Thank you for the responses, both of you, and mostly for the relief I felt! To me the difference in most second growth forests across the east and some old growth stands I believe I have seen is obvious, but I had concerns.
Today I was hiking in Stokes State Forest in Eastern Pennsylvania, where there were many Hemlock stands, but sadly a great number of them there are also suffering from hemlock woolly adelgid. -Jon On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 9:36 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > JP, > Lee beat me to the punch. I was going to say basically the same thing. Since > the Wild Earth initiative of the early 1990s to identify old growth in the > East, we have been successful in inventorying somewhere between 1,500,000 > and 2,000,000 acres. Places like Big Reed Pond in Maine (5,000+ acres), the > Porcupine Mountains (30,000+), the Great Smokies (150,000 acres), > Adirondacks (350,000+ acres), Catskills (64,000+ acres), etc., etc., etc. > are probably close to what they were in pre-settlement times, at least in > terms of composition and age structure. > In terms of big trees, the big ones we find in the recesses of these old > growth reserves are most likely comparable to what grew in pre-settlement > times. The massive hemlocks of the southern Appalachians are a case in point > (until recently, anyway). What has changed are the forests in the flood > plains, the rich agricultural areas, and the areas that are repeatedly cut - > the re-growth areas. This is Lee's point about the accuracy of the author's > statement, i.e the author is probably accurate when old growth is compared > to the second growth that covers most of the landscape today. > A situation that may well make the accuracy of author's statement come true > in the near future is the invasion of insect pests and alien blights. If we > continue to lose species, then the remaining old growth will become > compositional different. In many places that is occurring now. The loss of > the magnificent eastern hemlocks of the Smokies to the hemlock woolly > adelgid is one example. > Bob > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Lee Frelich" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 8:56:28 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern > Subject: Re: [ENTS] Historic eastern forest stature > > JP: > > Its not accurate. There are still forests in the Great Smokies Mountains > NP, Adirondacks, Cook Forest PA, Upper Peninsula of Michigan, and > northern Minnesota (and many smaller areas) that are representative of > forest from presettlement times. The comparison is is more accurate when > old growth is compared to the second growth that covers most of the > landscape today. > > Lee > > jon parker wrote: >> ENTS, >> I found this article while doing a search for old growth around the >> Delaware Water Gap. >> >> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/8/23/769735/-If-you-go-out-in-the-woods-today... >> It's a liberal editorial but the second half has some rather >> hyperbolic descriptions of what the land here was like pre-settlement. >> Specifically the author claims that there are no places in the East >> Coast left that can compare to the way things used to be, and the only >> place to really get a sense of that past is in the great Białowieża >> national forest in Poland. I suspect a bit of exaggeration >> (especially the illustration included) but I wonder if the sentiment >> is accurate? >> JP >> >> > > -- > 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] > > -- > 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] -- 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]
