DOCSLIB.ORG

Biggest Trees of the World Pub 13-2

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Dendrology Series WSFNR13-2 January 2013 Tallest, Biggest, & Oldest Trees by Dr. Kim D. Coder, Professor of Tree Biology & Health Care Warnell School of Forestry & Natural Resources, University of Georgia Trees have a long relationship with people. They are both utility and amenity. Trees can evoke awe, mysticism, and reverence. Trees represent great public and private values. Trees most noticed and celebrated by people and communities are the one-tenth of one-percent of trees which approach the limits of their maximum size, reach, extent, and age. These singular, historical, culturally significant, and massive trees become symbols and icons of life on Earth, and our role in environmental stewardship and sustainability. What Is A Tree? Figure 1 is a conglomeration of definitions and concepts about trees from legal and word defini- tions in North America. For example, 20 percent of all definitions specifically state a tree is a plant. Concentrated in 63% of all descriptors for trees are four terms: plant, woody, single stem, and tall. If broad stem diameter, branching, and perennial growth habit concepts are added, 87% of all the descrip- tors are represented. At its most basic level, defining a tree is not species based, but is a structural definition. A tree is represented by a type of plant architecture recognizable by non-technical people. The most basic con- cepts for defining a tree are -- a large, tall, woody, perennial plant with a single, unbranched, erect, self- supporting stem holding an elevated and distinct crown of branches greater than 10 feet in height and greater than 3 inches in diameter. Everyone tends to have their own tree definition. Maximum Trees The structure and architecture of a tree help define its past, present, and future appearance and continued growth. The four tree metrics most people list to represent maximum limits of tree expression are height, girth, mass, and longevity. In compliance with federal law, including the provisions of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Sections 503 and 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the University of Georgia does not discriminate on the basis of race, sex, religion, color, national or ethnic origin, age, disability, or military service in its administration of educational policies, programs, or activities; its admissions policies; scholarship and loan programs; athletic or other University-administered programs; or employment. In addition, the University does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation consistent with the University non-discrimination policy. Inquiries or complaints should be directed to the director of the Equal Opportunity Office, Peabody Hall, 290 South Jackson Street, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602. Telephone 706-542-7912 (V/TDD). Fax 706-542-2822. Tallest Figure 2 lists the fifteen tree species which contain the tallest trees in the world. These are scientifically confirmed measures of living trees. The height in feet is listed for the tallest individual within each species, as of the date of this publication. Note redwood is by far the tallest tree on the planet. Eucalyptus represents the tallest angiosperm. Height records fall rapidly with inclusion of more species providing a maximum height for most trees less than 150 feet. Figure 3 is a list of the top ten tallest individual trees in the world. Note redwoods occupy the first six spots. The tallest tree in the world with a confirmed height measure is the Hyperion redwood at 379 feet. It should be noted the tallest trees grow in isolated areas of cloud forests in temperate climatic zones (mountain slopes in California, USA, and Tasmania, Australia). Myth has always suggested the tallest trees grow somewhere in tropical rain forests, but this is not the case. Largest Diameter Figure 4 is a list of the fifteen species of trees which contain individuals with the largest mea- sured stem diameters (dbh). In older popular literature, the girth (circumference) of stem bases was measured anywhere between ground level and 60 inches above the ground. These older measures may have included multiple stems and buttressed stem bases. The values presented here provides a diameter taken as close to 4.5 feet above the soil surface on the uphill side of the tree as possible. This position of measurement is termed “dbh” or diameter breast high. All these measures of diameter are in feet. The largest diameter trees in the world are lead by a short statured but immense diameter tree, the baobab. Its stem is low density, and shrinks and swells from season to season. The Montezuma cypress and the giant sequoia are next in line with massive stems. A number of trees with large diameters are not necessarily tall, and tall trees are not always large in diameter. Biggest Figure 5 presents the ten largest species of trees in the world. Size is measured as above ground volume, calculated in cubic feet. The largest volume occurs in trees with large diameter and tall stems. The volume