Ongoing Research Summary Leolyn Grove at Lilydale, NY Erik Danielson, 2019 Figure 1: Leolyn Grove's tallest remaining White Pine (Pinus strobus) Site Description Leolyn Grove (referred to throughout as “the Grove”) is a 16.5-acre old-growth forest located within the hamlet of Lilydale, NY, and owned by the Lilydale Assembly. As seen in the attached map, an additional ~2 acres covered by old-growth trees is separated from Leolyn Grove by Dale Drive. The land on which the Grove is located is functionally an island, ringed by the Cassadaga Lakes to the west and south, and a complex of wetlands to the east. These lakes are glacial kettles formed by ice masses left behind by the retreating Wisconsin glacier, and the moraine immediately to the north marks the edge of the Portage Escarpment, locating the Grove within the Western Allegheny Plateau ecoregion as defined by The Nature Conservancy (Edinger et al.. 2014). See Figure 2 for a map detailing the Grove's location and context. The land surface underlying the Grove slopes gently from east to west, where the smaller fragment of forest terminates at the lake edge. Soils underlying the Grove derive from glacial till and outwash and are classified as Chenango Gravelly Loams- a deep, well-drained soil with moderate texture (USDA Web Soil Survey). This soil type is usually described as having a low calcium carbonate content, but an the presence of several rich-site plant species suggests that calcium levels may be locally elevated. Calciphilic plant species in the wetlands surrounding the springs that supply Cassadaga Lake with water suggest a relatively mineralized output and it may be the water table, rather than the soil material, that benefits the rich-site species observed. Site Ecology Leolyn Grove falls under the Hemlock-Northern Hardwoods community type as defined by the NY Natural Heritage Program (Edinger et al., 2014). Eastern Hemlock (Tsuga canadensis) is the dominant canopy tree, but the canopy at this site is noted for its high diversity of co-dominant canopy species. The standing biomass is impressive; one source describes it as the “greatest density of old-growth broadleaf trees in the Northeast” (Kershner and Leverett, 2004). The grove features a well-developed shrub layer as well as a diverse ground flora. The ground flora includes many disturbance-sensitive species, reflecting the site's lack of historical logging. The herbaceous flora, along with the high diversity of canopy trees, suggest commonality with the rich-site variant of Hemlock-Northern Hardwoods community described from other Western Allegheny Plateau sites. See Table 1 for an expanded listing of the floristic composition described above. Common names used throughout the following narrative can be matched with specific names in Table 1. Beyond the Grove's eastern border, forested habitat continues, interrupted only by undeveloped wetland habitats. While much of this contiguous forest is not particularly intact, it links the Grove into a larger functional landscape that includes additional HemlockNorthern Hardwoods stands in various states of recovery. This lends it greater ecological value than it might have as a truly isolated pocket of old-growth within a more uniformly developed landscape. Close examination of the Grove's structure suggests that processes leading to the present canopy composition are still playing out today. The following discussion is speculative, but represents this researcher's best efforts to develop a narrative by applying described forest ecology dynamics and available historic information to the observed condition of the current stand. This may aid in predicting and understanding future developments in the Grove's ecology. In a stable old-growth Hemlock-Northern Hardwoods ecology, in this location, longterm succession would tend towards climax stands dominated by Hemlock, Beech, and Sugar Maple. Less shade-tolerant species like Black Cherry, Northern Red Oak, Shagbark Hickory, White Ash, and White Pine would persist by taking advantage of the small-scale gap-phase disturbance pattern resulting from typical various-cause mortality and would be relatively scattered and make up a much smaller percentage of the stand, and eventually may drop out altogether. The Leolyn Grove, however, has a very high percentage of those species, and the majority of dominant stems of each of those species seem to be close in age, including the white pine supercanopy. I would speculate that this cohort stems from a major blowdown event. Based on recorded stump counts and cores (Battaglia, personal communication) as well as conservative visual assessment of age characteristics this likely occurred around 250 years ago. Scattered throughout