Virgin forest. Why is there no such thing in our endless

In Russia, the Conservation Council natural heritage nation in the Federation Council Federal Assembly RF opened the program "Trees - Monuments of Wildlife".

Enthusiasts across the country are looking for trees from two hundred years and older with fire during the day.

Trees two hundred years old are unique! All breeds and varieties have so far been found throughout the country about 200 pieces. Moreover, most of the trees found have nothing to do with the forest, like this 360-year-old pine tree. This is determined not only by its modern proud loneliness, but also by the shape of the crown.

Thanks to this program, we are able to fairly objectively assess the age of our forests.

Here are two examples of applications from the Kurgan region.

But in the Kurgan region, perhaps more favorable conditions for pines - a pine from the Ozerninsky pine forest, which was discussed above, has a trunk thickness of 110 centimeters and is only 189 years old. I also found several freshly cut stumps with a diameter of about 70 cm and counted 130 annual rings. Those. the pines from which the forest began are about 130-150 years old.

If things are the same as the last 150 years - forests will grow and gain strength - then it is not difficult to predict how the children from these photos will see this forest in 50-60 years when they bring their grandchildren to these, for example, pines (fragment the photo above - pine trees by the lake).

You understand: pines at 200 years old will cease to be a rarity, in one Kurgan region they will be unmeasured, pines over 150 years old, grown among the pine forest, with a trunk smooth as a telegraph pole without knots, will grow everywhere, but now there are none at all, that is, no at all.

Of the entire mass of pine-trees, I found only one that grew in the forest, in the Khanty-Mansiysk district:

Given the harsh climate of those places (equated to areas Far north), with a trunk thickness of 66 cm, it is fair to consider this tree to be significantly older than 200 years. At the same time, the applicants noted that this pine is a rarity for local forests. And in local forests, with an area of ​​at least 54 thousand hectares, there is nothing like this! There are forests, but the forest in which this pine tree was born disappeared somewhere - after all, it grew and stretched among the pines that were even older. But they are not.

And now, what will prevent those pines that grow, at least in the Kurgan forests, from continuing their lives - the pines live and for 400 years, as we have seen, we have ideal conditions for them. Pines are very resistant to diseases, and with age, resistance only increases, fires for pines are not scary - there is nothing to burn down there, grassland fires are easily tolerated by pines, and riding ones are, nevertheless, a great rarity. And, again, adult pines are more resistant to fires, so fires destroy, first of all, young ones.

Someone, after the above, will argue with the assertion that there were no forests at all 150 years ago? There was a desert like the Sahara - bare sand:

This is a fire furrow. What we see: the forest stands on bare sand, covered only with needles with cones and a thin layer of humus - only a few centimeters. Everything pine forests here, and, as far as I know, in the Tyumen region, they stand on such bare sand. This is hundreds of thousands of hectares of forest, if not millions - if so, then the Sahara is resting! And all this was literally some one and a half hundred years ago!

The sand is dazzling white, with no impurities whatsoever!

And it seems that such sands can be found not only in the West Siberian Lowland. For example, there is something similar in Transbaikalia - there is a small area, only five by ten kilometers still stands "not developed" by the taiga, and the locals consider it a "Miracle of nature".

And it was assigned the status of a geological reserve. We have this "miracle" - well, heaps, only this forest, in which we conducted an excursion, has a size of 50 by 60 kilometers, and no one sees any miracles and does not organize reserves - as if it should be so ...

By the way, the fact that Transbaikalia was a continuous desert in the 19th century, documented by photographers of that time, I have already laid out what those places looked like before the construction of the Circum-Baikal railroad... For example:

A similar picture can be seen in other Siberian places, for example, a view in the "deep taiga" at the construction of the road to Tomsk:

All the above stated convincingly proves that about 150-200 years ago there were practically no forests in Russia. The question arises: were there forests in Russia before? Were! It's just that, for one reason or another, they turned out to be buried in a "cultural layer", like the first floors of the St. Petersburg Hermitage, the first floors in many cities of Russia.

