed, but still on the Willamette National Forest and within the AMA boundaries (Berryman 2002). Stands sampled outside of the Blue River watershed represented stand types that were scarce or absent in the watershed. Stands were sampled in the summers of 1997-1999 using one permanent plot (34.7 m radius, 0.4 ha) per stand following the FHM plot methodology (McCune et al. 1997b). A total of 117 plots were permanently installed for this study.
• Once the stand was located on the ground, a reference point (RP) was established along the road to assist in future plot relocation. From the RP (typically a tree) we chose an approximate azimuth into the stand. The RP was labeled with metal tags indicating the azimuth and distance to plot center. This azimuth was followed for 46.0 m (not slope-corrected) plus a two-digit random integer. Plot center was located no less than 46.0 m from: designated reserve areas in timber sales (other than stream buffers); the stand edge; roads; campgrounds; and power lines. Failing this, another random number was chosen and the same azimuth was followed until plot center was located outside of these exclusive areas and at least within 46.0 m of the stand edge. Riparian plots were installed to border the stream edge.
• Plot center was marked with steel rebar and PVC pipe to increase the possibility of plot relocation after major disturbances, such as a fire or timber harvest. Three RP trees near plot center were tagged to reference the plot center with an azimuth and distance to facilitate relocation
• The Forest Health Monitoring (FHM) lichen method was used to sample lichen communities in each stand. These data will be used as a baseline for long-term monitoring of lichen communities in the managed landscape. In each FHM plot, the surveyor completed a maximum two-hour ocular lichen community survey. The survey method consisted of two parts performed simultaneously (McCune et al. 1997): 1. The field surveyor used a field check list of easily identifiable lichens in the field and sometimes collected voucher specimens of these species. Voucher specimens were collected for all other species that could not be easily identified in the field. The collection represented the species diversity and composition of epiphytic macrolichens in the plot as fully as possible. The population sampled consisted of all macrolichens occurring on woody plants, excluding the 0.5 m basal portions of trees and shrubs below 0.5 m. Given the large plot area, lichen litter and fallen branches provided a sample of the canopy lichens. 2. The abundance of each species was estimated using a five-step scale (modified from McCune et al. 1997): 0 = absent; 1 = rare (less than 3 individuals per plot); 2 = uncommon (4-10 individuals per plot); 3 = common (greater than10, but less than 40 individuals per plot); 4 = very common (greater than 40 individuals per plot, but less than half of the available substrate was covered by the species); 5 = abundant (more than half of the available substrate had the species present).
• The FHM method has been used to sample lichen communities in over 1,000 plots for the FHM program nationwide (McCune 2000) and has been used by the Pacific Northwest Forest Service Air Quality Biomonitoring Project for nearly 1,000 lichen community plots in Oregon and Washington (L. Geiser, unpublished data). Field methods have been documented for repeatability and quality assurance and are described in McCune et al. (1997).
• We estimated epiphytic lichen biomass from lichen litterfall on the forest floor in litter plots, sub-sampled in each stand. Epiphytic lichen biomass includes all epiphytic lichens growing on boles and branches of trees and tall shrubs. Collecting lichen litter in late summer (late August through October) avoids the large and variable amounts of litter that can occur in winter months due to large storm events (Stevenson and Rochelle 1984; Esseen 1985). Late summer litter does not represent annual litterfall because lichen litter in the forests of the western Cascades is eaten and decomposes rapidly (McCune and Daly 1994). However, such samples can be used to estimate epiphytic lichen biomass at the stand level (Neitlich 1993; McCune 1994; Peck and McCune 1997; Sillett and Goslin 1999). Annual variation in litterfall is one source of error in such estimates. Hence, this method should be based on samples collected during one late-summer period and is best used for estimating large relative differences in epiphytic lichen biomass among stands over a large area (McCune 1994).
