# 128 - YIPPEE (MTSF, MA)

[dbhguru]

NTS,

  Yesterday, Monica, friend Marjorie Barrell and I went to Mohawk to revisit some favored sites and look for more hemlock woolly adelgid. I did find a small amount of adelgid on the summit of Thumper Mtn. That's the bad news. Thumper is a small ridge with lots of heart. It is a very aesthetic spot - one of Monica's favorites. Here is a scene going up the ridge.

               

                       

                                       

               

   Monica and Marjorie at the top. It was here I found adelgid on two summit hemlocks. Other trees are in fine shape.

               

                       

                                       

               

  We'll be hunting for adelgid over the next few weeks and trying to determine the extent of coverage, the characteristics of the sites, etc. Everybody agrees that now is the time to catch it and do treatments. NTS role will be to find the occurrences, describe them, and help prioritize the treatments.

   The thinning of the crowns of the Mohawk pines continues to be disturbing. So far researchers who have identified the fungi haven't determines the long term impacts. But I am hoping that it will not get steadily worse.According to researchers, the fungi seem to favor extremes, i.e. pines growing in very wet or dry areas. However, my observations in Mohawk is that the fungi are not that discriminating. I see the impact across the spectrum of growing environments. Since I observe the crowns of the Mohawk pines more than any other human in the known universe, Tim is relying on me to classify the level of defoliation for different areas. That is another job for the coming weeks.

  On the good news side, we revisited Marjorie's favorite pine. Here are two images of Marjorie in silent communication with her tree.

               

                       

                                       

               

               

                       

                                       

               

  Naturally, I had to re-measure Marjorie's pine and it is 151.0 feet. It becomes number 128. I evidently hadn't found the top on my past measurement and had the pine at 148.0 feet on March 16, 2010. I don't think it grew 2.1 feet since that last measurement, although close. Regardless, it is now a member of the exclusive 150-Club. I'm glad Marjorie's tree has entered the club. She relates to her tree at a deep level. I was impressed.

  I also went over to the Jake Swamp tree and photographed its crown. Nowhere in New England can one witness the view of a higher twig of a tree above its base. While I was in Colorado, Tim Zelazo took a group around inspecting the damage to the pines from the fungus. One person was a U.S. Forest Service researcher who was mightily impressed with the pines in Mohawk, observing that they didn't have ANYTHING in the New England research forests to compare with what he was seeing. Smart researcher. Which brings me to a point:

               

                       

                                       

               

  Now that I'm back and in the swing of things, I am thinking fresh thoughts about Mohawk and its significance. How much importance, value, worth, etc. is there intrinsically? How much is there because of the intense amount of attention that it has been given by NTS? I'm a little too prejudiced to be counted as an objective contributor. But I'm wondering what some of the rest of you think. How much importance can reasonably be given to the elements I report on. You all have seen many images taken in Mohawk and have read the statistics and have a pretty good basis of comparison to other sites in Massachusetts, New England, the Northeast, and the entire East. Is Mohawk Trail State Forest of principal value more because so much of New England has crappy, abused forests as described by myself and Joe Zorzin? Beyond its obvious aesthetic appeal, what value can realistically be placed on Mohawk's reserve of exceptionally tall pines? Examining other potential sources of information about the trees exposes a void. For example, if we relied on sources like the University of Massachusetts forestry school to keep us informed about the exceptional trees of Mohawk Trail State Forest, the place wouldn't be a bleep on the forest radar scope. I'm serious. In the past, Mohawk would have fared little better via official DCR literature. Thankfully, that is now changing, and changing rapidly, but we are obviously deeply involved in the transition, and will likely remain so. I'm so focused in promoting Mohawk that I seldom think about the what would happen in our absence, but I expect a gradual return to anonymity. Then, maybe not. Maybe the ground has been sufficiently seeded over the past 25 years as to permanently change the culture.  

  Related to the above musings, why have we in NTS had to work so hard to bring this state park-forest into public consciousness? Just wondering? I would appreciate any comments/observations the rest of you would be willing to make. I like to have fresh thoughts when talking to members of the public who show interest in Mohawk, but wonder why they hadn't heard about the place's exceptional trees before.

Bob

[Larry Tucei]

Bob,  Congrats on another 150' White Pine.  Without you leading the way for the Forests at MTSF I don't think they would have been noticed by as many, me for example. You have brought the MTSF to the people and the right people. But not just MTSF many other Forests!  NTS is one of if not the best group of tree advocates in the country. Without you, Will, Ed, Don, Don, Lee and many others places like MTSF, Cook, Congaree, etc., would not get the true recognition that they deserve. Places like these need to be protected, studies and cherished by all!  Thanks Bob!!!  On the last comment “but wonder why they hadn't heard about the place's exceptional trees before". In Mississippi for example we have many National Forests, State Parks, etc., but often they don't get the recognition or appreciation that they deserve. In this modern age we seem to be forgetting our bond with the natural world, you and others has pointed this out on many occasions. I guess it’s up to us at NTS to make sure places like these are on the radar. One of most important things I think is to get our children introduced to the Forests for they are the future! Maybe MTSF could have a childrens trail with numbered stops and a small booklet for parents to help the children learn the different Trees, Plants, etc.  

