Table 19 — Relative resistance, resilience, and tolerance of species in New 

 Hampshire's White Mountains 



A/^i AO 



opecics 



^^^^ 1^^^ B^^^ 1 



riesisiance 



nesiiiencc 



T A 1 Ar Q n ^ a3 



Shrubs 









VdUUlf llUfli UuyiliUoUili \ \ ) 



III 



1 



1 



Graminoids 









Carex bigelowii {^) 



h 



m 



m 



Carex crinita (2) 



m 



m 



m 





III 



1 1 1 



m 

 III 



Ferns 









Dryopteris spinulosa (3,4) 



1 



m 



m 



Gymnocarpium dryopteris (4) 



1 



m 



. m 



Onoclea sensibilis (2) 



1 



m 



m 



Forbs 









Aralia nudicaulis (4) 



1 



1 



1 



Arenaria oroenlandica (^) 



1 



1 



1 



Aster acuminatus (2,3,4) 



1 



l-m 



l-m 



Impatiens pallida (2) 



1 



m 



m 



Maianthemum canadensis (2,4) 



1 



m 



m 



Oxa//s montana (2,3,4) 



1 



1 



1 



Rubus pubescens (2) 



1 



h 



h 



Trientaiis borealis (4) 



1 



m 



1 



Wo/a pallens (2) 



m 



m 



m 



Other 









>4tj/es balsamea seedling (3,4) 



m 





1 



^cer rubrum seedling (4) 



1 





1 



Acer saccharum seedling (2) 



1 





1 



Lycopodium lucidulum (3,4) 



h 





1 



Mosses (1,2,4) 



h 



l-h 



l-h 



Lichens (1) 



1 





1 



^Resistance classes are based on the minimum number of passes that reduced cover 

 by 50 percent: h > 500 passes; m = 200 passes; I < 75 passes. 



^Resilience classes are based on recovery after cover was reduced nearly to zero: 

 h = cover 1 year after trampling was more than two-thirds of the original cover; m = cover 

 1 year after trampling was between one-third and two-thirds of original cover; I = cover 

 1 year after trampling was less than one-third of original cover. 



^Tolerance classes are based on the maximum number of passes that could be toler- 

 ated and still have at least 75 percent of original cover 1 year after trampling: h > 500 

 passes; m = 200 passes; I < 75 passes. 



"Vegetation types: 1 = Carex bigelowii; 2 = Leersia oryzoidesr, 3 = Lycopodium 

 lucidulum; 4 = Maianthemum canadensis. 



high. The maple seedlings had low resistance, while 

 the fir seedlings had moderate resistance; all had low 

 resilience and tolerance. Lichens had low resistance, 

 resihence, and tolerance. Mosses were highly resis- 

 tant in all three vegetation types, but resilience and 

 tolerance were low in the Carex type and high in the 

 others. The resilience of mosses has generally been 

 found to be moderate to extremely high — both in 

 other areas in this study and elsewhere (Leonard and 

 others 1984; Studlar 1983). The low resihence of the 

 mosses (primarily Polytrichum juniperum) in the al- 

 pine Carex type was unusual. Bayfield (1979) also 

 found variable rates of recovery among mosses, some- 

 times even for the same species, following trampling 

 of alpine plant communities in Scotland. 



EFFECTS OF TRAMPLING IN THE 

 GREAT SMOKY MOUNTAINS 



The study sites in the Southeast were all located 

 along the crest and southeastern flank of the Great 

 Smoky Mountains, within the portion of Great Smoky 

 Mountains National Park in North Carolina. Two 

 sites were at relatively low elevations (about 700 m) 

 near Smokemont Campground. One site was along 

 the Oconoluftee River in an undisturbed cove hard- 

 wood forest. The overstory was dense (90 percent 

 cover) and diverse. Liriodendron tulipifera (yellow- 

 poplar) was the most abimdant species in the overstory. 

 The ground cover layer was moderate in height, densi- 

 ty, and diversity (fig. 28A). The most abundant species 



36 



