Sierra, Cascade, & Coast Ranges Forests - IB

[ Home ]

137. In their own shade-Two views of the interior of a North Cascades Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir forest that developed in a moist lowland ( a draw or gulch). Overall, western hemlock and mountain hemlock were associate species. Forest composition varied considerably from one local stand to the next, but in the stand presented here Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir made up almost all of the age classes of the conifer component. This included mature treees, poles, saplings, and seedlings though most of the latter two age groups were subalpine fir. Major shrubs were common snowberry and Alaska huckleberry. Blue elderberry (Sambucus cerulea ssp. pubens= S. nigra ssp. cerulea= S. caeulea) grew on the forest edge, but not in the interior of this dense forest. There were essentially no herbaceous species.

East Slope of Northern Cascades. Methow Valley Ranger District, Okanogan National Forest, Skagit County, Washington. June (third full day of summer). FRES No. 23 (Fir-Spruce Forest Ecosystem). K-14 (Western Spruce-Fir Forest). SAF 206 (Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir). There was no appropriate unit given by Brown et al. (1998, p. 36-37), but there should be an Engelmann Spruce-Alpine Fir Series under Cascade-Sierran Subalpine Conifer Forest biotic community (121.4) the same as there was for Rocky Mountain and Great Basin Subalpine Conifer Forest. North Cascades- North Cascades Highland Forests Ecoregion, 77b (Environmental Protection Agency, undated).

138. Right on target (or a narrow miss)- An Engelmann spruce fell exactly between two standing Engelmann spruce sparing them from an almost certain toppling by their falling cohort. Lots of fallen timber and bare understorey (nothing but conifer needles) is typical of an old-growth forest of which this particular stand of Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir appeared to be. The next two photographs in the description of this lowland Engelmann spruce-subalpine forest strongly suggested that this was a subclimax forest because the rate of regeneration of Engelmann spruce was not keeping up with their death rte. As Engelmann spruce aged and fell they were being replaced by the faster regenerating subalpine fir.

139. Changing the dominant (or what the future holds)- Young subalpine fir of large sapling- to small pole-sizes growing under shade of the currently dominant Engelmann spruce in a moist lowland forest. Interior of the near old-growth stand of Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir forest that developed in a draw situated within a series of ridges of the North Cascades. Large quantities of downed logs, bare understorey, and large size of trees, many of which had lost sizable portions of their crowns all suggested that this was an old-growth forest. While this appeared to be a virgin forest it was obvious that the Very Tolerant subalpine fir was replacing the Tolerant Engelmann (Wenger, 1984, p. 6). This successional development was consistent with the description of this cover type in Washington where Engelmann spruce can be a climax conifer, but more commonly is a persistent seral species with subalpine fir being the major climax species (Eyre, 1980, p. 86).

Rate of reproduction of subalpine fir was enough greater than that of Engelmann spruce that fir was succeeding spruce. Tthis indicated that Engelmann spruce was a long-lived, late seral or subclimax species that did not persist completely through climax, at least not at the same relative cover as in the preceding (subclimax) stage.

Examples of North Cascades forest range types described above were east of the Cascade Crest. West of the Crest the continental climate or combination continental-maritime climate of the North Cascdes East Slope gives way to maritime climate of the West Slope due to close proximity to the Pacific Coast and being on the windward side of the Cascade rain shadow. Shown below were examples of forests in the Northern Cascades, West Slope (west of Cascades Crest). Coverage consisted of the Red Alder forest cover type (SAF 221), forests along the Skagit River and adjacent hillsides in Skagit Gorge (most aptly interpreted as Douglas-fir-western hemlock cover type, SAF 230), and floodplain forests primarily of the western red-cedar-western hemlock cover type (SAF 227).

Whatcom County, Washington. June, estival aspect.

140. High thickets above a deep gorge- Red alder (Alnus rubra) formed a forest dominated by their single species just above the Skagit River Gorge. This stand had a limited woody understorey--a second and sporadic woody layer--comprised of Douglas or Rocky Mountain maple (Acer glabrum var. douglasii) and creambush oceanspray (Holodiscus discolor). Herbaceous plants were essentially absent. What species could possibly find enough light through this double-dense cnopy to survive, let alone form a ground layer?

Whatcom County, Washington. June, estival aspect. Bloom stage of phenology in oceanspray (foreground first photograph). No FRES unit for this generally seral vegetation. Variant of K-25 (Alder-Ash Forest), but in Kuchler (1964) not as part of Garrison et al. (1977). SAF 221 (Red Alder). No unit in Brown et al. (1998). North Cascades- North Cascades Lowland Forest Ecoregion, 77a (Environmental Protection Agency, undated).

141.Down an overflow gorge- A short section of the Skagit River Gorge featuring conifer forest along and above this interesting stream. The Skagit River (at least the portion featured here below Diablo,Washington) has been interpreted by geologist as a drainage reversal. This interesting geologic phenomenon occured when a part of the massive Cordilleran Ice Sheet of the Wisconsin Ice Age (Glacial Epoch) dammed the then-north-flowing Skagit River (approximately 14,000-15,000 years BP) causing it to flood and cut a new course with a narrow, V-shaped channel that flowed southward Matthews (1999, ps. 529-531). The result was the current Skagit Gorge. Franklin and Dryness (1973, p. 312) summarized the natural vegetation of the Upper Skagit River.

Forest range vegetation featured here was primarily a Douglas-fir forest (though more of a woodland from standpoint of tree specing and crown cover) with local stands of red alder. Conspicuous were rocks covered in moss that formed a distinctive lithic community.

The geologic material visible along much of the Skagit Gorge was migmatite, a rock that is a "hybrid" between igneous and metamorphic rocks, that formed as part of the Skagit gneiss complex from magma under extremes of temperature and pressure at great depths (Matthews, 1999, p. 556).

North Cascades National Park Complex, Whatcom County, Washington. June, estival aspect. FRES No. 20 (Douglas-fir Froest Ecosystem). K-24 (Mosaic of Cedar-Hemlock-Douglas-fir Forest), partially. No FRES or Kuchler unit for the red alder. No unit in Brown et al. (1998). North Cascades- North Cascades Lowland Forest Ecoregion, 77a (Environmental Protection Agency, undated).

West Slope North Cascades lowland (including floodplain) Douglas-fir-western red-cedar-western hemlock forest- One of the main types (or subtypes), forms, or expressions of North Cascades conifer forests that are west of the Cascades Crest is that of floodplain or bottomland forests made up of varying propostions of Douglas-fir, western hemlock, and western red cedar along with the characteristic climax deciduous tree, big leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum). Another, though much less common angiosperm tree in this forest cover type is black cottonwood (Populus trochocarpa). Such forests are variants of the climax western red-cedar-western hemlock (and "accomnpanied by " the pioneering seral and persistent Douglas-fir) conifer forest type. The second-growth forest featured below would have to be interpreted as the Society of American Foresters forest cover type of western red-cedar-western hemlock (227) rather than Douglas-fir-western hemlock (SAF 230) given that western red-cedar was the obvious dominant throughout. This forest range vegetation could be interpreted as being in the Thuja heterophylla zone, but it was an inland rather than a coastal form of the general western hemlock forest region. Franklin and Dryness, 1973, p. 312) interpreted this as a transitional forest situated between coastal forests of a moist, maritime climate and interior forests of drier, continental climate.

The following example of western red-cedar-western hemlock second-growth forest in the Northern Cascades was a floodplain forest. This tract of bottomland forest (adjoining the Skagit River) had been logged (after which it burned) in 1924, at least mostly so treated as the story goes. That was 83 years prior to taking of the set of photographs that followed this introduction. (There were still stumps, complete with notches for spring boards, in this forest that validated the history of logging.). Thus most trees (and the forest as a whole) were second-growth. Some of the larger trees, however, had to have been established at time when "cut-and-run" logging was still often the standard method of harvest operation because some of these would have been too small (especially in those days of logging old-growth) to be worth felling. Apparently some trees survived the post-logging fire. This resulted in some individual trees being of old-growth status at time of photography. Big leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum) was a major species of this tract, but Sitka spruce was absent so that even though this range plant community was west-side Cascades forest with maritime climate it did not qualify as coastal coniferous rainforest. Another major tree species at local scale was black cottonwood. Paper or white birch (Betula papyrifera) was present as a small tree or large shrub. Major shrubs of this second-growth forest included beaked hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), vine maple (Acer circinatum), red huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifolium), Devil's club (Oplopanax horridus), and dull or dwarf Oregon grape (Berberis nervosa= Mahonia nervosa). Red alder, Pacific or western yew (Taxus brevifolia), and Pacific or Nuttall's dogwood (Cornus nuttallii) were other, though generally less commonly observed, shrubs. Ferns were the major group of forbs; in fact, of herbaceous plants. Especially abundant was sword fern (Polystichum munitum) followed by western maidenhair fern (Adiantum aleuticum= A. pedatum var. or ssp. aleuticum).

Skagit River floodplain, Whatcom County, Washington. June, estival aspect.

142. Staying around for the final act in a floodplain forest- Two "photo-plots" of a North Cascades lowland forest on bottomland of the Skagit River with young, second-growth western hemlock and western red-cedar growing up beneath old-growth (at least older growth) Douglas-fir. The latter conifer is an early seral (perhaps pioneer) species, the long life span of which enables individuals to persist into the subclimax or early climax forest. Also present in both of these photographs were individual trees of bigleaf maple (prominent in the first slide; visible in second slide only in upper left corner).

In the first of these slides the larger (right) trunk with deeply furrowed bark was Douglas-fir. The smaller trunk to its left was a young western hemlock. In the second slide the largest trunk (and one farthest to the right) and the second-largest tree (to left and rear of the largest trunk) were two other Douglas-firs that were probably present and survived when this forest was clearcut 83 years prior to time of these photographs. The smaller trees beside (to the left and front of the Douglas-firs) in this second photograph were western hemlock, climax co-dominant with western red-cedar.

The study of this forest cover type involves, among other factors, a study in the concept of tolerance. Western red cedar, western hemlock, and bigleaf maple have historically been rated as Very Tolerant while Douglas-fir ranks Intermediate (Wenger, 1984, p. 6). Throughout this series of slides of a lowland North Cascades forest, tolerance of different tree species was shown to be of utmost importance in plant succession and the on-going development of vegetation in this second-growth forest.

Below the two tree layers (one of Douglas-fir and one of western hemlock) there were several other layers of forest vegetation including a ground (soil surface) layer of mosses, a layer of ferns (most abundant were sword and western maidenhair ferns) immediately above the ground layer, a lower shrub layer that included vine maple and dull or dwarf Oregon grape, and a taller shrub layer of red bilberry or red huckleberry and young bigleaf maple. The lower layers of vegetation were featured in the first photograph whereas the taller or upper shrub layer was presented in the second slide.

Trail of the Cedars, Skagit River floodplain, Whatcom County, Washington. June, estival aspect. FRES No. 20 (Douglas-fir Forest Ecosystem). K- 24 (Mosaic of Cedar-Hemlock-Douglas-fir Forest; K-2 in Kuchler [1964]). SAF 227 (Westerm Redcedar-Western Hemlock). No apt unit in Brown et al. (1998) because there was not a Western Hemlock Series for the Cascade-Sierrean Montane Conifer Forest biotic community as there was for Oregonian Coastal Conifer Forest. North Cascades- North Cascades Lowland Forest Ecoregion, 77a (Environmental Protection Agency, undated).

143. Hole in the top of a bottomland forest- A gap was produced or created in a lowland forest of persistent seral Douglas-fir and co-dominants western hemlock and western red-cedar when a mature bigleaf maple toppled (a moss-covered limb of this tree was in center foreground). In this gap or patch saplings of bigleaf maple had become established along with vine maple, red huckleberry, and the ever-presnt sword fern. In total there was beginning of three layers of forest range vegetation: tree (bigleaf maple), tall shrub layer vine maple and red huckleberry), and herbaceous.

144. Layers in the interior- Deep inside a bottomland forest dominated by Douglas-fir, western red-cedar, western hemlock , and bigleaf maple (considerable stand-to-stand variation in dominant species) there were various layers of range vegetation. In addition to the canopy layer comprised of crowns of mature dominant trees, these layers included a lower tree layer made up of saplings or small poles of the dominant trees; a tall shrub layer of red huckleberry or bilberry, beaked hazlenut, Devil's club, and Pacific dogwood; a low shrub layer dominated by dull or dwarf Oregon grape; an upper herbaceous layer consisting mostly of ferns; and a ground (land surface) layer dominated by mosses, lichens, and various fungi. The bryophytes and thallophytes also adorned branches (both fallen and those remaining on trees) where they could be construed as comprising a separate layer(s), at least a major component of other layers such as the canopy layer.

This local stand was dominated by western red-cedar, one of which had been broken off below its crown (remains of crown lay on the ground behind and to right of the remaining snag), with bigleaf maple filling in the gap left by the topped red-cedar. Western hemlock, the other co-dominant conifer, was represented by one tree at far right.

145. A long life outlast climax rank- On a lowland forest dominated locally and variously by f Douglas-fir, western hemlock, western red-cedar, and bigleaf maple a Douglas-fir (a long-lived seral species) stood by while a bark-shedding snag of western hemlock (right front), co-dominant climax conifer, was rotting away. Cause of death of the obviously smaller (and presumedly younger) western hemlock was not known but there was a scar from some injury at base of its trunk.Whatever factors were involved a large tree of the seral (at best, subclimax) and Intermediate tolerance Douglas-fir outlived an individual of the climax Very Tolerant western hemlock. Climax status does not always confer long life nor, conversely, seral status a short existence in the forest vegetation. Development of vegetation is a convoluted web of interactions among many species and physical-chemical factors.

Structure of this forest vegetation included a ground-level layer dominated by moss species, a low shrub layer comprised locally; of dull or dwarf Oregon grape and blackberry (Rubus) species, and an upper or higher shrub or small tree layer composed mostly of bigleaf maple and, to lesser extent, saplings of western red-cedar, the climax co-dominant conifer having the most regeneration in this local stand.

146. Mamma tree and nursing sapling- On a bottomland forest site in the West Slope of Northern Cascades an 83 year-old, second-growth forest had developed to approach species composition of the climax vegetation. Seral (maybe even, subclimax) Douglas-fir persisted in this forest due to the longevity of this species, but it had relatively little regeneration which was mostly that of western red-cedar and western hemlock, the co-dominant conifers of the climax forest. Douglas-fir regeneration is greatest on relatively bare mineral soil whereas western hemlock (and, to somewhat lesser degree, western red-cedar) regeneration is most successful on a seedbed high in organic matter.

This slide presented a sexually mature western hemlock (adult tree in center) standing as a proverbial "proud parent" while a western hemlock sapling was growing from a stump on which seed fell and germinated into this young tree. Although the stump was relatively small its level surface and what appeared to be an undercut suggested that this stump resulted from logging. Perhaps this stump was left when the preceding old-growth forest was clearcut 83 years prior to time of photograph. There were several larger stumps with spring board notches left over from the previous logging operation. Reconstruction of the past was complicated by presence of a small log (behind stump) which could have been the felled tree from the stump (they appeared to be of corresponding diameter). There was also a western hemlock sapling growing from the surface of this log. Regardless of the origin(s) of stump and log, a seed of western hemlock had fallen and germinated/emerged from the seedbed of the cut surface of the stump while the same had happened on the surface of the decomposing log. In other words, these were a nurse stump and nurse log. Other examples of nurse logs were presented below. Moss was also using the decaying stump for its source of mineral nutrients, some water, and growing space. Little is wasted is such moist, lowland forests as this example.

There was also regeneration of western red-cedar, the other co-dominant climax conifer, which with western hemlock made up a lower tree layer in this forest approaching climax species composition. Structure of this forest vegetation included a ground layer dominated by moss species, an herbaceous layer comprised mostly of various species of ferns, and a low shrub layer of dull or dwarf Oregon grape and immature blackberry canes. A tall shrub layer of red huckleberrry, Devil's club, beaked hazlenut, and Pacific dogwood that was present throughout much of this bottomland forest was absent from the "plot" presented here.

147. Climax actors and their supporting cast- Climax and dominant tree species of a moist lowland North Cascades (West Slope) forest and an array of understorey species were presented in these two "photo-quadrants". In the first "quadrant" two large western red-cedar and a bigleaf maple (all three obvious as to their species) grew surrounded at "close quarters" by a low shrub layer of dull or dwarf Oregon grape and an herbaceous layer made up of various fern species, sword fern the major one.

The second quadrant showed (left to right) a young western hemlock, a large western red-cedar with prominent buttressed trunk, and a Douglas-fir snag (crown broken off). Conicidentially this "line up" was reverse order of successional sequence on the sere of this forest cover type. Saplings of bigleaf maple represented reproduction of this Very Tolerant hardwood that is the climax angiosperm tree in the Westerm Redcedar-Western Hemlock

148. Climax co-dominants of a North Cascades lowland forest- An ultimate view of the ultimate state of vegetation development in a moist, lowland forest in West Slope of Northern Cascades. A second-growth (83 years post-"cut-and-run" clearcutting) western red-cedar-western hemlock climax forest including bigleaf maple, Very Tolerant climax hardwood, as associate species and some old-growth Douglas-fir that persisted from early seral stages and subclimax forest vegetation.The front tier of trees was western red-cedar while conifers in background (not very clear)were western hemlock.

Several layers of forest range vegetation were visible in this photo-quadrant including 1) a ground layer comprised mostly of moss species with some lichen, 2) a layer on down logs and limbs also comprised of mosses (about the same species composition), 3) a taller shrub layer locally dominated by vine maple with some saplings of bigleaf maple and 4) under (lower) tree layer comprised of regenerating western Very Tolerate red-cedar and western hemlock. This latter layer was mostly in the background of this photograph.

