Don, Both areas had characteristics that make them worthwhile. In terms of aesthetics I would have to say the north rim area (Stebbin's Gulch North) would rate higher. I will need to go through the listings and see what the numbers show. The north area had more hemlocks and the conifers to me makes the scene seem more primeval. There were grand vistas looking down into the gorge which contained a stream with rapids and small falls. The chestnut oaks in particular showed their age. They were twisted and bent by age and the weather. Some of the oaks had the greater than 10 foot girth stems listed in my criteria. The beech trees commonly reached over 100 feet tall. I would thin the hemlock- beech-chestnut oak assemblage was unusual for the area.
The southern area (Stebbin's Gulch South) had large trees in some areas and represented a larger contiguous area. Some of the trees had the thick bark and other characteristics associated with age, but most of the trees seemed younger. It lacked the vistas and the flowing streams in the area we visited. There was some more diversity of plants in the herbaceous layer, but this early in the season, how diverse is hard to judge. This are was one of almost entirely deciduous hardwoods and at the time of the visit without their foliage. So a deciduous forest varies in its feel for more dramatically with the changing seasons than does a conifer forest. It was nice, but in terms of aesthetics I would rate the northern rim area higher, Ed --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org Send email to [email protected] Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en To unsubscribe send email to [email protected] -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
