Why are our forests young? The oldest tree in Russia grows in Yakutia. Why are trees in Russia 200 years old?

Why are there no trees 300-500 years old in the vicinity of Tyumen? The same pines that can live longer, according to reference books? The question is interesting. If only because it gives lovers of the mysteries of history a reason to build interesting theories about cataclysms and even nuclear wars, which occurred in the 17-18 centuries and were deliberately erased from the chronicles by someone... Tricky questions about the age of trees correspondent website addressed to the largest Tyumen scientist in the field of dendrochronology, professor, doctor biological sciences, Head of the Biodiversity and Dynamics Sector natural complexes Institute for Research on Problems of Development of the North SB RAS to Stanislav Arefiev.

Using tree rings, Stanislav Arefiev can tell not only about the age of the trees, but also about the climate, emergency situations and natural anomalies that have occurred in the growing area over the past centuries

The impetus for discussing such a sensitive topic was another movie, released by the creative group "Tur-A". Amateur historians did not find trees 300-400-500 years old near Tyumen and considered this to be confirmation of their hypothesis, which wiped Tyumen off the face of the earth in the 18th century... Here it is.

We decided to discuss the issues raised by the adventurers with an expert whose authority in the scientific world is beyond doubt. Stanislav Pavlovich devoted several decades to studying the age of trees in Western Siberia and by the growth rings can judge not only the age of birch, larch, pine or cedar, but also tell about the climate and natural conditions, reigned several hundred years ago. Arefiev not only studied trees in the south and north of the Tyumen region, in the Urals and Central Russia, but also examined in detail the wood that was used several centuries ago for the construction of residential buildings and fortresses - samples were brought to him by archaeologists from excavation sites. And he came to the conclusion that 200-300-400 years ago, trees in the south of the region were aging, as they are now, about twice as fast as in the north... One more scientific fact should disappoint supporters of “parallel history”: the thickness of a tree cannot always be used to judge its age.

Stanislav Arefiev at the microscope. 2005

— Stanislav Pavlovich, why are there no trees older than 300-400 years near Tyumen? Pines in particular?

— In the vicinity of Tyumen, I really haven’t seen trees older than 250 years. The oldest pines, about 250 years old - from 1770 - were noted by me in the Tarman swamps near the village of Karaganda. By the way, on poor peat soil their diameter is only about 16 cm, and the average thickness of the rings is about 0.3 mm, which is an order of magnitude less values, named by the authors of the film for the best upland pine forests... Within the city limits near the village. Metelevo there is a single pine tree 220 years old. In the vicinity of the village. The sawmill also noted a cedar tree on the edge of the Tarman swamps, which is 220 years old. The oldest birches and pines of the Old Moscow Highway, with a thickness of up to 85 cm, are up to 126-160 years old. According to literary data, in the neighboring Kurgan Tobol region several small island pine forests up to 300 years old have been preserved. To the west of Tyumen, closer to the Urals, old trees are more common. To the east, with the increasing continentality of the climate, you will not find what is near Tyumen.

A team of Tyumen scientists during one of the many expeditions

- What is the reason?

“This situation is primarily due to the fact that Tyumen is located near the southern border of the forest zone, where conditions for tree growth are not particularly favorable. The region as a whole is moisture-deficient, and some years and even entire periods over the past 400 years have been very dry. This is evidenced by records in documents of the Tobolsk Voivodeship and the Tobolsk Province (T.N. Zhilina, 2009; V.S. Myglan, 2007, 2010). In particular, prolonged droughts were noted at the beginning and in mid-18th century centuries. Such droughts were always accompanied by forest fires, and if not by them, then by the massive development of forest pests, as a result of which the forest died over vast areas. According to A.A. Dunin-Gorkavich (1996), even north of Tobolsk, forests were constantly burning, and individual fires spread with a front up to hundreds of kilometers wide. Therefore, in the vicinity of Tyumen there are almost no spruce and other dark coniferous species that cannot withstand drought and fires, and natural area in which the city is located is called the zone of West Siberian aspen-birch forests.