149. Climax lower levels and the next generation of climax conifers- Two remarkably well-lite (for this lowland forest on a cloudy afternoon) photo-plots of the understorey of a second-growth climax western red-cedar-western hemlock that developed on river bottomland 83 years following a "slicked-off" clearcut of the original pre-Columbian old-growth forest. Many of the saplings of both climax dominant conifers were growing out of or immediately next to downed logs and uprooted stumps of wind-thrown trees.

Llimbs and branches, downed timber, and so forth in this North Cascades lowland forest were not as heavily festooned with mosses and lichens as are those of the coastal coniferous rainforest of the Olympic Peninsula, but the epiphyte layer(s) were prominently displayed in the forest interior seen here. These two forest cover types have much in common including western hemlock and western red-cedar, but Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis) is usually absent from the Northern Cascades, including the West Slope. Even though both forest types have a moist, cool climate that of the Olympic Peninsula is distinctive with considerabaly greater precipitation and fog. Still, similarity is striking and epiphytes are a common feature that enhancing the resemblance. Besides the abundant western sword and maidenhair ferns other species included lady fern (Athyrium filix-femina), licorice fern (Polypodium glycyrrhiza), and wood fern (Dryopteris expansa).

150. By light revealed- Deep interior of a bottomland forest in Norther Cascades (West Slope) dominated by Douglas-fir, western red-cedar, western hemlock, and bigleaf maple. This was a second-growth forest photographed 83 years following a "cut-and-run" clearcutting operation. The forest range vegetation presented here featured regeneration of the climax co-dominants, western red-cedar and western hemlock. This "doghair" emphasized the Very Tolerant rating of these climax conifers. Also featured were the epiphytes and the layer(s) they form by growing from every available limb, branch, rotting log or stump, or upheaved forest ground surface. Several species of ferns were present (see immediately preceding set of two slides), but the most conspicuous species in this photograph was the common or western sword fern.

151. Big three climax dominants of a North Cascades lowland forest- In the deep (and, unfortunately for photographers, dark) interior of a second-growth, climax, bottomland forest in the West Slope of the Northern Cascades both of the climax co-dominant conifers (western red-cedar and western hemlock) and the climax hardwood (bigleaf maple) gathered together for this "group photograph". If western hemlock had not insisted in hanging behind the two western red-cedars (two trunks to left) and one bigleaf maple (tree on the right in the three-tree group) this would have been a near-perfect example for students of Pacific Northwest forest ranges.

The herbaceous layer consisted of a ground level made up of mosses and somewhat higher level that was composed primarily of ferns, especially western sword fern. These two levels could be interpreted as two layers though that was less prominent in this than in some other stands in this forest. There was an upper (taller) layer of shrubs and regenerated saplings of the climax tree species.

152. All in the pictures- Species composition of a second-growth climax lowland forest of Northern Cascades (West Slope). Trees in this photograph included the "three-tree row" of bigger trunks (left to right): western hemlock, Douglas-fir, and western red-cedar. Also present were younger age classes of regenerating climax dominant conifers: western red-cedar (sapling in center foreground; in front of moss-covered log) and western hemlock (the sapling behind and to the right of the red-cedar sapling. The multi-stemmed shrub to the right and slightly in front of the western hemlock was bigleaf ample.

There was a discontinuous low shrub layer dominated by dull or dwarf Oregon grape. Mosses and lichens grew on logs and stumps as well as trunks and branches of trees so as to be interpreted as a multi-layer component of the range vegetation of this bottomland forest. Regenerated conifers and bigleaf maple made up a lower tree layer or, alterntively, were part of the upper (=higher or tall shrub) layer. There was a ground layer comprised mostly of mosses (not visible) and a forb layer made up of fern species.

153. Big ole good 'uns on the bottomland forest- Old-growth specimens of western red-cedar (left) and Douglas-fir (right) in a climax bottomland forest in the West Slope of the Northern Cascades. The younger (smaller) tree to immediate right of Douglas-fir was western hemlock. The conspicuous fern left of western red-cedar was western sword fern. All conifer regeneration was western hemlock and western red-cedar, the two climax dominant conifers.

The old-growth forest on this site had been clearcut 83 years prior to time of photograph so that most trees were second-growth. It seemed plausible that some of the current, larger (and presumedly older) conifers of Douglas-fir, western red-cedar, and western hemlock were growing on-site at time of clearcut logging, but that they were too small or inconvenient to fell and were thus spared. Said another way, the larger conifers on this lowland forest that had shape, size, bark features, etc. of old-growth trees had not been cut during last logging and therefore had "crown-start" on those conifers that had to germinate and make all their growth since the last forest harvest. Examples of this situation included the two "good ole big 'uns" featured here.

Younger (ie. post cutting of the old-growth forest) age classes included those of size of the western hemlock to right of Douglas-fir and saplings of the climax western red-cedar and western hemlock in left foreground and background.

154. Climax components up close- Two trees each of western red-cedar (left side of photograph; one behind and to left of the other) and western hemlock (right side of photograph; one in front of and partially blocking view of the other), climax co-dominants of a Northern Cascades (West Slope) lowland forest. These reasonably large trees were members of a second-growth forest that developed following "cut-and-run", clearcut loggging 83 years prior to time of photograph. It seemed likely that the largest western red-cedar had been a tree during cutting of the old-growth forest, but one that was too small for loggers to bother with (too little for a marketable log) and that then somehow survived the fire that following logging.

In this view of the floodplain Douglas-fir-western red-cedar, western hemlock-bigleaf maple forest there were two prominent layers and two obscure, sporadic layers of vegetation in the understorey: a taller shrub layer of regenerating bigleaf maple (Very Tolerant species), an herbaceous layer dominated by sword fern, a sparse lower shrub layer represented by dull or dwarf Oregon grape (eg. at base of biggest western red-cedar), and an epiphyte layer composed of mosses and lichen on limbs and fallen timbers.

155. Down but not out (of the forest ecosystem)- The last visible stage in the life history and endlessness of forest renewal was captured in this photograph of a fallen old-growth Douglas-fir. State of decomposition and sexual reproduction of conifers like western hemlock were not yet advanced to the stage of a nurse log, the trunk of a fallen tree that functions as a gemination and, later, rooting and nutrient medium for young trees ranging from seedlings to saplings. An example of a Douglas-fir nurse log for western hemlock was presented in the immediately following slide. The present slide presented a potential nurse log in a less advanced stage of rotting, hence a less favorable germination and growth medium for conifers.

In additon to functioning as a nursery for seedlings, mosses, forbs, etc., such downed timber act as debris dams reducing rate of water runoff from the forest floor and thereby reducing soil erosion and retaining precipitation longer so as to increase its infiltration into the soil profile. Furthermore, as only recently discovered (rediscovered perhaps) large rotting logs and other woody debris retain water that is slowly released to the soil (as well as evaporated). This "blotter effect" is an importat function in forest ecosystems.

The most obvious beneficial role of fallen trees in forest range ecosystems is the recycling of nutrients back to soil and thence to trees and finally back to soil as the next tree dies, falls, and becomes the next down but still-in-the-ecosystem log. This is the endless rhythm of the forest and the way of renewable natural resources. This is the way of all life, man or tree: "... for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return" (Genesis 3: 19).

This was the edge of a floodplain, lowland forest in the Western Slope of the Northern Cascades adjacent to the Skagit River (background of photograph). All of the major dominants of this near-tree maturity stage, second-growth forest were present in the "lineup": Douglas-fir (persistent seral species), western red-cedar and westrn hemlock (climax co-dominant conifers), and bigleaf maple (climax hardwood tree species). Incidentially, many of the nutrients released in rotting of the Douglas-fir log will end up in the Skagit River and be transported off of this forest site and forest range ecosystem. This provided a good example of the relevance of the concept of corridor in Landscape Ecology, the Skagit River being a corridor for transference of nutrients from this forest ecosystem to other ecosystems, aquatic and God alone knows what else.

For whatever reason(s) the understorey was sparse in this "photo-quadrant" being limited mostly to scattered herbaceous species (primarily the always-there sword fern) and alowshrub layer consisting mostly of vine maple and dwarf or dull Oregon grape.

156. Persistency but only to nurse another's baby- Interior of a floodplain Douglas-fir-western red-cedar-western hemlock-bigleaf maple forest with several cohorts (groups of individuals of a species of the same or similar age) or age classes of western hemlock, the climax co-dominant conifer (along with western red-cedar). At far right of photograph the trunk of an old-growth Douglas-fir "watched" as its persistent, seral species was being succeeded by western hemlock, climax co-dominant (with western red-cedar). This now-mature or even old-growth Douglas-fir had apparently been too small or "out of the way" for felling when the previous old-growth forest had been logged by "cut-and-run" methods 83 years prior to time of photograph.

Featured in the center of this slide were remains of another Douglas-fir that had fallen of nautral causes several years before and subsequently rotted to the point that it had become a nurse log for several individuals of western hemlock including two saplings visible here: one growing on the butt of and a second growing farther up (back) on the rotting log. Mosses grew and were hanging from the remaining up-ended roots of the toppled Douglas-fir.

This phenomenon whereby one species or group of species (say a seral stage) prepared the sere for other species (of higher successional order) or the next successive group of plants (seral stage) is the concept of facilitation or the facilitation model presented by Connell and Slatyer (1977) which in turn was nothing but a rephrased, reworked version of reaction ("the effect which a plant or community exerts upon its habitat") in the Clementsian model (Clements, 1916, ps.79-81 ). Each seral plant community modifies its environment so that the sere is prepared for the next successive seral community until at the terminus of plant succession no further modification ("improvement") is possible under existing climatic, edaphic, topographic, etc. conditions. This is termination of plant succession on the sere. The terminal plant community is in dynamic equilibrium with the overall prevailing environment (often the climate)--if and until some perturbation results in some denuding of the sere so as to reset plant succession back to a lower seral stage from which it must progress forward toward the final stage. That final plant community, termination of plant succession, terminal stage of vegetation development, (ie. the successional grand finale for a given sere) is the climax or climax vegetation.

In this Northern Cascades lowland forest example Douglas-fir modified its original habitat, but the effect of this reaction or facilitation was to improve the habitat for western hemlock, the co-dominant climax conifer, not for progeny or future generations of seral-stage Douglas-fir. Douglas-fir seedlings do best--under certain environments they often require--exposed mineral soil as for instance following fire or flood (ie. Clements' denudation). By contrast, western hemlock germinates and becomes established on organic matter (such as that provided by the rotting tissueof dead trees of the preceding Douglas-firgeneration). Douglas-fir, species of Intermediate tolerance (Wenger, 1984, p. 6) could not reproduce "in its own shade", at least not at rates that were competitive with western hemlock which was regenerating beneath adults of its own species. Ergo: Douglas-fir is a seral species while western hemlock is a climax species. However, as was shown previously in this series of photographs devoted to this lowland forest, individual trees of Douglas-fir typically live to such old age (often several centuries) that they persist into the climax forest vegetation and may even outlive much youngr individuals of climax tree species like western hemlock. Foresters and rangemen must understand plant succession and tree silvics to understand and correctly interprete forest vegetation.

The hollow at the butt of the rotten log had served as a den for some furbearer as evident from the packed mud at entrance of the same. For sake of imagination and the romance of woodmanship let's pretend it was the den of a wolverine (Gulo gulo); too small for a bear and coons are too common to have as much "sex appeal" (besides the hounds were on another cold trail).

This second-growth lowland forest had progressed along the forest sere to the climax stage (even though size and age of the climax western red-cedar and western hemlock scarcely approached those of the old-growth state). Forest range vegetation presented here was a stand of western hemlock with several age classes of that climax coniferous species. The most abundant shrub in the understorey of this stand was vine maple. Herbaceous layer was dominated by sword fern with western maidenhair fern the associate forb species.

Pacific Slope Ponderosa (Western Yellow) Pine

Ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) Forests in the High Cascades-Columbia Basin and adjoining Blue Mountain provinces- The several Kuchler units and variants of the three forest cover types of ponderosa pine-- SAF 237 (Interior Ponderosa Pine), SAF 244 (Pacific Ponderosa Pine-Douglas-fir), SAF 245 (Pacific Ponderosa Pine)-- and of the two rangeland cover types of ponderosa pine-- SRM 109 (Ponderosa Pine-Shrubland) and SRM 110 (Ponderosa Pine-Grassland)-- seemed to warrent a seperate treatment (subsection) for these forests within the Forest Range Types of the Cascades section.

Ponderosa pine (= western yellow pine) has a vast and diverse species range in North America so as to form far-flung range cover types. In Range Types of North America ponderosa pine-dominated vegetation was treated under the Sierra Nevada Forests, Southern and Central Rocky Mountain Forests, and Northern Rocky Mountain Forests.

The treatment that followed immediately below included representative subtypes (associations) from the Columbia Basin and Blue Mountains geologic and physiographic provinces of Franklin and Dyrness (1973, p. 6), which coincide with the Walla Walla Plateau section and the Blue Mountain section of the Columbia Plateau physiographic province of Fenneman (1931, ps. 248-252).Given the close proximity of these provinces (and their vegetation) to the High Cascades province (Franklin and Dyrness, 1973, p. 6) these forest range types were included within the generic or defining designation of "Cascades Region"even though strictly speaking they were not in the Cascades Range.

The author of the current publication provided plant-associations for the Brown et al. (1998) Yellow Pine Series in Cascade-Sierran Montane Conifer Forest biotic community as was done by Brown et al. (1998, p. 37) for the Yellow Pine Series in the Rocky Mountain Montane Conifer Forest biotic community. This expansion of Pinus ponderosa associations to Yellow Pine Series in other biotic communities like the Cascade-Sierran Montane Conifer was suggested specifically by Brown (1998, p. 35). It was done herein because ponderosa pine comprises a major forest range cover type from the Rocky Mountains to the Sierra-Cascade Ranges. Within the geographic area (or region, subregion) of this general ponderosa pine cover type there are numerous distinctive associations that should be specified with photographic presentations of these different range communities. The area or subregion to which these herein-designted Pinus ponderosa associations were expanded was the High Cascade-Columbia Basin-Blue Mountain ranges situated between the Northern Rocky Mountains and Willamette Valley. Pinus ponderosa associations added to the Yellow Pine Series in the Cascade-Sierran Montane Conifer Forest of Brown et al. (1998) were, with one exception, those listed and described by Franklin and Dyrness (1973, ps. 173-183) so that these additions were simply inclusions of previously published associations into an existing classification system.

57. Quintessential ponderosa pine range- This Pinus ponderosa/Festuca idahoensis association or habitat type (Daubenmire and Daubenmire, 1968, ps.13-15; Franklin and Dyrness, 1973, ps. 173-176, ) was presented as the sterotypic example of ponderosa pine forest (or woodland) range. Daubenmire and Daubenmire (1968, ps. 13-18) and Franklin and Dyrness (1973, ps. 173-180) recognized several other ponderosa pine-perennial bunchgrass associations or habitat types including Pinus ponderosa-Agrpyron spicatum and Pinus ponderosa/Stipa comata.

Ponderosa pine (commonly known also as western yellow pine) grew in readily distinguishable distributional patterns (usuallly designated as dispersion, internal pattern of a popuulation; a population's spatial distribuition). Individual pines (usually adult trees) had regular or uniform dispersion. Pines also grew in groups with the groups appearing to have random dispersion (= random clumping).The lovely understorey stand of Idaho fescue primarily had a clumped or aggregated dispersion (specifically aggregated clumping ).

There was relative little regeneration of ponderosa pine, but with the low stocking of pine in this forest (almost a woodland form of trees) regeneration replacment to maintain tree density would of necessity be fairly low or infrequent. It was obvious that there were several age classes of ponderosa pine such that this was not an even-aged stand or forest as is often typical of this species and the cover types dominated by it.

Deschutes National Forest, Deschutes Cunty, Oregon. June. Estival aspect; peak standing crop.FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem). K-10 (Western Ponderosa Pine Forest). SAF 237 (Interior Ponderosa Pine). Ponderosa pine-Idaho fescue association (= habitat type), including that designation for association by Kagan et al. (2004). SRM 110 (Ponderosa Pine-Grassland). Pinus ponderosa/Festuca idahoensis Association of Yellow Pine Series in Cascade-Sierran Montane Conifer Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998). Eastern Cascades Slopes and Foothills- Ponderosa Pine/Bitterbrush Woodland Ecoregion, 9d (Pater et al., undated; Thorson et al., 2003).

58. The grandeur of a ponderosa pine-Idaho fescue range- Two views of a parklike ponderosa (western yellow) pine forest with an understorey consociation of Idaho fescue provided the textbook example of an open-canopy, bunchgrass forest range. Is there a more beautiful forest range anywhere? The floor is open for nominations.

These two photographs portrayed the physiognomy and forest community structure of this "forest-in-a-grassland" vegetation.

Regeneration of ponderosa pine was obvious as was the presence of several age classes of pine.

This vegetation was in the western edge of the Columbia Plateau, the Columbia Basin province of Franklina nd Dyrness (1973, p. 6) just out of the High Cascades province.

Deschutes National Forest, Deschutes County, Oregon. June. Estival aspect; peak standing crop. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem). K-10 (Western Ponderosa Pine Forest). SAF 237 (Interior Ponderosa Pine). SRM 110 (Ponderosa Pine-Grassland). Ponderosa pine-Idaho fescue association (= habitat type), including that designation as an association by Kagan et al. (2004).Pinus ponderosa/Festuca idahoensis Association of Yellow Pine Series in Cascade-Sierran Montane Conifer Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998). Eastern Cascades Slopes and Foothills- Ponderosa Pine/Bitterbrush Woodland Ecoregion, 9d (Pater et al., undated; Thorson et al., 2003).

59. Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis)- The dominant-- for practical purposes, the only-- species in the understorey of a parklike ponderosa pine forest in the Columbia Basin province of Franklin and Dyrness (1973, p. 6) that coincided closely with the Columbia Plateau physiographic province, Walla Walla Plateau section of Fenneman (1931, p. 248-252). Locally there were isolated individuals of squirreltail bottlebrush (Sitanion hystrix). Remarkably there was almost no cheatgrass or downy brome (Bromus tectorum). Hurray!

