Bear Meadows   David Orwig
  Apr 08, 2004 18:48 PDT 
Dale, hope I'm not repeating a message but the citation is: 

Abrams, M. D., C. A. Copenheaver, B. A. Black, and S. van de Gevel. 2001. The dendroecology and climatic impacts for a relict, old-growth, bog forest in the Ridge and Valley Province of central Pennsylvania, USA. Canadian Journal of Botany 79:5869.

Sincerely,
DAVE ORWIG
RE: BEAR MEADOWS pub   Ed Frank
  Apr 10, 2004 20:49 PDT 

Dale,

What did you find at Bear Meadows? I am curious about the site even if
you did not find any giant trees. Did you measure anything?

This is from the greenworks.tv site:

http://www.greenworks.tv/radio/earthtones/bearmeadows.htm
Bear Meadows Natural Area   Dale J. Luthringer
  Apr 16, 2004 19:25 PDT 
Bob, Bruce, Dave, Charlie, Lee, et. al.,

I've spent the last couple weeks mulling over two recent trips (4/7/04,
4/15/04) to the Bear Meadows Natural Area in the Ridge & Valley Province
of Central Pennsylvania. The site is located a short distance east of
State College just inside Centre County in the Rothrock State Forest.
It is very close to both the Alan Seeger and Detweiler Run natural
areas. As with Detweiler Run N.A., the Beaver Meadows N.A. is also a
part of the Thickhead Mountain ridge with about 500ft of relief from the
bog to the surrounding hilltops.

This rare Pennsylvania ecosystem is a relic boreal bog old growth forest
containing red spruce, black spruce, and balsam fir.   The natural area
contains 890 acres and is designated a registered National Natural
Landmark. See the state forest website below:

http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/forestry/oldgrowth/bearmeadows.aspx

The entire wetland site is dominated by a number of different species of
sphagnum moss. The dark tea colored water that drains from the main
stream out of this site resembles that of the dark colored waters of
cedar bogs that I've visited in the Pine Barrens of New Jersey.

A decent map of the area can be observed here:

http://www.nvrun.com/nicksruns.html

Dave Orwig and Charlie Cogbill have referred me to the following papers
on the Bear Run N.A., but I haven't had an opportunity to read them yet:

Abrams, et. al. 2001. The dendroecology and climatic impacts for a
relict, old-growth, bog forest in the Ridge and Valley Province of
Central Pennsylvania, USA. Canadian Journal of Botany 79

Potter, Jr., F.W. 1970. A study of some plant communities of Bear
Meadows Basin, Centre County, Pennsylvania

I had a very difficult time telling the difference between red spruce
(Picea rubens) and black spruce (Picea mariana) here. It appears I'm
not the only one according to these papers, since it has been suggested
that there is some hybridization going on. The heights of spruce listed
at the end of this post are only for trees that I could definitely
identify by their morphological characteristics. There were many that
were just too close tell and shared the same characteristics of both
species in terms of needle length, cone size, and habitat.

Charlie also suggested that the following sources would be helpful in
dealing with spruce taxonomic problems specifically from Bear Meadows:

Morgenstern, E.K. and Farrar, J.L. 1964. Introgressive hybridization in
red spruce and black spruce, For. Res. Br. Contrib. 608 Forestry Canada.

Gorgon, A.G. 1976. The taxonomy and genetics of Picea rubens and its
relationship to Picea mariana. Canadian Journal of Botany. 9:781-813.

There were many morphological identification difficulties with these two
species of spruce found here. According to most identification sources
that I had access to, black spruce cones (<1") are supposed to be
shorter than red spruce cones (1-1.5"). I found very few cones that
were under 1" (black spruce). Black spruce are supposed to hold onto
their cones much longer than red spruce which generally fall off every
year. Most cones were between 1.25 to 1.5" long (red spruce) and seemed
fairly young.