I have already written here many times about this very "cultural layer", but I cannot resist publishing a photo that has recently spread over the Internet:

For rent, in Kazan, the "cultural layer" from the first floor, which was long years"basement" stupidly removed by a bulldozer, without resorting to the services of archaeologists.

But bog oak, and even more so, is mined without notifying any "scientists" - "historians" and other archaeologists. Yes, such a business still exists - the extraction of fossil oak.

Adherents of "alternative history" are very funny people, but this is not what this article is about. According to this pseudoscience, in the 19th century there was global flood, which destroyed all the forests in central (and maybe not only) Russia. What prompted these wonderful "researchers" to think so? Everything turns out to be very simple: all forests in modern Russia- young!

Trees (spruce and pine) in forests - no older than 150 - 200 years

The photo shows a pine (Udmurtia) over 300 years old. As you remember from your last trip to the forest, the pines in it are not at all like this giant twisting pine tree. By the way, the maximum age of pines and firs reaches 400 years, you can read about this in reference books or textbooks - no one refutes this fact.

Any sane person with a developed outlook, of course, will reject the theory of some kind of miraculous flood that destroyed all the forests, but the fact that the forests are young really makes anyone think. There are really few relict forests in Russia, and even in Siberia, which has not yet reached the hand of a woodcutter, old trees cannot be found. How so ?! Where did the old spruces and pines go? Maybe 150-200 years ago, almost all trees died out?

In addition to the authoritative opinion of the "familiar forester", who certainly knows better how old the trees in his forest are and the exclamations: "Even foresters do not understand where the old trees in the forests have gone!" - photographs of Prokudin-Gorsky, a student of Mendeleev, who was the first in Russia to start taking color photographs. Prokudin-Gorsky, starting in 1909, traveled a lot around the country and took color photographs. Why are these photographs so attracted to alternative historians? There are very few trees in the pictures and no forests at all! For some reason, pictures and black-and-white photographs are not taken into account by these excellent "researchers", such a feature of this "science" is to reject objectionable facts. We will talk about Prokudin-Gorsky a little later, and now we will begin to explain where the old trees in Russian European forests have gone.

So where did all the old trees go? Exposing the myth!

If you turn to the search engines for an answer, you will find heaps of informational garbage, bred by the works of "alternatives"! All the links on the first pages about the deluge that destroyed the forests, and not a single sensible page with the answers! So - below I will finally reveal the secret of the disappearance of ancient forests.

Spruces and pines live up to 450 years, and this is an established fact real scientists... I will now ask you just one question that will destroy the entire forest alternative theory and provide the long-awaited answers. The maximum age of a person is about 120 years. So why on the street you do not meet a single even a hundred-year-old man? - yes, because their extremely few! If you look around, you will mainly see people from 20 to 50 years old - there are most of them among the population. So why should trees live by different laws? Where have trees over 300 years old gone? - died out! Yes Yes! Well, now let's turn to reliable sources and consider this issue in more detail.

Natural thinning of forest plantations

Trees, like all life on Earth, fight with each other for vital resources: sunlight, moisture, the area on which they grow. But unlike people, they cannot move in search of new resources, no matter how trite it may sound! Quote from an authoritative (unlike any foresters) site:

Among foresters, it is considered axiom that the forest normally develops to any a certain age(not maximum); after reaching the age of ripeness, he begins decay, while losing not only the stock of wood, but also all of its environment-forming and environmental properties.

In the forest, as the age and size of trees increase, their number per unit area decreases due to the death of weaker trees, that is, natural thinning or self-thinning of the forest occurs. This phenomenon should be considered as a process of self-regulation. forest plantation, i.e., bringing the needs of the entire plantation into line with the available vital resources of the environment and how natural selection fittest trees.