• Lichen litter was collected in a minimum of one stand per stand type. Of the 117 stands in which we collected lichen community data, we sampled 63 stands for lichen litter biomass. The 63 stands were chosen to include the full range of stand types included in the 117 stands. In each stand, epiphytic macrolichen litter was sampled in 2 m radius circular plots ("litter plots"). Depending on the stand age and complexity of canopy structure, ten to fifteen litter plots were sampled for each stand (McCune 1994). Stands with obviously low lichen biomass (e.g., even-aged young stands, less than 20 yr) were sampled with ten litter plots. Old growth (greater than 200 yr), mature stands (81-200 yr), and most stands with remnants were sampled with 15 litter plots.
• Litter plots were placed along three transects per stand at randomly selected intervals, but constrained to 12-30 m between plots (two transects if sampling only ten litter plots). Transects were established parallel to the contour, intersecting the FHM plot center for the first transect. The other two transects were parallel to the first, separated by 12 m. This achieved interspersion throughout the stand. Some litter plots were placed outside of the FHM plot boundaries, though still within the stand. Five litter plots were sampled per transect.
• Epiphytic macrolichens were divided into three functional groups based on their roles in the forest ecosystem (McCune 1993). These groups include "cyanolichens," which consist of all nitrogen-fixing lichens with cyanobacteria present as either the primary or secondary photobiont; the major contributors to this group included primarily Lobaria oregana and to a lesser degree L. pulmonaria. "Forage lichens" consist of all pendulous fruticose lichens. These are used for forage by wildlife, primarily the genera Usnea, Alectoria, and Bryoria. "Matrix lichens" account for all remaining green-algal macrolichens, primarily foliose in growth form, most commonly Platismatia and Hypogymnia.
• We modified McCune’s (1994) litter-pickup method for estimating stand-level lichen biomass to expedite sampling across many stands at the landscape scale. The "reference method" was developed based on visual biomass estimates of thalli to sample lichen litter from the forest floor more rapidly, while maintaining a similar level of accuracy to that obtained with the litter-pickup method. The visual estimates of lichen biomass were made using reference lichen samples for calibration. This method was adapted from Rosso et al. (2000) and Campbell et al. (1999), in which they visually estimated biomass of lichens and bryophytes in the forest canopy using air-dried reference samples for calibration. The reference method is also a modification of the abundance classes (defined by grams of lichen) used by Stevenson et al. (1998) to estimate arboreal forage lichen biomass. We modified these approaches to visually estimate lichen litter biomass by functional group on the forest floor.
• We estimated lichen litter biomass during the late summers of 1997–1999, during which each of the 63 stands was sampled once for lichen litter. Within each litter plot, oven-dried samples from each functional group (0.1, 1.0, 5.0, 10.0 g) were used as references for calibrating estimates of lichen litter biomass in the field. To assess reliability of the method, estimates from the reference method were calibrated against true litter-pickup masses for one litter plot in each of 16 different stands. Two field collectors calibrated their biomass estimates from the lichen litter plot to true lichen masses (16 litter plots per field collector). The “picked-up” specimens were air-dried, then oven-dried at 60°C for 24 hours, and then weighed to the nearest milligram in the lab. Daily calibrations were also made between estimates of biomass for individual clumps of lichen litter and true lichen masses for each functional group. These calibrations allowed field collectors to gauge the accuracy of their litter estimates. We also calibrated litter estimates between field collectors to improve precision of the estimates.
• Lichen biomass data was entered at the sub-plot level for each stand. Data were cross-checked once for data entry errors. Lichen biomass data were averaged across all subplots by functional group for each stand, resulting in one mean biomass value at the stand level for each functional group: cyanolichen, matrix lichen and forage lichen.