value given in this figure is the largest of the species reliably measured. Giant sequoia and redwood species enclose extremely large volumes of space filled with both living and dead woody material. Oldest Longevity is one defining component for trees. Aging trees is fraught with huge inaccuracies. Indistinct annual increments, false rings, wood decay, and wood cavities (especially within the center of the tree stem base) conspire to make aging trees difficult. Some trees have been properly aged only upon death through full examination of the stem base. For living trees, estimates from branches, increment cores, and wedge-shaped dead areas have been used. Figure 6 provides a best estimate of the tree species living the longest on Earth. Clonal systems are not included (like aspen clumps). Bristlecone pine is by far the eldest tree species with individuals reaching almost 5,000 years of age. Note there are two bristlecone pines on the list, Pinus longaeva and Pinus aristata. For all their great height, the oldest redwood is far below other species in maximum age. The European yew measure is a rough estimate. Conclusions Trees which are tall, large, and old capture people’s attention. Beyond knowing the growth limits of individuals and species, tree size helps place important trees into human context. People’s communities, civilizations, and structures, and even our own size and age, can be dwarfed by trees. Dr. Kim D. Coder, Warnell School, University of Georgia 2 cumulative descriptor percent percent PLANT 20% WOODY 16 SINGLE STEM 14 TALL / HEIGHT 13 63% BRANCHED 9 PERENNIAL 8 GIRTH / DIAMETER 7 87% ELEVATED CROWN 4 DISTINCT CROWN 3 SELF-SUPPORTING 3 97% LOWER STEM WITHOUT BRANCHES 2 ERECT STEM 1 100% Figure 1: Relative frequency of descriptors defining a tree. (155 descriptors in 45 definitions) Dr. Kim D. Coder, Warnell School, University of Georgia 3 # height scientific name common name 1 379 ft Sequoia sempervirens redwood 2 328 ft Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 2 328 ft Eucalyptus regnans swamp gum / mt. ash (tallest angiosperm) 3 318 ft Picea sitchensis sitka spruce 4 314 ft Sequoiadendron giganteum giant sequoia 5 297 ft Eucalyptus globulus Tasmanian blue gum 6 292 ft Eucalyptus viminalis manna gum 7 290 ft Shorea faguetiana yellow meranti 8 288 ft Eucalyptus delegatensis alpine ashe 9 236 ft Eucalyptus diversicolor karri 10 211 ft Abies grandis grand fir 11 207 ft Pinus strobus white pine (tallest tree in Eastern US) 12 204 ft Picea abies Norway spruce 13 177 ft Eucalyptus grandis flooded gum 14 174 ft Thuja plicata Western redcedar Figure 2: List of the fifteen tree species which contain the tallest (feet) individuals in the world. Dr. Kim D. Coder, Warnell School, University of Georgia 4 # height scientific name common name tree name / location 1 379 ft Sequoia sempervirens redwood Hyperion, CA, USA 2 374 ft Sequoia sempervirens redwood Helios, CA, USA 3 371 ft Sequoia sempervirens redwood Icarus, CA, USA 4 369 ft Sequoia sempervirens redwood Stratosphere Giant, CA, USA 5 367 ft Sequoia sempervirens redwood Federation Giant, CA, USA 6 363 ft Sequoia sempervirens redwood Deadalus, CA, USA 7 328 ft Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir Doerner Fir, CA, USA 7 328 ft Eucalyptus regnans swamp gum Centurion, Tas, AUS 8 318 ft Picea sitchensis sitka spruce Prairie Creek Spruce, CA, USA 8 318 ft Eucalyptus regnans swamp gum Icarus Dream, Tas, AUS 9 314 ft Sequoiadendron giganteum giant sequoia CA, USA 10 308 ft Sequoia sempervirens redwood Del Norte Titan, CA, USA Figure 3: List of the twelve tallest (exceeding 300 feet in height) individual trees in the world. Dr. Kim D. Coder, Warnell School, University of Georgia 5 # diameter scientific name common name 1 49.2 ft Adansonia digitate baobab tree 2 30.8 ft Taxodium mucronatum Montezuma cypress 3 29.0 ft Sequoiadendron giganteum giant sequoia 4 25.9 ft Sequoia sempervirens redwood 5 22.0 ft Eucalyptus obliqua Australian oak 6 21.4 ft Eucalyptus regnans swamp gum / mountain ash 7 19.6 ft Thuja plicata Western redcedar 8 17.7 ft Picea sitchensis sitka spruce 8 17.7 ft Dracaena draco Canary Island dragontree 9 17.5 ft Agathis australis kauri 10 16.9 ft Cryptomeria japonica sugi 11 16.4 ft Fitzroya cupressoides alerce 12 14.8 ft Quercus robur pedunculate oak 13 13.9 ft Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 14 13.6 ft Quercus petraea sessil oak 15 13.6 ft Taxus baccata European yew Figure 4: List of the fifteen tree species which contain individuals with the greatest diameter (dbh feet) in the world. Dr. Kim D. Coder, Warnell School, University of Georgia 6 # volume scientific name common name 1 52,508 ft3 Sequoiadendron giganteum giant sequoia 2 42,500 ft3 Sequoia sempervirens redwood 3 25,999 ft3 Taxodium mucronatum Montezuma cypress 4 17,200 ft3 Agathis australis kauri 5 17,650 ft3 Thuja plicata Western redcedar 6 13,000 ft3 Eucalyptus globulus Tasmanian blue gum 7 12,714 ft3 Eucalyptus regnans swamp gum / mt.
Recommended publications
  • Growth and Colonization of Western Redcedar by Vesicular-Arbuscular Mycorrhizae in Fumigated and Nonfumigated Nursery Beds

