DOCSLIB.ORG

Forest Health Monitoring in the Northeast Temperate Network 2014 Summary Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Forest Health Monitoring in the Northeast Temperate Network 2014 Summary Report National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Forest Health Monitoring in the Northeast Temperate Network 2014 Summary Report Natural Resource Report NPS/NETN/NRR—2015/973 ON THE COVER Camilla Seirup and Mary Short sampling a forest plot in Acadia National Park Photograph by: Kate Miller, NPS Forest Health Monitoring in the Northeast Temperate Network 2014 Summary Report Natural Resource Report NPS/NETN/NRR—2015/973 Jesse S. Wheeler1, Kate M. Miller1, Brian R. Mitchell2 1Northeast Temperate Network Acadia National Park Bar Harbor, ME 04609 2Northeast Temperate Network 54 Elm Street Woodstock, VT 05091 May 2015 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate comprehensive information and analysis about natural resources and related topics concerning lands managed by the National Park Service. The series supports the advancement of science, informed decision-making, and the achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series also provides a forum for presenting more lengthy results that may not be accepted by publications with page limitations. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner. This report received informal peer review by subject-matter experts who were not directly involved in the collection, analysis, or reporting of the data. Data in this report were collected and analyzed using methods based on established, peer-reviewed protocols and were analyzed and interpreted within the guidelines of the protocols. Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations, and data in this report do not necessarily reflect views and policies of the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S. Government. This report is available in digital format from the Northeast Temperate Network website (http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/units/netn/monitor/programs/ForestHealth/forestHealth.cfm) and the Natural Resource Publications Management website (http://www.nature.nps.gov/publications/nrpm). To receive this report in a format optimized for screen readers, please email [email protected]. Please cite this publication as: Wheeler, J. S., K. M. Miller, and B. R. Mitchell. 2015. Forest health monitoring in the Northeast Temperate Network: 2014 summary report. Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/NETN/NRTR—2015/XXX. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. NPS 962/128719, May 2015 ii Contents Page Figures.................................................................................................................................................... v Tables ................................................................................................................................................... vii Appendices ..........................................................................................................................................viii Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................. ix Acknowledgements .............................................................................................................................. xv Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1 Methods .................................................................................................................................................. 4 Sampling Methods .......................................................................................................................... 4 Ecological Integrity Scorecard ............................................................................................................... 5 Structural Stage Distribution .......................................................................................................... 7 Background................................................................................................................................ 7 Results and Discussion .............................................................................................................. 8 Coarse Woody Debris and Snag Abundance ................................................................................ 10 Background.............................................................................................................................. 10 Results and Discussion ............................................................................................................ 11 Tree Regeneration ........................................................................................................................ 14 Background.............................................................................................................................. 14 Results and Discussion ............................................................................................................ 16 Tree Condition and Forest Pests ................................................................................................... 18 Background.............................................................................................................................. 18 Results and Discussion ............................................................................................................ 19 Invasive Exotic Plant Indicator Species ....................................................................................... 21 Background.............................................................................................................................. 21 Results and Discussion ............................................................................................................ 21 Deer Browse Indicator Species .................................................................................................... 22 Background.............................................................................................................................. 22 Results and Discussion ............................................................................................................ 24 Tree Growth and Mortality Rates ................................................................................................. 24 iii Contents (continued) Page Background.............................................................................................................................. 24 Results and Discussion ............................................................................................................ 26 Management Implications ............................................................................................................ 29 Ecological Integrity Scorecard: ............................................................................................... 29 2011-2014 ................................................................................................................................ 29 Acadia National Park ............................................................................................................... 29 Marsh-Billings-Rockefeller National Historical Park ............................................................. 