• At each stand, basic plot level information was recorded and the “stand type” for the plot was classified. Plot level information included: the date of sampling (note that all measurements for a plot were taken in one day, including lichen communities, lichen biomass, overstory trees and plot data); latitude and longitude coordinates and elevation (m) were taken from the GPS unit at plot center; percent slope was taken at plot center (averaging both up-hill and down-hill measurements using a clinometer); aspect was taken at plot center (degrees east of true north using a compass); topographic position of the stand in relation to the surrounding landscape was classified; and a code of 0 or 1 was assigned if lichen biomass was collected (0=no biomass, 1=lichen biomass was collected).
• To classify the “stand type” we verified and recorded information for four main attributes. The overall vascular plant series for the FHM plot was determined using the Willamette National Forest Plant Association and Management Guide (Logan et. al. 1987), and the topographic position was recorded (upland or riparian intermittent stream, riparian perennial fish-bearing stream or riparian perennial non fish-bearing stream). The age class of the younger cohort was estimated for the stand, or, if the age class was difficult to determine, we cored representative trees to better estimate stand age. Old growth was defined as stands greater than 200 yr with highly variable canopy layers. Total percent canopy cover of remnant trees was used as an estimate of total percent retention of remnants for a stand. We estimated canopy cover of remnants in the field from dbh and crown width. J. Mayo (unpublished data) developed a table for estimating canopy cover of trees from dbh. This table is based on the relationship of dbh to crown width, from which percent canopy cover by each remnant tree was calculated. Remnants were typically Pseudotsuga menziesii, and in some cases Tsuga heterophylla, Thuja plicata, or Abies procera. Remnant tree age was not measured.
• We calculated the heat load index and potential direct incident radiation for each stand. The heat load index represents the amount of heat a site potentially receives and is derived from models based on latitude, slope, and aspect (McCune and Keon 2002). Potential direct incident radiation (MJ/cm/yr) represents the amount of light a site potentially receives, and is also derived from latitude, slope, and aspect.
• Overstory basal area (BA) was measured with an angle gauge (note: a relescope was used in 1997 only) in five variable-radius subplots within each stand: one at plot center and the other four at 23.0 m in each cardinal direction from plot center (subplot labels were: plot center=1, N=2, E=3, S=4, W=5). A consistent BA factor (BAF) was used for all subplots within one stand, though the factor varied across all stands, depending on tree size and density. The goal for repeatability of BA was a standard error of less than 15% of the mean. Stand basal area (BA, m/ha) was measured for all live and dead trees, separating hardwoods and conifers. However, at two plots (SB14 and SB17) we were unable to perform BA measurements because the stand was very young and dense (i.e., dog-hair stand). Instead, we did a count of trees per 1/10 acre for each subplot and no BAF was used. BA calculations for the plot level were made by averaging BA data across the 5 subplots to generate six BA variables as the plot level: total BA of live trees, basal area of conifers, BA of conifers, BA of hardwoods, BA of dead trees, and BA of remnants. In addition, we calculated the percent total BA that was comprised of remnant trees in the stand.
• All overstory trees that were accounted for in the BA variable-radius subplots (or those trees that were “in”) were measured. Overstory tree measurements included: identifying species (species acronym recorded); forestry assessment of tree condition class; diameter at breast height (dbh); percent ratio of live crown class; and assignment of crown class (note: see class code descriptions in metadata file). Crown width was measured only for remnant trees, measured from the center of the tree bole, out to the tip of the crown edge (estimating by looking up). The longest branch was the starting point for measuring the crown width.