Pine is the most resistant to fires and droughts, but in such conditions the probability of its survival to a ripe old age is low. By the way, according to biological reasons in the south of the forest zone she (and other tree species) 2 times faster than in the North. The maximum age of a pine tree near Tyumen, obviously, cannot exceed 400 years, even if it were miraculously saved from the numerous disasters that have occurred in our area over the years. By the way, old log houses with their thick, weathered logs are not necessarily built from centuries-old pine trees. Usually they have no more than 150 growth rings. This was the case not only in our times, but also 400 years ago. A study of thick pine logs taken during excavations of Tobolsk from the period of its foundation showed that they contain only 80-120 growth rings (samples were brought to me by A.V. Matveev).

This spruce is about 500 years old. Poluisky reserve. Sample selection

- Interesting... It turns out that in the north trees live twice as long... What are the oldest trees you have seen in Ugra and Yamal?

— As you move north from Tyumen, the maximum age of trees increases, although there are not very many very old trees anywhere in Western Siberia. In the river basin I drilled cedars and pines up to 350 years old near Khanty-Mansiysk, and up to 400 years old near Khanty-Mansiysk. I recorded the oldest trees in the Tyumen region at the northern limit of the forest distribution - in the vicinity of the city of Nadym (cedar 500 years old), in the vicinity of the village located in the forest-tundra zone. Samburg (larch - 520 years). Near Nadym, even birch trees reach the age of 200 years. The dwarf birch tree in the tundra of Yamal lives up to 140 years. In general, in Western Siberia the age of trees is less than in the same latitudes in the Urals or Eastern Siberia (and even in Yakutia, where larch lives up to 800 years). The reason is the flatness of the territory, open to all northern and south winds, swampiness, the unhindered spread of huge fires that were not extinguished by anyone.

— Are there centuries-old trees in Central Russia?

— Central Russia is not the southern limit of the forest zone, like Tyumen, but its middle. Conditions for forest life are better there, and trees can live there to an older age. Although such protected areas There are not many left in Central Russia. Oak is the most durable there; it can grow for up to 500 years or more. But more legends than facts. Usually, very thick, free-standing trees that simply had excellent conditions for growing in width are mistaken for old trees. There is a centuries-old dendroscale for Novgorod, built using archaeological wood. I have not heard of other reliable age-related phenomena in Central Russia. There are much older trees nearby - in the mountains of the Southern Urals (up to 600 years). IN Eastern Europe mature trees also grow in mountainous areas.

Participant of the expedition near a larch tree, which is 520 years old (Samburg, lower reaches of the Pur River)

— How do you judge the age of trees? Are samples stored somewhere?

— I judge the age based on the results of counting growth rings on wood cores taken from growing trunks with a special Pressler drill. Thousands of samples have been collected. They are kept in my collection. I measure the rings under a microscope. There are also photographs. Judging the age of a tree by the thickness of its trunk is a misconception. Usually the thickest trees simply have wide rings and are no more than average in age. The oldest trees are usually unsightly.

— Is it possible to draw conclusions from the state of the trees about what cataclysms they survived in the era of their youth?

- Can. This is the subject of a special science—dendrochronology. In the North, cold years are especially clearly recorded, by the way, often associated with large volcanic eruptions. In the southern part of the region, near Tyumen, droughts, fires, pests are clearly recorded along the anomalous rings; in river valleys - high floods, etc. Using a series of rings, the climate can be reconstructed. Much in such a living “chronicle of nature” depends on the place where the tree grew.

— How do you feel about the theory of “global cataclysm”, which is being promoted to the masses by Tyumen enthusiasts?

- What they noticed interesting points- commendable. But people always want more. With the interpretation of some facts, their fantasy played out so much that they completely forgot about other facts, moreover, more obvious ones. The cataclysm that enthusiasts talk about clearly did not happen in Tyumen. There were cataclysms that were not so impressive that I mentioned... However, if you think about it, real story is no less impressive than the coveted sensations.