Red spruce are supposed to be more of an upland species, where as black
spruce is mostly a wetland species. I found many trees that I would
identify as red spruce in the bog, especially on its periphery. All
black spruce, that I feel confident of a correct ID, were located within
the bog or adjacent to its edge.

Needle length was usually unattainable since the needles were generally
out of my reach either due to height or inaccessible portions of the
wetland. Needle lengths that I was able to attain from broken branches
beneath the trees were almost always about 0.5" long. Black spruce are
supposed to be around 0.25-0.5" long; whereas red spruce are supposed to
be 0.5-0.6" long. It appeared that needle length changed depending on
what section of the tree the needles were located. Lower branches on
some spruce generally had black spruce needle visual characters, but as
you looked farther up the tree towards it's top, needles often resembled
more red spruce visual characters.

It appears that the safest thing to say for identification between most
spruce species at this site, would be to just say they are spruce
species. Field identification is very difficult here. It appears that
my most reliable identification feature would be that spruce with
smaller cones <1" and located within saturated soils were most likely
black spruce. Spruce with larger cones and located on definite upland
soils were most likely red spruce. I'm sure there could be a multitude
of studies completed here on genetic material and these species'
apparent ability to hybridize. Are they any masters or doctoral
candidates out there?

It was hard for me to differentiate between the species using tree shape
as well. Black spruce are supposed to not self prune as well and have
more of a spire like crown:

http://www.cnr.vt.edu/dendro/dendrology/syllabus/pmariana.htm

Red spruce is supposed to self prune better and have a narrow crown:

http://www.fw.vt.edu/dendro/dendrology/syllabus/prubens.htm

The few black spruce that I could definitely ID didn't have green
branches to its base, but had many small dead branches down much lower
than the red spruce.

The black spruce is generally a much smaller tree, especially in acidic
sphagnum bogs, whereas red spruce can get much higher. All the definite
ID black spruce I measured were under 71ft high, red spruce were all
under 95ft high.

I believe I was observing some old growth spruce in here too. There
were a few that had some very twisted branches like the old hemlock and
white pine that I'm accustomed to seeing, but on a smaller scale. I've
never aged naturally growing spruce before, so I couldn't comment on the
age. There weren't any downed trees either that I could get rough
visual ring counts. I'm curious as to what Abrams et. al. has found in
their dendroecological study listed above.

The state forest website says that the bog was never logged, but I did
find evidence of logging practices and fire scars on parts of the
southern and western edges of the bog (Castanea dentata stumps and pitch
pine). There is a nice ~4 mile trail that circles the bog, but I
believe the best section of old growth would be just north of the main
parking area and adjacent to the bog. There are some very old hemlock
trees here (350 range?). The understory is dominated by a thick wall of
great rhododendron, just like the nearby Detweiler Run and Alan Seeger
natural areas. It is very difficult walking, not just from the thick
Rhodes, but also having to negotiate away from the deeper areas of the
wetland at the same time.

The best surprise for me on yesterday's trip, was measuring my first
natural growing balsam fir (Abies balsamea) in PA
(3.7ft CBH x 84.8ft). The long slender steeple-like crown and smoother
bark was easy to spot way off. Needle morphology sealed it for sure
once I got closer:

http://www.cnr.vt.edu/dendro/dendrology/syllabus/abalsamea.htm

It appears that we don't have any balsam fir listed on the ENTS database
yet. I was only able to measure 3 balsam firs. All were located deep
within the bog in virtually inaccessible areas (often took me 5 min to
navigate 30 yards through the tangle of Rhodes and knee deep sphagnum
bog). There appears to be more balsam fir closer to the open water
zone, but I wasn't able to travel deeper into the forested wetland zone
to document any of the spruce or fir species due to reasons explained
above.

