Pine Barrens without Fire?

[NJChileHead]

Hi Again Folks,

I wanted to ask about the role of fire in Pine Barrens ecology. I've done a little reading on the benefits of controlled burning and how burning is essential to maintaining the Pine Barrens, but I am not sure about one thing.

What I was wondering is if the Pine Barrens could ever really become a full oak/mixed hardwood forest with the soil conditions being the way they are? I may misunderstand this, but if I understand correctly, the pine needles could add enough nutrients to the soil, in theory, to allow succession to continue, and the mixed detritus could eventually condition the soil enough for a full oak forest.

What I am wondering; is the porosity of the soil too great, and the soil too acidic, to maintain a full oak or mixed hardwood forest? Would it become a mixed pine/oak or oak/pine and stabilize, or is it actually climaxed 'as is' because of soil and acidity restrictions? I thought that with the porosity of the sand, that it would not retain the nutrients and that the conditions may always be 'just right' for the ecosystem that is there now (or am I wrong?)

Thank you for any info that you can share.

Chilehead

 

[bobpbx]

Chile (I can't write the head part for some reason):

To answer you would require a book by someone very knowledgeable on the subject. I am not, but I point you to the chapter entitled "Development of Pine Barren Soils" by John C. F. Tedrow in the great book..."Pine Barrens, Ecosystem and Landscape", Richard T. Forman, Rutgers University Press. From the summary..."Soils of the Pine Barrens are formed on sandy, siliceous, acid materials which are highly leached and strikingly depauperate in plant nutrients".

With that said, I note that the pine barrens are not homogenous, and I have noted many full oak areas in the pine barren boundaries. However, in those really typical sand areas, such as the Sassafrass or Lakewood variety, you'd have to wait a long, long time for the change to full Oak.

 

[manumuskin]

From what I have read the pines will turn into an oak hickory forest in the uplands if unburnt for quite awhile.I have read theories that the oak areas in the barrens such as surrounds Washington and Mount are from people living there and protecting the area from wildfire because the lived there.I can't say this is accurate.I know when people down here cut the oaks for firewood they resprout so quickly that the pines cannot take over and the pines we do have are generally much bigger then the oaks because they are passed over for firewood at each successive cutting.Now most fires only kill the oaks above ground and they still resprout like what happened in 98 down here on Buckshutem road across from the present motorsports park.The stumps are resprouted and the area has thickened up top about ten foot high oak shrubbery now.Almost all trees were killed off and the trees still are falling reguarly.Now if the fire was hot enough to kill everything even below ground (Don't know if that would be possible but it seemes to have happened east of 206 in the 82 fire) Then it would be a toss up as to what tree would colonize the area.I'd have to bet on pine.The seeds are on the tree all year so when the big trees fell any unburnt cones would reseed the area whereas all acorns on the ground would be toast and any scrub oak acorns would be toast also.I am of the opinion thats hot wildfire that toasted below ground level would set the succession back to pine/oak or solid pine.I don't know if this has ever been verified or not.The only wildfire I ever seen kill absolutely everything was the 82 fire east of 206 and that area was pine to begin with so it's not an example of an area going from aok back to pine.
Al

 

[PancoastDrifter]

... 'depauperate', what a great word.

 

[bobpbx]

Al, several weeks ago I had Scott, Chris, Ben and Gabe in the Chamberlin Branch area. The 95 fire swept through there like Armageddon. All the cedars (some 30-40 feet high) for the whole width of the swamp were killed in one fiery blast...as well as all the ground cover.

But one species did survive.

 

[manumuskin]

Al, several weeks ago I had Scott, Chris, Ben and Gabe in the Chamberlin Branch area. The 95 fire swept through there like Armageddon. All the cedars (some 30-40 feet high) for the whole width of the swamp were killed in one fiery blast...as well as all the ground cover.

But one species did survive.

let me guess! Pinus Rigidia?

 

[bobpbx]

let me guess! Pinus Rigidia?

Yes, see the burned cedars in the background. Even if 15 years ago, those pines had to be large at the time of the fire. Now, after the fire they are "living large"!