Nikita SMIRNOV,

photo from the archive of S.P. Arefiev and the Institute for Research on Problems of Northern Development SB RAS

In Russia, the Conservation Council natural heritage nations in the Federation Council Federal Assembly The Russian Federation has opened the program “Trees - Monuments of Living Nature”. Enthusiasts all over the country search with fire during the day for trees two hundred years old and older. Trees that are two hundred years old are unique! So far, about 200 of all breeds and varieties have been discovered throughout the country. Moreover, most of the trees found have nothing to do with the forest, like this 360-year-old pine. 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 is on this moment, oldest tree in the Kurgan region, whose age is set by experts at 189 years, is slightly short of 200 years. Pine grows in Ozerninsko Bor near the Sosnovaya Roshcha sanatorium. And the forest itself, naturally, is much younger: the pine tree grew long years alone, as can be seen from the shape of the tree’s crown.
Another application was received from the Kurgan region, claiming a pine tree 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 a tree nursery was organized for the Forestry School, created in 1893. The forest school and tree nursery were needed to train forestry specialists who would carry out forest management and assessment work 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 evaluate 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 on Kazakhstan.
Let us 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. Pines growing in the forest are a bare, straight whip, “without a hitch,” with a panicle on the top, like this group of pines on the left side of the photo:

Here it is, straight as a string, without knots, the trunk of a pine tree that 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 washed with a dredge onto the highway under construction, which is now called “Baikal”. This place is located a kilometer from the northern outskirts of Kurgan.
Now let’s make a foray into the Kurgan forest and look at the “structure” of a typical West Siberian forest on the ground. Let's move a kilometer away from the lake into the thick of the "ancient" forest.
In the forest you constantly come across trees like this pine in the center:

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

This is an old tree that began its life in an open field, then other pines began to grow around and the branches from below began to dry; the same tree is visible on the left in the background of the frame.

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

But in the Kurgan region, perhaps more favorable conditions for pine trees - pine from the Ozerninsky 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 came are about 130-150 years old.
If things continue to be the same as they have been for the last 150 years - the forests will grow and gain strength - then it is not difficult to predict how the children from these photographs will see this forest in 50-60 years, when they bring their grandchildren to these, for example, pine trees (fragment the photo above is of a pine tree by the lake).

You understand: pine trees at 200 years old will cease to be rare, in the Kurgan region alone there will be countless of them, pine trees over 150 years old, grown in the middle of the forest, with a trunk as straight as a telegraph pole without knots, will grow everywhere, but now there are none of them at all, that is, no at all.
Of the entire mass of pine monuments, I found only one that grew in the forest, in the Khanty-Mansiysk Okrug:

Considering 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 much older than 200 years. At the same time, the applicants noted that this pine is rare for local forests. And in the local forests, with an area of ​​at least 54 thousand hectares, there is nothing like that! There are forests, but the forest in which this pine was born has disappeared somewhere - after all, it grew and stretched among pines that were even older. But there are none.
And this is what will prevent those pines that grow, at least in the Kurgan forests, from continuing their lives - pines live and for 400 years, as we have seen, we have ideal conditions for them. Pine trees are very resistant to diseases, and with age, resistance only increases, fires are not terrible for pine trees - there is nothing to burn down there, pine trees can easily tolerate ground fires, but high fires are still very rare. And, again, mature pines are more resistant to fires, so fires destroy, first of all, young trees.
After the above, will anyone argue with the statement that we had no forests at all 150 years ago? There was a desert, like the Sahara - bare sand:

This is a firebreak. What we see: the forest stands on bare sand, covered only with pine needles with cones and a thin layer of humus - just a few centimeters. All our pine forests, 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 this is so, then the Sahara is resting! And all this was literally some hundred and fifty years ago!
The sand is dazzlingly white, without any impurities at all!
And it seems that such sands can be found not only in the Western Siberian Lowland. For example, there is something similar in Transbaikalia - there is a small area there, only five by ten kilometers, that still stands in “undeveloped” taiga, and the locals consider it a “Miracle of Nature.”

And it was given the status of a geological reserve. We have this “miracle” - well, there are heaps, only this forest in which we spent an excursion measures 50 by 60 kilometers, and no one sees any miracles and no one organizes nature reserves - as if this is how it should be...
By the way, the fact that Transbaikalia was a complete desert in the 19th century was documented by photographers of that time; I have already posted what those places looked like before the construction of the Circum-Baikal Railway. Here, for example:

A similar picture can be seen in other Siberian places, for example, a view in the “dead taiga” during the construction of the road to Tomsk:

All of the above convincingly proves: 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 ended up buried in the “cultural layer”, like the first floors of the St. Petersburg Hermitage, the first floors in many Russian cities.
I have already written here several times about this very “cultural layer”, but I can’t resist once again publishing a photo that recently spread around the Internet:

It seems that in Kazan the “cultural layer” from the first floor, which was considered a “basement” for many years, was stupidly removed with 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:

But the next photo was taken in central Russia - here the river washes away the bank and centuries-old oak trees, uprooted at one time, appear:

The author of the photo writes that the oak trees look perfect - smooth, slender, which indicates that they grew in the forest. And the age, with that thickness (the cover set for the scale is 11 cm) is much older than 200 years.
And again, as Newton said, I am not inventing hypotheses: let the “historians” explain why trees older than 150 years are found in large numbers only under the “cultural layer”.