    Growth and Colonization of Western Redcedar by Vesicular-Arbuscular Mycorrhizae in Fumigated and Nonfumigated Nursery Beds

    Tree Planter's Notes, Volume 42, No. 4 (1991) Growth and Colonization of Western Redcedar by Vesicular-Arbuscular Mycorrhizae in Fumigated and Nonfumigated Nursery Beds S. M. Berch, E. Deom, and T. Willingdon Assistant professor and research assistant, Department of Soil Science, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, and manager, Surrey Nursery, British Columbia Ministry of Forests, Surrey, BC Western redcedar (Thuja plicata Donn ex D. Don) VAM. Positive growth responses of up to 20 times the seedlings were grown in a bareroot nursery bed that had nonmycorrhizal controls occurred under conditions of limited been fumigated with methyl bromide. Seedlings grown in soil phosphorus. Incense-cedar, redwood, and giant sequoia fumigated beds were stunted and had purple foliage. seedlings in northern California nursery beds are routinely Microscopic examination showed that roots from these inoculated with Glomus sp. (Adams et al. 1990), as seedlings were poorly colonized by mycorrhizae, and only by experience has shown that the absence of VAM after soil fine vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizae. In contrast, roots from fumigation leads to phosphorus deficiency and poor growth. seedlings grown in non-fumigated beds had larger shoots and When western redcedars in fumigated transplant beds at green foliage and were highly colonized by both fine and the British Columbia Ministry of Forest's Surrey Nursery coarse vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizae. Tree Planters' began to show signs of phosphorus deficiency, a deficiency Notes 42(4):14-16; 1991. of mycorrhizal colonization was suspected. Many studies have demonstrated improved P status of VAM-inoculated Species of cypress (Cupressaceae) and yew plants (see Harley and Smith 1983).
  • Stuart, Trees & Shrubs