Deschutes National Forest, Deschutes County, Oregon. June; anthesis.

60. Spikelets of Idaho fescue- Spikelets on the panicle inflorescence of Idaho fescue. Anthesis. Deschutes National Forest, Deschutes County, Oregon. June.

61. Ponderosa pine-antelope bitterbrush browse range- Example of the Pinus ponderosa/Purshia tridentata association or habitat type (Daubenmire and Daubenmire, 1968, p.18 ; Franklin and Dyrness, 1973, ps. 173-180 passim). This yellow pine-bitterbrush range would certainly be a worthy contestant against the preceding yellow pine range-Idaho fescue range in the imagined contest for most beautiful forest range.

This forest community grew donterminuous with the ponderosa pine-Idaho fescue community presented as the immediately preceding forest range cover type. Interesting the two associations or habitat types (climax vegetation) did not co-mingle except over a narrow edge or ecotone. Sucn a natural arrangement of climax communities provided the ultimate in range for beef cattle and mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus)-- and probably for domestic sheep (Ovis aries) as well.

Dispersion (= distributional pattern) of pine was the same as described for the ponderosa pine-Idaho fescue range above. Ponderosa pine grew in groups that seemed to have random clumping as well as individual trees standing alone in a pattern closely resembling uniform or regular dispersion. Antelope bitterbrush tended to grow in groups, but individuals (especially smaller shrubs) also occurred.

There were at least two well-pronounced age classes of yellow pine so this was not an even-aged stand or forest. Pine reproduction was low, but was adequate to maintain the low stocking of this climax forest vegetation.

This climax forest range was in the Columbia Basin province, just out of the High Cascades province, of Franklin and Dyrness (1973, p. 6). It has a closer affinity with the Cascades Range than with the Northern Rocky Mountains, but cover types (vegetation in general) does not align perfectly with physiographic provinces any more than with soil, climate, or other factors. Instead, vegetation is product of all these factors working in concert.

Deschutes National Forest, Deschutes County, Oregon. June. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem). K-10 (Western Ponderosa Pine Forest). SAF 237 (Interior Ponderosa Pine). SRM 109 (Ponderosa Pine-Shrubland). Ponderosa pine-antelope bitterbrush association or habitat type. Pinus ponderosa/Purshia tridentata Association of Yellow Pine Series in Cascaade-Sierran Montane Conifer Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998). Not shown in Kagan et al. (2004). Eastern Cascades Slopes and Foothills- Ponderosa Pine/Bitterbrush Woodland Ecoregion, 9d (Pater et al., undated; Thorson et al., 2003).

62. Ponderosa pine-antelope bitterbrush range- Physiognomy and community structure of this climax forest with shrub understorey. At local level (on some microsites) green rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus nauseosus) was an associate of antelope bitterbrush (immediately preceding photograph; second slide in this set). Grass was notable by its rarity or presence in trace amounts. There were isolated individuals of Idaho fescue and squirreltail bottlebrush, but cheatgrass was conspicuous by its abesence.

Some forb species grew in interspaces among bitterbrush plants. Two such species were presented below.

Deschutes National Forest, Deschutes County, Oregon. June. Estival aspect. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem). K-10 (Western Ponderosa Pine Forest). SAF 237 (Interior Ponderosa Pine). SRM 209 (Ponderosa Pine-Shrubland). Ponderosa pine-antelope bitterbrush association or habitat type. Pinus ponderosa/Purshia tridentata Association of Yellow Pine Series in Cascade-Sierran Montane Conifer Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998). Not shown in Kagan et al. (2004). Eastern Cascades Slopes and Foothills- Ponderosa Pine/Bitterbrush Woodland Ecoregion, 9d (Pater et al., undated; Thorson et al., 2003).

63. Tailcup or spurred lupine (Lupinus caudatus)- This papilionaceous legume was sometimes growing conspicuously around edges of bitterbursh plants in the ponderosa pine-antelope bitterbrush range shown immediately above.

Deschutes National Forest, Deschutes County, Oregon. June.

64. Annual Indian paintbrush (Castilleja exilis)- This is the one annual Castilleja species in the Pacific Northwest. This gay fellow was blooming to its "heart's content" (and the photographer's "heart's delight") in the understorey of the ponderosa pine-antelope bitterbrush forest range pictured immediately above. Indian paintbrush is a member of the figwort or snapdragon family (Scrophularicaceae).

Deschutes National Forest, Deschutes County, Oregon. June.

65. Ponderosa pine-mountain mahogany browse range- Pinus ponderosa/Cercocarpus montanus community (association or habitat type?), but amazingly neither Daubenmire and Daubenmire (1968) nor Franklin and Dyrness (1973) recognized this quite obvious and common forest range type in the Blue Mountain area of central Oregon. Perhaps this community does not occur in eastern Washington and northern Idaho, the region covered by Dubenmire and Daubenmire(1968), but as the "bible" of natural vegetation in Oregon and Washington the omission from Franklin and Dyrness (1973) remained a mystery to the current author. This is a very important forest browse range type on the Ochoco and Malheur National Forests and generally thorughout much of the Blue Mountains.

This was true mountain mahogany or birchleaf mountain mahogany (C. montanus= C betuloides) as distinguished from curl-leaf mountain mahogany (C. ledifolius).

There were several age classes of ponderosa pine so this was an uneven-aged ponderosa pine forest. Regeneration was low, but so was stocking of pines such that reproduction was adequate for maintenance of pine populations.

Although this forest community was obviously browse range there was an herbaceous component that formed an herbaceous layer at local scale. Idaho fescue, squirreltail bottlebrush, Sandberg bluegrass (Poa secunda= P. sandbergia), and Junegrass (Koeleria cristata) were the main grasses. These native perennials were far more common and contributed more cover that the even less common cheatgrass or downy brome. There was also some sedge (Carex sp., possibly C. rossii). All graminoids were sparse except at microsite scale (eg. around more mesic spots).

FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem). K-10 (Western Ponderosa Pine Forest). SAF 237 (Interior Ponderosa Pine). SRM 109 (Ponderosa Pine-Shrubland). Pinus ponderosa/Cercocarpus montanus Association in Yellow Pine Series of Cascade-Sierran Montane Conifer Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998). Not shown in Kagan et al. (2004). Blue Mountains- Continental Zone Highlands Ecoregion, 11h (Thorson et al., 2003).

Malheur National Forest, Harney County, Oregon. June.

66.Co-dominants of yellow pine browse range in the Blue Mountains of central Oregon- Ponderosa pine and birchleaf or true mountain mahogany were the dominant tree and dominant shrub, respecitvely, of this Pinus ponderosa/Cercocarpus montanus community in the Ochoco Mountains (part of the larger Blue Mountains Range).

This forest range type was in the Blue Mountains province of Franklin and Dyrness (1973, p. 6) in contrast to the ponderosa pine-Idaho fescue and ponderosa pine-antelope bitterbrush communities that were in the Columbia Basin province. Some of these forest range types occur in the Northern Rocky Mountains also.

There was a limited herbaceous layer in this range type, but only at local scale. It was obviously absent from these "photo-quadrants". (The sparse herbaceous component of the understorey was shown in the nest photograph below.).

Malheur National Forest, Harney County, Oregon. June. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem). K-10 (Western Ponderosa Pine Forest). SAF 237 (Interior Ponderosa Pine). SRM 109 (Ponderosa Pine-Shrubland). Pinus ponderosa/ Cercocarpus montanus Association in Yellow Pine Series of Cascade-Sierran Montane Conifer Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998). Blue Mountains- Continental Zone Highlands Ecoregion, 11h (Thorson et al., 2003).

67.Western yellow pine-shrub-bunchgrass range- Vegetation of a ponderosa pine-mountain mahogany range community with perennial bunchgrasses at local scale. Grasses were the more xeric species with Sandberg bluegrass and squirreltail bottlebrush being the major ones. Herbaceous plants were minor members of this forest range community. This was exclusively browse range for all practical purposes. There were young plants (seedling stage ) of squaw or wax current (Ribes cereum).

This vegetation was in the Ochoco Mountains that are part of the larger Blue Mountains Range.

Malheur National Foret, Harney County, Oregon. June. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem). K-10 (Western Ponderosa Pine Forest). SAF 237 (Interior Ponderosa Pine). SRM 109 (Ponderosa Pine -Shrubland). Pinus ponderosa/ Cercocarpus montanus Association in Yellow Pine Series of Cascade-Sierran Montane Conifer Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998). Blue Mountains- Continental Zone Highlands Ecoregion, 11h (Thorson et al., 2003).

68. Yellow pine in the Blue Mountains- Ponderosa pine-birchleaf or true mountain mahogany community in the Ochoco Mountains (part of the larger Blue Mountains). Local range vegetation shown here included a lower shrub layer composed primarily of wax or squaw current (lower, lighter-green plants in right foreground and growing around birchleaf mountain mahogany in center foreground). An herbaceous layer was present only in local "spots" (micorsotes) that made up a small percentage of the vegetational cover.

This was browse range. That fact had to be considered when selecting the "Proper Kind and Class of Range Animal" (one of the Four Cardinal Principles of Range Management). This forest range with a shrub-dominated understorey was obviously ideal for browsing animals (eg. big game wildlife species like mule deer or elk). If cattle grazed (were selected as a livestock species for) this browse range then either: 1) cattle should be "browse cattle" (those that will eat broswe; those that were selected --bred-- to be browsers) or 2) cattle should be stocked based only on carrying (= grazing) capacity of the herbaceous (mostly, grass) portion of range feed with browse allocated to big game species.

This lesson was a simple one that illustrated how knowledge of range vegetation has direct application to on-the-ground management of ranges. In professions like Range Management, Forestry, Range Management, and Watershed Management knowledge has to have application, sooner or later, (even if is it viewed as "basic" science), or it is worthless to those professions. This was the conecpt of "practical education" as mandated by the Morrill Act (land grant college act) of 1862. It was emphasized at this point that "basic" or "fundamental" sciences (vs. "applied" sciences) like Vegetation Science or research activities like mapping of potential natural vegetation usually have direct application to "practical" or industrial concerns. For example, the Kuchler units and descriptions were useful to actual management of native grazing lands, of both forests and rangelands. Distinction between "basic" and "applied" science and research is always arbitrary-- and, like vegetation, never static.

There were several age classes of ponderosa pine, including seedling. This forest was perpetuating itself. The pnoderosa pine-birchleaf mountain mahogany community was the climax vegetation. It was capable of sustained yield management for wood, range, and watershed products. Research will continue to assist in that endeavor.

Malheur National Forest, Harney County, Oregon. June. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem). K-10 (Western Ponderosa Pine Forest). SAF 237 (Interior Ponderosa Pine). SRM 109 (Ponderosa Pine-Shrubland). Pinus ponderosa/ Cercocarpus montanus Association in Yellow Pine Series of Cascade-Sierran Montane Conifer Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998). Blue Mountains- Continental Zone Highlands Ecoregion, 11h (Thorson et al., 2003).

69. Yellow pine-tobacco bush range- This Pinus ponderosa/Ceanothus velutinus association (Franklin and Dyrness, 1973, ps. 176-178) had developed in the Ochoco Mountains (part of the larger Blue Mountains). This association is less widespread in this area than is the ponderosa pine-birchleaf mountain mahogany community, but the association featured here is an important one for wildlife as well as livestock. Birchleaf mountain mahogany was the associate shrub to tobacco bush or, as it also known, sticky laurel or snowbush.

Malheur National Forest, Harney County, Oregon. June. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem). K-10 (Western Ponderosa Pine Forest). SAF 237 (Interior Ponderosa Pine). SRM 109 (Ponderosa Pine-Shrubland). Pinus ponderosa/ Ceanothus velutinus Association in Yellow Pine Series of Cascade-Sierran Montane Conifer Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998). Not listed in Kagan et al. (2004) who included C. velutinus as an understorey species only combined with Purshia tridentata. Blue Mountains- Continental Zone Highlands Ecoregion, 11h (Thorson et al., 2003).

70. Tobacco bush (Ceanothus velutinus)- Flowering shoot of tobacco bush, snowbush, mountain balm, or sticky laurel. This is one of several Ceanothus species growing in North America. Ceanothus species are quite numerous in western mountains and frequently make major contributions of range animals, both native and domestic. Ceanothus species are in the Rhamnaceae or buckthorn family. A valuable reference for the Ceanothus (and other browse species in the Pacific Slope and Cascade-Sierra Nevada Region) is Sampson and Jespersen, 1963, ps. 102-112).

Malheur National Forest, Harney County, Oregon. June.

71.Blue Mountains ponderosa pine (Douglas-fir and tamarack were associate tree species) with herbaceous understorey- Here was an example of a variant of the general Pinus ponderosa-Festuca idahoensis association (Franklin and Dyrness, 1973, 175-176) in the Blue Mountains province in contrast to this same association in the Columbia Basin province presented above. Besides obvious differences in steepness of slope and presence of other conifer species (discussed directly below) the forest range community shown here was perhaps in some slight state of degradation. Idaho fescue, generally the most mesic of the dominant bunchgrass species in ponderosa pine forests, did not dominate the herbaceous understorey to the degree it did in the ponderosa pine-Idaho fescue range shown previously.

This was consistent with the description by Franklin and Dyrness (1973, ps. 175-176) wherein they explained that in the Blue Mountains the understorey of the ponderosa pine-Idaho fescue association consist of an array of grass and sedge species including bluebunch wheatgrass, squirreltail bottlebrush, pinegrass (Calamagrostis rubescens), elk sedge (Carex geyeri), and Ross sedge (C. rossii). All but the last of these listed species were positively identified on this forest range, and Ross sedge may have been present and just not found on cursury examination. In addition, however, Sandberg bluegrass was present, often as the local dominant. Furthermore, the introduced and naturalized Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis) was also present and locally dominant though less so than Sandberg bluegrass. Smooth bormegrass was likewise present. This suggested some degree-- though perhaps a minor degree-- of deviation from climax species composition. Cheatgrass was not observed.

From the ecological literature and personal communication Franklin and Dyrness (1973, ps. 175-176) concluded that presence of sizeable cover of pinegrass and elk sedge indicated that ponderosa pine was seral to Douglas-fir and grand fir on such sites (in contrast to climatic and edaphic climaxes of other ponderosa pine associations with woody or herbaceous understoreies). Douglas-fir was present in this ponderosa pine forest, as both larger trees and with regeneration. Western larch or tamarack (Larix occidentalis) was also present and invasion by this coniferous species was at sapling and seedling age-classes. Based on relative cover (both basal and canopy) Douglas-fir was the associate tree species, but from perspective of recent invasion (regeneration) western larch was also an associate.

In tolerance rating western larch, ponderosa pine, and Douglas-fir are Very Intolerant, Intolerant, and Intermediate, respectively (Wenger, 1984, p.3). In fire-adaptation, ponderosa pine is, of course, the species cause celebre and is one of the classic forest "fire types". Adult western larch has thick bark and is moderately fire-tolerant, but young trees of this species are easily damaged even by low-intensity surface fires (Harlow et al., 1979, p. 124). Burns and Honkala (1990, p. 169) reported that adult western larch "are the most fire-resistant trees in the Northern Rockies" due to thick bark, high branching habit, and low flammability of needles while pole size tamarack are moderately fire-resistant. Likewise, adult Douglas-fir has very thick bark and is fairly tolerant of surface fire (Fowls, 1965, p. 551; Burns and Honkala, 1990, p.537). In regeneration western larch and ponderosa pine respond similarily to natural surface fires. Surface fire frequencies of 20-30-years allow reproduction and establishment of tamarack and ponderosa pine in forest understories (Burns and Honkala, 1990. p. 168). Mature Douglas-fir is well-adapted to fire due to both its thick bark and adventitious roots and this species regularly depends on fire as a disturbance for establishment because its seedlings often survive and establish best on mineral soil (Burns and Honkala, 1990, ps. 532, 535). In fact, Burns and Honkala (1990, p. 535) concluded that "natural occurrence of Douglas-fir in extensive stands is mainly a consequence of forest fires".

Overall then, presence of these three relatively fire-adapted species in the forest shown here probably some burning of this land in the past. Logically, fire was one environmental factor common to presence of these three conifer species on this site.

Shrubs were almost non-existent in this forest. The dominant forb was tailcup or spurred lupine.

Ochoco National Forest, Wheeler County, Oregon. June. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem). K-10 (Western Ponderosa Pine). SAF 237 (Interior Ponderosa Pine). SRM 110 (Ponderosa Pine-Grassland). Pinus ponderosa- Pseudotsuga menziesii/ Mixed Grass Association in Yellow Pine Series of Cascade-Sierran Montane Conifer Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998). Blue Mountains- John Day/Clarno Uplands Ecoregion 11a (Thorson et al., 2003).

72. Ponderosa pine-grass understorey range- This horizonal perspective of the ponderosa pine-Idaho fescue forest presented in the immediately preceding slide provided more detail of the strictly herbaceous understorey as well as regeneration of western larch or tamarack (sapling in front of foremost ponderosa pine at right margin). Douglas-fir was also present and regenerating as an associate species (western larch could also be interpreted as an associate).

Idaho fescue "held a slight lead" over the other grass species, but pinegrass, bluebunch wheatgrass, and Sandberg bluegrass were almost as common and had similar apparent relative cover. Squirreltail bottlebrush was present at lower cover. Naturalized introduced perennial grasses included Kentucky bluegrass and smooth bromegrass. Cheatgrass or downy brome was not noticed. Elk sedge was present in smaller amounts. Presence of this latter species and pinegrass indicated that this forest range community (ponderosa pine-Idaho fescue association) on this site was seral to Douglas-fir and grand fir (Franklin and Dyrness, 1973, p. 175-176).