As individual trees grow in size, their requirements for crown space, food and moisture also increase. In this regard, the total demand for the listed factors for the entire forest also grows. I will try to explain further simple language... When the trees in the forest are still young, they need much less resources to maintain life, therefore the number of trunks per unit area is greater. As the trees grow, they need everything more resources, and at one point the trees begin to "conflict" with each other and "fight" for living space. Natural selection comes into play - some trees begin to die already in early age... Self-regulation of the number of trees in a plantation creates conditions for normal growth and long-term existence of a forest plantation due to the death of individual, usually the weakest trees.

Over-growing stand - "retirement" age of trees

When the trees reach the age of 100 - 140 years, the forest becomes ripe. At the same time, conifers stop growing in height, but they can still grow in width. Over-growing - a tree stand that has stopped growing in height, is destroyed by old age and diseases (more than 140 years) - coniferous and hard-leaved seed origin. All in all: how older forest- the fewer trees it contains.

It is not economically profitable to let the forest grow old - why allow nature to destroy such valuable material for humans? That is why the over-mature forest should be cut down first of all! In forestry, all forests in the central part of Russia (and not only) are registered and their cutting and planting with new trees are planned. Trees are simply not allowed to live up to 150 years old and are chopped down in their “prime of life”.

If about 200 years ago all forests were destroyed, then what were the railroad ties, buildings, ships, and stoves made of then? My relatives live in Oryol region- the region is not rich in forests, so they practically do not have wooden buildings!

Fiction and painting

What about the mention of forests and logging in literature and paintings of the 18-19 centuries? Just ignore? Or are these masterpieces commissioned by a secret world government to erase these events from people's memory? Seriously? Damn, this theory is so delusional that it is difficult to find words from amazement: global catastrophes, nuclear war- and no traces of these events, except for the "young forests" and the first floors of houses "covered with soil" ...

Prokudin - Gorsky forest photos

Let's return to Prokudin - Gorsky, so dearly beloved by alternatives. Thanks to their efforts, it is difficult to find “normal” photographs of an early 20th century forest on the internet, but I found it enjoyable to look at.

View from Sekirnaya Mountain to the Savvatievsky Skete, 1916
Border of Moscow and Smolensk provinces. Borodino, 1911
Rolling firewood for burning ore, 1910
Mount Taganay, 1910

Conclusions and summaries

The main mistake of the inventors of alternative history lies in the establishment of an incorrect causal relationship. If now in modern forest not to meet trees older than 200 years, this does not mean at all that 200 years ago all forests were destroyed, it also does not mean that in 100 years in our forests there will be three hundred-year-old pines all the time! Trees do not appear and die at the same time! In nature, almost everything obeys the normal statistical distribution law: most of the trees have average age, the oldest trees are in the minority, and the older they are, the fewer there are. It is surprising that people do not want to understand the question, look for answers, and instead run headlong to tell everyone that mankind is being deceived because the trees are young! If you are in doubt or do not understand something - you should not sow ignorance, try to understand at least a little at first. Write comments, I will be glad!

How did Tartaria die? Part 3a. "Relict" forests. September 28th, 2014

One of the arguments against the fact that a large-scale catastrophe could have happened 200 years ago is the myth about "relict" forests that supposedly grow in the Urals and in Western Siberia.
For the first time the thought that something is wrong with our "relic" forests, I came across ten years ago, when I accidentally discovered that in the "relic" city forest, firstly, there were no old trees older than 150 years old , and secondly, there is a very thin fertile layer, about 20-30 cm.It was strange, because reading various articles on ecology and forestry, I repeatedly came across information that for a thousand years a fertile layer of about one meter is formed in the forest, then yes, by a millimeter per year. A little later, it turned out that a similar picture is observed not only in the central city forest, but also in other pine forests located in Chelyabinsk and its environs. Old trees are absent, the fertile layer is thin.