 

[Spung-Man]

Pines seem to thrive where windblown sands are present around the world. Much of Pinelands soils are composed of ancient cover sands and dunes. On the Delmarva Peninsula, the best pine stands developed on the Parsonsburg dunes. The same is true for dune areas like Brandenburg region in Germany (Scots Pine, Pinus sylvestris), and other sand-belts I’ve visited across Northern Europe. While droughty areas are fire prone, favoring pine for its fire adaptability, I suspect that even without wildfire pines would do quite well in sandy locations. Many pine species are exquisitely adapted to droughty conditions. For example, Japanese Black Pines (P. thunbergiana) forms forests on coastal dunes in Japan and Korea that rarely burn. I don’t think Pitch Pine (P. rigida) patches on Mid-Atlantic coastal dunes are much affected by fire either. On sandy windblown deposits in Western China, Pitch Pine is being introduced to take the place of Chinese Pine (P. tabulaeformis). Chinese Pine is poorly adapted to fire.

S-M

 

[manumuskin]

Pines seem to thrive where windblown sands are present around the world. Much of Pinelands soils are composed of ancient cover sands and dunes. On the Delmarva Peninsula, the best pine stands developed on the Parsonsburg dunes. The same is true for dune areas like Brandenburg region in Germany (Scots Pine, Pinus sylvestris), and other sand-belts I’ve visited across Northern Europe. While droughty areas are fire prone, favoring pine for its fire adaptability, I suspect that even without wildfire pines would do quite well in sandy locations. Many pine species are exquisitely adapted to droughty conditions. For example, Japanese Black Pines (P. thunbergiana) forms forests on coastal dunes in Japan and Korea that rarely burn. I don’t think Pitch Pine (P. rigida) patches on Mid-Atlantic coastal dunes are much affected by fire either. On sandy windblown deposits in Western China, Pitch Pine is being introduced to take the place of Chinese Pine (P. tabulaeformis). Chinese Pine is poorly adapted to fire.

S-M

So what do you think Spung Man ? Without fire would the pine barrens become the oak barrens? With repeated hot wildfires would this turn oak woodlands into pine woodlands? In my semi educated guess I'd say yes to both but am not totally sure of my answers.

 

[manumuskin]

Yes, see the burned cedars in the background. Even if 15 years ago, those pines had to be large at the time of the fire. Now, after the fire they are "living large"!

I remember walking down Cooks Branch with you and you relating how it looked before the firs nad it was plain the area had been leveled by it in the past.Was any of the pre fire swamp left unscorched or did the fire take it all? It did seem to be coming back solid cedar.I have never seen cedar sprout from the stump so I assume that there were berries in the trees that survived and fell to reseed the swamp or perhaps seeds carried in from nearby swamps in bird poop?I see these areas where the cedar swamp has been clearcut to the ground like along route 54 by the Great Egg crossing and at Dan's branch north of Absegami lake and part of Penn swamp was cut like this and there are always signs that said it was a cedar regeneration project.In all cases these swamps seemed to be doing just fine in regards to cedar production before they were cut.I always looked at it as a money making project by the state and nothing more with the cedar regeneration being an excuse for their profiteering on the publics land and a poor excuse at that.Is there anything to these clearcuts other then greed?

 

[Spung-Man]

Without fire would the pine barrens become the oak barrens?

Manumuskin,

What a tough question! Read Silas Little’s The Effects of Forest Fires on the Stand History of New Jersey’s Pine Region, Forest Management Paper No. 2, February 1946, 43 pp. He concluded that light but frequent fires characterized the pre-settlement Pine Barrens, a condition which he felt optimized Pine stands over hardwoods. Little also felt there was hardly an upland stand today that resembled the Pine forests seen by the first colonists. In lowlands, severe fires of the last 200-years destroyed the Atlantic Whitecedar that were replaced with hardwoods. So according to Little fires give and taketh away conifers.

Here’s some additional musings of my own. Fire favors Pine. Drought favors Pine. Insects and disease ravage both species, so that’s a draw (e.g., southern pine beetle on Pines vs. bacterial leaf scorch on Oak). Abrupt interglacial climate temperature swings would probably benefit Pine over Oak. Forest exploitation by man would probably favor Pine too, but will vary greatly upon the nature of his disturbance. Over-exploitation of shallow ground water by man probably favors Pines. Face it, Pitch Pine is the cockroach of South Jersey’s plant world. My money is on Pine/Oak in the long-term. Wanna make a 1000-year bet?

S-M, NJ Certified Tree Expert #285.

 

[manumuskin]

Hooray for Pinus cookaracha!

 

[Ben Ruset]

I have almost the same pic from that day.

 

[bobpbx]

Think of the sound and the fury when that stand of cedar went up in a flash of fire. If you were standing on the edge of the swamp your skin would have dripped right off your bony frame.

Kawhoooomph!

 

[manumuskin]

Bob I haven't had a bony frame since sometime in the 80's but thanks anyway