Canadian Maps and Graphics

[TownGuy]

For Ontario I found this eco-regions map, which is highly detailed. If you click the link I post it lists corresponding trees for each eco-region.

[https://www.ontario.ca/page/ecosyste...ions#section-6

[lio45]

Actually, just for the sake of closure (and I guess I should've thought of that yesterday), I'll suggest this:

1) Find me just ONE common forest characteristic shared by all of the following: Southeastern Manitoba, Thunder Bay, Huron County ON, Kingston, Montreal, Edmundston NB, Campbellton NB, Gaspé, but NOT present in Central NB / Fredericton.

or 2) shut up and agree with me.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by TownGuy

For Ontario I found this eco-regions map, which is highly detailed. If you click the link I post it lists corresponding trees for each eco-region.

[https://www.ontario.ca/page/ecosyste...ions#section-6

That's the kind of minimum detail level I expect an Ontario forester to work with when you tell them that you have X acres in Area Y, to have an idea of the tree mix you're likely to have over there, and what you should try to focus on growing long term.

It's really not rocket science though, and very imperfect. The idea that you can't possibly hope to argue against a given random map if you don't have a PhD in Forestry is total BS. Of course, the more detailed the map, the harder it will be to challenge, and the more likely it is to have few flaws. The map above, for example, I don't see why anyone would have a problem with it, unless they're really an expert in their own Ontario neck of the woods and want to point out a slightly incorrect boundary due to a microclimate the mapmakers oversaw, or something like that.

[TownGuy]

Actually noticed from that link I posted it's only showing info on certain eco-regions. If you click around you can get to it all though.

[shreddog]

Originally Posted by vid

The map says Thunder Bay has Eastern Hemlock and Oak in its forests, but we don't. I didn't see an oak tree in the wild until I went to Manitoba.

FWIW, drive out to Stanley. Park on the side of Hardstone road just west of River rat and the area between you and the river up to the bridge is full of oak trees.

link

[vid]

Originally Posted by shreddog

FWIW, drive out to Stanley. Park on the side of Hardstone road just west of River rat and the area between you and the river up to the bridge is full of oak trees.

link

So, 1: it's rare and 2: I've never been to that particular location in Stanley. I've gone to the tavern but I've never been tubing. I don't like getting wet.

They're essentially an endangered species here.

[shreddog]

Originally Posted by vid

So, 1: it's rare and

Yup, T Bay is on the northern edge of the natural range

Originally Posted by vid

2: I've never been to that particular location in Stanley. I've gone to the tavern ...

If you ever go back, just walk east of the parking lot and you'll see them.

Originally Posted by vid

They're essentially an endangered species here.

Based on the article, likely to become moreso

There used to be a couple stands around South Gillies and the conservation area at Cloud lake.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by lio45

Of course there's specific characteristics unique to the Maritimes, it's just that that map was not at that level of detail. I'm sorry but if you have Southeastern Manitoba, Thunder Bay, Kingston, Montreal, Campbellton, Gaspé, Edmundston in the exact same zone, you do not get to put Fredericton in a different zone. That's just indefensible.

Perhaps true of Fredericton but not true of Southwestern NS.

If you look up coastal plain flora you can find a list of 100 or so species that are only in NS within Canada aside from some that are also found in extreme Southern Ontario. Thousands of square km in NS are dominated by plants that don't live in other parts of Canada. It's not just a case of the tree proportions being a bit different.

They look different from other plants in Eastern Canada too. For example several of them are leafy evergreens (e.g. ilex glabra).

I guess you could argue that the Atlantic Coastal Plain biome is too geographically small for its own category but on American maps it usually does get its own category; Cape Cod is in one and upstate NH another. It's just overlooked in Canada because it's a relatively small area with a small population. If it were in Ontario it would be on the maps.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by someone123

Perhaps true of Fredericton but not true of Southwestern NS.

Oh, absolutely. That post of mine which I'm re-quoting below was very carefully worded...

Originally Posted by lio45

Actually, just for the sake of closure (and I guess I should've thought of that yesterday), I'll suggest this:

1) Find me just ONE common forest characteristic shared by all of the following: Southeastern Manitoba, Thunder Bay, Huron County ON, Kingston, Montreal, Edmundston NB, Campbellton NB, Gaspé, but NOT present in Central NB / Fredericton.

or 2) shut up and agree with me.

If we replaced "Central NB / Fredericton" by "The mildest, most oceanic bits of Nova Scotia", it would be easy to supply a distinguishing characteristic to justify having that area not lumped into "Eastern Mixed Forest": the presence of many leafy evergreens in the tree mix.

As I said a couple pages ago - I'd be perfectly okay with having these parts of NS joining extreme southern Ontario in the "deciduous" category, at the very limited level of detail that has the entirety of Eastern Canada divided in only a handful of zones (Arctic, Boreal, Mixed, Deciduous).

My objection is really to mixing detail levels, as illustrated by my big-no-no climate map analogy (which, thinking about it, seems to have needlessly messed up Metro-One; I should instead have gone with a Greater Vancouver real estate prices heat map, where Point Grey, West Vancouver, the DTES, Burnaby, and everything else is Color A, defined in the legend as "Expensive", while the Arbutus Ridge neighborhood is Color B, defined in the legend as "$2M to $3M").

[Taeolas]

Originally Posted by lio45

Actually, just for the sake of closure (and I guess I should've thought of that yesterday), I'll suggest this:

1) Find me just ONE common forest characteristic shared by all of the following: Southeastern Manitoba, Thunder Bay, Huron County ON, Kingston, Montreal, Edmundston NB, Campbellton NB, Gaspé, but NOT present in Central NB / Fredericton.

or 2) shut up and agree with me.