When I began to ask local experts on this topic, they began to explain to me something about the fact that before the revolution, pine forests were cut down and replanted, and the rate of accumulation of the fertile layer in pine forests it is necessary to assume differently that I do not understand anything about this and it is better not to go there. At that moment, this explanation, in general, suited me.
In addition, it turned out that one should distinguish between the concept of "relict forest" when it comes to forests that have been growing on a given territory for a very long time, and the concept of "relict plants", that is, those that have survived only in this place since ancient times. The last term does not mean at all that the plants themselves and the forests in which they grow are old, respectively, the presence a large number relict plants in the forests of the Urals and Siberia does not prove that the forests themselves have been growing in this place invariably for thousands of years.
When I began to deal with the "Ribbon bora" and collect information about them, I came across the following message on one of the regional Altai forums:
“One question haunts me ... Why is our tape forest called relict? What is relict in it? They write, they say, owes its appearance to the glacier. The glacier fell down more than one thousand years ago (if you believe the tormented). The pine tree lives for 400 years and grows up to 40 meters. If the glacier melted so long ago, where was the forest belt all this time? Why are there practically no old trees in it? And where are the dead trees? Why is there a layer of earth just a few centimeters and just sand? Even for three hundred years, the cones / needles should have given a larger layer ... In general, it seems that the ribbon forest is a little older than Barnaul (if not younger) and the glacier, thanks to which it arose, did not come down 10,000 years ago, but much closer to for us in time ... Maybe I don't understand why? ... "
http://forums.drom.ru/altai/t1151485069.html
This message is dated November 15, 2010, that is, then there were no videos by Alexei Kungurov, or any other materials on this topic. It turns out that, independently of me, another person had exactly the same questions that I once had.
Upon further study of this topic, it turned out that a similar picture, that is, the absence of old trees and a very thin fertile layer, is observed in almost all forests of the Urals and Siberia. Once I accidentally got into a conversation about this with a representative of one of the companies that were processing data for our forestry department throughout the country. He began to argue with me and prove that I was wrong, that this could not be, and immediately in front of me called the person who was responsible for statistical processing. And the person confirmed this that the maximum age of the trees that they had been counted in this work was 150 years. True, the version issued by them said that in the Urals and Siberia coniferous trees generally do not live more than 150 years, therefore they are not taken into account.
We open the directory on the age of trees http://www.sci.aha.ru/ALL/e13.htm and see that the Scots pine lives 300-400 years, in especially favorable conditions up to 600 years, Siberian cedar pine 400-500 years, European spruce is 300-400 (500) years old, prickly spruce is 400-600 years old, and Siberian larch is 500 years old under normal conditions, and up to 900 years old under especially favorable conditions!
It turns out that everywhere these trees live for at least 300 years, and in Siberia and the Urals no more than 150?
You can see how relict forests really should look here: http://www.kulturologia.ru/blogs/191012/17266/ These are photos from the cutting of sequoias in Canada at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries, the thickness of the trunks of which reaches up to 6 meters, and the age is up to 1500 years. Well, then Canada, and we, they say, do not grow sequoias. Why do not they grow, if the climate is practically the same, none of the "specialists" could really explain.


Now yes, now they are not growing. But it turns out that similar trees grew here. Guys from our Chelyabinsk state university who participated in excavations in the Arkaim region and the "country of cities" in the south Chelyabinsk region, they said that where the steppe is now, at the time of Arkaim there were coniferous forests, and in some places there met giant trees, the diameter of the trunks of which was up to 4 - 6 meters! That is, they were comparable to those that we see in the photo from Canada. The version about where these forests have gone says that the forests were barbarously cut down by the inhabitants of Arkaim and other settlements created by them, and even an assumption is made that it was the depletion of the forests that caused the migration of the Arkaim people. Like, here the whole forest was cut down, let's go cut it down in another place. The people of Arkaim apparently did not yet know that forests can be planted and re-grown, as they have been doing everywhere since at least the 18th century. Why for 5500 years (this age is now dated to Arkaim) the forest in this place has not recovered itself, there is no intelligible answer. Not grown, well, not grown. It happened so.

Here is a series of photos I took in local history museum in Yaroslavl this summer, when I was on vacation with my family.