    Stuart, Trees & Shrubs

    Excerpted from ©2001 by the Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. May not be copied or reused without express written permission of the publisher. click here to BUY THIS BOOK INTRODUCTION HOW THE BOOK IS ORGANIZED Conifers and broadleaved trees and shrubs are treated separately in this book. Each group has its own set of keys to genera and species, as well as plant descriptions. Plant descriptions are or- ganized alphabetically by genus and then by species. In a few cases, we have included separate subspecies or varieties. Gen- era in which we include more than one species have short generic descriptions and species keys. Detailed species descrip- tions follow the generic descriptions. A species description in- cludes growth habit, distinctive characteristics, habitat, range (including a map), and remarks. Most species descriptions have an illustration showing leaves and either cones, flowers, or fruits. Illustrations were drawn from fresh specimens with the intent of showing diagnostic characteristics. Plant rarity is based on rankings derived from the California Native Plant Society and federal and state lists (Skinner and Pavlik 1994). Two lists are presented in the appendixes. The first is a list of species grouped by distinctive morphological features. The second is a checklist of trees and shrubs indexed alphabetically by family, genus, species, and common name. CLASSIFICATION To classify is a natural human trait. It is our nature to place ob- jects into similar groups and to place those groups into a hier- 1 TABLE 1 CLASSIFICATION HIERARCHY OF A CONIFER AND A BROADLEAVED TREE Taxonomic rank Conifer Broadleaved tree Kingdom Plantae Plantae Division Pinophyta Magnoliophyta Class Pinopsida Magnoliopsida Order Pinales Sapindales Family Pinaceae Aceraceae Genus Abies Acer Species epithet magnifica glabrum Variety shastensis torreyi Common name Shasta red fir mountain maple archy.
  • Giant Sequoia Insect, Disease, and Ecosystem Interactions1

    Giant Sequoia Insect, Disease, and Ecosystem Interactions1

    Giant Sequoia Insect, Disease, and Ecosystem Interactions1 Douglas D. Piirto2 Abstract: Individual trees of giant sequoia (Sequoia gigantea [Lindl.] afflict and kill other trees." Similarly Hartesveldt (1962) Decne.) have demonstrated a capacity to attain both a long life and very concurred that "Sequoia's longevity and great size have large size. It is not uncommon to find old-growth giant sequoia trees in their native range that are 1,500 years old and over 15 feet in diameter at been attributed by nearly all writers, popular and scientific, breast height. The ability of individual giant sequoia trees to survive over to its few insect and fungus parasites and the remarkable such long periods of time has often been attributed to the species high resistance of the older trees to damage or death by fire. resistance to disease, insect, and fire damage. Such a statement, however, is There is no record of an individual sequoia living in its a gross oversimplification, given broader ecosystem and temporal interac- tions. For example, why isn't there a greater representation of young-growth natural range as having been killed by either fungus or insect giant sequoia trees throughout the mixed-conifer belt of the Sierra Nevadas? attack." Even as recently as 1991 Harlow and others (1991) What other factors, in addition to physical site characteristics, limit giant stated: "Insects and fungi cause but minor damage, and no sequoia to its present range and grove boundaries? How does fire and fire large Bigtree killed by them has ever been found." frequency affect disease and insect interrelationships in the giant sequoia/ mixed-conifer ecosystem? Are current forest management strategies (e.g., It is finally being recognized that giant sequoia is fire suppression, prescribed burning programs) affecting these interactions? subject to the same natural forces as other tree species (Bega Giant sequoia trees are subject to the same natural forces (e.g., insect and 1964, Harvey and others 1980, Parmeter 1987, Piirto 1977, disease organisms) as other tree species.
  • Why Are Coast Redwood and Giant Sequoia Not Where They Are Not?1

    Why Are Coast Redwood and Giant Sequoia Not Where They Are Not?1

    Proceedings of the Coast Redwood Science Symposium—2016 Why Are Coast Redwood And Giant Sequoia Not Where They Are Not?1 2 W.J. Libby Abstract Models predicting future climates and other kinds of information are being developed to anticipate where these two species may fail, where they may continue to thrive, and where they may colonize, given changes in climate and other elements of the environment. Important elements of such predictions, among others, are: photoperiod; site qualities; changes in levels and yearly patterns of temperature, wind, fog and precipitation; the effects of these on interactions with other biota at each site; the effects of changes in fire frequency and intensity; the availability of seeds and seed vectors; and the effects of human activity. Examples are presented, with focus on fire and human activity. Natural migration may need assistance. Establishing groves far from the native ranges is advocated. Keywords: assisted colonization, assisted migration, climate change, fire, Sequoia, Sequoiadendron When preparing this talk and then paper, it became increasingly clear that it is more of an Op-Ed than a comprehensive review, and is meant for people interested in and familiar with coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens (D. Don) Endl.) and giant sequoia (Sequoiadendron giganteum (Lindl.) Buchholz). Thus, four background references are provided, and they in turn provide detail on many of the topics covered. The final two references provide background on future speculative scenarios. Possible responses to such future scenarios are suggested. Coast redwood’s current natural latitudinal range begins with discontinuous canyon-bottom populations near the southern Monterey County border, extends north through increasingly- continuous coastal and generally-separated interior populations, and stops just north of the Oregon/California border.
  • Giant Sequoia Management in National Parks 1