How about The Black walnut.

(No I'm not being serious at all. And as the article points out that tree is an import to the Freddy region so not part of the natural forest. )

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Taeolas

How about The Black walnut.

(No I'm not being serious at all. And as the article points out that tree is an import to the Freddy region so not part of the natural forest. )

Red spruce is one example of a tree that's super common around the Maritimes and Maine and doesn't extend much west of that. The "Acadia" region is probably 70% of its range.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by someone123

Red spruce is one example of a tree that's super common around the Maritimes and Maine and doesn't extend much west of that. The "Acadia" region is probably 70% of its range.

I happen to know for a fact that there are significant amounts of red spruce in this area, in my neck of the woods (Townships).
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%A...u_Mont-Gosford

Great little mountain for hiking, one of my favorites around here. Tallest peak in Southern Quebec actually... It's even got its own website:

https://www.montgosford.com/photos


Again, though - sure, at a certain level of detail, we're starting to see peculiarities of the Acadian forest, but as MonctonRad said, they're subtle and absolutely cannot justify a separate category while everything else is lumped together as "Eastern Mixed Forest". That's been the point all along, and I'm sure you understand it very well

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Taeolas

How about The Black walnut.

(No I'm not being serious at all. And as the article points out that tree is an import to the Freddy region so not part of the natural forest. )

Even if you were trying to be serious, the answer would be "nope!", as I know for a fact the black walnuts I personally planted in both the Trois-Rivières area and on my lands in northern NH (climate similar to the Eastern Townships of Quebec, i.e. "Eastern Mixed Forest") five years ago are doing well, so it's not unique to NB at all.

I have no doubt that the following places in my list can grow black walnut at least as well as Fredericton:

Huron County ON, Kingston, Montreal

(likely better in the case of the former two, as well in the case of the latter)


The natural range of black walnut in Canada matches roughly the Carolinian / Deciduous part of Ontario, so they're much less outside that if planted in Huron County or the eastern parts of the GTA than if planted in Freddy.

[lio45]

For the record, this area has centenarian black walnuts ("imported", obviously; they were planted in the 1800s by the lord who owned that domain) and is squarely in the "Eastern Mixed Forest" zone (being in the St. Lawrence Valley between Trois-Rivières and Quebec City)...

http://www.domainejoly.com/fr/accueil/

[Marty_Mcfly]

Originally Posted by lio45

Even if you were trying to be serious, the answer would be "nope!", as I know for a fact the black walnuts I personally planted in both the Trois-Rivières area and on my lands in northern NH (climate similar to the Eastern Townships of Quebec, i.e. "Eastern Mixed Forest") five years ago are doing well, so it's not unique to NB at all.

I have no doubt that the following places in my list can grow black walnut at least as well as Fredericton:

Huron County ON, Kingston, Montreal

(likely better in the case of the former two, as well in the case of the latter)


The natural range of black walnut in Canada matches roughly the Carolinian / Deciduous part of Ontario, so they're much less outside that if planted in Huron County or the eastern parts of the GTA than if planted in Freddy.

Black Walnut trees have successfully been planted, and have produced walnuts, in Corner Brook NL, so that may completely destroy the illusion. They may be able to be successful in a lot of spots in the country.

[lio45]

I heard that some particularly hardy varieties can even grow in Saskatchewan, so, yeah, definitely. (I transplanted two from my Trois-Rivières bunch to my backyard in Lévis a couple years ago, and they died but it's likely because I kinda botched the job, not because the climate there is too rough for them.) They don't seem too picky in terms of soil, but they seem to grow much faster in good soil (I'm starting to have a large sample of them in various locations). At first sight, it's all about whether or not the lowest winter temps kill them, and also a minimum bar for summer sunlight I'd guess (easy enough to meet, but maybe not in the very cloudiest areas of Atlantic Canada).



Also, just to be clear, we're all in agreement here - the possibility of growing black walnut is most definitely not a factor that allows a hard distinction between Central NB and "Eastern Mixed Forest", and the search for such a factor is still going on

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Marty_Mcfly

Black Walnut trees have successfully been planted, and have produced walnuts, in Corner Brook NL, so that may completely destroy the illusion. They may be able to be successful in a lot of spots in the country.

They're grown commercially on PEI. Hazelnuts too.

In the milder parts of NS people get fruit from trifoliate orange trees and paw paws. And we'll see if the Dartmouth palms survive the winter with protection.

[SaskScraper]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

What is your problem with this map?

A map that separates a vast expanse of three continents into 4 zones?

It is also worth noting that in this map tundra is not the same as barren (which is a nearly non vegetated zone depicted in grey)

Looks like this map is largely based on a remote sensing NDVI.

Low elevation Arctic Tundra covering northern extremes of only the provinces of Manitoba, Ontario, Newfoundland and covering most of province of Quebec, not unlike Alaska...
Maps looks about right to me.

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by lio45

Even if you were trying to be serious, the answer would be "nope!", as I know for a fact the black walnuts I personally planted in both the Trois-Rivières area and on my lands in northern NH (climate similar to the Eastern Townships of Quebec, i.e. "Eastern Mixed Forest") five years ago are doing well, so it's not unique to NB at all.

I have no doubt that the following places in my list can grow black walnut at least as well as Fredericton:

Huron County ON, Kingston, Montreal

(likely better in the case of the former two, as well in the case of the latter)


The natural range of black walnut in Canada matches roughly the Carolinian / Deciduous part of Ontario, so they're much less outside that if planted in Huron County or the eastern parts of the GTA than if planted in Freddy.

The eternal SSP struggle of all against all has now turned to walnuts?

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Andy6

The eternal SSP struggle of all against all has now turned to walnuts?

It's not really a struggle in this case...