Introductory
SPECIES: Pinus lambertiana | Sugar Pine 



ABBREVIATION : 
PINLAM

SYNONYMS : 
NO-ENTRY


SCS PLANT CODE : 
   PILA


COMMON NAMES : 
   sugar pine


TAXONOMY : 
The currently accepted scientific name of sugar pine is Pinus
lambertiana Dougl. [24].  There are no recognized subspecies, varieties,
or forms.



LIFE FORM : 
Tree

FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS : 
No special status

OTHER STATUS : 
NO-ENTRY


COMPILED BY AND DATE : 
R. J. Habeck, April 1992



LAST REVISED BY AND DATE : 
NO-ENTRY


AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION : 
Habeck, R. J. 1992.  Pinus lambertiana.  In: Remainder of Citation

DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Pinus lambertiana | Sugar Pine 



GENERAL DISTRIBUTION : 
Sugar pine extends from the western slope of the Cascade Range in
north-central Oregon to the Sierra San Pedro Martir in Baja California.
Its distribution is almost continuous through the Klamath and Siskiyou
mountains and on western slopes of the Cascade Range and Sierra Nevada.
Smaller and more disjunct populations are found in the Coast Range of
southern Oregon and California, Transverse and Peninsula ranges of
southern California, and east of the Cascade and Sierra Nevada crests.
Its southern extremity is an isolated population high on a plateau in
the Sierra San Pedro Martir in Baja California, Mexico.  Over 80 percent
of its distribution is in California [16,21].



ECOSYSTEMS : 
   FRES20  Douglas-fir
   FRES21  Ponderosa pine
   FRES26  Lodgepole pine
   FRES27  Redwood
   FRES28  Western hardwoods
   FRES34  Chaparral - mountain shrub


STATES : 
     CA  NV  OR  MEXICO


ADMINISTRATIVE UNITS : 
     CRLA  KICA  LABE  LAVO  REDW  SEQU
     WHIS  YOSE


BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS : 
   1  Northern Pacific Border
   3  Southern Pacific Border
   4  Sierra Mountains


KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS : 
   K002  Cedar - hemlock - Douglas-fir forest
   K005  Mixed conifer forest
   K006  Redwood forest
   K007  Red fir forest
   K008  Lodgepole pine - subalpine forest
   K010  Ponderosa shrub forest
   K034  Montane chaparral


SAF COVER TYPES : 
   207  Red fir
   211  White fir
   229  Pacific Douglas-fir
   231  Port-Orford-cedar
   232  Redwood
   234  Douglas-fir - tanoak - Pacific madrone
   244  Pacific ponderosa pine - Douglas-fir
   246  California black oak
   247  Jeffrey pine
   249  Canyon live oak


SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES : 
NO-ENTRY


HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES : 
Sugar pine usually occurs in mixed-conifer forest stands with a wide
variety of overstory associates including ponderosa and Jeffrey pine
(Pinus ponderosa and P. jeffreyi), California red fir (Abies magnifica),
white fir (A. concolor), noble fir (A. procera), and Douglas-fir
(Pseudotsuga menziesii) [4,21].  In southern California, sugar pine is
characteristically found in vegetation types of the woodland and
timberland chaparral zones.  Canyon live oak (Quercus chrysolepis) is
found with sugar pine on more mesic sites, while at higher elevations
sugar pine occurs with mountain whitethorn (Ceanothus cordulatus), Parry
manzanita (Arctostaphylos parryana var. pinctorum), and bush chinkapin
(Castanopsis sempervirens) [14].

Publications listing sugar pine as a codominant species in plant
vegetation types (vts) or community types (cts) are listed as follows:

Area                   Classification                       Authority
----                   --------------                       ---------
s CA                    forest (vts)                        Horton 1960
s CA                    forest (cts)                        Thorne 1977
  CA                    forest (cts)                        Thorne 1976

VALUE AND USE
SPECIES: Pinus lambertiana | Sugar Pine 



WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE : 
High-grade sugar pine lumber is sought after for its dimensional
stability and workability.  The wood is light and resists deformity.  It
is easily milled and is favored for molding, window and door frames,
window sashes, doors, and other special products like piano keys and
organ pipes [16].



IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE : 
Birds and mammals use sugar pine as a source of food and shelter.
Douglas' squirrels and white-headed woodpeckers have been noted to
occupy sugar pine trees [16].



PALATABILITY : 
Sugar pine is considered low in palatability to livestock and wildlife.



NUTRITIONAL VALUE : 
NO-ENTRY


COVER VALUE : 
Sugar pine is used for cover by wildlife.  Early in sugar pine
development, large mammals use dense stands as hiding and thermal cover.
Mature trees are used by arboreal species such as birds, squirrels, and
other small mammals.  Old-growth sugar pine is prime habitat for cavity
nesters such as woodpeckers and owls [16].



VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES : 
NO-ENTRY


OTHER USES AND VALUES : 
Native Americans used the pitch from sugar pine to repair canoes and to
fasten arrowheads and feathers to shafts [2].



MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : 
Sugar pine is planted on a vast scale in Oregon and California, and also
has been tried in several countries around the world.  Large-scale
plantings, however, are few due to establishment difficulties and
restrictive site requirements for good growth [21].  Sugar pine does not
self-prune; therefore, high-quality clear-lumber requires the pruning of
lower limbs.  It is the most tolerant to oxidant air pollution among its
coniferous associates [8,16].

Disease:  Sugar pine is highly susceptible to white pine blister rust
caused by the fungus Cronartium ribicola.  Among commercially important
North American white pines, sugar pine is the most susceptible to this
disease.  Infected seedlings and young trees are inevitably killed by
cankers girdling the main stem.  Incidence and intensity of infection on
sugar pine are highest in Oregon and northern California and become
progressively less to the south, as the climate becomes warmer and
drier.  Dwarf mistletoe (Arceuthobium californicum) may seriously damage
infected trees, but spread is slow and can be controlled by sanitation
cutting [13,16,21].

Insects:  The most damaging insect threatening sugar pine is the
mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae).  During periods of
drought, other insects such as the red turpentine beetle (D. valens) and
California flathead borer (Melanophila californica) usually attack
unhealthy trees and those under moisture stress.  The sugar pine cone
beetle (Conophthorus lambertianae) is extremely destructive to
developing second-year cones [5,16].

Animals:  Small mammals such as pocket mice, jumping mice, chipmunks,
and ground squirrels forage on young seedlings, thus reducing
regeneration on disturbed sites [3].

BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Pinus lambertiana | Sugar Pine 



GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS : 
Sugar pines may live 400 to 500 years and are second only to giant
sequoia (Sequoia gigantea) in total volume.  A record sugar pine in
California measured 216 feet (66 m) tall and 122 inches (310 cm) in
d.b.h.  Trees up to 250 feet (76 m) tall and 10 feet (3 m) in diameter
have been reported.  Mature sugar pine cones are among the largest of
all conifers, averaging 12 inches (30 cm) in length, and can reach 22
inches (56 cm) long.  Its needles are 3 inches (7.5 cm) long and have
five to a cluster.  Sugar pines pyramidal crown has whorls of horizontal
branches with several conspicuously longer than others.  Its sap
contains a sugary substance [7,16,21].



RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM : 
   Phanerophyte: (Megaphanerophyte)
   Phanerophyte: (Mesophanerophyte)


REGENERATION PROCESSES : 
Sugar pine does not sprout, but young trees can be rooted from cuttings.
Its primary regeneration strategy is via seed [3,16].

Flowering and fruiting:  Sugar pine is monoecious.  Reproductive buds
are set in July and August, but are not discernible until late the next
spring.  Time of pollination ranges from late May to early August,
depending on elevation.  Female strobili are approximately 1 to 2 inches
(2.5-5.0 cm) long when pollinated and may double in size by the end of
the growing season.  Fertilization occurs the following spring,
approximately 12 months after pollination.  Dates of cone opening range
from mid-August at low elevations to early October at high elevations.
Sugar pine does not become a good cone producer until it has attained a
diameter of about 30 inches (75 cm) or is about 150 years old [2,16].

Seed production and dissemination:  Mature trees produce large amounts
of seeds, averaging up to 150 seeds per cone.  In good crop years, the
proportion of sound seeds is usually high (67 to 99 percent) but in
light crop years can fall as low as 28 percent.  Seed shed may begin in
late August at low elevations and at higher elevations is usually
complete by the end of October.  Seeds are large and heavy, averaging
2,100 seeds per pound (4,630/kg).  Seeds are not dispersed great
distances by wind, and 80 percent fall within 100 feet (30 m) of the
source.  Birds and small mammals aid in seed dissemination [16].

Seedling development:  Sugar pine seeds may lie dormant, but dormancy
can be broken by a 60 to 90 day stratification.  Fresh seed may
germinate with a 90 percent success rate if adequately ripened, cleaned,
and stratified.  Losses due to unprepared seedbeds, drought, insects,
and rodents may be high.  Germination is epigeal.  Seedlings rapidly
grow a deep taproot when seeds germinate on mineral soil.  Seedlings
will germinate on both litter and bare mineral soil, but development is
slow under shade conditions.  After 2 years, taproots range from 22 to
40 inches (56-102 cm) deep.  Planting sugar pine has met with some
failure.  A low drought tolerance may be the determining factor.  Sowing
stratified seed in February or March extends the growing season and
produces healthy seedlings of plantable size in one season [4,16].

