Jump to content

Talk:Ecology of the Sierra Nevada

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fire return intervals, etc

[edit]

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)[reply]

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.

Rename article?

[edit]

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)[reply]

I forget why I chose this title --- ecology seems better to me, too. hike395 07:43, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I moved the page, as you can see. -- Cielomobile talk / contribs 07:51, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

High Sierra (biome)

[edit]

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)[reply]

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

Sierra Nevada Forests

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

Name of article

[edit]

Shouldn't it be "Ecology of the Sierra Nevada"? Why "Environment"? Why not parallel structure with Natural history of California (which used to be Ecology of California)? I'm puzzled about the change and non-uniformity, perhaps we can discuss further. —hike395 (talk) 07:48, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge

[edit]

Given that two ecoregion articles (California oak woodland and California interior chaparral and woodlands) already cover the ecology of the lot hills, I believe that Sierra Nevada foothills is going to remain a redundant stub for a long time. The content of Sierra Nevada foothills would very nicely expand the Foothill Woodland and Chaparral section of this article. I propose merging the other article into that section and redirect to that section. If that section expands further, we can always split the article bak out. —hike395 (talk) 00:36, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Ecology of the Sierra Nevada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:43, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ecology_of_the_Sierra_Nevada&oldid=1196369096"