29 Minute Man National Historical Park ..................................................................................... 30 Saint-Gaudens National Historic Site ...................................................................................... 30 Saratoga National Historical Park ........................................................................................... 30 Tree Recruitment, Growth, and Mortality ........................................................................................... 31 Background................................................................................................................................... 31 Results and Discussion ................................................................................................................. 32 Acadia National Park ............................................................................................................... 36 Marsh-Billings-Rockefeller National Historical Park ............................................................. 38 Minute Man National Historical Park ..................................................................................... 41 Morristown National Historical Park ...................................................................................... 43 Roosevelt-Vanderbilt National Historic Sites ......................................................................... 45 Saint-Gaudens
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Coastal Landscaping in Massachusetts Plant List
    Coastal Landscaping in Massachusetts Plant List This PDF document provides additional information to supplement the Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management (CZM) Coastal Landscaping website. The plants listed below are good choices for the rugged coastal conditions of Massachusetts. The Coastal Beach Plant List, Coastal Dune Plant List, and Coastal Bank Plant List give recommended species for each specified location (some species overlap because they thrive in various conditions). Photos and descriptions of selected species can be found on the following pages: • Grasses and Perennials • Shrubs and Groundcovers • Trees CZM recommends using native plants wherever possible. The vast majority of the plants listed below are native (which, for purposes of this fact sheet, means they occur naturally in eastern Massachusetts). Certain non-native species with specific coastal landscaping advantages that are not known to be invasive have also been listed. These plants are labeled “not native,” and their state or country of origin is provided. (See definitions for native plant species and non-native plant species at the end of this fact sheet.) Coastal Beach Plant List Plant List for Sheltered Intertidal Areas Sheltered intertidal areas (between the low-tide and high-tide line) of beach, marsh, and even rocky environments are home to particular plant species that can tolerate extreme fluctuations in water, salinity, and temperature. The following plants are appropriate for these conditions along the Massachusetts coast. Black Grass (Juncus gerardii) native Marsh Elder (Iva frutescens) native Saltmarsh Cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora) native Saltmeadow Cordgrass (Spartina patens) native Sea Lavender (Limonium carolinianum or nashii) native Spike Grass (Distichlis spicata) native Switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) native Plant List for a Dry Beach Dry beach areas are home to plants that can tolerate wind, wind-blown sand, salt spray, and regular interaction with waves and flood waters.
    [Show full text]
  • Gypsy Moth CP
    INDUSTRY BIOSECURITY PLAN FOR THE NURSERY & GARDEN INDUSTRY Threat Specific Contingency Plan Gypsy moth (Asian and European strains) Lymantria dispar dispar Plant Health Australia December 2009 Disclaimer The scientific and technical content of this document is current to the date published and all efforts were made to obtain relevant and published information on the pest. New information will be included as it becomes available, or when the document is reviewed. The material contained in this publication is produced for general information only. It is not intended as professional advice on any particular matter. No person should act or fail to act on the basis of any material contained in this publication without first obtaining specific, independent professional advice. Plant Health Australia and all persons acting for Plant Health Australia in preparing this publication, expressly disclaim all and any liability to any persons in respect of anything done by any such person in reliance, whether in whole or in part, on this publication. The views expressed in this publication are not necessarily those of Plant Health Australia. Further information For further information regarding this contingency plan, contact Plant Health Australia through the details below. Address: Suite 5, FECCA House 4 Phipps Close DEAKIN ACT 2600 Phone: +61 2 6215 7700 Fax: +61 2 6260 4321 Email: [email protected] Website: www.planthealthaustralia.com.au PHA & NGIA | Contingency Plan – Asian and European gypsy moth (Lymantria dispar dispar) 1 Purpose and background of this contingency plan .............................................................. 5 2 Australian nursery industry .................................................................................................... 5 3 Eradication or containment determination ............................................................................ 6 4 Pest information/status ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Birch Defoliator Yukon Forest Health — Forest Insect and Disease 4
    Birch Defoliator Yukon Forest Health — Forest insect and disease 4 Energy, Mines and Resources Forest Management Branch Introduction The birch leafminer (Fenusa pusilla), amber-marked birch leafminer (Profenusa thomsoni), birch leaf skeletonizer (Bucculatrix canadensisella) and the birch-aspen leafroller (Epinotia solandriana) are defoliators of white birch (Betula papyrifera) in North America. Of the four, only the Bucculatrix is native to North America, but it is not currently found in Yukon. The other three species, as invasives, pose a far greater threat to native trees because their natural enemies in the form of predators, parasites and diseases are absent here. The birch leafminer was accidently introduced from Europe in 1923 and is now widely distributed in Canada, Alaska and the northern United States, though it has not yet been found in Yukon. The amber-marked birch leafminer was first described in Quebec in 1959 but is now found throughout Canada, the northern contiguous U.S., and Alaska. The amber-marked birch leafminer has proven to be, by far, the more damaging of the two species. Both species are of the blotch mining type as opposed to the skeletonizing Bucculatrix and the leafrolling Epinotia. Amber-marked leafminer damage is typically found along road systems. Infestations along roadsides are often greater in areas of high traffic, or where parked cars are common, suggesting that this pest will hitchhike on vehicles. It was first identified in Anchorage, Alaska in 1996 and has since spread widely to other communities. In areas of Alaska, efforts to control the spread of the amber-marked birch leafminer have been underway since 2003 with the release of parasitic wasps (Lathrolestes spp.).