    Giant Sequoia Management in National Parks 1

    in: Aune, rnuip s., teen, coora. iyy*. rroceeainss oi me symposium on uian. sc^uiaa. '«'" ^.o^c ... the ecotystea and society; 1992 June 23-25; Visalia, CA. Albany, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station: 109-115. Objects or Ecosystems? PUB #267 Giant Sequoia Management in National Parks 1 David J. Parsons2 Abstract: Policies and programs aimed at protecting giant sequoia the effects of such external threats as air pollution and (Sequoiadendron giganteum) in the national parks of the Sierra Nevada projected human induced climadc change. The challenges have evolved from the protection of individual trees to the preservation of entire ecosystems. We now recognize that the long-term preservation of associated with assuring the long-term preservation of giant giant sequoia depends on our ability to minimize and mitigate the influences sequoia have become increasingly complicated as we have of human activities. National Park Service management strategies for giant learned more about the complexity and inter-relatedness of sequoia focus on the restoration of native ecosytem processes. This includes the greater Sierra Nevada ecosystem. the use of prescribed fire to simulate natural ignitions as well as the movement of visitor facilities out of the groves. Basic research is being This paper briefly reviews the history of giant sequoia carried out to improve our understanding of the factors infuencing giant management in the National Parks of the Sierra Nevada, sequoia reproduction, growth, and survival. Future management decisions emphasizing a gradually improved understanding of giant must recognize that giant sequoia are only part of a complex ecosystem; they sequoia ecosystems and how management has attempted to cannot be managed as objects in isolation of their surroundings.
  • Species Interactions and Abiotic Effects on Stand Structure of Bristlecone Pine (Pinus Longaeva) and Limber Pine (Pinus Flexilis)

    Species Interactions and Abiotic Effects on Stand Structure of Bristlecone Pine (Pinus Longaeva) and Limber Pine (Pinus Flexilis)

    Species interactions and abiotic effects on stand structure of bristlecone pine (Pinus longaeva) and limber pine (Pinus flexilis) Selene Arellano1, Anna Douglas2, Neira Ibrahimovic3 , Janette Jin1 1University of California, Berkeley; 2University of California, Santa Cruz; 3University of California, Los Angeles ABSTRACT Plants experience a wide range of biotic and abiotic stresses based on their environmental conditions. Demographic stages—recruits, saplings, and adults—may react differently under stress. In this study, we examine how the factors of aspect, substrate, and competition affect the stand structure of Great Basin bristlecone pine (Pinus longaeva) and limber pine (Pinus flexilis), which are among the few trees that can withstand the stressful subalpine environment. We surveyed an even distribution of north and south- facing slopes with both dolomite and granite substrate in the White Mountains of Inyo National Forest, California. We recorded the density of different demographic stages of both tree species and tested how neighboring trees affected the cone production of bristlecones. We found that the effect of aspect and substrate depended on the demographic stage. We also found no evidence of competition between bristlecone and limber. Taken together, our results suggest that abiotic factors are more important than biotic factors in determining bristlecone and limber establishment. Overall, we suggest that abiotic factors are more influential in shaping subalpine plant communities. Keywords: bristlecone pine, limber pine, competition, abiotic stress, stand structure INTRODUCTION and have low levels of phosphorus, which is an essential element for plant development Plants may experience extreme stress (Wright and Mooney 1965, Malhotra et al. when they are growing in environments with 2018).
  • The Taxonomic Position and the Scientific Name of the Big Tree Known As Sequoia Gigantea

    The Taxonomic Position and the Scientific Name of the Big Tree Known As Sequoia Gigantea