Growth and yield:  Early growth of sugar pine is slow compared to
ponderosa pine but increases rapidly in the pole stage and continues
through maturity.  On favorable sites, growth increments in basal area
of 2.5 percent or more can be sustained for up to 100 to 150 years.  The
best growth can be found between 4,500 to 6,000 feet (1,370-1,830 m) in
the central Sierra Nevada, between the American and San Joaquin Rivers.
Sugar pine is semitolerant to shade and may exhibit poor growth if
seedlings are enclosed by brush.  Sugar pine is a deep-rooted species
that is not susceptible to windthrow [9,16,21].



SITE CHARACTERISTICS : 
Sugar pine is found on a variety of sites from moist, steep, north- and
east-facing slopes, to more mesic, south-facing slopes.  The fuels under
sugar pine are generally heavy with deep soils.

Climate:  Temperature and precipitation vary widely throughout the range
of sugar pine.  The general weather pattern consists of hot, dry 
summers and cool, wet winters.  Precipitation during July and August is
usually less than 1 inch (2.5 cm) per month and summertime relative
humidities are low.  Most precipitation occurs between November and
April, mostly in the form of snow at middle elevations.  Total
precipitation varies from 33 to 69 inches (83-173 cm) per year [16].

Soils and topography:  Soil parent material include rocks of volcanic,
granitic, and sedimentary origin.  Soils formed from peridotite or
serpentinite typically support sugar pine stands of inferior growth and
quality.  The most extensive soils supporting sugar pine are
well-drained, moderately to rapidly permeable, and slightly acidic to
neutral pH (7.0).  Best development of sugar pine is on mesic soils with
sandy to clayey loam textures.  Much of the terrain occupied by sugar
pine is steep and rugged.  Sugar pines are equally distributed on all
aspects at lower elevations but grow best on warm exposures as elevation
increases.  Optimum growth occurs on gentle terrain at middle elevations
[16].

Elevation:  Sugar pine ranges from near sea level in the Coast Range to
more than 10,000 feet (3,000 m) in the Transverse Range.  Elevational
limits increase with decreasing latitude.  Typical elevational ranges
are as follows [16]:
                   Cascade Range:  1,100 to  5,400 feet (335-1,645 m)   
                   Sierra Nevada:  2,000 to  7,500 feet (610-2,285 m)
         Sierra San Pedro Martir:  7,056 to  9,100 feet (2,150-2,775 m)
Transverse and Peninsular Ranges:  4,000 to 10,000 feet (1,220-3,000 m)



SUCCESSIONAL STATUS : 
Sugar pine is primarily an early-seral to seral species.  It is
rarely found in pure stands.  When sugar pine is found to be the dominant
species in old-growth stands, it most often was dominant to begin with
or released by natural causes.  White fir would usually be the climax
species in mixed conifer forest in the absence of any natural
disturbances.  When disturbance does occur, it creates gaps in which
sugar pine is well adapted to grow [3,4,16,25].



SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT : 
Seasonal growth durations of sugar pine at various elevations in the Sierra 
Nevada are as follows [11]:

                   Height           Radial
                   Growth*          Growth
                   ------           ------
Start (days)**       146              107
Start (date)       May 26         April 17
Length (days)         51              129
Rapidity (days)       15               46

* An 8-year average.
** Number of days from January 1.

FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Pinus lambertiana | Sugar Pine 



FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS : 
Sugar pine is very resistant to low- to moderate-severity fires.  It has
adapted a thick, fire-resistant bark and open canopy that retards aerial
fire spread.  Young sugar pine seedlings prefer bare mineral seedbeds
[2,3].



POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY : 
   off-site colonizer; seed carried by wind; postfire years 1 and 2
   off-site colonizer; seed carried by animals or water; postfire yr 1&2

FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Pinus lambertiana | Sugar Pine 



IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT : 
Sugar pine is rated as intermediate in fire tolerance.  Young sugar
pines are susceptible to low- to high-severity fires.  Mature trees can
survive most fires, suffering only bole scorch.  Sugar pine
susceptiblity to secondary attack by insects and disease following fire
is rated as low [3].



DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT : 
NO-ENTRY


PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE : 
Sugar pine reaction to a low-severity fire is by seeding on the exposed 
mineral soil, thus enhancing germination.  High-severity fires that occur 
during periods of high stress will generally result in death [3,16].



DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE : 
NO-ENTRY


FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : 
Prescribed burning has been found to be an effective management
treatment that will destroy infected stands of sugar pine where dwarf
mistletoe and other diseases have rendered stands unmerchantable [1].
Dead sugar pine is susceptible to blue stain fungus in the sapwood;
however, the heartwood is very durable.  Salvagable trees may be found
up to 17 years after being killed by fire [15].

