Barry,

There are certain areas within a formerly timbered landscape where there might 
be pockets of old growth forest remaining.
  a.. Areas where there was a boundary dispute between properties
  b.. Atop and within narrow canyons where logging was difficult or impossible
  c.. Remnants in swamps and marshes where it was not profitable to log the 
small difficult patch
  d.. Barrens, including shale barrens and serpentine barrens where the trees 
are often stunted or distorted
  e.. Rocky talus and steep scree slopes 
  f.. Rock "cities" and islands where old trees may exist growing among the 
large rocks
  g.. On the sides of rock cliff
  h.. River Islands
  i.. Old private estates where the landowner did not want the property cut
  j.. Churchyards and cemeteries where the church did not want the property 
disturbed
  k.. Older Parks - city, county, state, and national
  l.. Sometimes military properties where access was limited
I would not doubt that there may be some pockets of old growth, or at least old 
trees in the Pine Barrens.  Most of these are not applicable because there 
would have been relatively easy access to most  of the area.  In January 2009 
at Marion Brooks Natural area I measured a Pitch Pine 6'2" in girth, 63.7 feet 
tall that grew after devastating fires in the area in the late 1920's.  I am 
sure there are larger ones in the area that I would find with more searching.  
That is in the same size range as your pines.  On the other hand, if there is a 
break in the tree sizes they may be remnants left out of the last cut in the 
area.  The only way to tell their ages would be to core them.  These areas are 
called barrens because of the generally poor growing conditions, so comparisons 
 with similar sized trees in other areas are not directly applicable The Marion 
Brooks area is a barrens also.  It is difficult to say for sure without seeing 
the site and without any firm age data.  I would think it unlikely, but I don't 
know.

Ed


http://nature-web-network.blogspot.com/
http://primalforests.ning.com/
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?ref=profile&id=709156957
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Barry Caselli 
  To: [email protected] 
  Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 7:14 PM
  Subject: Re: [ENTS] Re: Old growth in the NJ Pine Barrens?


        Well the bog iron industry, and related charcoal industry, decimated 
the Pitch Pine forests before 1850. 
        Before coal was readily available, the glass and paper industries ate 
up the Pitch Pine forests as well.
        I guess the forests have had much of the 20th century to grow back.
        Those few scattered trees in the park in Estell Manor, if my idea is 
correct, are around 90 years older than the rest of the trees in the park, 
which would make them the closest thing to old growth that I've seen.
        They say the entire Pine Barrens was cut over several times, but they 
used to say that about the Adirondacks too.

        --- On Fri, 1/8/10, James Parton <[email protected]> wrote:


          From: James Parton <[email protected]>
          Subject: [ENTS] Re: Old growth in the NJ Pine Barrens?
          To: "ENTSTrees" <[email protected]>
          Date: Friday, January 8, 2010, 4:04 PM


          Barry,

          The 7+ft cbh Pitch Pine I have found are all second growth, probably
          not being much over 100 years at best. It depends on how much
          disturbance and logging has occurred in the barrens and of course on
          how fast, or slow the Pitch Pine there grows.

          JP

          On Jan 8, 6:55 pm, Barry Caselli <[email protected]> wrote:
          > ENTS,
          > On Tuesday I posted this, and got no response, even though I asked 
for input on what I was saying. I thought that with the words "old growth" in 
the subject line, I might get people to talk.
          > Anyway, here it is again:
          >  
          > ENTS,
          > Today I was down in the Atlantic County Park at Estell Manor. I 
wanted to eat my lunch, do some hiking, and re-visit my favorite Pitch Pine.
          > While there, I realized something.
          > But first you need some background info to understand. In 1917 a 
munitions plant was built on the site for the war effort for WW I. On the 
history page for this park, on the park website, you can see old photos. In a 
couple of the old photos you can clealy see that some of the mature Pitch Pines 
from the forest at that time were left there when the site was cleared for the 
munitions plant and village. The plant was closed when the armistice was signed 
in 1919. It was subsequently dismantled and abandoned. In the ensuing 90 years 
the forest has grown up again, the Pine Barrens reclaiming the area. But 
scattered around in the woods there are Pitch Pines that are larger than the 
others. Some of these are along the dirt roads, which are old rail beds from 
the munitions plant days. My favorite pine is one of these trees. Several 
months ago it hit me that the biggest Pitch Pines in the park may well be the 
ones that can be seen in the historic photos, trees
          >  that were not cut when the site was cleared to build the munitions 
plant in 1917. That would make the trees 90 years older than the rest of them, 
give or take a couple years.
          > Today I realized something else, that we could call those older 
trees "old growth", at least in a limited sense. What do you think?
          > I have posted about my favorite tree before, by the way. The CBH is 
6'11".
          > Oh, and here is the web page I 
mentioned:http://www.aclink.org/PARKS/mainpages/historic.asp
          > And the 3.5 minute video I shot of the tree is 
here:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=272KWC_O7qA
          > Barry
       

Reply via email to