In the first two photos, pine trees were cut at the age of 250 years. The trunk diameter is more than a meter. Directly above it are two pyramids, which are made up of cuts from pine trunks at the age of 100 years, the right one grew free, the left one in mixed forest... In the forests in which I happened to be, there are basically just such 100-year-old trees or a little thicker.




In these photos they are given larger. At the same time, the difference between a pine that grew free and in an ordinary forest is not very significant, and the difference between a pine of 250 years and 100 years is just somewhere 2.5-3 times. This means that the trunk diameter of a pine tree at the age of 500 years will be about 3 meters, and at the age of 600 years about 4 meters. That is, the giant stumps found during excavations could have remained even from an ordinary pine tree about 600 years old.


On last photo cuts of pines that grew in the wilderness spruce forest and in the swamp. But I was especially struck in this showcase by the saw cut pine at the age of 19, which is on the upper right. Apparently this tree grew free, but still the thickness of the trunk is just gigantic! Now the trees are at such a speed, even if they are free, even if artificial cultivation with care and feeding, they do not grow, which again indicates that very strange things are happening with the climate on our planet.

From the above photographs it follows that at least pine trees are 250 years old, and taking into account the manufacture of saw cut in the 50s of the 20th century, born 300 years from today, in the European part of Russia have a place to be, or, at least, met there 50 years ago. During my life, I have walked through the forests for more than one hundred kilometers, both in the Urals and in Siberia. But I have never seen such large pines as in the first picture, with a trunk more than a meter thick! Neither in forests, nor in open spaces, nor in habitable places, nor in remote areas. Naturally, my personal observations are not yet an indicator, but this is confirmed by the observation of many other people. If someone reading can give examples of long-lived trees in the Urals or Siberia, then you are welcome to submit photographs indicating the place and time when they were taken.

If we look at the available photographs of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, we will see very young forests in Siberia. Here are the photographs known to many from the site of the fall of the Tunguska meteorite, which have been repeatedly published in various publications and articles on the Internet.










All photographs clearly show that the forest is quite young, no more than 100 years old. Let me remind you that Tunguska meteorite fell on June 30, 1908. That is, if the previous large-scale disaster that destroyed the forests in Siberia occurred in 1815, then by 1908 the forest should look exactly like in the photographs. Let me remind skeptics that this territory and now it is practically not inhabited, and at the beginning of the 20th century there were practically no people there. This means that there was simply no one to cut down the forest for economic or other needs.

Another interesting link to the article http://sibved.livejournal.com/73000.html where the author gives interesting historical photos with the construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway in the late 19th early 20th centuries. On them, we also see only a young forest everywhere. No thick old trees are observed. Yet large selection old photos from the construction of the Transib here http://murzind.livejournal.com/900232.html












Thus, there are many facts and observations that indicate that in a large territory of the Urals and Siberia there are virtually no forests older than 200 years. At the same time, I want to immediately make a reservation that I do not claim that there are no old forests in the Urals and Siberia at all. But precisely in those places where the disaster occurred, they are not.

The oldest tree in Russia grows in Yakutia

Scientists of the Krasnoyarsk Institute of Forest and Timber named after V.N. Sukachev discovered a territory with the oldest trees growing within our country.

It is known that of the trees growing in the forest zone of Eurasia, larch trees (genus Larix). Trees of this genus (there are about 25 species) grow in the lowland forests of the temperate cold and mountain forests of the temperate zone of the Northern Hemisphere - in Europe, Asia and North America... Until now, one of the trees growing in North America was considered the longest-living larch - its age is estimated at 728 years.

The age of larches growing in Russia, as studies have shown, increases in the direction from west to east. In the Polar Urals and Western Siberia, the oldest living tree found was 486 years old, in Central Siberia it was 609 years old, and in northeastern Siberia it was 670 years old. Further research in this region made it possible to find an area where numerous Cajander larch trees ( Larix cajanderi) that are more than 800 years old!