References for species: Pinus lambertiana

1. Alexander, Martin E.; Hawksworth, Frank G. 1975. Wildland fires and dwarf mistletoes: a literature review of ecology and prescribed buring. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-14. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, ForestService, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 12 p. [15583]

2. Arno, Stephen F.; Hammerly, Ramona P. 1977. Northwest trees. Seattle, WA: The Mountaineers. 222 p. [4208]

3. Atzet, Thomas; Wheeler, David L. 1982. Historical and ecological perspectives on fire activity in the Klamath Geological Province of the Rogue River and Siskiyou National Forests. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 16 p. [6252]

4. Barbour, Michael G.; Major, Jack, eds. 1977. Terrestrial vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 1002 p. [388]

5. Bedard, William D. 1966. High temperature mortality of the sugar-pine cone beetle, Conophthorus lambertianae Hopkins (Coleoptera: Scolytidae). The Canadian Entomologist. 98: 152-157. [12261]

6. Bernard, Stephen R.; Brown, Kenneth F. 1977. Distribution of mammals, reptiles, and amphibians by BLM physiographic regions and A.W. Kuchler's associations for the eleven western states. Tech. Note 301. Denver, CO: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 169 p. [434]

7. Brockman, C. Frank. 1979. Trees of North America. New York: Golden Press. 280 p. [16867]

8. Campbell, Robert K.; Sugano, Albert I. 1987. Seed zones and breeding zones for sugar pine in southwestern Oregon. Res. Pap. PNW-RP-383. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 18 p. [15819]

9. Dale, Virginia H.; Hemstrom, Miles A.; Franklin, Jerry F. 1984. The effect of disturbance frequency on forest succession in the Pacific Northwest. In: New forests for a changing world: Proceedings of the 1983 convention of The Society of American Foresters; 1983 October 16-20; Portland, OR. Bethesda, MD: Society of American Foresters: 300-304. [4781]

10. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]

11. Fowells, H. A. 1941. The period of seasonal growth of ponderosa pine and associated species. Journal of Forestry. 39: 601-608. [12690]

12. Garrison, George A.; Bjugstad, Ardell J.; Duncan, Don A.; [and others]. 1977. Vegetation and environmental features of forest and range ecosystems. Agric. Handb. 475. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 68 p. [998]

13. Hoff, R.; Bingham, R. T.; McDonald, G. I. 1980. Relative blister rust resistance of white pines. European Journal of Forest Pathology. 10(5): 307-316. [1177]

14. Horton, Jerome S. 1960. Vegetation types of the San Bernardino Mountains. Tech. Rep. PSW-44. Berkeley, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 29 p. [10687]

15. Kimmey, James W. 1955. Rate of deterioration of fire-killed timber in California. Circular No. 962. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 22 p. [15547]

16. Kinloch, Bohun B., Jr.; Scheuner, William. 1990. Pinus lambertiana Dougl. sugar pine. In: Burns, Russell M.; Honkala, Barbara H., tech. coords. Silvics of North America. Volume 1. Conifers. Agricultural Handbook 654. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 370-379. [13194]

17. Kuchler, A. W. 1964. Manual to accompany the map of potential vegetation of the conterminous United States. Special Publication No. 36. New York: American Geographical Society. 77 p. [1384]

18. Lyon, L. Jack; Stickney, Peter F. 1976. Early vegetal succession following large northern Rocky Mountain wildfires. In: Proceedings, Tall Timbers fire ecology conference and Intermountain Fire Research Council fire and land management symposium; 1974 October 8-10; Missoula, MT. No. 14. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station: 355-373. [1496]

19. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]

20. Spencer, Donald A. 1955. The effects of rodents on reforestation. Proceedings, Society of American Foresters Annual Meeting: 125-128. [16769]

21. Steinhoff, R. J. 1972. White pines of western North America and Central America. In: Bingham, Richard: Hoff, Raymond J., tech. coords. In: Biology of rust resistance in forest trees: Proceedings of a NATO/IUFRO Advanced Study Institute; August 17-24, 1969: Washington, DC. Misc. Pub. 1221. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 215-232. [30287]

22. Thorne, Robert F. 1976. The vascular plant communities of California. In: Latting, June, ed. Symposium proceedings: plant communities of southern California; 1974 May 4; Fullerton, CA. Special Publication No. 2. Berkeley, CA: California Native Plant Society: 1-31. [3289]

23. Thorne, Robert F. 1977. Montane and subalpine forests of the Transverse and Peninsular ranges. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Major, Jack, eds. Terrestrial vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley and Sons: 537-557. [7214]

24. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1982. National list of scientific plant names. Vol. 1. List of plant names. SCS-TP-159. Washington, DC. 416 p. [11573]

25. Yeaton, Richard I. 1983. The successional replacement of ponderosa pine by sugar pine in the Sierra Nevada. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club. 110(3): 292-297. [17348]

Related categories for Species: Pinus lambertiana | Sugar Pine