• All lichen vouchers collected in the field were identified in the laboratory by Shanti Berryman, with the assistance of Dr. Bruce McCune. Lichen nomenclature followed McCune and Geiser (1997), and McCune’s key (2002, http://oregonstate.edu/~mccuneb/Usnea.PDF) to the genus Usnea in the Pacific Northwest. Thin layer chromatography was performed when necessary for identification. In addition, some specimens were sent to lichen specialists for verification. Representative voucher specimens were curated and deposited in the Oregon State University Herbarium (OSC).
• All lichen community data were recorded on FHM lichen identification data sheets during identification in the laboratory and data were entered using compact format (text file; McCune and Mefford 1999) for PCORD using lichen species codes from the FHM lichen program species list. Duplicate collections of species at a given plot were combined following the FHM lichen program protocol (http://www.fia.fs.fed.us/library/field-guides-methods-proc/). All lichen community data entries were cross-checked once for data entry errors.

• The study site is located in the Blue River watershed of the Central Cascades Adaptive Management Area (AMA) in the Willamette National Forest, Oregon.
• Sampling frequency: one-time sampling

• The study site is located in the Blue River watershed of the Central Cascades Adaptive Management Area (AMA) in the Willamette National Forest, Oregon. Stands were sampled between 44.0 and 44.5 degrees N, and 122.0 and 123.0 degrees W. The Blue River watershed consists of 23,900 ha of conifer-dominated forest on steep volcanic terrain of the Cascade Mountain Range, ranging from 317 – 1,639 m in elevation (Cissel et al. 1999; Figure 1). Annual precipitation averages 220 cm (ranging from 55 to 361 cm), deposited as rain or snow in higher elevations, mainly between October and April. The winters are mild and wet with average temperature of 2 degrees C in January (ranging from -1.5 to 7.3 degrees C), and the summers are warm and dry with average temperature of 19 degrees C in July (ranging from 15 to 22 degrees C). The northern section of the watershed consists of a narrow band of high elevation, Abies amabilis (Dougl.) Forbes (Pacific silver fir) and Abies procera Rheder (Noble fir) dominated forest (hereafter, “true fir series;” Logan et al. 1987). Most of the watershed is lower elevation forest dominated by Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco. (Douglas fir) and Tsuga heterophylla (Raf.) Sarg. (western hemlock; hereafter, “western hemlock series;” Logan et al. 1987).
• The Blue River watershed has had decades of fire suppression and timber extraction. Historical fire regimes varied in frequency and severity within the watershed (Weisberg 1998). Forests in true fir series burned infrequently (mean fire interval of 260 yr), but fires were severe with high mortality (greater than 80%). The fire return interval for the western hemlock series ranged from 100 to 180 yr with less severe burns (40-80% mortality). Consequently, forests in the two plant series will be managed differently in the Blue River watershed, as part of the Landscape Plan (LP) which is an adaptive management approach using historical fire history as reference for management (Cissel et al. 1999).
• Lichen communities were sampled in forest stands according to a stratified random design. Forest stands were stratified by four attributes, modified from Cissel et al. (1999; Figure 2):
• two plant series (western hemlock and true fir), plant series were determined based on the key to climax vegetation, Logan et al. 1987;
• four age classes (the younger tree cohort; young less than 20 yr, pole 21-80 yr, mature 81-200 yr; and old growth greater than 200 yr);
• four classes of remnant retention based on the percent canopy cover of remnant trees that survived from the previous stand, following a disturbance that initiated tree regeneration: 0 = 0 - 7.5%; 15 = 7.5 - 22.5%; 30 = 22.5 - 37.0%; 50 = 37.0 - 62.0%. Remnant trees included the older live trees that remained following the most recent timber harvest or those old trees that survived a natural forest fire. The characteristics of remnant trees (i.e., size, crown structure) varied among stands because remnants from a timber harvest were often smaller and younger than those remnants surviving forest fires. Old-growth stands were not stratified by remnant classes. Only 0% and 15% retention classes were sampled in the true fir series, since future management strategies will prescribe only these retention levels in the true fir series (Cissel et al. 1999);
• four topographic classes (upland, and three riparian stream classes: intermittent; perennial non fish-bearing; and perennial fish-bearing). We adopted these stream classes from the LP management strategy to strengthen the link between our results and management activities.
• Upland stands were at least two tree-heights (about 105 m) from perennial streams (hereafter referred to as “perennial fish-bearing”) and one tree-height (about 52 m) from all other streams (USDA and USDI 2001). Riparian stands were defined as having some part of the stream within or immediately bordering the plot boundary. Intermittent streams formed narrow channels and the stream-bank vegetation was similar to that of upland slopes. Perennial streams formed wider channels and vegetation along the stream banks was characteristic of riparian areas, including hardwood trees and shrubs. We were unable to identify stands along perennial streams with a definite remnant cohort; therefore, these stands were stratified by the age-class of the co-dominant tree cohort, ignoring the remnant stratum (Figure 2).
• The design yielded 34 possible stand types for the western hemlock series and 22 for the true fir series, of which we sought to sample three stands each. However, some stand types were sampled with fewer stands or were not sampled due to their scarcity or absence in the landscape (such as stands with remnant retention greater than or equal to 30%). The 50% remnant retention class was uncommon in the landscape at the time of sampling and was therefore under-represented compared to other retention classes. The 50% retention class will become more prominent in the future landscape as managed under the LP (Cissel et al. 1999). We sampled 27 stand types in the western hemlock series, 6 of which were sampled with less than 3 stands. In the true fir series we sampled 18 stand types, 10 of which were sampled with less than 3 stands.