    The Taxonomic Position and the Scientific Name of the Big Tree known as Sequoia gigantea HAROLD ST. JOHN and ROBERT W. KRAUSS l FOR NEARLY A CENTURY it has been cus­ ing psychological document, but its major,ity tomary to classify the big tree as Sequoia gigan­ vote does not settle either the taxonomy or tea Dcne., placing it in the same genus with the nomenclature of the big tree. No more the only other living species, Sequoia semper­ does the fact that "the National Park Service, virens (Lamb.) End!., the redwood. Both the which has almost exclusive custodY of this taxonomic placement and the nomenclature tree, has formally adopted the name Sequoia are now at issue. Buchholz (1939: 536) pro­ gigantea for it" (Dayton, 1943: 210) settle posed that the big tree be considered a dis­ the question. tinct genus, and he renamed the tree Sequoia­ The first issue is the generic status of the dendron giganteum (Lind!.) Buchholz. This trees. Though the two species \differ con­ dassification was not kindly received. Later, spicuously in foliage and in cone structure, to obtain the consensus of the Calif.ornian these differences have long been generally botanists, Dayton (1943: 209-219) sent them considered ofspecific and notofgeneric value. a questionnaire, then reported on and sum­ Sequoiadendron, when described by Buchholz, marized their replies. Of the 29 answering, was carefully documented, and his tabular 24 preferred the name Sequoia gigantea. Many comparison contains an impressive total of of the passages quoted show that these were combined generic and specific characters for preferences based on old custom or sentiment, his monotypic genus.
  • Street Tree Inventory Report Hillsdale Neighborhood August 2016 Street Tree Inventory Report: Hillsdale Neighborhood August 2016

    Street Tree Inventory Report Hillsdale Neighborhood August 2016 Street Tree Inventory Report: Hillsdale Neighborhood August 2016

    Street Tree Inventory Report Hillsdale Neighborhood August 2016 Street Tree Inventory Report: Hillsdale Neighborhood August 2016 Written by: Kat Davidson, Angie DiSalvo, Julie Fukuda, Jim Gersbach, Jeremy Grotbo, and Jeff Ramsey Portland Parks & Recreation Urban Forestry 503-823-4484 [email protected] http://portlandoregon.gov/parks/treeinventory Hillsdale Tree Inventory Organizers: Jim Keiter Staff Neighborhood Coordinator: Jim Gersbach Data Collection Volunteers: Dennis Alexander, Richard Anderson, William Better, Ben Brady, Brian Brady, Julia Brown, Marty Crouch, Hannah Davidson, April Ann Fong, Lise Gervais, Margaret Gossage, Karen Henell, Jim Keiter, John Mills, Pat Ruffio, Jerry Sellers, Kristin Sellers, Mimi Siekmann, Haley Smith, Nancy Swaim, Mark Turner, Loris Van Pelt, Paige Witte, and Maggie Woodward Data Entry Volunteers: Michael Brehm, Nathan Riggsby, and Eric Watson Arborist-on-Call Volunteers: Will Koomjian GIS Technical Support: Josh Darling, Portland Parks & Recreation Financial Support: Portland Parks & Recreation Cover Photos (from top left to bottom right): 1) Colorful foliage on a golden Deodar cedar (Cedrus deodara 'Aurea'). 2) The deep green leaves of a quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides). 3) Unusual peeling bark on a young madrone (Arbutus menziesii). 4) A vivid fuchsia bloom on a magnolia (Magnolia sp.) 5) The developing cone of a rare China-fir Cunninghamia( lanceolata). 6) Unusually shaped leaves on a tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera). 7) The pendant foliage of a weeping giant sequoia (Sequoiadendron giganteum 'Pendulum'). 8) Multicolored scaly foliage on a variegated elkhorn cedar (Thujopsis dolobrata 'Variegata'). ver. 10/17/2016 Portland Parks & Recreation 1120 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 1302 Portland, Oregon 97204 (503) 823-PLAY Commissioner Amanda Fritz www.PortlandParks.org Director Mike Abbaté Contents Key Findings .........................................
  • Discover Giant Sequoia National Monument

