TO ALL ENTS!
07, 2004 10:09 PDT
a different subject, how many distinct sites can you think of
that have white pines that reach the Thoreau threshold? I've
of the southern locations and the concentration of 150s at those
It would be useful to at least have estimates of the number of
each listed site, even if we have classes of 200 and above as
numerous. Maybe classes like the following would work:
Lower Bound Upper
TO ALL ENTS!
08, 2004 20:13 PDT
The difficulty with your question is figuring out what is
defined as a
site. Is the Great Smoky Mountains National Park one site or
many? If it
is a series of distinct sites, then virtually every watershed
a 150 site. Cook Forest is generally considered 1 site, but
several distinct old growth areas at Cook Forest separated by
second growth trees. Would an isolated tree in a field that
feet tall (not likely, but hypothetically) be considered a
TO ALL ENTS!
09, 2004 04:14 PDT
Colby, Will, and I have long struggled
with the site definition problem. It rears its head with 150s,
old growth, many things. As is clear from our loose usage of the
term, a site can be any of those things you mentioned. MTSF has
perhaps 6 geographically separate stands of pines with 150s. In
bigger picture statistics, I lump them all as one site; i.e.
MTSF. Political considerations, geographical features,
convenience of access, etc. all influence what we whimsically
call a site. About all we can do is to provide descriptions of
areas we label as sites. In cases where there is a compact
region delineated by clear boundaries and no adjacent areas
with similar compositions, site becomes clear to everyone.
Beyond those situations, we each define our sites as we see fit.
Dale might break Cook Forest into subsites based on convenient
boundaries, the network of trails, stand histories, etc. I'm
sure that we'd all honor his boundaries.
TO ALL ENTS!
09, 2004 07:52 PDT
The hierarchical organization I use for studies usually goes
like this from
small to large spatial scale:
Neighborhood, a grove of adjacent trees within a stand.
Stand, an area of one forest type with fairly uniform soils and
history within a site.
Site, a cluster of similar stands (i.e. pine stands on moraines,
stands along a river, dwarf forests along a ridgetop).
Study area, a cluster of sites that may be very heterogeneous
several forest types, usually defined by political boundaries
Smoky Mountains, MTSF, Porcupine Mountains).
Region, a large are defined by political or biogeographical
(i.e. the Southern Appalachians, New England, deciduous forest
Note that this scheme for practical application during field
different than the biological hierarchy:
And different than the hierarchy used in the national ecological
classification system (which is fully nested in a spatial
ELTP, Ecological land type phase, basically equivalent to a
ELT, Ecological land type
LTA, Landtype Association
11, 2004 19:46 PST
I have been thinking about how individual sites should be
reconsideration, I agree with Bob Leverett's initial feeling
delineation of a particular site should be left to the
describing it. I would like to see the limits of a site be
delineated, but conditions from area to area are so variable
one-size-fits-all strategy for site delineation would be
at this moment.
I can give an example of classification problems that still
today. Coarse grained igneous rocks (volcanic rocks) form a
one chemistry containing quartz and potassium feldspar through
feldspar and hornblende, to olivine and pyroxene. Examples
these and all of the in-between mineral assemblages can be
found. So early
on in geology they divided the coarse grained rocks into three
groups: Granite representing one end of the spectrum, light in
quartz and Potassium feldspar. Diorite - a middle ground of half
half light minerals, generally calcium feldspar and hornblende.
dark igneous rock with pyroxene, hornblende, and olivine. Minor
other minerals are also found in each of these assemblages. This
sense, light, medium, and dark. However with a hundred and fifty
research (that is how young serious geology is) we have found
that plots of
the most common chemistries actually fall into four general
Many of the of the lighter colored, coarse grained rocks
really granite but are granodiorite. On the standard classification
taught to everyone, this common of the light coarse grained
rock falls half within the granite category, and half within the
category. The classification is so ingrained it is hard to
change, and it
doesn't match real world clusters of rock chemistries.
So it would be best to see what is out there that naturally
particular site, look at how sites in general tend to be
trying to force an arbitrary site boundary classification
protocol on the
real world situation.
I can see several factors that might in varying circumstances be
delineate boundaries of a site: Between areas that have been
those that have not (these may correspond in some cases to
boundaries), The amount of water at a site, (in the extremes
swampy), The exposure at the site (open versus sheltered),
corresponding to a disturbance boundary, Hilltop hillside,
ravine, or flat
valley. I am interested in seeing what else is found in the real