• Cascade Mountains, Oregon and Washington
  W -122.65947700, E -122.27221300, N 41.90189100, S 48.91215300
  Altitude: 4392 to 4392 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 001
  W -122.29175568, E -122.29175568, N 44.16998291, S 44.16998291
  Altitude: 579 to 579 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 002
  W -122.29055786, E -122.29055786, N 44.27072144, S 44.27072144
  Altitude: 1219 to 1219 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 003
  W -122.29241943, E -122.29241943, N 44.27050018, S 44.27050018
  Altitude: 1219 to 1219 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 004
  W -122.29086304, E -122.29086304, N 44.20035934, S 44.20035934
  Altitude: 732 to 732 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 005
  W -122.18629456, E -122.18629456, N 44.26362610, S 44.26362610
  Altitude: 975 to 975 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 006
  W -122.17684937, E -122.17684937, N 44.26370621, S 44.26370621
  Altitude: 944 to 944 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 007
  W -122.29058075, E -122.29058075, N 44.17016602, S 44.17016602
  Altitude: 616 to 616 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 008
  W -122.20070648, E -122.20070648, N 44.24137497, S 44.24137497
  Altitude: 652 to 652 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 009
  W -122.18013763, E -122.18013763, N 44.29330444, S 44.29330444
  Altitude: 841 to 841 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 010
  W -122.16423035, E -122.16423035, N 44.33226013, S 44.33226013
  Altitude: 1438 to 1438 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 011
  W -122.15890503, E -122.15890503, N 44.33200455, S 44.33200455
  Altitude: 1347 to 1347 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 012
  W -122.14258575, E -122.14258575, N 44.32363129, S 44.32363129
  Altitude: 1274 to 1274 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 013
  W -122.17074585, E -122.17074585, N 44.33066177, S 44.33066177
  Altitude: 1463 to 1463 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 014
  W -122.13056946, E -122.13056946, N 44.31846237, S 44.31846237
  Altitude: 1158 to 1158 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 015
  W -122.25061798, E -122.25061798, N 44.21623230, S 44.21623230
  Altitude: 469 to 469 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 016
  W -122.16779327, E -122.16779327, N 44.28850555, S 44.28850555
  Altitude: 896 to 896 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 017
  W -122.13489532, E -122.13489532, N 44.33080673, S 44.33080673
  Altitude: 1188 to 1188 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 018
  W -122.21879578, E -122.21879578, N 44.32557678, S 44.32557678
  Altitude: 1188 to 1188 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 019
  W -122.22137451, E -122.22137451, N 44.30754852, S 44.30754852
  Altitude: 890 to 890 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 020
  W -122.22398376, E -122.22398376, N 44.30977631, S 44.30977631
  Altitude: 963 to 963 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 021
  W -122.22649384, E -122.22649384, N 44.30910110, S 44.30910110
  Altitude: 871 to 871 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 022
  W -122.25454712, E -122.25454712, N 44.31787872, S 44.31787872
  Altitude: 1213 to 1213 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 023
  W -122.22696686, E -122.22696686, N 44.28716660, S 44.28716660
  Altitude: 896 to 896 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 024
  W -122.16931915, E -122.16931915, N 44.29024506, S 44.29024506
  Altitude: 853 to 853 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 025
  W -122.17044067, E -122.17044067, N 44.28989792, S 44.28989792
  Altitude: 822 to 822 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 026
  W -122.08719635, E -122.08719635, N 44.31628036, S 44.31628036
  Altitude: 1377 to 1377 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 027
  W -122.06960297, E -122.06960297, N 44.30563354, S 44.30563354
  Altitude: 1243 to 1243 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 028
  W -122.23383331, E -122.23383331, N 44.04850006, S 44.04850006
  Altitude: 1210 to 1210 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 029
  W -122.16917419, E -122.16917419, N 44.25529480, S 44.25529480
  Altitude: 859 to 859 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 030
  W -122.27058411, E -122.27058411, N 44.22588730, S 44.22588730
  Altitude: 579 to 579 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 031
  W -122.12772369, E -122.12772369, N 44.26647186, S 44.26647186
  Altitude: 1249 to 1249 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 032
  W -122.13211823, E -122.13211823, N 44.28177643, S 44.28177643
  Altitude: 1225 to 1225 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 033
  W -122.13366699, E -122.13366699, N 44.28221512, S 44.28221512
  Altitude: 1255 to 1255 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 034
  W -122.12468719, E -122.12468719, N 44.24209976, S 44.24209976
  Altitude: 1469 to 1469 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 035
  W -122.17703247, E -122.17703247, N 44.23232651, S 44.23232651
  Altitude: 682 to 682 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 036
  W -122.12672424, E -122.12672424, N 44.26824570, S 44.26824570
  Altitude: 1277 to 1277 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 037
  W -122.25498199, E -122.25498199, N 44.31618118, S 44.31618118
  Altitude: 1219 to 1219 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 038
  W -122.24430847, E -122.24430847, N 44.32199860, S 44.32199860
  Altitude: 1310 to 1310 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 039