Shrub species were absent. Most abundant forb was tailcup or spurred lupine.

It was ponderosa pine forest ranges like this one that made this range cover type legendary. If proper grazing management and sound presceribed burning is practiced forest ranges like this will continue to be invaluable for production of timber, livestock, wildlife, and water as well as the spiritually restorative powers of the woods.

Ochoco National Forest, Wheeler County, Oregon. June. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Froest Ecosystem). K-10 (Western Ponderosa Pine). SAF 237 (Interior Ponderosa Pine). SRM 110 (Ponderosa Pine-Grassland). Pinus ponderosa- Pseudotsuga menziesii/ Mixed Grass Association in Yellow Pine Series of Cascade-Sierran Montane Conifer Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998). Not included in Kagan et al. (2004) who recognized only one ponderosa pine-Douglas-fir/ herbaceous understorey association (elk sedge). Blue Mountains- John Day/Clarno Uplands Ecoregion 11a (Thorson et al., 2003).

73. Silviculture for restoration of ponderosa pine- Pondaerosa pine forests comprise one of the textbook examples of a "fire type". Ponderosa or western yellow pine is one of the most widely distributed conifers in western North America, and throughout the range of this species the diverse forests (cover types, associations, communities, stands) dominated by ponderosa pine depend on periodic fire for their mainenance. In absence of natural fire regimes (or prescribed fire regimes that resemble natural ones) other conifer species that are less adapted to fire (and generally better adapted to more favorable habitats such as more mesic soil environments) come in time to dominate and perhaps almost totally replace western yellow pine. Within the Cascades and Blue Mountains provinces of Oregon and on into the Northern Rocky; Mountains this shift in dominance includes most other native conifers with Douglas-fir, grand fir, white fir (Abies concolor), and incense-cedar (Libocedrus decurrens= Calocedrus decurrens) especially important and apt to replace ponderosa pine in absence of natural and/or prescribed fire.

The ponderosa pine range community shown in this and the following photograph had been invaded by white fir to the stage that ponderosa pine had been so nearly completely replaced by white fir that there was almost no regeneration of pine. White fir were composed primarily of ripe to over-ripe individuals and this species also had but limited reproduction. All -in-all not a "healthy" forest condition. The U.S. Forest Service "repented of its sins" (at least at the local level) and began silvicultural management to restore ponderosa pine. First the white fir was logged as a salvage operation. Coincident with this logging all of the younger white fir were felled. Reproduction of ponderosa pine was then assured by both artificial regeneration (planting of seedlings) and natural regeneration (seed tree method).

This understorey of this ponderosa pine range was essentially herbaceous with no woody species present except as rare, widely scattered individuals of current and wild rose. There was no obvious dominant species in the understorey but rather this layer was botanically diverse and consisted of native grass species including bluebunch wheatgrass, Idaho fescue, Sandberg bluegrass, squirreltail bottlebrush, and Junegrass as well as introduced-- and naturalized-- perennial grasses including intermediate wheatgrass (Agropyron intermedium), smooth bromegrass (Bromus inermis), and orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata). Cheatgrass or downy brome was present but in trace amounts. Sedge (Carex) species, including elk sedge (C. geyrei), were also present in trace amounts.Forbs were extremely limited with lupines (Lupinus spp.) most common.

Note: Slides of many introduced grass (and legume) species, including the three Eurasian perennial grasses listed in the preceding paragraph, were included in this publication under the section: Grasslands, Introduced Forages.

This range vegetation was in the Blue Mountains physiographic and geologic province of Franklin and Dyrness (1973, ps. 6, 27-29).

Ochoco National Forest, Wheeler County, Oregon. June. Estival aspect. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem). K-10 (Western Ponderosa Pine). SAF 237 (Interior Ponderosa Pine). SRM 110 (Ponderosa Pine-Grassland). Further natural vegetation designations not appropriate given importance of naturalized Eurasian perennial grasses. Blue Mountains- John Day/Clarno Uplands Ecoregion 11a (Thorson et al., 2003).

74. Regeneration of western yellow pine- Horizonal view of same "photo-plot" that was presented in immediately preceding slide. Natural regeneration was more obvious (smaller seedlings) as was the exclusively herbaceous composition of the understorey. Grasses were the dominant herbaceous species and included both native species (bluebunch wheatgrass, Idaho fescue, Junegrass, Sandberg bluegrass, and squirreltail bottlebrush) and introduced, perennial species (intermediate wheatgrass, smooth brome, and orchardgrass) as well as cheatgrass in trace amounts. There were also trace amounts of elk sedge. Forbs were extremely limited. Lupines were the most common forb group. There were almost no shrubs and these were limited primarily to currents.

Successional status of ponderosa pine as a fire-adapted species (and ponderosa pine forests as fire types) has been-- and likely always will be-- somewhat problematical, and hence controversial.The perspective has been put forth that if in absence of fire conifers like Douglas-fir, grand fir, white fir, and incense cedar become dominant these species should be interpreted as climatic climax. That point of reference and argument is fine as far as it goes (but as will be seen it does not go far enough, in fact not far at all). The perspective of climatic climax versus edaphic, topographic, zootic, and, in this specific instance, pyric climax does provide a useful instructive dochotomy. It is often a sound pedogic device for introduction of monoclimax versus polyclimax theories and the distinction of climatic climax in contrast to topographic, edaphic, and zootic climaxes can be used to illustrate how range sites and local or microsites vary within an overall climatic regime. The concept of a pyric climax (ergo, fire type), however, does not fit with the four forms or kinds of climax just listed. This incontrovertable scientific fact becomes obvious when upon deeper thinking it is realized that a fire or pyric climax is just a subset of climatic climax. Fire is merely the dominant or determining component of climate most responsible for expression of climax vegetation.

What is fire if not a facet or part of climate? Lightening as the most common source of ignition of natural fire is a function of the atmosphere. Fuel that supports fire is a function of climate (precipitation, temperature, wind, precipitation:evaporation ratio, etc.) and of other factors including soil. Soils in turn, at least mature soils, are functions of several formation factors of which climate is often the major one. Topography is a major variable in determination of role of fire in formation of vegetation. So it is obvious that fire is more than a climatological product. Even here though, climate is typically the major group of factors that ultimately determines most of topographical variation via geologic erosion. Overall then, fire types and fire climaxes are both unique but primarily a subset of climatic climax.

It follows from this that while fire as an agent of defoliation (also variously an agent of seed scarification, seed bed preparation, etc.) is a disturbance, the absence or reduction of fire (just as the absence or reduction of precipitation) is also a disturbance. Too little burning (ie. underburning) is a disturbance just as is too much burning (overburning). Fire is essential in the process of vegetation development to the potential natural plant community.

So it seemed advisable to barbeque Smokey Bear and move on to prescribed burning augmented when necessary with other remedial measures such as removal by logging of white fir from this formerly weedy stand.

75. Uneven-aged management of ponderosa pine- Ponderosa pine forests are often, perhaps typically, even-aged (consisting of a single age class of trees, usually plus or minus 20% of rotation, the period between regeneration establishment and final harvest [Helms, 1998]). As such, ponderosa pine forests are often managed by even-aged silvicultural systems (Forest Service, 1973, ps. 18, 32, 46, 52), but on drier sites the selection (uneven-aged or all-aged) system or method, a silvicultural method used to create or maintain uneven-aged stands, is often used (Smith, 1986, 427, 460-463). By definition uneven-aged forest stands include three or more more distinct age classes. Uneven-aged methods "regenerate and maintain a multiaged structure by removing some trees in all size classes either eingly, in small groups, or in strips" (Helms, 1998).

This stand of ponderosa pine consisted of three age-classes: 10 mature trees, 2) large seedlings of the size seen in the foreground and 3) small seedlings too small to be readily seen.

The understorey was herbaceous and dominated by grasses of both native and agronomic species. Forbs were rare. Understorey species for this ponderosa pine range were listed in the two preceding captions.

This forest community had been invaded by white fir due largely to total fire suppression. White fir was removed in a combination salvage and weeding operation. There had been inadequate regeneration of ponderosa pine under white fir invasion and dominance so that artificial regeneration by tree planting was deemed necessary. Following removal of white fir and planting of ponderosa pine seedlings natural regeneration of pine took place. Net result is an uneven-aged stand, and perhaps on track for an all-aged stand, "a stand of trees of all or almost all age classes, including those of exploitable age" (Helms, 1998).

Blue Mountains physiographic and geologic province of Franklin and Dyrness (1973, ps. 6, 27-29).

Ochoco National Forest, Wheeler County, Oregon. June. Estival aspect. FRES Nol. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem). K-10 (Western Ponderosa Pine). SAF 237 (Interior Ponderosa Pine). SRM 110 (Ponderosa Pine-Grassland). Further designations of natural vegetation not appropriate given importance of naturalized Eurasian perennial grasses. Blue Mountains- John Day/Clarno Uplands Ecoregion 11a (Thorson et al., 2003).

Forest Range Types of the Sierra Nevada

Note: The following forest range (= forest cover) types arrayed along the gradient of the northern Sierra Nevada and southern Cascade Range are series in the Cascade-Sierran Montane Conifer Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998) unless otherwise specified (eg. Cascade-Sierran Montane Scrub biotic community, Cascade-Sierran Subalpine Conifer Forest biotic community, California Evergreen Forest and Woodland biotic community).

76. Clearcuts in the Sierra Nevada- The extent of even-aged management in Forestry becomes "clear" at 32,000 feet from a jet-liner. Clearcuts of various sizes and stages of regeneration in the Sierra Nevada. Properly planned and conducted clearcuts are often the best forest management practice. The patchwork of clearcuts of various ages, sizes, and configurations often maintains optimum or even maximum biodiversity, wildlife habitat, livestock and game range, sustained income for local communities, profitable returns to lumber companies, and "peaceful" working conditions for natural resource agencies. Nevada and Placer Counties, California. June.

77. The woods mean work- Work in the forest is hard, fast-paced, and dangerous. It requires skill, stamina, brains, and nerves of steel especially for loggers or lumberjacks like fellers, buckers, choker setters, and lead operators. It is dignified, honorable work and woodsmen are justly proud of their calling. Here a boom-loader operator is loading logs on a logging truck at a landing in order to haul them to the mill for processing into lumber. Plumas County, California.

The Sierra Nevada Mixed Conifer Type— (SAF 243), K-5 (Mixed Conifer Forest, Abies-Pinus-Pseduotsuga). Kuchler (1977) California vegetation map unit K-15 (Sierran Montane Forest, Abies-Pinus) —is one of the largest and most diverse forest cover types in western North American. There is even "diversity" in the way various ecologists and vegetation mappers have classified and delineated it on vegetation maps, including by the same worker! For example, when Kuchler (1977) mapped at smaller scale (1:1,000,000) than at larger scale (1:7,500,000) (Kuchler, 1966) he broke the Sierra Nevada forests, including the Mixed Conifer Type, into more mapping units.

The diversity is most obviously expressed as different, distinct forest communities arranged along elevational gradients. Differences in these distinct communities exist in both tree and various understory levels, especially the shrub layer(s). The elevational zonation of vegetation for a part of the Sierra Nevada is shown diagramatically in the pictoral transect produced in Shelford (1963, p. 170). This is a profile of the vegetation along the entire geologic formation at that latitude. Within any one of the major communities or elevational zones indicated (eg. montane forest, subalpine forest) there are further gradations or subzones existing due to differences in finer distinctions of elevation, soils, slope, aspect, etc. Some of these are at size and scale more typical or range sites while others are more readily understood as range or forest cover types. Sometimes the cover types exist as remnants (relict vegetation) or as patches more the size of range sites within (inside of) a larger-sized range or forest cover type. As a result, vegetation mapped as contiguous units by, say, Kuchler (1977) sometimes occur inside of another Kuchler map unit but at such a smaller size that it is not shown therein. For example, the Kuchler (1977) units K-3 (Northern Jeffrey Pine Forest, Pinus jeffreyi) and K-5 (Sierran Yellow Pine Forest, Pinus ponderosa) were shown as conterminous units to K-15 (Sierran Montane Forest). K-3 and K-5 were mapped adjacent to but not inside of K-15. On the land ("ground truth") patches of K-3 and K-5 routinely occur within K-15. The same condition holds for other units that are interpreted as cover types as when, for instance, "islands" of K-15 exist within K-17 (Upper Montane-Subalpine Forest, Abies-Pinus).

The Sierra Nevada Mixed Conifer Type in its different forms is characterized by various combinations of one deciduous oak, California black oak (Quercus kelloggii), and the "big five" dominant conifer species:

Sugar pine (Pinus lambertiana),
Ponderosa pine,
Douglas-fir,
California white fir (Abies concolor var. or ssp. lowiana), and
Incense-cedar (Libocedrus decurrens= Calocedrus decurrens).

In the Transverse and Peninsular Ranges of southern California there are forest cover types "equivalent" (homologous vegetation) in origin and composition to those of the Sierra Nevada. Kuchler (1977) mapped these as K-18 (Southern Montane-Subalpine Forest, Abies-Pinus). This unit corresponds to the Sierra and Cascade units of K-15 and K-17. These all are interpreted as comprising the Sierran Floristic Province (Barbour and Major, 1995, ps. 535-599). In both of these regional forests, elevation is the most obvious— but not the only —factor that differentiates range vegetation types.

Sugar pine, the California foresters favorite, is a white or soft pine in subgenus Haploxylon (vs. the yellow or hard pines of subgenus Diploxylon). It is a local dominant in both the Sierra and Transverse-Peninsular montane forest forms but seldom forms pure stands or exclusive communities. Incense cedar also occurs most commonly as one or two individuals and, infrequently, in restricted clusters.

White fir dominates on more mesic sites and tends to have sugar pine and incense cedar as associates on both Sierra and Transverse-Peninsular mixed conifer forest (see Barbour and Major, 1995, ps. 545-546, 563-565). The white fir of the Transverse and Peninsular Ranges is Abies concolor var or ssp. concolor while that of the Sierra is A. concolor var. or ssp. lowiana (Vasek and Thorne in Barbour and Manor, 1995, p. 823). In northern parts of the Sierra and the southern Cascade range Douglas-fir replaces white fir as the dominant conifer, but across the mixed conifer type white fir is the "overwhelming dominant species" that defines the forest which is often designated White Fir-Mixed Conifer (Rundel et al. in Barbour and Major, 1995, p. 563).

Likewise, ponderosa pine is the dominant on more xeric sites in the lower montane zone in both the Sierra and Transverse-Transverse ranges, but in the latter ranges Jeffrey pine tends to be associated with ponderosa pine to form yellow pine forests (although Jeffrey dominates at higher elevations). In the Sierra by contrast, Jeffrey pine grows in the upper montane zone more with red fir (Abies magnifica) as a transition forest (Rundel et al. in Barbour and Major, 1995, ps. 560, 574-577). In both forms Jeffrey pine is more common at higher elevations. Ponderosa pine and California black oak are commonly associated in the lower montane forests and both are adapted to surface fires (Thorne in Barbour and Major, 1995, ps. 539, 542, 543, 561-562)

Species composition and age structure of the mixed conifer communities differ due to fire, logging, and even tree planting history as well as to the myriad factors comprising site such as elevation, soils, slope, and aspect. This applies to shrub and herb layers also.

In the central Sierra Nevada giant sequoia (Sequoiadendron giganteum) grows in groves which are usually interpreted as the more mesic parts of the overall white fir community (Barbour and Major, 1995, p. 569-571). At the University of California Blodgett Experimental Forest, giant sequoia is included in replanted clearcuts along with the "big five conifers".

78. Sierra Mixed Conifer (Lower Montane) Forest- Douglas-fir, white fir, and ponderosa are the dominant conifers seen here at an elevation of about 4000 feet. The dominant understory species is the shrub deerbrush (Ceanothus integerrimus). Shrubs besides deerbrush that are either dominants or associates at specific locations in the understory include: western blueberry (Vaccinium occidentale= V. uliginosum ssp. occidentale), Sierra gooseberry (Ribes roezlii), Sierra or pink currant (R. nevadense), pale or Utah servicebery (Amelanchier pallida= A. utahensis), soft or creeping snowberry (Symphoricarpos mollis), Pacific or mountain dogwood (Cornus nuttallii), and wood rose (Rosa gymnocarpum). Forbs include Sierra iris (Iris hartwegii), mountain iris (I. douglasiana), trailmarker or pathfinder (Adenocaulon bicolor), angelica (Angelica breweri), and false solomon's seal (Smilacina sp.). Grasses absent.

Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem), K-5 (Mixed Conifer Forest), Kuchler (1977) California vegetation map unit K-15 (Sierran Montane Forest), SAF 243 (Sierra Nevada Mixed Conifer). Mixed Conifer Series of Brown et al. (1998).

79. Deerbrush-dominated understory- This is the understory seen in the preceding slide. Deer brush is dominant. This is representative of much of the mixed conifer type. In fact, grazing capacity of forest livestock ranges is often determined largely by deerbrush abundance (Sampson and Jespersen, 1963, p. 104). Deerbrush (known also as blue brush, sweet birch, wild lilac, and numerous other local names) is not only one of the most widely distributed browse plants in the Sierra it is also one of the most nutritious and palatable. It is taken readily even by cattle and cattlemen who rely on deerbrush browse have selected lines of cattle based on their ability to utilize this extremely important forest shrub.

80. Deerbrush in full-bloom- "Deerbrush ceanothus is one of the most important summer browse species in California, in some localities supplying most of the feed" (Sampson and Jespersen, 1963, p. 104). It is also the shrub that in many locations is most likely to come in quickly on clearcuts. This situation interferes with conifer regeneration, but it provides opportunistic range for cattle and enables cattle to be used as a tool in silviculture. An example is shown below.

Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June.