    Discover Giant Sequoia National Monument

    United States Department of Agriculture Discover the Giant Sequoia National Monument Western Divide Ranger District Hume Lake Ranger District The Monument is named for the native Giant Sequoia tree, Sequoiadendron giganteum, the world’s largest tree. Sequoias can tower more than 300 feet high and reach diameters of 40 feet. Out of approximately 67 groves in the Sierra, the Monument contains 38. On April 15, 2000, President William J. Clinton, by proclamation, In addition, almost all National Forest System land created the Giant Sequoia National Monument. The Giant Sequoia is available for you to choose your own camping National Monument is located within Sequoia National Forest in the spot and this is called dispersed camping. Southern Sierra Nevada Mountains of California. Gateways are Highway Remember to obtain a campfire permit if you plan 180 east of Fresno, Highway 190 east of Porterville, County Road M-56 to make your own camp and pack out all your trash. east of California Hot Springs, and Highway 178 east and north of Bakersfield. The Monument encompasses approximately 327,769 acres Several refurbished historic cabins can be rented for over-night of federal land managed by the Sequoia National Forest, Western Divide visits: Big Meadows Guard Station near Hume Lake, Poso Station and Hume Lake Ranger Districts. near Sugarloaf and Glenville, Frog Meadow Guard Station near Tobias Peak, and Mountain Home Guard Station near Balch Park The landscape is as spectacular as its 38 groves of giant sequoia. Elevation and Mountain Home Demonstration State Forest. Please contact the climbs from around 1,000 to 9,700 feet over a distance of only a few Districts for more miles, capturing an extraordinary array of habitats within a relatively information .
  • Density Effects on Giant Sequoia (Sequoiadendron Giganteum) Growth Through 22 Years: Implications for Restoration and Plantation Management

    Density Effects on Giant Sequoia (Sequoiadendron Giganteum) Growth Through 22 Years: Implications for Restoration and Plantation Management

    Density Effects on Giant Sequoia (Sequoiadendron giganteum) Growth Through 22 Years: Implications for Restoration and Plantation Management Robert A. York, Kevin L. O’Hara, and John J. Battles Giant sequoia were planted at various densities and tracked for 22 years to quantify the effect of growing space on diameter, height, stem volume, branch diameter, and branch density. Beginning after just 4 years and continuing through year 22, both stem diameter and height growth were highly sensitive to initial planting density (expressed in this case as horizontal growing space per tree) within the tested range of 3.7 to 28.4 m2. Through 22 years, treatments allocating the greatest growing space per tree had greater volume per tree with no tradeoff yet observed in stand level volume growth. Branch diameter along the stem generally increased with growing space, but branch density did not change. To meet objectives, this study demonstrates that management strategies should be tailored to species’ specific growth strategies. Giant sequoia is characterized by rapid early growth coupled with exceptionally low mortality, which has relevance in both native grove restoration as well as plantation management contexts. The measurements in this study suggest either planting at low density ABSTRACT or thinning giant sequoia very early in dense stands if the objective is to increase individual tree growth rates without a corresponding reduction in stand volume. Young stands developing following high-severity fires may benefit from low-severity prescribed burns if objectives are to increase average stem growth or the rate of canopy recruitment. Keywords: spacing study, density management, intraspecific competition nderstanding the nature of competition between plants for In native groves, management objectives revolve around cohort es- finite resources is fundamental to the study of vegetation tablishment and canopy recruitment following regeneration failures Udynamics (Hutchings and Budd 1981).
  • Naturalization of Sequoiadendron Giganteum (Cupressaceae) in Montane Southern California Rudolf Schmid University of California, Berkeley

    Naturalization of Sequoiadendron Giganteum (Cupressaceae) in Montane Southern California Rudolf Schmid University of California, Berkeley