    [Show full text]
  • The HERITAGE River Birch (Betula Nigra 'Cully') a Notable Landscape
    1 Collyer Lane, Basking Ridge, NJ 07920 email: [email protected] Website: http://www.bernards.org/boards_commissions/shade_tree/default.aspx The HERITAGE River Birch (Betula nigra 'Cully') A notable landscape tree is the HERITAGE river birch (Betula nigra 'Cully'). This tree has gained a great deal of popularity and has been planted extensively in residential settings over the last ten years. It can be identified by the peeling tan bark of various shades. Most examples are multi-trunked in clumps of three to five. It is a native tree that grows both in the southern and northern areas of the United States. The cultivar HERITAGE was found by Earl Cully, a nurseryman from Illinois, who is well recognized for development of various worthwhile landscape trees. He found a birch tree that had exceptional peeling bark flourishing on a residential lawn in a St. Louis suburb more than two decades ago. River birch grow in moist, but not constantly wet areas, along streams and rivers. Other native birches in this area are the yellow birch which has curly black to gray peeling bark and the gray birch, Betula populifolia, which has chalky white non- peeling bark. In colder areas of the Northeast one may note white birch that in time develops peeling bark; these are non-native. The European white weeping birch, Betula pendula, is also useful in the landscape; it attains a good height and is strongly weeping. This is common plant to see European landscapes. Birch trees are also native to Asia and some have outstanding white bark and make wonderful specimen trees in colder areas of the Northeast.
    [Show full text]
  • (Betula Populifolia) R
    PRODUCTION AND PROPERTIES OF BIRCH SYRUP (Betula populifolia) R. Kok1, E.R. Norris1, and T. Beveridge2 1Department of Agricultural Engineering, and 2SchoolofFood Science. Macdonald College of McGillUniversity, Ste. Annede Bellevue, Quebec HOA ICO Received 30 November 1976 Kok, R., E.R. Norris, and T. Beveridge. 1978. Production and properties of birchsyrup(Betulapopulifolia). Can. Agric. Eng. 20: 5-9. Sixteen grey birch trees ( B. populifolia) were tapped during 1975; fifty were tapped during 1976. Sapwas collected daily and boiled to a syrup. Thesugar content as well as the volume of thesapproduced byeachtreewas measured every dayduring the 1976 season. Theaverage seasonal sap production during 1975 was 42.8 //tree;during 1976 it was 27.9 //tree.Theaverage sap sugarcontent during 1976 was 0.74% (w/v). Trees tapped suffered noapparentilleffects from thetapping. Average syrup/;Hwas 4.8. The average syrup (50% byweight sugar) viscosity was 15 centipoise. Thesyrup ash content increased during the tapping season from 1.22 to 3.3%. Thedominant wavelength ofthesyrup color was 580 nm; itsexcitation purity was 0.671. The syrup was judged as being acceptable by 59%, of an 82-member taste panel. INTRODUCTION birch), B. papyri/era (white birch) and B. combined and kept for boiling. alleghaniensis (yellow birch) (Marie- The solids content of the daily individual Although maple products and their Victorin 1964; Hosie 1969). For this study, characteristic flavor are today well known, tree sap samples was determined by the grey birch was chosen, since it was similar products obtainable from birch, pipetting 10 ml of sap into a drying dish, abundantly available in the immediate walnut, hickory, ash, basswood and leaving the dish in a drying oven at 75°C for vicinity.