Larry

[dbhguru]

Larry,

    Most of the time I just lower my head and charge with little thought to why's and wherefore's, but on occasion, I reflect back on what has happened over the past 25 years here in erudite Massachusetts and puzzle over the dynamics. We're supposed to be in the forefront, intellectually, but when dealing with forest topics, it is not necessarily the case. To understand the political environment, one must punch through lots of layers (for lack of a better term). There is the government layer, which we might call officialdom, mostly state and local, but some federal. There is the environmental organizations layer; the timber community layer; the academic layer; and there are individual nature writers, photographers, etc. The general public absorbs information about forested properties and forest issues through these layers. Some important professional groups work at the big picture, research level, e.g. Harvard Forest, and others are focused on individual wooded properties such as the Friends of the Holyoke Range. One comes into contact with representatives from most of these layers on an important forest issue. So what's my point?

  The hard thing for me to get into my noodle is that places like  MTSF, MSF, Ice Glen, and Bryant Woods passed virtually unnoticed through all the layers - except us. This means a lot of experienced, highly educated people are only now seeing what is in the named places with a comparative and more appreciative eye and realizing their importance as sources of state pride worth protecting. The exceptions are organizations such as Mass Audubon and Harvard Forest that we work with directly.

  As a bottom line, I'm trying to sort it out so that when I give public talks, I can give credible explanations to satisfy the puzzled looks I sometimes get. I'm usually in evangelist mode and don't stop to reflect on why what I'm saying may sound improbable to some of my listeners (Is this guy giving us the facts? Why hadn't we heard of these places before?). The attendees may like me, personally, or at least my enthusiasm, but I expect that they leave unconvinced that what I'm told them is indeed true. It does seem improbable, which makes its authenticity all the interesting.

  I hope what I've said above doesn't sound like complaining. I'm not. I'm thankful for our progress. I've simply reached a point where, in reflection, I'd like to better understand the dynamics of what has been going on. Maybe there's a book in there somewhere.

Bob

[Don]

Bob-
I noticed that the third image had a tree with a tag on it. Having worked for several land management agencies and attended several forestry schools, I recognize that as part of the record keeping system, so that the scientific method can be maintained, so that researchers can verify one's work.  But even tags get worn, chewed, taken off over time (30-40 years is about as much as I'd expect them to last, on average, across regions).
Where do you see NTS in this scheme of things?  What is the likelihood that future researchers will be able to: find individual trees, access associated published data, record growth data after we've gone beyond our ability to get around in the forest?

[dbhguru]

Don,

  The tags are ours. We put them on to allow us to monitor growth of individual trees over the years. Alas, the information has not been in demand. I use the tags to identify candidates that are about to break some dimensional threshold in reporting to others. There may come a time when the tags serve other functions to include monitoring the health of individual trees.

  In terms of the future, I expect that the tags will continue to serve limited purposes. I'd like to acquaint others who might like to do research. Mass Audubon, Harvard Forest, etc. know the tags are there. They definitely are under-used. From my particular perspective, I'll continue to make data available on individual trees to DCR. They get all my data, but is is overwhelmingly dimensional data as of specific dates.  

Bob

[AndrewJoslin]

Bob, can you provide links to more info on the fungus defoliating white pine? Thanks!

I haven't noticed any white pines with needle drop issues in eastern Mass., is there a known range for the fungus at this point?
-AJ

[Joe]

Bob, can you provide links to more info on the fungus defoliating white pine? Thanks!

I haven't noticed any white pines with needle drop issues in eastern Mass., is there a known range for the fungus at this point?
-AJ

I'm starting to see pines dying or having a significant amount of unexplained dead foliage in north central Mass.
Joe

[AndrewJoslin]

Is it the same fungus associated with White Pine Blister Rust or something else? Just read something that said higher altitude white pine is more susceptible to blister rust.
-AJ

[Joe]

We're supposed to be in the forefront, intellectually, but when dealing with forest topics, it is not necessarily the case.
Bob

Bob, that's it in a nutshell. It's a weak topic in Mass. but also in many other places world wide. Partly because the forest is a resource for different types whose interests clash.

and also because it's such a hugely complex topic that few people can or want to get a full picture of the forests

which is why I've been saying for a long time that there is a need for a fusion of all these views which will be difficult when attempted but so few even bother

with a richer view of the forests- that could reduce the conflict because, I suggest, there is no real conflict

Joe