Forest list archive: msg00087

[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: Old growth, pristine forest etc. definitions



What about ANTIGUE FORESTS?

This article is from BEN (Botanical Electronic News) # 144.

Adolf Ceska <aceska@victoria.tc.ca>


WHAT ARE THE ANTIQUE FORESTS ? (RE: BOTANY BC FIELD TRIP)
From: Trevor Goward, Nature Canada - Summer 1994.

As  a  rule,  lichen colonization in a maturing forest occurs in
two pulses. The first consists of various species of  widespread
distribution, and is essentially complete by the time the forest
reached the century mark. The second, more diffuse pulse doesn't
really  begin  to  register  until  50 to 100 years later. It is
comprised of species living at or near the ecological limits  of
their  range;  many  will  remain  rare even once they do become
established.

These phenomena are by no means peculiar to the conifer  forests
of  western  North  America.  Similar patterns have already been
amply  documented  in  Britain  by  lichenologist  Francis  Rose
(1976).

In  mid-'70s,  Rose  conducted inventories of the lichens of 102
oak and beech woodlands in different parts of the British Isles.
When later he compared his species lists against  existing  land
use  records,  he  found a definite positive correlation between
lichen diversity and forest age. This led him to  conclude  that
some  lichens  may be regarded as "historical indicators of lack
of environmental change, within certain  critical  limits,  over
long periods of time."

British forests undisturbed for many hundreds of years typically
support between 120 and 150 lichen species per square kilometre.
The  richest  forest  for lichens by far is the New Forest which
ironically, is  anything  but  new,  having  apparently  escaped
woodcutter's axe since at least the Middle Ages. It was found to
contain  an  astonishing  259  species  of lichens. By contrast,
British woodlans dating from less than 200  years  ago  tend  to
support fewer than 50 lichens per square kilometre.

In  the  British  Isles,  as in British Columbia, a 150-year-old
forest will not acquire its full complement of epiphytic lichens
for at least another century or two.  The  fact  obliges  us  to
think again about what we mean when we speak of "old growth."

Should  an old-growth woodland 1000 years old be lumped, for the
purposes of conservation, with one that is "only" 200 years old?
Both forests may appear identical to the untrained eye. But they
clearly are not  identical  -  whether  as  living  archives  of
British Columbia's past, or as repositories of biological tradi-
tion.

"Antique  forests,"  as  I define them, are simply the oldest of
the old: forests that have been around long  enough  to  accumu-
late,  among  other  things,  a  rich  assemblage  of old-growth
epiphytes. Such forests seem invariably to be more than  300  to
350  years  old, and many, in many cases, have been in existence
much longer than the most ancient trees within  them.  The  last
point is important. A 150-year-old tree in a 500-year-old forest
may  well support more old-growth indicators than a 250-year-old
tree in a forest dating from a fire of equivalent vintage.

Goward, T. 1994. Living antiquities. Nature Canada, Summer 1994:
   14-21.
Goward, T. 1994. Notes on oldgrowth-dependent  epiphytic  macro-
   lichens  in  inland  British  Columbia, Canada. Acta Botanica
   Fennica 150: 31-38.
Rose, F. 1976. Lichenological indicators of age and  environmen-
   tal  continuity  in woodlands. Pp. 279-307 in: Brown, D.H. et
   al.  [eds.]  Lichenology:  progress  and  problems.  Academic
   Press, London.


References:

[Metla] [Main Index] [Thread Index]

Mail converted by MHonArc 1.1.0