the grove are a handful of trees visually appear as though they may be older than this grouping, and tellingly most of these are currently slanted and show signs of having recovered from major crown damage a long time ago. Microbursts occur periodically in the area and this stand would have been relatively exposed in such an event, due to its geography. While individuals of all of these species can attain ages of greater than 250 years, it may be expected that this cohort will experience an increasing rate of natural mortality in coming decades. This may already be underway; the mortality rate of large, dominant trees dying in the last five years of observation is much higher than could realistically be projected backwards over the last century while still resulting in the high-density stand observed today. The majority of the stand's small-stem trees are Sugar Maple, Beech, and Hemlock, with a large number of sub-dominant Sugar Maples already jockeying for space in the canopy, so this period of elevated mortality is likely to increase the proportion of shade-tolerant species in the canopy. Table 1: Native Plant Species Binomial Common Name Trees Acer rubrum Red Maple Acer saccharum Sugar Maple Betula alleghaniensis Yellow Birch Notes Carya ovata Shagbark Hickory Fagus gradiflora American Beech Beech Bark Disease Fraxinus americana White Ash Declining Juglans cinerea Butternut 1991 record, no recent observation Magnolia acuminata Cucumber Magnolia Pinus strobus White Pine Prunus serotina Black Cherry Quercus rubra Northern Red Oak Tilia americana Basswood Tsuga canadensis Eastern Hemlock Declining Shrubs Acer pensylvanicum Striped Maple Cornus alternifolia Alternate-Leaved Dogwood Rubus sp Blackberry Sambucus canadensis Black Elderberry Viburnum acerifolium Maple-Leaved Viburnum Viburnum lantanoides Hobblebush Herbaceous Plants Allium tricoccum Wild Ramp Arisaema triphyllum Jack in the Pulpit Carex laxiflora Loose-Flowered Sedge Caulophyllum sp Blue Cohosh Collinsonia canadensis Citronella Horse Balm Conopholis americana American Cancer-Root Dryopteris intermedia Intermediate Wood Fern Dryopteris marginalis Marginal Wood Fern Epifagus virginiana Beechdrops Galium triflorum Fragrant Bedstraw Geranium robertianum Herb Robert Hydrophyllum virginianum Virginia Waterleaf Impatiens pallida Pale Jewelweed Maianthemum canadense Canada Mayflower Maianthemum racemosum False Solomon's Seal Mitchella repens Partridgeberry Nabalus sp Rattlesnake-Root Parasitic Parasitic Parathelypteris noveboracensis New York Fern Parthenocissus quinquefolia Virginia Creeper Podophyllum peltatum Mayapple Polygonum biflorum Solomon's Seal Polystichum acrostichoides Christmas Fern Prosartes lanuginosa Yellow Fairybells Smilax herbacea Smooth Carrionflower Tiarella cordifolia Heartleaf Foamflower Trillium erectum Red Trillium Viola pubescens Downy Yellow Violet Concerns Beech Bark Disease has been impacting the Grove's Beech trees for at least a decade. A number of mature trees appear to be healthy in spite of openings that would facilitate bark disease, so this stand may have a reasonably high presence of resistant genetics and recover its beech component quickly (in the forest-dynamics sense of the term). Mortality in White Ash has increased due to Emerald Ash Borer. The Grove's largest specimen came down in the winter of 2018-19 and its fallen trunk showed signs of borer activity. No Hemlock Woolly Adelgid has been detected in the Grove yet, but it would be prudent to inventory the stand's Hemlocks and devise a strategy for their conservation. No other single species is as vital to the Grove's structure and ecosystem functions as Hemlock. Due to the grove's small size and proximity to developed areas, nonnative invasive species have made their way into the understory. Goutweed (Aegopodium podagraria) and Knotweed (Reynoutria sp) along the Grove's northern margin are of greatest concern, but Periwinkle (Vinca minor) has established large patches in the southwestern portion and Garlic Mustard (Allaria petiolata). The Lilydale Assembly is working with WNY PRISM to address invasive species threats. Research in the Grove Historically, formal investigation and descriptions of the Grove are limited. The Grove was assessed by the Western New York Old-Growth Survey Team in March 1991. The Team recorded the presence of Butternut as a canopy tree, none of which are still present in the Grove today. They recorded a single core sample with ~200 readable rings, from a tree 40.4” in diameter- unfortunately the notes did not record the species of the sampled tree. They also recorded stump counts of ~230 years from a Basswood and ~220 years from a Hemlock. From 2014 to present, I have been recording