81. Inflorescence and leaves of deerbrush- Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June.

82. Sierra Nevada (Lower Montane) Mixed Conifer Forest- This exterior view of the mixed conifer cover type shows the dominance of California white fir. Crowns on the left are young white fir and the center tree is a mature white fir. The tree on the right is incense cedar. Note female osprey (Pandion haliaetus) on her nest atop a snag in right background.

Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June. FRES No. 21 (Polnderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem), K-5 (Mixed Conifer Forest), Kuchler (1977) California vegetation map unit K-15 (Sierran Montane Forest), SAF 243 (Sierra Nevada Mixed Conifer). Mixed Conifer Series of Brown et al. (1998).

83. Composite view of Sierra Nevada (Lower Montane) Mixed Conifer Forest- A straight, clean bole of ponderosa pine and an incense cedar with characteristic branching pattern represent the upper tree layer while saplings and younger trees of California white fir and Douglas-fir comprise a second tree layer. Deerbrush, western blueberry, and Ribes species dominate the understory.

Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem), K-5 (Mixed Conifer Forest), Kuchler (1977) California vegetation map unit K-15 (Sierran Montane Forest), SAF 243 (Siearra Nevada Mixed Conifer). Mixed Conifer Series of Brown et al. (1998).

84. Bottomland and east slope site of Lower Montane Sierra Mixed Conifer Forest- Douglas-fir and incense cedar occupy the alluvial site while sugar pine and white fir are more common higher up on the terrace. Ponderosa pine is limited to a southern exposure just to the left of this scene. Pacific or mountain dogwood is the locally dominant shrub which shares the understory with young trees of the dominant species. Predominate soil series is Cohasset. This is a high-potential forest site.

Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem), K-5 (Mixed Conifer Forest), Kuchler (1977) California unit K-15 (Sierran Montane Forest), SAF 243 (Sierra Nevada Mixed Conifer). Mixed Conifer Series of Brown et al. (1998).

85. An example of the species richness of Sierran Mixed Conifer Forest- Three incense cedars, California white fir, Douglas-fir and Sierra maple (Acer glabrum), along with willows, Sierra gooseberry, and western blueberry make for a rich community even on a small local scale.

Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem), K-5 (Mixed Conifer Forest), Kuchler (1977) California vegetation map unit K-15 (Sierran Montane Forest). SAF 243 (Sierra Nevada Mixed Conifer). Mixed Conifer Series of Brown et al. (1998).

86. Branch of incense cedar (Calocedrus decurrens)- Leaves (needles) and immature cones of incense cedar. Jefferson County, Oregon. June.

87. Sierra Nevada Mixed Conifer Type- A mesic east slope in the Lower Montane zone supports California white fir (foremost trunk on right and front center tree) and sugar pine (the two trunks behind the center white fir). Dense canopy prohibits much understory development other than some pathfinder. Elevation about 4,000 feet. Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June. White fir-mixed conifer forest. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem), K-5 (Mixed Conifer Forest), Kuchler (1977) California unit K-15 (Sierran Montane Forest), SAF 243 (Siearra Nevada Mixed Conifer). Mixed Conifer Series of Brown et al. (1998).

88. Sierra Nevada Mixed Conifer Forest (Pacific Ponderosa Pine and Douglas-fir Forest Cover Type)- Ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir comprise one of the distinct communities of forms of the Sierran Mixed Conifer Type in the Lower Montane zone. This is a high-potential site being on a rich terrace of alluvium (Cohasset soil series). The fire scar on the large ponderosa pine indicates the fire history of this community. A reduced or even eliminated fire regime was perhaps a factor in allowing increased stocking of Douglas-fir which are obviously younger trees.On this fertile site there is very little understory due to the high stocking of trees. Stocking in this usage means a general indication of the number of trees in a stand compared to the desired number of trees for optimum forest growth and management or, from the perspective of site or habitat rather than trees, the space available for trees as compared to some optimum standard for growing space.

In this scene "there ain't much room left for anything", yet a good yield of board footage is being produced. Any harvest of trees will allow more light to reach the forest floor to grow a grazable/browsable understory. Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem), K-5 (Mixed Conifer Forest), Kuchler (1977) California vegetation map unit K-15 (Sierran Montane Forest). SAF 244 (Pacific Ponderosa Pine-Douglas-fir). Pinus ponderosa- Pseudotsuga menziesii Association (if one exist per se) in Yellow Pine Series of Brown et al. (1998).

89. Flasher on the floor-This flashy denizen of the forest floor in the Sierra Nevada Mixed Conifer Type is snow plant (Sarcodes sanguinea). It is one of the monotrophic species (a member of the Monotropaceae, a family of the Ericales). These are fleshy, leafless or reduced-leaved saprophytes or, sometimes, parasites that are devoid of chlorophyll and mutually symbiotic with mycorrhizae.

Some botanists place snow plant in the Ericaceae or heath family which is one of the more important families in the Sierra Nevada. Other plant taxonomists place these saprophytic species in the Pyrolaceae, the wintergreen family. All three families are in the Ericales order. A secondary lesson from this example is the confusion that still remains after decades of study (and squabble) over taxonomic issues like scientific names, families, etc. How come these folks cannot settle on a standard and go with it? Is knowledge that imperfect and dynamic? Or are there incentives to keep changing names and taxonomic arrangements? Another published paper perhaps.

Anyway these unique plants are saprophytes, plants that live on and derive their food from dead organic matter. Two species of saprophytic fungi were seen on tallgrass prairie under the Grassland Biome slides. Here is a saprophytic species of vascular plant (a dicotylendonous saprophyte). This brilliant little plant (about eight inches tall) reminds beginning rangemen, foresters, and wildlifers that there are two categories of heterotrophs (organisms dependant on producers, the autotrophs, for their food): 1) consumers (including manipulators) and 2) reducers or decomposers. Decomposers are those heterotrophs that are known also as saprotrophs (= saprobe= saprovore). Saprotrophs include animals such as carrion and dung beetles, vultures, and earthworms as well as plants. Saprotrophic plants are saprophytes.

Thus it is that snow plant and other non-commercial species (those producing no commodity such as lumber or feed for livestock or economically important wildlife) are still important, if not essential, for ecosystem function. Saprophytes like snow plant are not just pretty plants to take pictures of. They also cycle nutrients in forest and range ecosystems thereby making more nutrients available for the economically valuable species. Saprophytes can also be important in the food chain even though they are not producers. Saprophytes often provide for food for primary consumers which in turn become direct food for secondary consumers and indirect food for tertiary, etc. consumers. In ecosystems nothing is unimportant even if it is not essential for general ecosystem structure and function, or if it returns no cash income.

90. Physiogonomy of the Mixed Conifer Forest Type- This community is typical of the mixed conifer forest that grows below a brush transition zone that interrupts the mixed conifer cover type. This scene depicts the array of dominant species. A giant sugar pine (the largest tree; on the right) is joined by a ponderosa pine while a California black oak leans over from the left side. The shrub understory is deerbrush in full-bloom. Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem), K-5 (Mixed Conifer Forest), Kuchler (1977) California vegetation map unit K-15 (Sierran Montane Forest), SAF 243 (Sierra Nevada Mixed Conifer). Mixed Conifer Series of Brown et al. (1998).

91. Canopy of the Sierra Nevada Mixed Conifer Forest- This composite shot captures the species make-up of this valuable forest cover type: California black oak, big-leaf maple, incense cedar, ponderosa pine, sugar pine, and incense cedar (left to right, respectively). Plumas National Forest, Butte County, California. June. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem), K-5 (Mixed Conifer Forest), Kuchler California vegetation map unit K-15 (Sierran Montane Forest), SAF 243 (Sierra Nevada Mixed Conifer). Mixed Conifer Series of Brown et al. (1998).

92. Brush Transition Zone within the overall Sierra Nevada Mixed Conifer Forest- This brushfield is the Mixed Montane Chaparral known also as Yellow Pine Chaparral or Timberland Chaparral. It was included and described above as one of several kinds of California chaparral cover types (Shrubland slides), but is included here to show the different zones of vegetation along a transect profile of the Sierra Nevada. This is a rock outcrop, but it is the same dominant soil series (Corbett) seen in several of the above examples of mixed conifer forest. Dominant is clearly ponderosa pine (stunted as it is), but the distinguishing species is whiteleaf manzanita (Arctostaphylos viscida). Plumas National Forest, Butte County, California. June. FRES No. 34 (Chaparral-Mountain Shrub Ecosystem), K-29 (Chaparral), variant of SRM 209 (Montane Shrubland). California Native Plant Society Whiteleaf Manzanita Series. Manzanita Series in Cascade-Sierran Montane Scrub biotic community of Brown et al. (1998).

93. Whiteleaf manzanita. Plumas National Forest, Butte County, California. June.

94. Sierra Nevada Mixed Conifer Forest (Lower Montane Sierran Forest)- At still lower elevations the mixed conifer type begins to "pick up" species form the California Mixed Evergreen Forest (eg. Pacific madrone [Arbutus menziesii] and tanbark oak [Lithocarpus densiflorus]). This form of Sierran Mixed Conifer Forest is distinguished from the mixed evergreen cover type species composition-wise by the absence of California white fir, ponderosa pine, and sugar pine from the mixed evergreen cover type. A Pacific madrone is at far right. A tanoak is beside it. Californnia black oak, ponderosa pine, sugar pine, incense cedar are also visible. Shrub layer in front of forest is a recent clearing dominated by Rubus and Ceanothus species. FRES No.21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem), K-5 (Mixed Conifer Forest), Kuchler (1977) California vegetation map unit K-15 (Sierran Montane Forest), SAF 243 (Sierra Nevada Mixed Conifer). Mixed Conifer Series of Brown et al. (1998).

95. Sierra Nevada Mixed Conifer Forest (Lower Montane Sierran Forest)- This is a physiogonomic-scale view of the lowest elevational limit of the mixed conifer type. It is pine forest with ponderosa pine as dominant and sugar pine as associate. Tanbark oak and pacific madrone form a second tree layer. A few "stray" incense cedars happened along for good measure. The understory is prominent and dominated by common manzanita with sparse cover of naturalized annual grasses from the foothill annual grassland type. Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem), K-5 (Mixed Conifer Forest), Kuchler (1977) California vegetation map unit K-15 (Sierran Montane Forest), SAF 243 (Sierra Nevada MIxed Conifer). Mixed Conifer Series of Brown et al. (1998).

96. Interior of the lowest elevational form of Sierran Mixed Conifer Type (Lower Montane Sierran Forest)- This is inside the pine-dominated community of mixed conifer forest seen in the previous slide. The telltale crown of beautiful sugar pine is distinct. Tan oak (just beginning to bloom) and common manzanita are visible in center and left foreground, respectively. Soils are the Strawberry series with lesser amounts of the Sierra series. This is a transition forest between the Montane Chaparral and the Digger Pine-Blue and Interior Live Oak Forest just below. Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem), K-5 (Mixed Conifer Forest), Kuchler (1977) California vegetation map unit K-15 (Sierran Montane Forest), SAF 243 (Sierra Nevada Conifer). Mixed Conifer Series of Brown et al. (1998).

97. Interior of Lower Montane Sierran Mixed Conifer Forest- The understory is dominated by common manzanita with very little herbaceous species. Young trees of ponderosa and sugar pine, incense cedar, tanoak and a few Pacific madrone form a second tree layer. Strawberry soil series. Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem), K-5 (Mixed Conifer Forest), Kuchler (1977) California vegetation map unit K-15 (Sierran Montane Forest), SAF 243 (Sierra Nevada Mixed Conifer). Mixed Conifer Series of Brown et al. (1998).

98. Diagram of zones of vegetation along the elevational gradient of the central Sierra Nevada- Source: Shelford (1963, p. 170). Communities along this generalized transect vary depending on latitude or even general section of the Sierra (eg. northern, central, southern Sierra Nevada) as well as factors like soils, slope, aspect, etc.

99. Giant Sequoia or Sierran Redwood Grove- These spectacular but locally restricted stands of Sequoiadendron gigantea are part of the Sierra Nevada (central and southern) Mixed Conifer Forest. They are treasured for their inspirational value which is accepted as their "highest and best use". "Big trees", another common name by which they are well known, are associated with white fir, a few of which are seen here at far left with young sequoia. As a unique part of the mixed conifer type sequoia groves were not accorded a separate map unit except by Kuchler (1977) on his California potential natural vegetation map (K-sss, Big Trees).

100. Second-growth grove of giant sequoia- Sierra redwood does not reproduce asexually like coast redwood (only young, as in 20 years or so, trees stump sprout) and establishment of sequoia seedlings "is an unusually tenuous process" (Burns and Honkala, 1990, p. 555) for any number of reasons (Burns and Honkala, 1990, p. 554-557). Big tree reproduction is enhanced by disturbances like fire and logging activity, especially those which expose mineral soil thereby increasing seed germination and seedling establishment (Fowells, 1965, p. 660). Ill-advised fire exclusion has been the most adverse human impact on giant sequoia groves (Burns and Honkala, 1990, p. 560).

This second-growth stand at the University of California Whitaker Forest Station came in following logging ("cut and run" not the scientific management prescription clearcutting) which exposed adequate soil for seed germination. The logged land was donated to the University of California in, depending on authority, 1910 (Ferrier, 1930, p. 559) or 1914 (Teeguarden and Zivnuska, 1991`, p.107) with the iron-clad provision: "That no sequoia or redwood trees growing or that may grow on said premises shall be felled or cut down" (quoted in Ferrier, 1930, p. 559). Such stipulation was made with best interest of tree and forest and seemed reasonable at that time. However, sequoia regeneration was so great while fire and other natural population-reducing factors were limited that the second-growth forest developed almost as a dog-hair stand which slowed tree growth rate and forest recovery. Selective thinning would have benefited the forest, but was prohibited by "the best of intentions".

This illustrates a fundamental lesson of Ecology: once man has upset the apple cart he cannot refuse to pick up the apples because "it is not natural". When an ecosystem has been drastically altered by human action a "leave it to Nature" approach often results in rotting apples that do not provide "the greatest good to the greatest number" as advocated by Gifford Pinchot in his doctrine of conservation.

Don P. Gasser, former Lecturer and property manager in the Forestry program at the University of California, Berkeley, caught this image of second-growth sierra redwood at Whitaker's Forest and wrote the caption, "Branches, limbs, knotholes". Don taught the Forest Harvesting Systems course in the UC Forestry curriculum and was heavily involved in career counseling Forestry students (Teeguarden and Zivnuska, 1991, p. 186). Gasser was also a non-tenure track faculty member and under a seemingly emergency budget crunch and with the back-stabbing nastiness legendary of university politics was "cut down" leaving Forestry students without a professional course in forest harvesting for a number of years. (Even though improper forest harvest is the human practice most likely to damage forest, as this is written the position has been unfilled at what was once a great Forestry school.) Academe's loss was industry's gain, but the "highest and best use" of this human resource was not realized due to mismanagement by inept university administrators, an all-too-common characteristic of today's Academy. Meanwhile we are told by some that faculty tenure is unnecessary for maintenance of quality programs because tenure only protects "dead wood" (branches, limbs, knotholes).

"Bad laws are the worst sort of tyranny" (Edmund Burke, 1780).

University of California Whitaker's Forest, Tulare County, California. May. Sequoia groves are part of the white fir-dominated communities of the Sierra Mixed Conifer Forest and were not recognized as a unit or forest cover type by standard references.

Kuchler (1977) in potential natural vegetation of California mapped them as groves (K-sss) in the Sierran Montane Forest, but if prescribed fires of the natural fire regime are not used in managing sequoias their groves, which are seral communities, will advance toward climax white fir forest minus sequoias (Burns and Honkala, 1990, p. 560; Barbour and Manor, 1995, p. 571). Note that even in this dense stand there is a sparse understory of herbs and shrubs. Fire will also benefit herb and shrub layers and provide more browse for wildlife.Understory species in sequoia groves are those typical of the California white fir-mixed conifer.California Native Plant Society Giant Sequoia Series of Sierran Mixed Conifer Forest. SAF 243.

101. Branch of giant sequoia- Needle-leaves and cones of big tree or giant sequoia.

102. Peninsular Range Mixed Conifer Forest- In introducing the mixed conifer forest type it was explained that this forest cover type is interpreted as including homologous forests in the Transverse and Peninsular Ranges of southwestern California, both being of the Sierran Floristic Province. The composite view seen here is the yellow pine form of the Lower Montane Coniferous Forests (Thorne in Barbour and Major, 1995, ps. 539-544). Species left to right: ponderosa pine, incense cedar, California black oak, Jeffrey pine, sapling of canyon live oak (Quercus chrysolepis). Most common shrub is greenleaf manzanita (Arctostaphylos patula).

San Jacinto State Park, Riverside County, California. June. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem), K-5 (Mixed Conifer Forest), Kuchler (1977) California vegetation map unit K-18 (Southern Montane-Subalpine Forest, Abies-Pinus), SAF 243 (Mixed Conifer except Transverse-Peninsular Ranges not Sierra Nevada). Although this is a variant of the California Mixed Conifer Type it was described by Brown (1994, ps. 66-69) as the Mixed Hardwood Series in California Evergreen Forest and Woodland biotic community. This title was replaced by the Oak-Pine Series in Brown et al. (1998, p. 38).

103. California black oak (Quercus kelloggii)- Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June.

104. Forest glade in Peninsular Range Mixed Conifer Forest- Within the mixed conifer type relatively small forest openings are common. Herbs are mostly perennial grasses of the Poa and Bromus genera which are co-dominant with sedges (Carex spp.). All graminoid species except squirreltail bottlebrush (Sitanion hystrix) were in the vegetative stage and could not be identified positively. Thorn (in Barbour and Major, 1995, p. 542) listed as more common native perennial grasses Bromus breviaristatus (which is an obsolete designation for B. catharticus or B. unioloides which is rescuegrass and clearly not native as Thorne mistakenly wrote), orcutt bromegrass (B. orcuttianus ssp. hallii) and pine bluegrass (Poa scabrella). Many-stemmed sedge (Carex multicaulis) was listed also listed.