    Aliso: A Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Botany Volume 30 | Issue 1 Article 4 2012 Naturalization of Sequoiadendron giganteum (Cupressaceae) in Montane Southern California Rudolf Schmid University of California, Berkeley Mena Schmid Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.claremont.edu/aliso Part of the Botany Commons, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons, and the Forest Biology Commons Recommended Citation Schmid, Rudolf and Schmid, Mena (2012) "Naturalization of Sequoiadendron giganteum (Cupressaceae) in Montane Southern California," Aliso: A Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Botany: Vol. 30: Iss. 1, Article 4. Available at: http://scholarship.claremont.edu/aliso/vol30/iss1/4 Aliso, 30(1), pp. 19–32 ’ 2012, Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden NATURALIZATION OF SEQUOIADENDRON GIGANTEUM (CUPRESSACEAE) IN MONTANE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RUDOLF SCHMID1,3 AND MENA SCHMID2 1Department of Integrative Biology, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720-3140, USA ([email protected]); 2Somerville, Massachusetts 02144, USA([email protected]) 3Corresponding author ABSTRACT After the August 1974 fire in the upper Hall Canyon area on the southwestern flank of Black Mountain in the northwestern San Jacinto Mountains, Riverside Co., California, the United States Forest Service revegetated the burn in the mixed-conifer forest with the Sierra Nevada endemic Sequoiadendron giganteum (Cupressaceae). On 1 May 2009 a GPS census starting at the head of Hall Canyon revealed both in the canyon and upslope beyond it at least 157 individuals in the vicinity of the Black Mountain Trail, plus an outlier 450 m distant near the summit. This species alien to southern California is regenerating prolifically on Black Mountain, as revealed by multiple age classes, from juveniles (seedlings and saplings) about 20– 60 cm tall to young adult trees over 6 m tall, up to about 40 years old, and reproductively mature.
  • High-Elevation Five Needle Pine Cone Collections in California and Nevada

    High-Elevation Five Needle Pine Cone Collections in California and Nevada

    High-elevation white pine cone collections from the Great Basin of Nevada, California, & Utah on National Forest, Bureau of Land Management, National Park, and State lands, 2009 – 2013. Collected 40-50 cones/tree. 2009 (all on NFS land): 3 sites # trees Schell Creek Range, Cave Mtn., NV Pinus longaeva 100 Spring Mtns., Lee Canyon, NV Pinus longaeva 100 White Mtns., Boundary Peak, NV Pinus longaeva 100 2010 (all on NFS land except as noted): 7 sites Carson Range, Mt. Rose, NV Pinus albicaulis 23 Hawkins Peak, CA Pinus albicaulis 26 Luther Creek, CA Pinus lambertiana 15 Monitor Pass, CA Pinus lambertiana 25 Pine Forest Range, NV [BLM] Pinus albicaulis 20 Sweetwater Mtns., NV Pinus albicaulis 20 Wassuk Range, Corey Pk., NV [BLM] Pinus albicaulis 25 2011 (all on NFS land except as noted): 13 sites Fish Creek Range, NV [BLM] Pinus flexilis 25 Fish Creek Range, NV [BLM] Pinus longaeva 25 Grant Range, NV Pinus flexilis 25 Highland Range, NV [BLM] Pinus longaeva 25 Independence Mtns., NV Pinus albicaulis 17 Jarbidge Mtns., NV Pinus albicaulis 25 Pequop Mtns., NV [BLM] Pinus longaeva 25 Ruby Mtns., Lamoille Canyon, NV Pinus albicaulis 25 Ruby Mtns., Lamoille Canyon, NV Pinus flexilis 20 Schell Creek Range, Cave Mtn., NV Pinus flexilis 25 Sweetwater Mtns., NV Pinus flexilis 25 White Pine Range, Mt. Hamilton, NV Pinus flexilis 25 White Pine Range, Mt. Hamilton, NV Pinus longaeva 25 2012 (all on NFS land except as noted): 9 sites Black Mountain, Inyo NF, CA Pinus longaeva 23 Carson Range, LTBMU, NV Pinus albicaulis 25 Egan Range, Toiyabe NF, NV Pinus longaeva 25 Emma Lake, Toiyabe NF, CA Pinus albicaulis 25 Happy Valley, Fishlake NF, UT Pinus longaeva 25 Inyo Mtns., Tamarack Canyon, CA Pinus longaeva 25 Leavitt Lake, Toiyabe NF, CA Pinus albicaulis 25 Mt.