  W -122.29086304, E -122.29086304, N 44.23891830, S 44.23891830
  Altitude: 744 to 744 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 040
  W -122.22016907, E -122.22016907, N 44.08050156, S 44.08050156
  Altitude: 682 to 682 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 041
  W -122.16930389, E -122.16930389, N 44.30461121, S 44.30461121
  Altitude: 841 to 841 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 042
  W -122.21219635, E -122.21219635, N 44.18655396, S 44.18655396
  Altitude: 457 to 457 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 043
  W -122.16500092, E -122.16500092, N 44.21844482, S 44.21844482
  Altitude: 786 to 786 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 044
  W -122.00000000, E -122.00000000, N 44.00000000, S 44.00000000
  Altitude: 883 to 883 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 045
  W -122.24411011, E -122.24411011, N 44.04822159, S 44.04822159
  Altitude: 938 to 938 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 046
  W -122.16625214, E -122.16625214, N 44.22586060, S 44.22586060
  Altitude: 701 to 701 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 047
  W -122.16491699, E -122.16491699, N 44.25827789, S 44.25827789
  Altitude: 865 to 865 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 048
  W -122.17510986, E -122.17510986, N 44.25655365, S 44.25655365
  Altitude: 835 to 835 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 049
  W -122.21739197, E -122.21739197, N 44.06477737, S 44.06477737
  Altitude: 609 to 609 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 050
  W -122.25061035, E -122.25061035, N 44.28877640, S 44.28877640
  Altitude: 1213 to 1213 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 051
  W -122.24913788, E -122.24913788, N 44.29180527, S 44.29180527
  Altitude: 1200 to 1200 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 052
  W -122.27633667, E -122.27633667, N 44.29336166, S 44.29336166
  Altitude: 1085 to 1085 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 053
  W -122.28033447, E -122.28033447, N 44.30316544, S 44.30316544
  Altitude: 1255 to 1255 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 054
  W -122.27861023, E -122.27861023, N 44.29477692, S 44.29477692
  Altitude: 1078 to 1078 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 055
  W -122.27716827, E -122.27716827, N 44.30580521, S 44.30580521
  Altitude: 1261 to 1261 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 056
  W -122.26911163, E -122.26911163, N 44.31039047, S 44.31039047
  Altitude: 1237 to 1237 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 057
  W -122.17036438, E -122.17036438, N 44.29177856, S 44.29177856
  Altitude: 835 to 835 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 058
  W -122.16278076, E -122.16278076, N 44.29069519, S 44.29069519
  Altitude: 938 to 938 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 059
  W -122.28861237, E -122.28861237, N 44.21333313, S 44.21333313
  Altitude: 771 to 771 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 060
  W -122.28816986, E -122.28816986, N 44.20644379, S 44.20644379
  Altitude: 914 to 914 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 061
  W -122.29550171, E -122.29550171, N 44.26411057, S 44.26411057
  Altitude: 1286 to 1286 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 062
  W -122.30552673, E -122.30552673, N 44.26266479, S 44.26266479
  Altitude: 1097 to 1097 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 063
  W -122.17641449, E -122.17641449, N 44.23011017, S 44.23011017
  Altitude: 731 to 731 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 064
  W -122.16696930, E -122.16696930, N 44.22124863, S 44.22124863
  Altitude: 737 to 737 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 065
  W -122.15399933, E -122.15399933, N 44.27061081, S 44.27061081
  Altitude: 1194 to 1194 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 066
  W -122.16505432, E -122.16505432, N 44.30780411, S 44.30780411
  Altitude: 914 to 914 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 067
  W -122.15758514, E -122.15758514, N 44.30791855, S 44.30791855
  Altitude: 999 to 999 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 068
  W -122.19486237, E -122.19486237, N 44.27155685, S 44.27155685
  Altitude: 609 to 609 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 069
  W -122.16649628, E -122.16649628, N 44.30452728, S 44.30452728
  Altitude: 853 to 853 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 070
  W -122.19210815, E -122.19210815, N 44.24963760, S 44.24963760
  Altitude: 755 to 755 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 071
  W -122.20786285, E -122.20786285, N 44.27905655, S 44.27905655
  Altitude: 701 to 701 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 072
  W -122.24375153, E -122.24375153, N 44.39608383, S 44.39608383
  Altitude: 615 to 615 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 073
  W -122.16725159, E -122.16725159, N 44.38902664, S 44.38902664
  Altitude: 981 to 981 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 074
  W -122.19525146, E -122.19525146, N 44.39411163, S 44.39411163
  Altitude: 1249 to 1249 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 075
  W -122.13358307, E -122.13358307, N 44.34147263, S 44.34147263
  Altitude: 1194 to 1194 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 076
  W -122.13919067, E -122.13919067, N 44.35147095, S 44.35147095
  Altitude: 1237 to 1237 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 077
  W -122.13053131, E -122.13053131, N 44.32272339, S 44.32272339
  Altitude: 1091 to 1091 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 078
  W -122.13280487, E -122.13280487, N 44.33738708, S 44.33738708
