Talk:Ecology of the Sierra Nevada

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject California, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Ecology of the Sierra Nevada is part of WikiProject Ecoregions, a project to improve all ecoregion-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other ecoregion-related articles, please visit the project page. All interested editors are welcome.

Contents 1 Fire return intervals, etc 2 Rename article? 3 High Sierra (biome) 4 Sierra Nevada Forests

[edit] Fire return intervals, etc

The article quoted a fire return interval of lodgepole forests in Yosemite at 764 years. This is almost certainly way too high, and is unsupported by any references that I have seen, as well as my personal observations and data collections. I removed that figure and re-worded the paragraph to make it more coherent in its comparisons with other forest types and Rocky Mtn lodgepole forests.

Jeeb 16:58, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

This article should be titled "Biology of the Central Western Sierra Nevada" or "Yosemite Park". Although a disclaimer exists within the article, it should have more contributions before it can be labeled just 'Sierra Nevada'. East side ecology should be provided as well; I will see if I can get contributors for this.

[edit] Rename article?

It seems odd that the article is called the "biology" of the Sierra Nevada. Wouldn't "ecology" be more appropriate? If there are no protests, I'll move it to Ecology of the Sierra Nevada. -- Cielomobile ^{talk / contribs} 02:46, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I forget why I chose this title --- ecology seems better to me, too. hike395 07:43, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I moved the page, as you can see. -- Cielomobile ^{talk / contribs} 07:51, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] High Sierra (biome)

Editors here may be best able to evaluate the merit of this stub: High Sierra (biome). Is it worth keeping? Can it be expanded or should it be merged here? Any sources possible? -Will Beback · † · 05:12, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, a merge point here (or to Sierra Nevada (U.S.)) would be best, I think hike395 07:45, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sierra Nevada Forests

Sierra Nevada forests redirected here indirectly. I started a stub article on that ecoregion there, and removed its external links from this page. --Justin 19:05, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Seems like you've made a sub-stub: not very useful. Why not just keep the link here? hike395 05:19, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Granted, probably should've had an article in place before I made the move. But it's prep work related to WP Ecoregions - which is where the exact article name comes from. Working on fleshing out that article now. Should have a decent amount of info within a few days, maybe a "see also" link back to here... Dang, I just realized ecoregions is an inactive project, am I getting myself into? --Justin 06:00, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I still don't see how separating out the ecoregion article is helpful for our readers: won't any material that you write in that other article overlap strongly with this one? In other words, why not expand this article with your new material? Then, there is one place people will find for ecological information on the SN. If we add so much more that the article gets too long, we could separate out articles for the forest zone(s) and the alpine zone.

Looking forward to your new material: it's always good to expand WP! hike395 15:14, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

You're right, of course. I'll get the added info back in this article, and restore the original redirect - will be much more useful now. --Justin 02:47, 12 April 2007 (UTC)