San Jacinto State Park, Riverside County, California. June, FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine), K-5 (Mixed Conifer Forest), Kuchler (1977) California vegetation map unit K-18 (Southern Montane-Subalpine Forest, Abies-Pinus), SAF 243 (Mixed Conifer, except Transverse-Peninsular Ranges instead of Sierra Nevada).

Foresters typically recognize four general silvicultural systems for conifer forest: 1) clear cutting, 2) seed-tree cutting, 3) shelterwood and 4) selection (not the same as selective) cutting. Consideration of these methods is beyond scope of this presentation being, as it were, a major part of the subdiscipline of Silviculture. Those desiring details are referred to such standard texts as Smith (1986, in particular ps. 329-511) or Daniel et al. (1979) and the SAF Forestry dictionary (Helms, 1998).

All of these basic systems or reproduction methods of forest regeneration can have an understory usable as either permanent or transitory forest range depending on successional development of vegetation and/or forest management practices.

Two of these silvicultural systems were included below:

clearcutting (as one method to create even-aged stands or forests) and
the selection method (often known imprecisely by the more general term of "selective cutting"); as a way to create uneven-aged or all-aged forests).

The next four slides show even-aged management by small clearcuts on the University of California Blodgett Forest, Placer County, California. July. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem), K-5 (Mixed Conifer Forest), Kuchler (1977) California vegetation map unit K-15 (Sierran Montane Forest), SAF 243 (Sierra Nevada Mixed Conifer). Mixed Conifer Series of Brown et al. (1998).

"Clearcutting is "the cutting of essentially all trees, producing a fully exposed microclimate for the development of a new age class" (Helms, 1998).

Sadly, "clearcutting" as a scientific-professional term has been much malaigned and confused in the popular and collective mind of the lay public. Even worse, application of clearcutting has sometimes occurred when foresters beacame confused about its application (Smith, 1986, ps. 367-368). "Clearcutting" still conveys to many concerned citizens the image of "cut-and-run" logging by timber robber barons. The four slides that follow show the proper use of the sound harvest and silvicultural method of clearcutting as the term is applied by professional foresters.

105. Current-year clearcut in mixed conifer forest- This fresh clearcut was of second-growth mixed conifer forest (background vegetation). Logs, except for culls which will be used for firewood, have been hauled out from this location. Logs were brought to this point by skidders and bunched in preparation for loading and hauling to the sawmill. Locations at which logs, poles, etc. (round timber) are assembled for transport out of the woods are known as landings or yards. The work of getting timber to yards is known as yarding or skidding. Skidding equipment includes rubber-tired skidders, crawlers tractors, high leads, even helicopters.

Skidding can disturb the ground surface more than the actual felling and bucking (sawing felled timber into shorter lengths). Such disturbance can be beneficial if properly conducted so as to prevent or minimize erosion because it exposes mineral soil (the upper or A-horizon of soil versus the O-, organic matter, layer resting on the actual soil). Seed germination and seedling establishment is usually greater in mineral soil than in the O-layer of forest duff because seedlings can get their roots into the soil rather than germinating but subsequently dying when their roots cannot reach soil through all the conifer thatch (shed conifer needles and other leaves). This was the case with giant sequoia as explained for sequoia groves and second-growth. This often happens under natural conditions of forest fires and floods. Floods deposit new layers of alluvium and enhance germination of coast redwood thereby renewing the forest. Clearcutting— again, properly planned and executed—achieves the same result. This is more important with natural regeneration by seed, but it can also be beneficial with artificial regeneration by planted seedlings.

This raw clearcut has not been prepared for planting but it is part of the process of reforestation. Reforestation (or the synonymous regeneration) means re-establishment of the forest either by natural sexual reproduction (seeds) or asexual reproduction (eg. stump-sprouting or coppicing) or artificial means like planting seedlings. The first step in reforestation is often scarification:

"mechanical removal of competing vegetation or interfering debris, or disturbance
of the soil surface" (Helms, 1998).

Natural scarification can occur as a result of lightening-set fires, floods, avalanches, or windthrow that uproots trees.

University of California Blodgett Forest, Placer County, California.

106. A year-old clearcut that has been site-prepared and planted with nursery raised seedlings of the "big five" mixed conifer species— white fir, sugar pine, ponderosa pine, incense cedar, Douglas-fir— and giant sequoia. Seedlings and sprouts of deerbrush and manzanita are also coming up and will be serious competition for the young conifer seedlings.

University of California Blodgett Forest, Placer County, California.

107. A two-year-old clearcut in Sierran mixed conifer forest that is becoming dominated by deerbrush. This and other shrubs grow faster than conifer seedlings and will overtop them thereby out-competing the next wood crop for light, soil moisture, etc. This would reduce the rate of forest regeneration, lengthen the rotation, and decrease economic efficiency of the firm. It could even prevent regeneration, particularly of intolerant species like ponderosa pine and intermediate tolerance species like Douglas fir and sugar pine.

University of California Blodgett Forest, Placer County, California.

One remedy for shrub-conifer competition is the use of selective herbicides which kill or at least reduce cover of the dicotyledonous shrubs. A standard treatment was the use of the systemic phenoxy herbicide silvex, (2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy propionic acid). This was a safe, cost-effective, proven method of brush control. Unfortunately, the fear-mongering politics of the New Left and environmentalism forced removal of silvex and the equally safe and effective (for rangeland brush control) 2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy acetic acid from the market by means of class action lawsuits. The alleged culprit in the "politics of poisons" was dioxin. This is the subject of many books, symposia, and detailed research reports by such scientifically emient groups as the National Academy of Sciences. Readers should consult the scientific, especially peer-reviewed or refereed, literature and most certainly not the sensational yellow journalism of the nightly news, Time, Newsweek, and the New York Times or Washington Post. The classic and definitive work on herbicide use in Forestry is probably still United States Department of Agriculture and United States Environmental Protection Agency (1978). The series of reports by the Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences entitled Veterans and Agent Orange (National Academy Press) will be the official authority on impacts of dioxin on human health. The no-punches-pulled paper on dioxin by Tschirley (1986) is highly recommended.

An expose on the psychological warfare tactics of radical environmentalists was not an objective of this publication on range cover types so "we won't even go there". Besides it was a mute point for many forests even before the greenies chalked up their illigitimate victory. One alternative to herbicidal control of brush in conifer forest was "biological control" by running livestock on regenerating clearcuts.

108. A re-planted conifer forest grazed by cattle- This is a clearcut in second-growth mixed conifer forest (second-growth in background) replanted mostly to sugar pine and Douglas-fir for the third crop. The main brush species competing with the conifers is deerbrush. The browse value of deer brush was discussed earlier and it was explained that cattlemen breed strains of "brush cattle" that thrive off browse on Sierra Nevada forest ranges. This young conifer forest has been continuously summer browsed by brush cattle for several years and conifers have grown rapidly as cattle reduced deerbrush cover.

It is a documented fact that browse plants like the Ceanothus species are more nutritious and consequently more palatable than conifers to browsing animals. It is axiomatic that on sites where shrub-conifer competition exist the presence of livestock (cattle in this instance) will benefit the conifers, if and as long as livestock stocking rates are consistent with carrying capacity of the browse. This is an elementary application of the phenomenon of grazing selectivity. This is merely the basic principle of competition that is central to ecology and evolution. Use of selective browsers, as all are given their choice, and application of selective herbicides operate on this one and the same principle. The big difference is that selective herbivores (this can include the less-tractable wildlife species the same as livestock) are a marketable commodity and not just an out-of-pocket expense like herbicides. The end-result with cattle (assuming a willing cattle owner) is more jingle in everyone's pocket, except the herbicide salesman.

This management practice does ignore the fact that the overstocking with browsing wildlife like deer and/or livestock, especially those unadjusted to browse, will likely result in conifer damage. Maintaining proper deer numbers through bag limits is as important as proper cattle numbers kept by correct stocking rates and proper animal distribution .

As evident in this slide, forest-ranging animals do not, as a general rule, crop conifer buds if they have a choice.

Livestock and wildlife production that is complementary to wood products on commercial forests that are critical watershed is a textbook example of multiple use, professional resource management, and sound stewardship.

University of California Blodgett Forest, Placer County, California. July. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem), K-5 (Mixed Conifer Forest), Kuchler (1977) California vegetation map unit K-15 (Sierran Montane Forest), SAF 243 (Sierra Nevada Mixed Conifer).

The alternative to even-aged management is uneven-aged or all-aged management. An all-aged forest or forest crop is one that supports trees of all (or almost all) age classes. Uneven-aged forests are usually produced by the selection method which is accomplished by harvest of ripe timber, the mature trees which are usually the oldest or largest, as either individuals or small bunches at relatively short harvest intervals. These short-spaced harvests are done repeatedly so as to maintain continuous reproduction and the all-aged structure of the forest. (Smith, 1986, p. 330). "Selection methods regenerate and maintain a multiaged structure by removing some trees in all size classes either singly , in small groups, or in strips" (Helms, 1998).

109. "Fresh" selection harvest in Sierra Nevada Mixed Conifer Forest- This mostly ponderosa pine, with scattered white fir, forest has just been logged. The ground surface has been "tore up" by the logging operation resulting in scarification which, as explained above, enhances reproduction (seed germination and seedling establishment in this scene). The rotation is 60 years. Collins Pine Company, Plumas County, California. June. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem), K-5 (Mixed Conifer Forest), Kuchler (1977) California vegetation map unit K-15 (Sierran Montane Forest), SAF 243 (Sierra Nevada Mixed Conifer), but has resemblance at this stage of recovery to SAF 245 (Pacific Ponderosa Pine). Yellow Pine Series of Brown et al. (1998), Pinus ponderosa Association (if one is recongnized for the Yellow Pine Series of Cascade-Sierran Montane Conifer Forest).

110. Selection method to maintain uneven-aged Sierra Nevada Mixed Conifer Forest- One year following a selective harvest in a ponderosa pine-dominated Sierran mixed conifer forest. Note regeneration of understory as well as conifer seedlings. Squaw carpet is the dominant shrub and Idaho fescue and pine bluegrass are dominant grasses. Sixty year rotation. Collins Pine Company, Plumas County, California. June.

111. All-aged management in Sierra Nevada Mixed Conifer Forest- Appearance of vegetation 15 years after last cutting by selection method in a ponderosa pine-California white fir forest. Ponderosa pine is the dominant conifer on this commercial forest compartment, but the tolerant white fir has also reproduced well since the last harvest. Individual plants of Ceanothus species like C. integerrimus C. prostratus, and C. velutinus are scattered and small as are those of manzanita (Arctostaphylos viscida and A. patula). Grasses have largely been replaced by trees and shrubs. Under this management and on this site the range understory has gone from primarily grass and low shrub to taller but seemingly stunted shrubs with reproduction of white fir. A planned 60 year rotation. Collins Pine Company, Plumas County, California. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem), K-5 (Mixed Conifer Forest), Kuchler (1966) California vegetation map unit K-15 (Sierran Montane Forest). SAF 243 (Sierra Nevada Mixed Conifer). Mixed Conifer Series of Brown et al. (1998).

Jeffrey pine (Pinus jeffreyi) replaces ponderosa pine as the dominant pine at higher elevations in both the Sierra Nevada and Transverse-Peninsular Ranges. In the Sierra Nevada Jeffrey pine, aong with red fir (Abies magnifica) and lodgepole pine (Pinus cortorta ssp.murrayana), forms Upper Montane Coniferous Forests which are transitional to the subalpine forest that are made up of mountain hemlock (Tsuga mertensiana), western white pine (Pinus monticola) whitebark pine (P. albicaulis), foxtail pine (P. balfouriana), and limber pine (P. flexilis) as local community dominants (Rundel et al. in Barbour and Major, 1995, ps. 560, 571-583). In the Tansverse-Peninsular Ranges Jeffrey pine grows in a higher elevational zone than ponderosa pine but here it is part of the Lower Montane Coniferous Forests (Thorne in Barbour and Major, 1995, p. 540-544).

112. Jeffrey Pine-Jepson Ceanothus Forest- At higher elevation and a lower-quality site in the Sierran Mixed Conifer Forest Jeffrey pine becomes the dominant Pinus species and forms yellow pine forests in the Upper Montane Forest zone. Here Jeffrey pine and Jepson ceanothus or musk-bush (Ceanothus jepsonii) form a forest cover type on the relatively infertile Dubakella soil series. This is one of the several kinds of serpentine sites, and Jeffrey is more tolerant of serpentine soils than is ponderosa pine (Thorne in Barbour and Major, 1995, p. 542). Some young (at least, small) incense cedars are growing widely scattered. In addition to the shrub layer dominated by the ceanothus, there is a relatively species-rich herb layer dominated by native perennial grasses: slender wheatgrass (Agropyron trachycaulum), blue wildrye (Elymus glaucus), and western needlegrass (Stipa occidentalis). Only two specimens of cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) could be found! Excellent range condition class. Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem), K-5 (Mixed Conifer Forest), Kuchler (1977) California vegetation map unit K-15 (Sierran Montane Forest), SAF 247 (Jeffrey Pine). California Native Plant Society Jeffrey Pine Series. Yellow Pine Series of Brown et al. (1998), Pinus jeffreyi Association (if one is recognized).

113. Jeffrey Pine-Jepson Ceanothus Upper Montane Forest- This is one of many forms or distinctive forest (technically, perhaps, a savanna) communities of the Sierran Mixed Conifer Type. A physiogonomic view of the same vegetation as in the preceding slide. Rich native perennial grass community seemingly typical of both the Great Basin and Californian Floristic Province: slender wheatgrass, blue wildrye, western needlegrass. Forbs lacking. Incense cedar is the other conifer. Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June.SAF 247 (Jeffrey Pine). Pinus jeffreyi Association in Yellow Pine Series of Brown et al. (1998).

114. Jepson ceanothus or musk-bush- Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June.

115. Yellow Pine-Shrub Woodland (Pinus jeffreyi-Artemesia tridentata-Purshia tridentata)- This is the woodland, bordering on savanna, form of the "east side Jeffrey pine type". Jeffrey pine replaces ponderosa pine as the dominant tree on colder sites in the Sierra Nevada. This includes higher elevations and the east slope of the Sierra that joins the edge of the Modoc Plateau-Warner Mountains section of the Great Basin. As seen in this photograph there is a mingling of species from the Great Basin cold desert and the Jeffrey pine-dominated Upper Montane Sierran forests. The dominant shrub is big sagebrush (Artemesia tridentata) with antelope bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata) the associate. The latter is visible in the right foreground but is generally scarce. This suggest that it may have been overbrowsed which, coupled with abundant big sagebrush, would roughly rank this range in Fair range condition class. However, the dominant understory herb is clearlyThurber needlegrass (Stipa thurberiana) with western needlegrass (Stipa occidentalis) the main grass asociate while cheatgrass is extremely limited. Composition of the herbaceous understory is not indicative of abused range (range in Fair condition class). The range is currently being grazed by cattle (visible in right background). This xeric site community was described by Rundel et al. in Barbour and Manor (1995, p. 577) while the big sagebrush-dominated understory was described by Young et al. in Barbour and Major (1995, ps. 771-780).

Plumas County, California. June. No FRES is precise for this range vegetation because it is an ecotone between two general major communities: Great Basin big sagebrush desert (FRES No. 29 [Sagebrush Ecosystem], K-32 [Great Basin Sagebrush]) and Jeffrey pine, a special form of FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine), but there is no K-unit for Jeffrey pine and this is really out of the Sierran Mixed Conifer Type. That ambiguity notwithstanding this is a textbook example of an ecotone.

116. Pacific Ponderosa Pine Forest- Park-like open understory yellow pine forest typical of ponderosa pine with a "pure" grass understory, a consociation of blue wildrye. This is an island of Western Ponderosa Pine Forest (K-10) inside Mixed Conifer Forest (K-5) according to Kuchler (1966) or Sierran Yellow Pine Forest (K-7) according to Kuchler (1977), but the vegetation units are not mapped in the same locations! K-10 is mapped on the east side of the Sierra and K-7 is mapped on the west side of the Sierra with the eastside ponderosa pine type (K-10 in Kuchler [1966]) mapped as K-8, Yellow Pine-Shrub Forest, in Kuchler (1977). Vegetation mapping is not a precise science or even a consistent art form.

Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June. FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem), K-10 (Western Ponderosa Forest), SAF 245 (Pacific Ponderosa Pine). Pinus ponderosa/Elymus glaucus Association in Yellow Pine Series of Cascade-Sierran Montane Conifer Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998), with association title added here in conformanace with expanding Yellow Pine Series as suggested by Brown et al. (1998, p. 35).

117. Ponderosa pine- Female cone (left) and male cone (right).

118. California white fir forest form of the Sierran Mixed Conifer Cover Type- White fir is so widely distributed across all forms of the Lower Montane Mixed Conifer Forest that is regarded as the identifying dominant. As stated above and seen throughout these photographs there is tremendous variation among local communities within the mixed conifer type. One of these communities that is designated as a cover type by the Society of American Foresters (Eyre, 1980) is California white fir in pure stands of even-aged trees (Rundel et al. in Barbour and Major, 1995, p. 563-564).

Such a stand is seen in this and the next slide. Here at the edge of a small forest opening there is white fir reproduction along with a well-developed understory which exist less prominently on the forest floor of fully grown white fir. This understory includes

Huckleberry oak (Quercus vaccinifolia), greenleaf manzanita (Arctostaphylos patula), and tobacco bush or snowbush (Ceanothus velutinus). Pussy toes (Calyptridium umbellatum) on patches of disturbed ground and south slopes.

Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June. If interpreted or viewed as white fir forest then FRES No. 23 (Fir-Spruce Forest Ecosystem), but no Kuchler (1966) map unit; if viewed as White Fir-Mixed Conifer Forest then FRES No. 21 (Ponderosa Pine), K-5 (Mixed Conifer Forest). Kuchler (1977) California vegetation map unit K-15 (Sierran Montane Forest, Abies-Pinus), SAF 211 (White Fir), California Native Plant Society. White Fir Series. White Fir Series in Cascade-Sierran Montane Conifer Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998).

119. Interior of Sierran White Fir Forest- Inside the pure stand of climax white fir seen immediately above. The conspicuous low-growing shrub is huckleberry oak with tobacco bush in far right foreground. Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California, June. SAF 211 (White Fir), California Native Plant Society White fir Series. White Fir Series in Cascade-Sierran Montane Conifer Forest biotic community of Brown et al (1998).

120. Tobacco bush (known also as snowbush and sticky laurel)- Although failrly high in crude protein, Sampson and Jespersen (1963, ps. 102, 111) regarded this ceanothus as of "secondary browse rank" and no higher than fair browse value for deer and goats.

Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June.

121. Squaw carpet or mahala mat (Ceanothus prostratus)- This cenothus is an associate of deer brush often growing in interspaces between it but more commonly found on higher, drier, more sunlit slopes where ponderosa pine is dominant and even up through the white fir to certain sites dominated by more open stands of red fir. The dead basal stem and branches of mahala mat laid over a live plant shows the growth form and deserved specific epithet of prostratus. Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June.

122. Leaves of squaw carpet- Mahala mat produces small amounts of browse. It is rated as useless for livestock other than goats and is of variable browse vaue for deer. Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June.

123. Huckleberry oak- Sampson and Jespersen (1963, p.61) ranked this low-growing live oak as a species of secondary browse rank it being of poor feed value except for deer. Acorns are probably as imprortant for feed as is the browse. All shrubs of the white fir forest are critical for watershed protection. The dense, colony-forming shrubs like huckleberry oak are especially valuable as watershed plants. Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June.

124. Diagram of zones of vegetation along the elevational gradient of the central Sierra Nevada- Source: Shelford (1963, p. 170). Communities along this generalized transect vary depending on latitude or even general section of the Sierra (eg. northern, central, southern Sierra Nevada) as well as factors like soils, slope, aspect, etc.

125. Red Fir Forest- California red fir (Abies magnifica) forests are typically the first zone of Upper Montane Sierran Forest above the Mixed Conifer Forest (Rundel et al. in Barbour and Major, 1995, p. 571). It often forms "pure" stands of even age so dense as to prevent any (we're talkin' plumb bare, pilgrim) understory. Most precipitation comes as snow with depth of snowpack indicated by lower level of wolf lichen (Letharia vulpina and L. columbiana) on boles (Barbour, 1993, p. 113). Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June. FRES 23 (Fir-Spruce Forest Ecosystem), K-7 (Red Fir Forest), Kuchler (1977) California vegetation map unit K-17 (Upper Montane-Subalpine Forest), SAF 207 (Red Fir), California Native Plant Society Red Fir Series. Red Fir Series in Cascade-Sierran Montane Conifer Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998).

126. Red Fir Upper Montane Sierran Forest- This view is at edge of a clearcut with young red fir reproduction at the edge and mature red fir behind illustrating two age classes. Red fir is rated Intermediate in tolerance (Wenger, 1984, p. 3) and regenertes best following disturbance that opens up the canopy. Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June. FRES No. 23 (Fir-Spruce Forest Ecosystem), K-7 (Red Fir Forest), Kuchler (1977) California vegetation map unit K-17 (Upper Montane-Subalpine Forest, Abies-Pinus), SAF 207 (Red Fir). Red Fir Series in Cascade-Sierran Montane Conifer Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998).

127. Virgin Red Fir Forest- Interior view of this first zone of the Upper Montane Sierran Conifer Forest. There is reproduction of the intermediate tolerance red fir, but no shrub or herb layers due to dense canopy cover, late snowmelt, mulch effect of accumulated duff, etc. Obviously there is no range where there is no understory, and this is more often the case as not with red fir climax forest. The utilitarian value of this cover type to the rangeman is primarily its function in watershed protection and accumulation of snowpack to provide melt water for ranges below. The canopy is also valuable as summer shelter or cover for big game (and stray livestock), mostly in the form of thermal cover (shade, in civilian terms). Red fir is also important for tree-dwelling wildlife. And no complaints: it's easy to move through. Plumas National Forest, Plumas County, California. June. FRES No. 23 (Fir-Spruce Forest Ecosystem), K-7 (Red Fir Forest), SAF 207 (Red Fir), California Native Plant Society Red Fir Series. Abies magnifica Association (if one is recognized) in Red Fir Series in Cascade-Sierran Montane Conifer Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998).

128. Red fir Forest near subalpine zone in the Cascades- Here at upper reaches of the Upper Montane Red Fir forest trees widely dispersed enough for an open canopy and an understory of pinemat manzanita (Arctostaphylos nevadensis). This shrub does not provide much browse and that is of limited value. Lassen Volcanic National Park, Shasta County, California. June.FRES No. 23 (Fir-Spruce Forest Ecosystem), K-7 (Red Fir Forest), Kuchler (1977) California vegetation map unit K-17 (Upper Montane-Subalpine Forest, Abies-Pinus), SAF 207 (Red Fir), California Native Plant Society Red Fir Series. Red Fir Series in Cascade-Sierran Montane Conifer Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998).

129. Red fir (left trunk) and white fir (right trunk)- Rundel et al. in Barbour and Major (1995, p. 563) specified that at the upper elevational limit of white fir "A. concolor mixes with A. magnifica in a transition to red fir forest communities".

The subalpine forests of the Sierra Nevada and Cascades occur above the Sierra lodgepole pine forest zone. In contrast to the subalpine forests of the Rocky Mountains which are fir-spruce forest (eg. such dominants as subalpine fir [Abies lasiocarpa] and Engleman srpuce [Abies engelmannii]) the dominants of the Sierra-Cascade subalpine forests are mountain hemlock (Tsuga mertensiana), the most common conifer of this zone, and any of four species of pines the dominance of which varies site by site. Western white pine (Pinus monticola) is a dominant on the Pacific side of the Sierra and in the Cascade Mountains where it is an associate of mountain hemlock and the Upper Montane dominants, red fir and lodgepole pine. At timberline in the Sierra Nevada whitebark pine (P. albicaulis) is dominant. On the east side or Great Basin slope of the Sierra, limber pine (P. flexilis) replaces whitebark pine in a similar ecological niche (Rundel et al. in Barbour and Manor, 1995, p. 582). Limber pine was seen above as a common species in the photographs of Rocky Mountain forests. Foxtail pine (P. balfouriana) is much less common in the Sierra Nevada.

130. Mountain Hemlock Sierran Subalpine Forest- The Sierran subalpine forest occurs abjacent to and immediately above the upper montane zone which in the Sierra Nevada is lodgepole pine. Western hemlock is the overall dominant of the Sierra subalpine zone. According to Burns and Honkala (1990, p. 624) there are two subtypes of subalpine mountain hemlock forest: 1) forest subzone of fairly continuous forest canopy (> 25%) at lower elevations (or just above red fir and/or lodgepole pine) and 2) parkland subzone of scattered individual trees or small tree clumps (canopy < 25%) immediately above the forest subzone to timberline.

The climax mountain hemlock (this species can be seral [Eyre, 1980, p. 102]) forest seen here is the forest form in foreground with the parkland subzone in background below ridgeline. Lassen Volcanic National Park, Shasta County, California. June. Multiple choice on vegetation units: 1) FRES No. 23 (Fir-Spruce Forest Ecosystem), K-4 (Fir-Hemlock Forest) or 2) FRES No. 26 (Lodgepole Pine Forest Ecosystem), K-8 (Lodgepole Pine-Subalpine Forest). Kuchler (1966, 1977) did not map Mountain Hemlock Forest specifically. SAF 205 (Mountain Hemlock). California Native Plant Society Mountain Hemlock Series, part of Whitebark Pine-Mountain Hemlock Forest or, more general yet, Subalpine Conifer Forest. Mountain Hemlock Series in Cascade-Sierran Subalpine Conifer Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998).

131. Mountain Hemlock Sierran Subalpine Forest- This is the parkland subzone form of mountain hemlock. Though the trees are widely scattered there is very little understory in this old-growth forest. A few runt huckleberry (Vaccinium spp.) bushes eeked out a living and spots of western moss-heather (Cassiope mertensiana) grew in depressions wet with melt water. Elevation is about 8000 feet. Obviously the main value of this cover type is for watershed. It is a type that would be part of the range of free-ranging animals providing at least some cover. Lassen Volcanic National Park, Shasta County, California. Vernal to early estival aspect, June. Multiple guess on classification: 1) FRES No. 23 (Fir-Spruce Forest Ecosystem), K-4 (Fir-Hemlock Forest) or 2) FRES No. 26 (Lodgepole Pine Forest Ecosystem), K-8 (Lodgepole Pine-Subalpine Forest). Mountain Hemlock Forest not mapped per se by Kuchler (1966, 1977), SAF 205 (Mountain Hemlock). Mountain Hemlock Series in Cascade-Sierran Subalpine Conifer Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998).

132. Whitebark Pine at timberline in the Cascades- The dominant plant of timberline in Sierra Nevada and Cascade Range is whitebark pine. On this windswept crest this "king of the mountain" is the textbook example of the dwarfed, multi-stemed krumholtz growth form. Elevation is 8500 feet. Whitebark is a stone pine and its seeds are vaulable for such wildlife as Clark's nutcracker (Nucifraga columbiana), red squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus), and grizzly bear (Ursus horribilis) (Eyre, 1980, p. 88; Burns and Honkala, 1990, ps. 268, 271). Of course the California grizz is extinct, but young squirrels are fine fare fried. Otherwise this is another cover type most valued for watershed protection: holds top of the mountain on.

Lassen Volcanic National Park, Shasta County, California. Vernal aspect, June. Multiple guess on classification: 1) FRES No. 23 (Fir-Spruce Forest Ecosystem), K-4 (Fir-Hemlock Forest) or 2) FRES No. 26 (Lodgepole Pine Forest Ecosystem), K-8 (Lodgepole Pine-Subalpine Forest). Not mapped by Kuchler (1966, 1977) as such, but Garrison et al. (1977, p.III) included whitebark pine in FRES No. 26 suggesting that forest communities above K-7 (Red Fir Forest) in FRES No. 23 are most precisely in FRES No. 26. SAF 208 (Whitebark Pine). California Native Plant Society Whitebark Pine Series as part of Whitebark Pine-Mountain Hemlock Forest or as the Whitebark Pine Forest. Whitebark Pine Series in Cascade-Sierran Subalpine Conifer Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998).

Unfortunately whitebark pine forests have declined in recent years due to human altered fire regimes and fungal disease so that steps are necessary to restore this important high elevation forest community (Tomback et al., 2000).

133. Details of whitebark pine bark and crown- Two trunks (two trees) and partial crowns of an ancient whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis). Whitebark pine has often been included with limber pine (P. flexilis) as in the "stone pine group" and as distinguished from the so-called "nut pines" such as pinyon pine (P. edulis) and one-leaf pnyon (P. monophylla). This was the standard treatment in Harlow et al. (1979, ps. 71-76). Other treatments make no such distinction. The seeds of whitebark pine are also gathered and eaten (raw or roasted) just like the nut pines (Elias, 1980, p. 41).

Although whitebark pine is typically a scrubby tree with a more shrub-like appearance--and often dwarfed in krumholtz form as shown immediately above--some specimens like the two shown here can achieve more upright growh and attain tree-forms. Such individuals are some of the most "stately" of all trees combining the "rugged good looks" with tall, straight trunk "dignified" by honor scars from "many winds and much of strife" as written in the poem Good Timber by Douglas Malloch.

These trees were growing at about 800 to 1200 feet lower elevation than the ones presented immediately above..

Lassen Volcanic National Park, Shasta County, California. June (and yes, the white behind trees was a snowbank).

134. Sierra Lodgepole Pine (Pinus cortorta ssp.[or var.] murrayana)- The next elevational zone of Sierra forest, the one immediately above the red fir fir forest zone, is the Sierra lodgepole pine. These trees are not the tall, straight trees of the Rocky Mountain lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta ssp. [or var.] latifolia) nor the extremely depauperate or dwarf lodgepole of the Pacific shore and Coast Range known as shore or beach pine (P. contorta ssp. [or var.] contorta and P. contorta ssp. [or var.] bolanderi). The latter is often known specifically as Bolander pine especially when it is associated with pygmy cypress (Cupressus pygmaea) and forms the California pine barrens called the pygmy forest. The pine barrens (= pygmy) forest was pictured and discussed below. The Rocky Mountain lodgepole forest cover type was shown and described under the Rocky Mountain portion of these Forest and Woodland slides.

As just indicated by the scientific names, some authorities regard the taxa murrayana, latifolia, contorta, and bolanderi as subspecies while others interprete them as varieties. Most practical rangemen and foresters elect not to split those hairs. Enough to know that there are taxonomic units within the Pinus contorta species that reflect the different major habitats this diverse pine dominates.

Harlow et al. (1979, ps. 109-112) characterized the cones of P. contorta var. murrayana as symmetrical and non-serotinous (ie. the cones open at maturity) whereas the cones of the other three subspecific taxa typically have cones that are serotinous (ie. the cones remain closed for extented periods after the seeds are ripe). Serotinous cones often require heat in excess of the highest ambient temperature before they will open. See also Eyre (1980, p. 97). The most obvious such heat source is forest fire. Hence the "closed cone pines", as serotinous species are known, are largely dependent on fires for successful reproduction and forest regeneration (ie. they are fire-dependent species; their forests are fire-types).

Even though the high Sierra Nevada and Cascade ranges experiences lightening strikes in summer storms such storms are relatively infrequent (recall that at elevation of red fir forest snowfall is the main source of soil moisture). Even with "dry lightening" (little no rain accompanies thunderstorms) the vegetation at upper elevations of these ranges is less apt to ignite or develop into the intense fires of the Lower Montane and foothill zones of the yellow pine forests or chaparral. Evolution has wrought self-opening cones as seen here in the Cascades on the Devastated Area of Lassen Volcanic National Park. Sierra lodgepole pine is usually the first tree species to return during secondary succession on land whose vegetation was destroyed by cataclasmic disturbances like the eruption of Lassen Peak which occurred here 70 years ago. Each of the variant genetic forms of lodgepole pine is admirably suited to its unique habitat.

This is an example of Darwinian fitness or natural selection (subspeciation in this case).

California Mixed Evergreen Forests

California Mixed Evergreen Forests is a collective term that encompasses a set or array of Pacific coastal mountain forest communities. These are spatially situated within (ie. "sandwiched" between) the Northern Pacific Coast Conifrerous Forests (the complex of Redwood Forest, Cedar-hemlock-Douglas Fir Forest, Spruce-Cedar-Hemlock Forest, etc.) to the west and California Oak-Pine Woodland, California Annual Grassland, and various forms of California Chaparral to the east. This general community of mixed evergreen forest forms often occurs as a mosaic within these types (Sawyer et al. in Barbour and Major, 1995, ps. 360-361). It extends from southern Oregon to southwestern California, but it's form as zonal vegetation is limited mostly to central and, especially, northern sections.

Sawyer et al. in Barbour and Major (1995, ps. 360-361) divided the general Mixed Evergreen Forest thusly:

--- Douglas-fir-Hardwood Forest

--- Klamath Mountains

--- North Coast Ranges

--- Mixed Hardwood (South Coast Ranges)

--- Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia)-Pacific Madrone (Arbutus menziesii) Forest

--- Tanoak (Lithocarpus densiflora)-Pacific Madrone-Oak Forest

--- Canyon Live Oak-Coulter Pine (Pinus coulteri) Forest

--- Minor Forest Types including:

--- Santa Lucia or Bristlecone Fir (Abies venusta= A. bracteata) and

--- Big-cone Douglas-fir or Big-cone Spruce (Pseudotsuga macrocarpa) Forests

Note: The following examples of California Mixed Evergreen Forest are series in the Oregonian Deciduous and Evergreen Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998) unless otherwise noted (eg. Oregonian Coastal Conifer Forest biotic community).

135. California Mixed Evergreen Forest- This transitional form or subtype of the Mixed Evergreen (Douglas-fir-Hardwood) Forest Type is a Digger pine-Pacific madrone-Douglas-fir-overstory with a shrub layer of scrub oak, mostly canyon live oak or maul oak (Quercus chrysolepis) and scrub interior live oak (Q. wislizenii var. frutescens). The understory is naturalized Eurasian annual grasses and forbs from the California annual type. Rock outcrops support conspicuous lichens. This is a bluff with a northwest slope along the Trinity River. At the upper, more mesic reaches and at a more northward aspect the tree layer also has widely scattered giant chinquapin, also spelled chinkapin, (Castanopsis chrysophylla= Chrysolepis chrysophylla), tanoak, and California black oak. This stretch of the river and the Mixed Evergreen Forest is in the inner ridge area of the Coast Range west of the California annual grassland and foothill woodland zones and east of the Douglas-fir-dominated mixed hardwood subtype shown in the next slide. This is an example of an ecotone or transition zone between other and more specific communities or range cover types (ie. the three just named). It has the Digger pine from foothill pine-oak woodland and the Douglas-fir from the Pacific Coast Coniferous Forest. The tanoak is of the shrub rather then the tree form which occurs in the Douglas-fir-Mixed Hardwood Forest, the non-transitional form and the major forest cover type of the Mixed Evergree Forest Complex.

Trinity River, Trinity National Forest, Trinity County, California. Estival aspect, June. FRES No. 20 (Douglas-fir Forest Ecosystem), K-25 (California Mixed Evergreen Forest), transitional to Kuchler California vegetation map unit K-21 and SAF 234 (Douglas-fir-Tanoak-Pacific Madrone) seen in next three slides. Mixed Mesophytic Series in Oregonian Deciduous and Evergreen Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998).