  Altitude: 1158 to 1158 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 079
  W -122.12816620, E -122.12816620, N 44.34463882, S 44.34463882
  Altitude: 1252 to 1252 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 080
  W -122.14657593, E -122.14657593, N 44.34416962, S 44.34416962
  Altitude: 1322 to 1322 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 081
  W -122.14638519, E -122.14638519, N 44.34219360, S 44.34219360
  Altitude: 1319 to 1319 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 082
  W -122.14897156, E -122.14897156, N 44.34222412, S 44.34222412
  Altitude: 1335 to 1335 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 083
  W -122.12966919, E -122.12966919, N 44.35725021, S 44.35725021
  Altitude: 1170 to 1170 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 084
  W -122.13214111, E -122.13214111, N 44.35614014, S 44.35614014
  Altitude: 1191 to 1191 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 085
  W -122.14819336, E -122.14819336, N 44.33919525, S 44.33919525
  Altitude: 1341 to 1341 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 086
  W -122.14294434, E -122.14294434, N 44.33447266, S 44.33447266
  Altitude: 1261 to 1261 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 087
  W -122.14983368, E -122.14983368, N 44.27180481, S 44.27180481
  Altitude: 1280 to 1280 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 088
  W -122.31583405, E -122.31583405, N 44.36469269, S 44.36469269
  Altitude: 1289 to 1289 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 089
  W -122.33797455, E -122.33797455, N 44.37305450, S 44.37305450
  Altitude: 1139 to 1139 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 090
  W -122.14111328, E -122.14111328, N 44.33680725, S 44.33680725
  Altitude: 1255 to 1255 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 091
  W -122.26058197, E -122.26058197, N 44.30952835, S 44.30952835
  Altitude: 1298 to 1298 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 092
  W -122.26789093, E -122.26789093, N 44.31158447, S 44.31158447
  Altitude: 1286 to 1286 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 093
  W -122.22213745, E -122.22213745, N 44.27027893, S 44.27027893
  Altitude: 798 to 798 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 094
  W -122.21321869, E -122.21321869, N 44.32252884, S 44.32252884
  Altitude: 1212 to 1212 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 095
  W -122.18711090, E -122.18711090, N 44.25266647, S 44.25266647
  Altitude: 734 to 734 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 096
  W -122.13030243, E -122.13030243, N 44.32397079, S 44.32397079
  Altitude: 1078 to 1078 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 097
  W -122.31105042, E -122.31105042, N 44.21004868, S 44.21004868
  Altitude: 957 to 957 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 098
  W -122.30457306, E -122.30457306, N 44.20541000, S 44.20541000
  Altitude: 950 to 950 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 099
  W -122.31181335, E -122.31181335, N 44.20440292, S 44.20440292
  Altitude: 970 to 970 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 100
  W -122.18194580, E -122.18194580, N 44.31568146, S 44.31568146
  Altitude: 914 to 914 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 101
  W -122.18441772, E -122.18441772, N 44.28411102, S 44.28411102
  Altitude: 853 to 853 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 102
  W -122.17942810, E -122.17942810, N 44.28294754, S 44.28294754
  Altitude: 796 to 796 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 103
  W -122.20143127, E -122.20143127, N 44.27234268, S 44.27234268
  Altitude: 731 to 731 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 104
  W -122.19536591, E -122.19536591, N 44.25873947, S 44.25873947
  Altitude: 837 to 837 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 105
  W -122.19882202, E -122.19882202, N 44.25537872, S 44.25537872
  Altitude: 813 to 813 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 106
  W -122.18605804, E -122.18605804, N 44.25844574, S 44.25844574
  Altitude: 811 to 811 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 107
  W -122.21198273, E -122.21198273, N 44.25131226, S 44.25131226
  Altitude: 675 to 675 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 108
  W -122.18433380, E -122.18433380, N 44.27465820, S 44.27465820
  Altitude: 670 to 670 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 109
  W -122.18566132, E -122.18566132, N 44.27143478, S 44.27143478
  Altitude: 790 to 790 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 110
  W -122.18328857, E -122.18328857, N 44.27288437, S 44.27288437
  Altitude: 796 to 796 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 111
  W -122.19947052, E -122.19947052, N 44.23069382, S 44.23069382
  Altitude: 610 to 610 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 112
  W -122.16085815, E -122.16085815, N 44.22463989, S 44.22463989
  Altitude: 823 to 823 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 113
  W -122.19180298, E -122.19180298, N 44.26811218, S 44.26811218
  Altitude: 732 to 732 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 114
  W -122.00000000, E -122.00000000, N 44.00000000, S 44.00000000
  Altitude: 604 to 604 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 115
  W -122.27925110, E -122.27925110, N 44.19202805, S 44.19202805
  Altitude: 683 to 683 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 116
  W -122.27927399, E -122.27927399, N 44.23213959, S 44.23213959
  Altitude: 762 to 762 meter
• Shanti Berryman Lichen Plot 117
  W -122.34493256, E -122.34493256, N 44.37403107, S 44.37403107
  Altitude: 1127 to 1127 meter