This site has coordinates 69 o 24'N. and 148 about 25'E. and is located on the territory of the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia), on the right bank of the river. Indigirka in its lower reaches. More than ten of the larches growing here were 750–850 years old, and two trees, 878 and 885 years old, were the record holders. However, the share of such old trees on the site is about 15%, and the rest of the stand is represented by younger larch trees.

It is interesting that trees of such a venerable age are not at all gigantic in size. Their height is only 8.5-9 m, and the diameter of the trunk at the level of the human chest is about 25 cm. This is due to the extremely harsh climatic conditions - the average value of the radial growth of trunks in this area is only about 0.15-0.22 mm / year, which corresponds to the annual growth of approximately 5–7 rows of wood cells.

It is natural that weather are not constant, but vary from year to year. Accordingly, the size of the growth rings changes - in more warm years they are wider, and in colder ones they are narrower. This gives researchers the ability to reconstruct wood cuts from the picture. climatic conditions previous years. And the presence of tree cuts, which are many centuries old, allows you to get truly unique data!

Along with growing living trees on the site discovered by Krasnoyarsk scientists, there is a significant number of dry trunks varying degrees safety. Comparing the dynamics of the thickness of tree rings on their cuts with fresh cuts, one can find identical areas and, by their location, establish the years of life of now dead trees. If it turns out that the dry trunk belonged to a tree that grew in older times than the living larch trees, scientists receive data on the dynamics of temperature in that distant period. And then you can compare the dynamics of the rings on a cut of an ancient tree with another dry cut, which may belong to a tree that grew at an even earlier time. Studies have shown that dry larch trunks in Yakutia are well preserved on the surface for 1500 years! Among these dead trunks, a specimen was found that grew here in the period from 310 to 1228, i.e. who lived for 919 years. This is a documented record for the life expectancy of trees in Russia.

Thus, in Yakutia, scientists actually discovered a natural recorder, which recorded the change in air temperature in this region over the past 2000 years! And such data, in turn, make it possible to evaluate in a new way information about the formation of vegetation and fauna, about the peculiarities of people's life at that time. For example, already a preliminary study of the collected material indicates that in the period from 900 to 1300 in the northeast of our country there was a warming of the climate.

Based on the article by E.N. Vaganov, M. Mnaurzbaeva and I.V. Gamekeepers
"Maximum age of larch trees in Siberia" (Forestry. 1999. No 6)

In Russia, the Council for the Conservation of the Natural Heritage of the Nation in the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation has launched the Trees - Monuments of Wildlife program. Enthusiasts across the country are looking for trees from two hundred years and older with fire during the day. Trees two hundred years old are unique! All breeds and varieties have so far been found throughout the country about 200 pieces. Moreover, most of the trees found have nothing to do with the forest, like this 360-year-old pine tree. This is determined not only by its modern proud loneliness, but also by the shape of the crown.

Thanks to this program, we are able to fairly objectively assess the age of our forests.
Here are two examples of applications from the Kurgan region.

This, on this moment, oldest tree in the Kurgan region, the age of which is set by experts at 189 years old, will be a little less than 200 years old. The pine tree grows in Ozerninsko Bor near the Pine Grove sanatorium. And the pine forest itself, naturally, is much younger: the patriarch pine grew for many years alone, which is evident from the shape of the crown of the tree.
Another application was received from the Kurgan region, claiming for a pine over 200 years old:

This tree ended up on the territory of the arboretum - it was preserved along with some other local species that grew on this territory before the establishment of the arboretum. The arboretum was founded when organizing a tree nursery for the Forestry School, created in 1893. A forest school and a nursery were necessary to train forestry specialists who were to carry out work on the allocation and assessment of forests during the construction of the Kurgan section of the Trans-Siberian Railway at the end of the 19th century.
Note: the forest school and tree nursery were founded about 120 years ago and their purpose was to assess the forest lands that already existed by that time.
These two trees grow in the Kurgan region, this is the south of Western Siberia - it borders on the Chelyabinsk, Tyumen, Omsk regions, and in the south - with Kazakhstan.
Let's pay attention: both trees began their life not in the forest, but in an open field - this is evidenced by the shape of their crown and the presence of branches extending almost from the very base. The pines growing in the forest are a bare, straight whip, "without a hitch, without a hitch" with a broom on the top, like this group of pines on the left side of the picture:

Here it is, the trunk of a pine tree, flat as a string, without knots, which grew next to other pines:

Yes, these pines grew in the middle of the forest, which was here until the early 60s of the last century, before a sand quarry was organized here, from which sand was dredged onto the track under construction, which is now called "Baikal". This place is located a kilometer from the northern outskirts of Kurgan.
And now we will make a sortie into the Kurgan forest and look at the terrain of the "structure" of a typical West Siberian forest. Let's move away from the lake for a kilometer into the thick of the "ancient" forest.
In the forest, you constantly come across such trees as this pine tree in the center:

This is not a withered tree, its crown is full of life:

This is an old tree, which began its life in an open field, then other pines began to grow around and branches began to dry from below, on the left in the frame in the background you can see the same tree.

The girth of the trunk at the level of the chest of an adult is 230 centimeters, i.e. trunk diameter is about 75 centimeters. For a pine, this is a solid size, so with a trunk thickness of 92 cm, the experts set the age of the tree in the next picture at 426 years

But in the Kurgan region, perhaps, more favorable conditions for pines - a pine from the Ozerninsky pine forest, which was discussed above, has a trunk thickness of 110 centimeters and is only 189 years old. I also found several freshly cut stumps with a diameter of about 70 cm and counted 130 annual rings. Those. the pines from which the forest began are about 130-150 years old.
If things are the same as the last 150 years - forests will grow and gain strength - then it is not difficult to predict how the children from these photos will see this forest in 50-60 years when they bring their grandchildren to these, for example, pines (fragment the photo above - pine trees by the lake).

You understand: pines at 200 years old will cease to be a rarity, in one Kurgan region they will be unmeasured, pines over 150 years old, grown among the pine forest, with a trunk smooth as a telegraph pole without knots, will grow everywhere, but now there are none at all, that is, no at all.
Of the entire mass of pine-trees, I found only one that grew in the forest, in the Khanty-Mansiysk district:

Given the harsh climate of those places (equated to the regions of the Far North), with a trunk thickness of 66 cm, it is fair to consider this tree to be much older than 200 years. At the same time, the applicants noted that this pine is a rarity for local forests. And in local forests, with an area of ​​at least 54 thousand hectares, there is nothing like this! There are forests, but the forest in which this pine tree was born disappeared somewhere - after all, it grew and stretched among the pines that were even older. But they are not.
And now, what will prevent those pines that grow, at least in the Kurgan forests, from continuing their lives - the pines live and for 400 years, as we have seen, we have ideal conditions for them. Pines are very resistant to diseases, and with age, resistance only increases, fires for pines are not scary - there is nothing to burn down there, grassland fires are easily tolerated by pines, and riding ones are, nevertheless, a great rarity. And, again, adult pines are more resistant to fires, so fires destroy, first of all, young ones.
Someone, after the above, will argue with the assertion that there were no forests at all 150 years ago? There was a desert like the Sahara - bare sand:

This is a fire furrow. What we see: the forest stands on bare sand, covered only with needles with cones and a thin layer of humus - only a few centimeters. All the pine forests here, and, as far as I know, in the Tyumen region, stand on such bare sand. This is hundreds of thousands of hectares of forest, if not millions - if so, then the Sahara is resting! And all this was literally some one and a half hundred years ago!
The sand is dazzling white, with no impurities whatsoever!
And it seems that such sands can be found not only in the West Siberian Lowland. For example, there is something similar in Transbaikalia - there is a small area, only five by ten kilometers still stands "not developed" by the taiga, and the locals consider it a "Miracle of nature".