    [Show full text]
  • Native Plant List Trees.XLS
    Lower Makefield Township Native Plant List* TREES LIGHT MOISTURE TYPE BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME STREET SUN PART SHADE DRY MOIST WET TREE SHADE EVERGREEN Chamaecyparis thyoides Atlantic White Cedar x x x x IIex opaca American Holly x x x x Juniperus virginiana Eastern Red Cedar x x x Picea glauca White Spruce x x x Picea pungens Blue Spruce x x x Pinus echinata Shortleaf Pine x x x Pinus resinosa Red Pine x x x Pinus rigida Pitch Pine x x Pinus strobus White Pine x x x Pinus virginiana Virginia Pine x x x Thuja occidentalis Eastern Arborvitae x x x x Tsuga canadensis Eastern Hemlock xx x DECIDUOUS Acer rubrum Red Maple x x x x x x Acer saccharinum Silver Maple x x x x Acer saccharum Sugar Maple x x x x Asimina triloba Paw-Paw x x Betula lenta Sweet Birch x x x x Betula nigra River Birch x x x x Betula populifolia Gray Birch x x x x x Carpinus caroliniana American Hornbeam x x x (C. tomentosa) Carya alba Mockernut Hickory x x x x Carya cordiformis Bitternut Hickory x x x Carya glabra Pignut Hickory x x x x x Carya ovata Shagbark Hickory x x Castanea pumila Allegheny Chinkapin xx x Celtis occidentalis Hackberry x x x x x x Crataegus crus-galli Cockspur Hawthorn x x x x Crataegus viridis Green Hawthorn x x x x Diospyros virginiana Common Persimmon x x x x Fagus grandifolia American Beech x x x x PAGE 1 Exhibit 1 TREES (cont'd) LIGHT MOISTURE TYPE BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME STREET SUN PART SHADE DRY MOIST WET TREE SHADE DECIDUOUS (cont'd) Fraxinus americana White Ash x x x x Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green Ash x x x x x Gleditsia triacanthos v.
    [Show full text]
  • "Big Tree – Paper Birch"
    "Big Tree – Paper Birch" By Anne Krantz, NH Big Tree Team UNH Cooperative Extension Paper birch, also known as canoe birch and white birch, is prized for its distinctive peeling white bark. It’s popular as both an ornamental landscaping tree and a striking woodland tree – its snow white trunks brightening up the forest. The light, waterproof, and durable bark provided the Native Americans with a material they used in many ingenious ways, from the classic birch bark canoes to covering for wigwams, and decay proof containers. The peels of papery bark provide reliable tinder in the wettest weather and the hard wood is an excellent fuel wood. Today the decorative bark is a popular material for New Hampshire souvenir items – baskets, bowls, candle holders. Collect bark only from fallen trees, as stripping the white bark from live trees leaves a permanent black patch. The fine-grained, light-colored wood is used today for everything from clothes pins and Popsicle sticks to furniture and decorative wooden ware. As saplings, paper birches don’t have white bark. They are disguised for about their first decade with indistinctive brown bark that makes them difficult to identify. When the trees are about 10 years old, 15-20 feet tall and two to three inches in diameter, the brown, papery layers begin to peel off revealing the unexpected, fresh white bark beneath. The New Hampshire legislature declared the paper birch (betula papyrifera) the Granite State's official tree in 1947 on the suggestion of the New Hampshire Federation of Garden Clubs, who noted that: ‘There are several reasons for choosing the paper birch for the state tree.