Object name: SA02101.csv

Records: N/A

Attributes: 7

Temporal coverage: 1997-09-23 to 1999-09-15

File size: 180931 byte

Checksum (MD5): f4514f8e8370a15e18ac1805def0d4d6

Format: headers=1, recordDelimiter=\r\n, fieldDelimiter=,, quoteCharacter=", orientation=column

Object name: SA02102.csv

Records: N/A

Attributes: 9

Temporal coverage: 1997-09-23 to 1999-09-15

File size: 5742 byte

Checksum (MD5): a03a68cd281ebc4fa0d5c05e573ac102

Format: headers=1, recordDelimiter=\r\n, fieldDelimiter=,, quoteCharacter=", orientation=column

Object name: SA02103.csv

Records: N/A

Attributes: 16

Temporal coverage: 1997-09-23 to 1999-09-15

File size: 8423 byte

Checksum (MD5): 1970a6eb3750b1310fb570225513a30e

Format: headers=1, recordDelimiter=\r\n, fieldDelimiter=,, quoteCharacter=", orientation=column

Object name: SA02104.csv

Records: N/A

Attributes: 12

Temporal coverage: 1997-09-23 to 1999-09-15

File size: 7512 byte

Checksum (MD5): 01d687e90471512c1a8b18298c90d9e4

Format: headers=1, recordDelimiter=\r\n, fieldDelimiter=,, quoteCharacter=", orientation=column