Barry:
According to my book, old forest (or woodland or savanna) can divided
into primary (never logged) or secondary (logged in the past). Within
each of those, there would be climax forests (dominated by species of
trees that are shade tolerant that can replace themselves without
disturbance other than individual or small group tree death), or
subclimax forest, dominated by species that are not shade tolerant and
require more substantial disturbance to regenerate. Nested within these
categories would be forests dominated by long-lived species, classified
as old growth) or short lived species, classified as old forest.
For pine barrens, in general an unlogged remnant would be primary,
subclimax, old growth forest if you consider the species to be
long-lived, or primary, subclimax old forest, if you consider the
species to be short lived. The lifespan of a given species might vary
regionally. In MN jack pine is long-lived in the Boundary Waters (200+
years), but short lived on sand plains in central MN (70 years).
Your pitch pine forest, if it had been logged, could also be secondary,
subclimax old growth or old forest.
Forest generally refers to tree vegetation with >70% canopy closure,
woodlands are between 30 or 40% and 70%, and savannas less than 30 or
40%, so you could also modify that term to fit the area you are
interested in. Most pine barrens were originally in the savanna or
woodland categories, but with fire exclusion have grown into forests.
This system allows one to place almost any forest, woodland or savanna
into a category with a few words that describe the situation. I had
forgotten that I wrote about this until I saw your question.
Lee
Barry Caselli 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
