Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />001582 <br /> <br />(Fig. 1). These data indicate that bolewood produc- <br />tion on a yearly basis was not significantly influ- <br />enced by varying environmental factors, including <br />those influenced by changes in snow parameters. It <br />has been suggested that cambial activation may begin <br />with snow still on the ground. Sometimes, this snow <br />persists for some time into the growing season (Fig. <br />4). If this persistent snow influences cambial cell <br />division and expansion early in the growing season, <br />this delay in growth may be compensated for by more <br />rapid growth later in the season, resulting in a <br />comparable amount of wood produced each year. In <br />another study with Engelmann spruce Gary (1974) found <br />that the growing season was long enough to overcome <br />any inhibitive effect due to late-lying snow and that <br />there was no significant difference in growth between <br />snow-covered and snow-free plots. This type of <br />"catch-up factor" has also been suggested for other <br />subalpine plant species (Owen, 1973). <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />This constant annual wood production can probably be <br />ascribed to the intrinsic genetic controls of the <br />species themselves. These spruce and fir trees have <br />genetically adapted over long periods of ecologic <br />time to the environmental conditions of the subalpine <br />and thus, the amount of wood produced each year <br />appears to be fixed. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />4.4.3. Conclusions and Recommendations <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Individual trees of the Engelmann spruce-subalpine <br />fir association were shown to exhibit relatively <br />constant bo1ewood production on a yearly basis. This <br />constant production is attributed to, the genetic <br />properties of the species themselves, rather than <br />controlled by factors of the environment. Therefore, <br />changes in snow parameters probably do not affect the <br />wood production of individual spruce trees on a year <br />to year basis. <br /> <br />Bolewood production of spruce-fir stands was also <br />shown to remain constant over the 20 year study <br />period. This trend is probably a function of genetic <br />control also, because stand production is a reflection <br />of the cumulative responses of the individual trees. <br />Such constant production is also a result of the <br />climax status of these forests; uneven-aged climax <br />forests typically exhibit a constant production over <br />time with minor fluctuations resulting from individual <br />tree mortality. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Bole biomass values for these stands were shown to <br />exhibit severe perturbations in standing crop values <br />and these sudden losses in biomass were attributed <br />to catastrophic events such as windthrow, insect out- <br />break or fire. Therefore, these forests could be <br />chara~terized as a "disturbance climax" in which the <br />spruce and fir trees dominate the site and reproduce <br />under their own shade, but show severe fluctuations <br />in standing crop because of disturbance events. It <br />is debatable as to whether changes in snowpsck <br />conditions could positively or negatively influence <br />these disturbance events. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />These conclusions must be conditional, however, due to <br />the short time period of this study. Cumulative <br />effects of snow manipulation could not be evidenced <br />in a study of this duration and detrimental effects of <br />direct snow on sapling and seedlings could affect the <br />future status of these forests. Therefore, it is <br />recommended that future studies be conducted on seed- <br />ling establishment and early growth. Also, the cell <br />deposition pattern within the growing sesson should be <br />investigated to reveal possible delayed cambial <br />activity in years of late sn~ melt. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />4.4.4. Literature Cited <br /> <br />Alexander, R.R. 1958. Silvical characteristics of <br />Engelmann spruce. USDA, USFS, RMFRES Sta. <br />Paper 31. 20p. <br /> <br />Blaue, R.W. 1973. Phenology of Engelmann spruce <br />in southwestern Colorado. M.S. Thesis, Colorado <br />State University, Ft. Collins, Colo. 85 p. <br /> <br />Gary, H.L. 1974. Growth of Engelmann spruce (Picea <br />en~elmanni1) unaffected by increased snowpack. <br />Arctic and Alpine Res. 6:29-36. <br /> <br />Kirs, T., H. Ogawa, K. Yoda and K. Ogino. 1967. <br />Comparative ecological studies on three main types <br />of forest vegetation in Thailand IV. Dry matter <br />production with special reference to the Khao <br />Chong rain forest. Nature and Life in Southeast <br />Asia 5:149-174. <br /> <br />Ovington, J.D. 1962. <br />woodland ecosystems <br />Res. I:103-183. <br /> <br />Quantative ecology and the <br />approach. Adv. in Ecol. <br /> <br />Owen, H. 1973. <br />The San Juan <br />Report 1973. <br />7052-Z. <br /> <br />Herbaceous phena10gy p. 14-16 IN: <br />Ecology Project, Interim Progress <br />U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, CSU-DWS <br /> <br />Whittaker, R.H. 1970. Communities snd ecosystems. <br />Collier-Macmillan Ltd., London. l58p. <br /> <br />24 <br /> <br />.. c c <br />