And it was assigned the status of a geological reserve. We have this "miracle" - well, heaps, only this forest, in which we conducted an excursion, has a size of 50 by 60 kilometers, and no one sees any miracles and does not organize reserves - as if it should be so ...
By the way, the fact that Transbaikalia was a continuous desert in the 19th century, documented by photographers of that time, I have already laid out what those places looked like before the construction of the Circum-Baikal Railway. For example:

A similar picture can be seen in other Siberian places, for example, a view in the "deep taiga" at the construction of the road to Tomsk:

All the above stated convincingly proves that about 150-200 years ago there were practically no forests in Russia. The question arises: were there forests in Russia before? Were! It's just that, for one reason or another, they turned out to be buried in a "cultural layer", like the first floors of the St. Petersburg Hermitage, the first floors in many cities of Russia.
I have already written here many times about this very "cultural layer", but I cannot resist publishing a photo that has recently spread over the Internet:

For rent, in Kazan, the "cultural layer" from the first floor, which had been a "basement" for many years, was stupidly removed by a bulldozer, without resorting to the services of archaeologists.
But bog oak, and even more so, is mined without notifying any "scientists" - "historians" and other archaeologists. Yes, such a business still exists today - mining of fossil oak:

But the next picture was taken in central Russia - here the river washes away the coast and the age-old oak trees, uprooted at one time, are born:

The author of the picture writes that the oak trees are smooth and slender, which suggests that they grew in the forest. And the age, with the same thickness (the cover set for the scale - 11 cm) is much older than 200 years.
And again, as Newton said, I am not inventing hypotheses: let the "historians" explain why trees over 150 years old are massively found only under the "cultural layer".

http://rosdrevo.ru/ - All-Russian program "Trees - monuments of wildlife"

Http://www.clumba.su/mne-ponyatna-tvoya-vekovaya-pechal/ - I understand your age-old sadness ...

Http://sibved.livejournal.com/153207.html - Growing Russia

Http://www.clumba.su/kulturnye-sloi-evrazii/ - about "cultural layers"

Http://vvdom.livejournal.com/332212.html - "Cultural layers" of St. Petersburg

Http://sibved.livejournal.com/150384.html - Charskaya desert

Http://humus.livejournal.com/2882049.html - Road construction works. Tomsk region. 1909 Part 1

Http://rosdrevo.ru/index.php?option=com_adsmanager&page=show_ad&adid=77&catid=1&Itemid=85 - pine in Ozerninsky pine forest in the Kurgan region

Http://www.bogoak.biz/ - extraction of bog oak

Http://sibved.livejournal.com/167844.html - oaks under clay

Http://sibved.livejournal.com/167844.html?thread=4458660#t4458660 - oaks in Sharovsky park

Http://sibved.livejournal.com/159295.html - Krasnoyarsk in the past

Http://sibved.livejournal.com/73000.html - Siberia at the time of development

Http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?s=bbcef0f3187e3211e4f2690c6548c4ef&t=1484553 - photo of old Krasnoyarsk

Http://rosdrevo.ru/index.php?option=com_adsmanager&page=show_ad&adid=79&catid=1&Itemid=85 - pine planted in the arboretum at the tree nursery on Prosve in the Kurgan region

Http://rosdrevo.ru/index.php?option=com_adsmanager&page=show_ad&adid=67&catid=1&Itemid=85 - 400 lazy pine near Tobolsk

Http://rosdrevo.ru/index.php?option=com_adsmanager&page=show_ad&adid=95&catid=1&Itemid=85 - pine from national park"Buzuluk pine forest"

Http://gorodskoyportal.ru/peterburg/blog/4346102/ - The oldest tree in St. Petersburg.

Http://sibved.livejournal.com/47355.html - 5,000-year-old forest unearthed by storms

http://nashaplaneta.su/news/chto_ot_nas_skryvajut_pochemu_derevja_starshe_150_200_let_vstrechajutsja_tolko_pod_kulturnym_sloem/2016-11-27-35423