data from the Grove measuring tree diameter, height, and canopy spread. As a member of the American Forests National Cadre I adhere to the methodologies developed by the Eastern Native Tree Society and standardized under American Forests with the aim of ensuring that measurement data is consistently reliable (Bertolette and Leverett, 2015). One of the key benefits of this methodology is that it eliminates the geometric error sources associated with height measurement by traditional clinometer methods and even today by height measurement routines programmed into professional forestry hypsometers. This provides the researcher with new opportunities to resolve fine correlations between species- and individual-specific height data and other environmental parameters. Some of the measurements collected from the Grove are currently incorporated into Virginia Tech Dendrology's Superlative Tree Database. Going beyond these standard measures, the Grove has proven an accessible testbed for approaches to optical modeling of tree volume. This work has applications to questions about carbon sequestration and storage and relationships between trunk mass and crown mass, particularly as they relate to trees of advanced age in old-growth systems. Table 2 collects the current measurement data. Expected margin of error on standard height measurements is +-1.5' except where noted by an asterisk. Measurements with an asterisk were collected with higher-precision, stabilized instuments and should be accurate to within 0.5'. Table 2: Tree Measurements Species Key: TsCn= Tsuga canadensis, PnSt= Pinus strobus, AcSc=Acer saccharum, AcRb=Acer rubrum, PrSr=Prunus serotina, QuRb=Quercus rubra, FgGr=Fagus grandifolia, BtAl=Betula alleghaniensis, CrOv=Carya ovata, MgAc=Magnolia acuminata, FrAm=Fraxinus americana Final Rucker Index (10) is compiled from the trees highlighted in green. Species Height (ft) DBH (in) Crown (ft) Notes /Year Last Measured AcRb 122.3* 37 2018 AcRb 116.4 35.9 2016 AcSc 127.7* 22.9 2018 AcSc 121.5 35.6 2014 AcSc 120.8 32.1 2018 AcSc 120.6 28.1 2018 AcSc 119.9 25.6 2018 AcSc 109 36.9 2019 BtAl 97.5 25.6 2016 BtAl 94.8 22.2 2016 CrOv 119.7 24.9 2018 CrOv 113.9 36.8 2018 FgGr 118.9* 37.1 2018 FgGr 110.6 36.4 2014 FgGr 107.5 38.3 2018 FrAm 128.63* 35.7 Fell 2019 /2018 FrAm 125.2 29.7 2018 FrAm 112.1 35 2014 MgAc 116.4* 38.1 ~405 ft3 trunk only (crown pending) /2019 PnSt 148.05* 50.5 PnSt 143.5 41.9 “Little Sister” Pine /2018 PnSt 135.5 33.7 2018 PnSt 126.5 34.2 Fell 2015 /2015 PnSt 125.6 42 Weathered snag at time of measurement, year of death unknown /2014 PrSr 128.63* 46.5 “Nina Serotina,” ~755 ft3*, trunk still 33.6” D at 74' high /2019 PrSr 126.2 36.6 2014 PrSr 123.2 45.1 2014 PrSr 113.9 42.2 “Stout Cherry” /2018 PrSr 110.9 41.7 2014 QuRb 118.98* 44 “Staghead Oak,” ~599 ft3* /2019 QuRb 111.3 33 2018 QuRb 110.4 44.9 2014 QuRb 103.8 53.8 Wrapped at 60” high to exclude burl. Fell 2019 /2015 TsCn 132.3* 39 Tallest in grove /2018 TsCn 129 41.7 “Hopeful Hemlock” /2018 TsCn 128.7 43.4 “Grandfather Hemlock,” ~716 ft3 /2018 TsCn 126.9 36.4 “Spire Hemlock” /2018 TsCn 125 34.5 2014 TsCn 123.4 43.6 “Great Uncle Hemlock,” ~620 ft3, fell 2019, partial ring count at fracture 223 rings /2018 TsCn 121.1 36 2014 TsCn 121 41.1 2014 TsCn 116.8 48.7 “On the Fence,” ~717 ft3 /2018 TsCn 111.7 43.1 “Grandmother Hemlock” ~497 ft3 /2018 Rucker Height Index (2019) 52.5 “Big Sister” Pine, modeled volume ~885 ft3 / 2018 125.8 References Cited Bertollette, D., Leverett, B. American Forests Champion Trees Measuring Guidelines Handbook. 2015. American Forests, Washington D.C. Kershner, B., Leverett, R.T. The Sierra Club Guide to the Ancient Forests of the Northeast. 2004. Sierra Club Books, San Francisco, CA. Edinger, G.J., D.J. Evans, S. Gebauer, T.G. Howard, D.M. Hunt, and A.M. Olivero. Ecological communities of New York State. Second Edition. A revised and expanded edition of Carol Reschke's Ecological Communities of New York State. 2014. New York Natural Heritage Program, New York Department of Environmental Conservation, Albany, NY. Figure 1: Contextual Map Figure 2: Fallen remains of “Great Uncle Hemlock,” with “Grandfather Hemlock” standing vigil in the background. February 2019 Figure 3: Buttressed roots of the tallest American Beech, October 2018 Figure 4: Hobblebush understory, October 2017 Figure 5: The Staghead Oak (left) and Nina Serotina (right), two exceptional specimens of their species and among the most carefully modeled old-growth exmaples of their kind to date. While Nina Serotina is the larger of the two, the greater wood density of Quercus rubra compared to Prunus serotina means that both trees are very close in estimated mass by dry weight (12.9 tons and 13.2 tons, respectively).