    [Show full text]
  • Betula Populifolia
    Woody Plants Database [http://woodyplants.cals.cornell.edu] Species: Betula populifolia (bet'you-lah pop-ue-li-fo'lee-ah) Gray Birch; Poplar Birch; Old Field Birch; Poverty Birch; White Birch Cultivar Information * See specific cultivar notes on next page. Ornamental Characteristics Size: Tree > 30 feet Height: 20' - 40' (spread 10' - 20') Leaves: Deciduous Shape: irregular narrow open form; usually multi-stem but can be single Ornamental Other: Environmental Characteristics Light: Full sun Hardy To Zone: 3b Soil Ph: Can tolerate acid to neutral soil (pH 5.0 to 7.4) Environmental Other: Adaptable to variety of soils (sand, rocky, gravel and heavy). Insect Disease leaf miner; cankers; bronze birch borer; chlorosis in high pH soils Bare Root Transplanting Moderately difficult Other native to North America, from Nova Scotia to Ontario, south to Delaware; transplant B & B in spring; good for naturalizing in difficult sites 1 Woody Plants Database [http://woodyplants.cals.cornell.edu] Moisture Tolerance Occasionally saturated Consistently moist, Occasional periods of Prolonged periods of or very wet soil well-drained soil dry soil dry soil 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2 Woody Plants Database [http://woodyplants.cals.cornell.edu] Cultivars for Betula populifolia Showing 1-2 of 2 items. Cultivar Name Notes Whitespire 'Whitespire' - inaccurately identified as a selection of Betula platyphylla var. japonica when it was first released; has resistance to bronze birch borer Royal Frost Betula populifolia x Whitespire 'Royal Frost' - hybrid between
    [Show full text]
  • Native Plant List TABLE 1: Species for Tree and Shrub Plantings Trees For
    Native Plant List TABLE 1: Species for Tree and Shrub Plantings Trees for Dry-Open Sites Scientific Name Common Name Mature Height Betula populifolia Gray Birch 30' Juniperis virginiana Eastern Red Cedar 10-75' Pinus resinosa Red Pine 70' Pin us rigida Pitch Pine 50' Pinus stro bus White Pine 80' Quercus rubra Red Oak 70' Quercus coccinea Scarlet Oak 70' Quercus velutina Black Oak 70' Shrubs for Dry-Open Sites Scientific Name 'Common Name Mature Height Amelanchier canadensis Shadbush 15' Ceanothus americanus New Jersey Tea 4' Comptonia peregrina Sweetfern 4' Cornus racemosa Gray Dogwood 6-10' Gaylussacia baccata Black Huckleberry l' Hypericum prolificum Shrubby St. Johnswort 4' Juniperus communis Pasture Juniper 2' Myrica pensylvanica Bayberry 6' Prunus maritima Beach plum 6' Rhus aromatica Fragrant Sumac 3' Rhus copallina Shining Sumac 4-10' Rhus glabra Smooth Sumac 9-15' Rosa carolina Pasture Rose 3' Rosa virginiana Virginia Rose 3' Spirea tomentosa Steeplebush 3-4' Viburnum dentatum/recognitum Arrowwood 5-8' Viburnum lentago Nannyberry 15' Shrubs For Dry-Shady Sites Scientific Name Common Name Mature Height Hamamelis wrginiana Witch Hazel 15' Kalmia latifolia Mountain Laurel 3-8' Rhododendron nudiflorum Pinxterbloom Azalea 4-6' Vaccinium angustifolium Lowbush Blueberry 2' Viburnum dentatum Arrowwood 5-8' Trees For Moist Sites Scientific Name Common Name Mature Height Acer rubrum Red Maple 60' Betula nigra River Birch Chamaecyparis thyoides Atlantic White Cedar Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green Ash 60' Picea mariana Black Spruce 40' Picea
    [Show full text]
  • High Line Plant List Stay Connected @Highlinenyc
    BROUGHT TO YOU BY HIGH LINE PLANT LIST STAY CONNECTED @HIGHLINENYC Trees & Shrubs Acer triflorum three-flowered maple Indigofera amblyantha pink-flowered indigo Aesculus parviflora bottlebrush buckeye Indigofera heterantha Himalayan indigo Amelanchier arborea common serviceberry Juniperus virginiana ‘Corcorcor’ Emerald Sentinel® eastern red cedar Amelanchier laevis Allegheny serviceberry Emerald Sentinel ™ Amorpha canescens leadplant Lespedeza thunbergii ‘Gibraltar’ Gibraltar bushclover Amorpha fruticosa desert false indigo Magnolia macrophylla bigleaf magnolia Aronia melanocarpa ‘Viking’ Viking black chokeberry Magnolia tripetala umbrella tree Betula nigra river birch Magnolia virginiana var. australis Green Shadow sweetbay magnolia Betula populifolia grey birch ‘Green Shadow’ Betula populifolia ‘Whitespire’ Whitespire grey birch Mahonia x media ‘Winter Sun’ Winter Sun mahonia Callicarpa dichotoma beautyberry Malus domestica ‘Golden Russet’ Golden Russet apple Calycanthus floridus sweetshrub Malus floribunda crabapple Calycanthus floridus ‘Michael Lindsey’ Michael Lindsey sweetshrub Nyssa sylvatica black gum Carpinus betulus ‘Fastigiata’ upright European hornbeam Nyssa sylvatica ‘Wildfire’ Wildfire black gum Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Philadelphus ‘Natchez’ Natchez sweet mock orange Cercis canadensis eastern redbud Populus tremuloides quaking aspen Cercis canadensis ‘Ace of Hearts’ Ace of Hearts redbud Prunus virginiana chokecherry Cercis canadensis ‘Appalachian Red’ Appalachian Red redbud Ptelea trifoliata hoptree Cercis
    [Show full text]
  • Betulaceae Birch Family
    Betulaceae Birch Family Betulaceae is a family of trees and shrubs included in six genera; four of which contain species native to Page | 317 Nova Scotia. Mostly ranging throughout the northern hemisphere, 120 species are found worldwide, generally in temperate climates. Flowers are unisexual; species are monoecious. Staminate catkins are pendulous; pistillate catkins are erect or pendulous, usually firm and often woody. Petals are lacking; sepals tend to be tiny. Fruit is a samara or a nut with a single seed. Leaves are simple, alternate and mostly serrate. Venation is straight and pinnate. Key to species A. Bark of older twigs and trunk without lenticels; fruit not winged, enclosed in an B involucre. B. Shrub, wiry with creeping stems; mature fruits 1–2 nuts, 1cm thick, Corylus the involucre long-beaked, bristly when immature; leaves with 5–8 pairs of veins, doubly serrate; winter buds velutinous, ovate. bb. Small tree; nutlets enclosed in a loose sac; leaves with 9 or more Ostrya pairs of veins, merely serrate; winter buds dark brown. aa. Bark of twigs with elongated lenticels; fruit small, exposed in the axils of the C scales, winged. C. Scales of pistillate catkins, thin and papery, deciduous, usually 3 Betula lobed; bark of mature specimens white to yellowish, often peeling; stamens 2; fruit a tiny samara, with thin wings. cc. Scales of pistillate catkins woody, 3–5 lobed at the tip, persistent; Alnus bark not white nor yellowish, never peeling; stamens 4;tiny nuts with thick wings. Alnus Miller alder Three of 30 species of alders are found in NS.
    [Show full text]
  • Scrub Oak Shrubland
    Classification of Natural Communities of Massachusetts, Version 2.0 Massachusetts Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program, Division of Fisheries & Wildlife Scrub Oak Shrubland Community Code: CT2B1F1000 State Rank: S2 Concept: A shrubland dominated by scrub oak, with essentially no pitch pine (stems are very scattered if present), although within Pitch Pine - Scrub Oak areas. Environmental Setting: Scrub Oak Shrublands are dense shrublands dominated by shrub oaks forming almost impenetrable thickets ranging from 2-3 feet (about1m) to greater than 6 feet (2m) in height. They occur on sandplains, usually in depressions where localized frosts keep out competing trees, and on ridge tops. Disturbances in both environments maintain mosaics in space and time of grassland and heathland openings, shrublands, Pitch Pine - Scrub Oak Communities, and oak / pine forest. Scrub Oak Shrublands are dry with few available nutrients since neither sand nor shallow soils on bedrock holds water or nutrients. Besides frosts that damage competing tree species, fires that eliminate or significantly reduce trees establish and maintain Scrub Oak Shrublands. Because the component shrub species both foster and are adapted to fire, Scrub Oak Shrublands are considered to be fire dependent communities - scrub oak and heath species resprout readily after fires. It is likely that this community burned under a variety of conditions, including droughts and possibly during the growing season as well as the dormant season, so that structural and compositional variation may have been greater than what we see today. In addition, Scrub Oak communities seldom occur on land that has been plowed; even a hundred years after agricultural abandonment many vegetatively reproducing plants are missing from the vegetation on previously plowed lands.
    [Show full text]