136. California Douglas-fir- Mixed Hardwood (Douglas-fir-Tanoak-Pacific Madrone) Forest- This North Coast Ranges unit of the general Mixed Evergreen Forest Complex is along the Trinity River north and west of the transitional Mixed EvergreenForest seen in the last slide. As in the preceding slide, Douglas-fir dominates at upper limits but dominance is much more complete at this more mesic forest site. Zonation is very pronounced with Pacific madrone forming a conspicuous zone in the foreground. Tanbark oak is also conspicuous as it is in full-bloom with its characteristic pale lemon-color. Giant chinquapin is an associate. California laurel which is known also as bay laurel or bay tree and, most commonly among locals, as pepperwood (Umbellularia californica) is widely scattered and short in stature. Canyon live oak occurs in the shrub understory, especially in openings and drier slopes, while pepperwood occupies the understory in more mesic shallow draws. An herbaceous understory is absent except along banks of the river where willows predominate and beneath the canyon live oak where annual Eurasian grasses like silver hairgrass survive. Young giant or golden chinkapin are growing behind the willows where disturbance by stream scouring created a habitat favorable for them. Sparsely scattered among the Douglas-fir are interior live oak and California black oak.

Trinity River, Trinity National Forest, Trinity County, California. Early estival aspect, June. FRES No. 20 (Douglas-fir Forest Ecosystem), K-25 (California Mixed Evergreen Forest), Kuchler (1977) California vegetation map unit K-21 (Mixed Evergreen Forest with Chinquapin, Arbutus-Chrysolepis-Lithocarpus-Pseudotsuga-Quercus). SAF 234 (Douglas-fir-Tanoak-Pacific Madrone). Mixed Mesophytic Series in Oregonian Deciduous and Evergreen Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998).

137. Interior of Douglas-fir-Tanoak-Pacific Madrone Mixed Evergreen Forest- Douglas-fir and tanbark oak with the latter in full-flower. Canyon oak (tree form) is the main associate. Trinity National Forest, Trinity County, California. Estival aspect, June.

138. Composite view of the Douglas-fir-Mixed Hardwood Forest- Young Douglas-fir are at far left foreground. Immdiately behind the young Douglas-fir is mature Pacific madrone with its characteristic smooth, light-orange, showy bark. The right foreground has immature and mature Douglas-fir with tanbark oak scattered among them. Tanoak is distinguishable by its greenish-yellow or lemon-colored inflorescences. The background (far right) is solid stand of even-age Douglas-fir indicating the dominance of this conifer. (Burns and Honkala, 1990, ps 126-127) described the Douglas-fir-Tanbark Oak-Pacific Madrone cover type as one with "Douglas-fir as the overstory species and tanoak and madrone as secondary canopy". California. Canyon or maul oak, the main associate tree, and understory species (eg. giant chinkapin) are not visible. Trinity National Forest, Trinity County, California. Estival aspect, June. FRES No. 20 (Douglas-fir Forest Ecosystem), K-25 (California Mixed Evergreen Forest), Kuchler (1977) California vegetation map unit K-21 (Mixed Evergreen Forest with Chinquapin). SAF 234 (Douglas-fir-Tanoak-Pacific Madrone). Mixed Mesophytic Series in Oregonian Deciduous and Evergreen Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998).

139. Interior of old-growth coast redwood forest- The climax vegetation seen here is a composite of the layers in this forest cover type. It shows that there is browse in virgin redwood forests such that even this dense primeval woods does function as permanent forest range (ie. redwood forest is not transitory range only; the type provides browse at all stages of succession on some sites). The tallest of the understory trees is tan oak (one in full-bloom is immediately to the left of the center redwood). The tallest shrub (sometimes of tree height and form) is red bilberry or red huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifolium). It is the woody plant directly in front of the center redwood. Blue or California huckleberry (V. ovatum) is to left and rear of the center redwood. California hazelnut (Corylus cornuta var. californica= C.rostrata var.californica) is barely visible at far right. Herbaceous layer is almost exclusively sword fern. Jedidah Smith Redwoods State Park, Del Norte County, California. June. FRES No. 27 (Redwood Forest Ecosystem), K-6 (Redwood Forest), SAF 232 (Redwood). Coast Redwood Series in Oregonian Coastal Conifer Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998). Coast redwood/evergreen huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum) association of Kagan et al. (2004).

Coast redwood is not part of the California mixed evergreen forest but it often developed adjacent to it and where these two forest cover types meet there is often an ectonal forest community of varyng breadth and composition.

Coast Redwood Forest

NOTICE: Coast Redwood Forest was covered separately under that title and also as part of Pacific Northwest Forest. This one example was included only for purposes of continuity and to direct readers to location of the coast redwood range cover type.

140. Tan oak (Lithocarpus densiflorus)- This attractive member of the Fagaceae gets it's common name from the former widespread use of it's high-tannin content bark (Peattie, 1953, ps. 414-415) for tanning cattle hides. The earliest major industry in Spanish-Mexican California was commerce in hides and tallow (the latter mostly for candles). New England merchants sailed their ships around the horn of South America (there being no American Cannel at Panama) up to ports in California like San Francisco. There was global trade in cattle hides that were produced in abundance on ranges in both North and South America. As Adam Smith wrote in Wealth of Nations (Smith, 1776, ps. 200-202) it is the province of early livestock industries in developing countries to deal in commodities like wool, hides, and tallow. Every California rangeman (and those Californians wanting to know the real [vs. Hollywood] culture of their grand Bear Flag Republic) should read the story of the California hide trade in the classic Two Years Before the Mast by Richard Henry Dana (1840). The other classic in this context is The Cattle on a Thousand Hills by Cleland (1941, ps. 31,34,106, 111, 134, 135, 185, 188, 197). For years the real currency of California was cattle hides. In remote parts of the "real California" where folk are countrified (and proud of it) a cow hide is still known as a "California banknote". "Frisco" once had excellent tanneries, but that was when it had more character than snobbery. Tan oak was also known as squaw oak after the habit of California Indians making a flour and mush from the crushed and extracted acorns (Peattie, 1953, p. 415). Trinity California, California. June.

141. Understory of the Douglas-fir-Tanoak-Pacific Madrone forest cover type-This interior understory view of the Douglas-fir-Mixed Hardwood Forest reveals the "monopoly" of the scattered herbaceous understory by naturalized Mediterranean annual grass. Such patches of California annual grassland vegetation are limited to rare openings in the canopy of this cover type of the Mixed Evergreen Forest Compex. Panicles of stunted wild oats are visible on this south slope. Silver hairgrass, soft brome, and foxtail fescue are also present. The tree trunk is obviously Douglas-fir and the shrub immediately to its right is a Pacific madrone seedling. Burns and Honkala (1990, ps. 130-131) stated that young madrone seedlings require partial shade to become established. Mature Pacific madrone are in left background and another Douglas-fir is at far right background. Range S1, University of California Hopland Field Station, Mendocino County, California. Estival aspect, June. FRES No. 20 (Douglas-fir Forest Ecosystem), K-25 (California Mixed Evergreen Forest). SAF 234 (Douglas-fir-Tanoak-Pacific Madrone). Mixed Mesophytic Series in Oregonian Deciduous and Evergreen Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998). Douglas-fir-Pacific madrone-oak/poison oak (Rhus diversiloba= Toxicodendron diversilobum) association of Kagan et al. (2004).

142. Interior of Pacific madrone forest phase- Even within a given forest cover type of the Mixed Evergreen Forest Complex such as the Douglas-fir-Tanoak-Pacific Madrone Forest (SAF 234) there is a patchwork of plant communities where species form consociations or even single-species stands much like fields of different crops on one farm. This is the interior of one such unit of vegetation: a dense population of Pacific madrone. Burns and Honkala (1990, p. 131) rated madrone as Intermediate in tolerance and concluded that the species "is more subclimax than climax in successional status". This conclusion seemed wrong— obviously so —given that madrone and tanoak are the main two associates of the climax Douglas-fir Mixed Hardwoods Forest. One plausible explanation is that "Pacific madrone reproduces mainly by sprouting" (Burns and Honkala (1990, p. 128). This asexual reproduction by sprouting or coppicing (explained shortly) not only allows Pacific madrone to dominate seral forest stages following logging or fire, but explains (at least partly) how an Intermediate species can survive to and persist in the climax. Besides, Douglas-fir is generally rated as Intermediate in tolerance (Wegner, 1984, p. 3; Burns and Honkala, 1990, 534). If madrone's Intermediate ranking relegates it to subclimax then Douglas-fir is also subclimax, but neither of these species (nor tanoak) is subclimax for the potential of this area. They are the dominants of the climax vegetation. In his map of Natural Vegetation of California (Kuchler, 1977) listed Arbutus as the first dominant for four forest formation mapping units. By this classification Burns and Honkala (1990, p. 113) had to be in error to categorize Pacific madrone as "subclimax".

***Background Material: Throughout discussions of forest vegetation repeated reference has been made to tolerance. This is a bedrock concept in Forest Ecology, Dendrology, Silvics, even Forest Management. The concept of tolerance is so basic to Forestry that most students of that profession learn (at least, are exposed to) the general idea. Students in Range Management (or Wildlife Management not to mention Agronomy, Animal Science, or Agricultural Economics) are generally much less familiar with the principle of tolerance. Such students are referred to such texts and references as Harlow (1979, p. 45), Spurr and Barnes (1980, ps. 380-390), and Wegner (1984, ps. 1-10). The concept of tolerance— like most vital concepts —is not simple, completely understood, or easily defined. In fact the term is defined in several ways because it is used in several contexts, even within Forestry. (What else is new? Ditto on range, forest, wildlife, cattle, cow, dog, man, student.) The most relevant and authoritative reference in the context pertinent to this discussion is perhaps that of the Society of American Foresters (Helms, 1998):

"Silviculture the capacity of trees to grow satisfactorily in the shade of, and in competition with other trees; if intolerant of shade, they are termed light demanders; if tolerant, shade bearers".

This interior of a Pacific madrone stand is climax vegetation, but it is a 40 year-old second-growth forest that regenerated by coppicing following firewood cutting. Usually Pacific madrone seedlings are uncommon, particularly under madrone trees. The clump of about eight small madrone stems in the left foreground regenerted by sprouting from a root burl.

In the discussion of silvicultural systems for the Sierran Mixed Conifer Type two of four basic reproduction methods were shown for conifers. According to Smith (1986, p. 330), besides even-aged and uneven-aged management the third general reproduction method is the coppice-forest method. This is production of forest trees "originating primarily from vegetative regeneration".

Coppice- A syntaxic feature of agricultural vocabulary is the use of a word as both noun and verb. Thus one plows with a plow, ropes with a rope, etc. (ax, knife, and lasso are exceptions as only greenhorns speak of axing a tree or lassoing a calf). Coppice follows the typical syntax and means variously: 1) production of new stems from stump or root, 2) to cut a trunk or root so as to encourage production of new shoots for purposes of regeneration, and 3) a plant originating by coppicing (Helms, 1998).

The coppice method, at least in some fashion, undoubtedly traces to antiquity. It has been included in silvicultural texts since the beginning (eg. Hawley, 1921, ps. 111-140).

In A Primer of Forestry Part II- Practical Forestry Pinchot (1905, ps. 18-22) established coppice methods as a proper silvicultural system in North America.

The Pacific madrone forest seen here is an example of coppice regeneration, albeit not a consciously planned forest management practice. Once again, this illustrates that forests are renewable natural resources and capable of renewing themselves. The mission of the forester is to facilitate this renewal for benefit of forest and man. He may be well-assisted in this action by the rangeman. Lumbermen, stockmen, sportsmen, and ordinary citizens all have roles to play in the wise use of forests and the goods and services they provide. Specifically, stock-growers should stock clear-cut Douglas-fir-Mixed Evergreen Forest units so as to regenerate those species having most value to the forest owner— the entrepreneur and manager of the resources —and society. This is discussed under the next slide and following a brief discussion of madrone leaves.

Pacific madrone, as much as any species, typifies the broad sclerophyll leaf feature mentioned above. The term is tracable back to Cooper (1922) who developed the useful idea of Broad-Sclerophyll Forest Formation (Sawyer et al. in Barbour and Major, 1995, p. 361). Sclerophyll is literally "hard leaf" and, by extension, hard-leaved plant. This hardness is a combination of several factors but heavy, thick cuticle to reduce transpiration and multiple layers of palisade cells with a tendency for mesophyll to be palisade-like (Cooper, 1922) are prominent among them. In addition "broad sclerophyll" suggest that these leaves might be so large as to discourage consumption. Leaves so constituted are not likely to be nutritious nor, therefore, palatable to browsing range animals. This could be predicted generally even without chemical analysis. The broad sclerophyllous leaves of Pacific madrone are clearly seen in this slide.

Range S1, University of California Hopland Field Station, Mendocino County, California. August. Stand of one dominant species in FRES No. 20 (Douglas-fir Forest Ecosystem), K-25 (California Mixed Evergreen Forest), variant or one part of SAF 234 (Douglas-fir-Tanoak-Pacific Madrone). Arbutus menziesii Association (when and if one is recongized), Mixed Mesophytic Series in Oregonian Deciduous and Evergreen Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998). Douglas-fir-Pacific madrone-oak/poison oak (Rhus diversiloba= Toxicodendron diversilobum) association of Kagan et al. (2004).

143. Interior of Pacific madrone vegetation unit of the Douglas-fir- Mixed Hardwood Forest Type (SAF 234, Douglas-fir-Tanoak-Pacific Madrone)- The coppice sprouting feature of madrone is evident here in this formerly cut-over forest (the Pacific madrone phase Mixed Evergreen Forest). The three trunks in a clump at left are joined at base to form a raised circular structure which is where they sprouted from the old stump which rotted leaving a distinct "hole". This is characteristic of old trees that developed by coppicing. It is a typical growth pattern of clonal trees. Each of the "trees" existing as an individual bole is a ramet, offshoot, or module (a clone; a genetically identical organism produced by asexual reproduction) of the original genet (the genetic organism, the original genotype) Coast redwood responds in a similar but even more spectacular fashion forming "catheral trees". If shoots, limbs, branches, buds of individual trees (or tillers and stolons of grasses) are interpreted as ramets essentially all plants are clonal organisms or modular organisms. This is known as modular structure. Trees having generation after generation of long-lived ramet trees from an original genotype are essentially immortal. Each clump of trees seen here is a set of ramets or modules from the original old-growth madrone.

The coppice method is another silvicultural system that allows management for sustained yield. It is primarily an even-aged reproduction method. This method does not allow tree breeding for genetic improvement because the genotypes of the parent trees are propagated. This is the foresters equivalent of the orchardman's grafting or budding.

The clonal or modular structure was shown for quaking aspen in the Shrubland slides.

The deep mulch of madrone leaves layered year after year has prevented anything resembling an understory to develop in this forest. Range students unfamilar with this vegetation would naturally assume that there is no range here. Their assumption is only partly correct. The morphology and structure of the broad sclerophyll (the wide, thick hard, stiff, heavily cutinized leaf) of Pacific madrone was seen in and mentioned with the previous slide where it was remarked that these would not be desirable browse. Sampson and Jespersen (1963, 127-128) rated browse value of madrone as poor to useless for all domestic ruminants and no higher than fair for deer.

That is not the "end of it". While determining nutritive value of sheep diets (Rosiere and Torell, 1985) on the experimental pasture which included this stand of madrone (and open grassy spaces like the one seen two slides above) the author observed sheep (ewes more than lambs) select many madrone leaves. Sheep chose madrone leaves primarily during summer and fall when annual grasses and forbs were dead. These leaves were eaten, passed down the esophagus, and fell out the fistula as estrusa into the collection bag. The botanical composition of diets was not determined as part of this study, but personal observations when esophageal extrusa of diets was gathered proved that Pacific madrone contributed considerable dry matter to sheep diets. The quality of this browse was unknown. Given the phenomenon of grazing selectivity, whereby free-ranging animals invariably eat more nutritious feeds, one must conclude that madrone made useful contributions to range sheep diets. On numerous occasions ewes were observed to carefully select green or yellow madrone leaves while avoiding brown ones. A ewe would take a leaf (after she had carefully sniffed it) and roll it around in her mouth before either swallowing it or letting it drop to ground. Ewes were comic-like as they rapidly moved their small lips over leaves testing what God and they alone knew. Notice the different colors of fallen leaves in this slide that was taken a few days following sheep diet sampling.

This incident relates to management of these forests as range. Sampson and Jespersen (1963, p. 127) observed that small ruminants eat madrone resprouts for two years following fire. If it was desired to regenerate madrone (it makes good firewood) browsing would have to be carefully managed or even prevented. Alternatively, Pacific madrone (along with giant chinkapin) dominates early seral stages of Douglas-fir forest following logging. Sheep and goats could be used to control this brush in order to reduce competition with Douglas-fir if was desired to quickly regenerate this valuable lumber species.

Range S1, University of California Hopland Field Station, Mendocino County, California. Estival aspect, June.Stand of one dominant species in FRES No. 20 (Dougla-fir Forest Ecosystem), K-25 (California Mixed Evergreen Forest), variant or part of SAF 234 (Douglas-fir-Tanoak-Pacific Madrone). Arbutus menziesii Association in Mixed Mesophytic Series in Oregonian Deciduous and Evergreen Forest biotic community of Brown et al. (1998). Douglas-fir-Pacific madrone-oak/poison oak (Rhus diversiloba= Toxicodendron diversilobum) association of Kagan et al. (2004).

*Scrub Forests of the Coast Ranges

Scrub forests occurring along the Pacific Coast and outer edge of the Coast Ranges were treated under Pacific Northwest Forests.

*Pacific Douglas-fir Forest of the Coast Ranges

Douglas-fir forests (including industrial or commercial forests) of the Coast Ranges were treated under Pacific Northwest Forests.

[ Home ]