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

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

Http://sibved.livejournal.com/153207.html - Overgrowing 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 - Chara desert

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

Http://rosdrevo.ru/index.php?option=com_adsmanager&page=show_ad&adid=77&catid=1&Itemid=85 - pine in the Ozerninsky 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 - oak trees in Sharovsky Park

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

Http://sibved.livejournal.com/73000.html - Siberia during 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 Prosvet 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"Buzuluksky Bor"

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

Http://sibved.livejournal.com/47355.html - 5000-year-old forest excavated 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

There are often reports of very young trees in our forests. The trees are said to be no older than 150 years. Various versions are given as the reason for this state of affairs. For my part, I can offer my own version.

Let's remember that almost from the beginning of the 19th century (that is, almost 200 years ago), the deliberate relocation of the country's human resources began to develop lands from the western provinces to Siberia and to the east. This was caused by state necessity. Therefore, starting from the beginning. Like a small stream, the flow of settlers soon turned into a large river. The bulk of migrants were peasant families, who occupied free lands, cleared them and sowed the resulting fields. What Siberia was like before this migration of peoples and at its beginning can be read in written sources of that time, as well as looking at paintings, drawings and maps. Not all settlers were able to immediately and finally settle in selected places. Internal relocation also took place at the same time. They will begin to settle down in one place, then, various reasons(for example, due to conflicts with old residents), they find a new place and move there. Now, to make things clearer, let’s turn to the materials of that time.

Ivan Ilyich Pushkarev "Historical, geographical and statistical description Russian Empire. Volume 1, book 4. Vologda province" 1846 https://www.wdl.org/ru

In this simple way, the peasants of that time “cultivated” new areas for sowing. You can tell me that this happened in the Vologda province. Then we read excerpts from a book for Ukrainian immigrants to Siberia, published in Kharkov in 1890:

As you can see, the method of developing and clearing the land is the same - fires and burning. Moreover, in this book it is especially noted that people who are accustomed to forests try to settle closer to the forests, and those for whom the release of a place “under the sun” from forests is unusual, having suffered, move closer to the steppe. That is, forests were burned and eliminated by people with experience. Pay attention to the calculated rate of settlement of Siberia - 50 thousand people per year. If everyone has at least a hectare (he not only needs to sow for himself, but also needs hayfields for his livestock). then this is 50 thousand hectares per year. We also need forest for construction (which lasts for more than one year), we need forest for firewood... So we shouldn’t be surprised at the speed of forest destruction. As a result, the old trees were “harvested”, but the new ones have not yet “matured”. And now we marvel at the giant stumps in old photographs and scan the skies for the area where it came from.

In the vast expanses of Russia - from St. Petersburg to Vladivostok - in a country where 1/5 of the planet's forests grow - equally young forests grow. You won't find trees older than 150-200 years. Why?

Let's look at the data on the possible age of trees: Norway spruce - capable of growing and living from 300 to 500 years. Scots pine is from 300 to 600 years old. Linden small-leaved from 300 to 600 years. Beech is from 400 to 500 years old. Cedar pine 400 to 1000 years. Larch up to 500 years old. Siberian larch (Larix sibirica) up to 900 years. Common juniper (Juniperus communis) up to 1000 years. Yew berry (Taxus baccata) up to 2000 years. English oak, up to 40 meters high, up to 1500 years old.

The photo shows a tree growing in California. The diameter of the trunk near the ground reaches 27 meters. The age is estimated at 2 thousand years. Well, even if it’s less, the age of this tree is still more than 500 years for sure. This means that everything was fine in California for the next 500 - 2000 years :))

What happened to the nature of Russia 200 years ago? The phenomenon that “reset” the forests of Russia... The following versions come to mind: 1. Forest fire. 2. Mass clearing. 3. Another cataclysm.