The following is a rough visual age estimate of some of the 9 old growth
species that I was able to observe within this site:

Species            Est. Age

Black birch        175
Black gum         200
Chestnut oak     175
E. hemlock        350
E. white pine     200
N. red oak         225
Spruce sp.        150+?
Tuliptree            150
White oak         225

This is the first site in PA I've visited that has 6 different confier
species all growing in the same locality (white pine, hemlock, pitch
pine, red spruce, black spruce, balsam fir). Lebo Run natural area is
the next closest I've observed with 4 (white pine, hemlock, pitch pine,
red pine).

The following is a tally of my two different field trips:

Species            CBH     Height   Comments

Balsam fir          N/A       73.5
Balsam fir          3.6        77.8
Balsam fir          3.7        84.8      40 44.140N x 77 45.383W

Black birch        6          72.1+
Black birch        6.9        77.6

Black gum         6.9        89.1

Black oak          5.2        67.1+

Black spruce     2.6        63.6
Black spruce     2.7        68.2
Black spruce     3.5        70.9      40 43.994N x 77 45.369W

Chestnut oak     6.2        87.1+

E. hemlock        8          74
E. hemlock        11.5      94.4
E. hemlock        8.9        96.5
E. hemlock        6.2        100.9

E. white pine     8.7        97.8
E. white pine     8.2        110.2

N. red oak         8.7        81.1+
N. red oak         7.2        90.1+
N. red oak         10.7      90.1+

Pitch pine          N/A       73.4
Pitch pine          5.2        77.2      personal fattest in PA
Pitch pine          4.3        83.9
Pitch pine          4.1        87.2

Red maple         3.7        84.1+

Red spruce        5.8        86.9
Red spruce        3.5        90.1
Red spruce        4.4        92.5
Red spruce        4.7        94.5
Red spruce        4.8        94.6      40 44.103N x 77 45.679W

Tuliptree            6.3        93.1+
Tuliptree            7.3        103.1

White oak         6.1        78.1+
White oak         7          90.1+

The following is the Rucker Index for the Bear Meadows N.A.:

Species            CBH     Height   Status               Rucker Index

E. white pine     8.2        110.2                            93.72
Tuliptree            7.2        103.1
E. hemlock        6.2        100.9
Red spruce        4.8        94.6
N. red oak         10.7      90.1+
White oak         7          90.1+
Black gum         6.9        89.1
Pitch pine          4.1        87.2
Chestnut oak     6.2        87.1+
Balsam fir          3.7        84.8      height record status unknown?

What are some of the heights others have found for naturally grown
balsam fir? The planted one I just came across in the old Irvine
plantation at Anders Run natural area went to 75ft even.

What a privilege to play even a small part in the cutting edge
technology that the Eastern Native Tree Society often delves into.

Dale
... and Bear Meadows N.A. update   Dale J. Luthringer
  Apr 28, 2004 19:26 PDT 
Bob, Lee, Charlie, Dave, Bruce,

I had the day off from the park today... Detweiler Run material...

I then took a short ride back to Bear Meadows N.A. on the other side of
Thickhead Mtn to take a few pictures there too.   I also decided to take
my core and age one of the older looking spruce in the bog. I revisited
a spruce that appeared to be old from my last visit. It’s first branch
was about 20’ up. This specific node had a number of small corkscrew
twisting branches. There were a few more at about 25’. I was hoping it
would go to 150, but it looks like it will be closer to around 223 years
old at 2.5ft up from its base.

This spruce is only 4ft CBH x 71.3ft high. At the moment, I’m siding
more towards black spruce, but I’m not 100% sure. It’s located in the
sphagnum bog and has cones <1” with needles to ½”. The problem is that
it has both red and black spruce looking needles, a red spruce looking
top, and self pruning up to ~20’. I believe the self pruning character
could also just be a result of its advanced age.

This area of the bog is loaded with old small stature hemlock, black
gum, and great rhododendron. I would classify the rhodo thicket closest
to the edge of the bog as impenetrable except under life and death
circumstances. I guess I could probably low crawl underneath them
through the muck and twisted branches, but I’d have to strip down and
grease myself up first…

Dale