Let's look at each version.

1. A version of a powerful fire 200 years ago.

The forest area of ​​Russia today is 809 million hectares. http://geographyofrussia.com/les-rossii/ Annual fires, even very strong ones, burn up to 2 million hectares. What is less than 1% forest area. It is generally accepted - human factor, that is, the presence of a person in the forest who lit a fire. It’s just that the forest doesn’t burn.

The forest fires closest to us in time were the period of summer 2010, when all of Moscow was in smoke. What kind of fires were these and what territory did they cover?

"At the end of July, August and beginning of September 2010 in Russia, throughout the entire territory of first the Central Federal District, and then in other regions of Russia, a difficult fire situation arose due to ABNORMAL HEAT and lack of precipitation. PEAT fires in the Moscow region were accompanied by a burning smell and heavy smoke in Moscow and in many other cities. As of the beginning of August 2010, fires in Russia covered about 200 thousand hectares in 20 regions (Central Russia and the Volga region, Dagestan). They write to us in a large and detailed article on Wikipedia.

Peat fires were recorded in the Moscow region, Sverdlovsk, Kirov, Tver, Kaluga and Pskov regions. The most severe fires were in Ryazan and Nizhny Novgorod regions and Mordovia, where a real disaster actually occurred. A real disaster from just 200 thousand hectares of burning forest! Burning peat.

About peat.

In the 1920s, as part of the GOELRO plan, swamps in Central Russia were drained in order to extract peat, due to its greater availability and need as fuel - compared to oil, gas and coal. In the 1970s and 1980s, peat was extracted for agricultural needs. The burning of dehydrated peatlands in the 2000s is the consequences of peat mining in the early 1920s. 200 years ago there seemed to be no peat mining. That is, the forest had even less reason to burn.

Heat abnormality of 2010.

The abnormal heat of 2010 in Russia is a long period of abnormally hot weather in Russia in the last ten days of June - the first half of August 2010. It became one of the causes of massive fires, accompanied by unprecedented smog in a number of cities and regions. Led to economic and environmental damage. In terms of its scope, duration and degree of consequences, the heat had no analogues in more than a century of weather observation history. The head of Roshydromet, Alexander Frolov, tells us a fairy tale that “based on data from lake sediments, such a hot summer in Russia has not happened since the time of Rurik, that is, in the last more than 1000 years!... "

Thereby public services they say that this heat was extremely rare.

This means that the consequences of burning 200 thousand hectares in Central Russia are an exceptional rarity. There is some reasonableness in this statement, since a fire in which at least a third of the forests of central Russia burned would have caused such smoke, such carbon monoxide poisoning, such economic losses - in the form of thousands of burned villages, such human losses - that this would certainly have been reflected in history. At least that's reasonable to assume.

So, fire as a phenomenon is, of course, possible.

But it needs to be specially organized over a large territory, and the territory of Russia is very, very huge. Which implies enormous costs. And these arsonists must be able to withstand the rain - since rain in Russia in the summer is also an everyday reality. And a few hours heavy rain will nullify all the efforts of the arsonists.

2.A version of mass cutting.

On an area of ​​800 million hectares - even with modern technology - benosipil is a very long and difficult undertaking. Now all loggers in Russia cut down a maximum of about 2 million hectares of forest per year. equipment is used to remove timber, ships to float it down rivers, cars and barges for transportation.

200 years ago, even if there were enough loggers to cut down 1/100 of the country’s forests, on an area of ​​8 million hectares (8 million loggers), who and how would be able to remove such volumes of forest and where to sell it. It is clear that it is not realistic to transport and use such volumes of timber using manual labor and horses.

3.A version of another cataclysm that could destroy all forests. What could it be?

Earthquake? So we don’t see them.

Flood? Where can we get enough water to flood an entire continent? And the mighty trees would still remain standing. Or at least lie down. But such a flood would wash away all the people.

In general, other disasters are not suitable. And even if they were suitable, their power of influence would have to be reflected in the history of the country.

Conclusion. There is a fact of absence of mature forest. We have forests everywhere - young thickets. An explanation for this phenomenon remains to be found.