Replies

Thanks for the explanation re the, er, rimshots......I think. One observation: Around here pine and the like grow on the high ground; hardwoods in the lowlands, that is, creek and river bottoms especially. Anywhere water tends to accumulate, you'll hardly find a pine or other softwood. The hardwoods rule there, FWIW. Hardwoods typically have shallower, wider spread root systems, while softwoods typically have a taproot in addition to small feeder roots. Why the difference in growing patterns???

IOW, the bays walk, look and act like a duck to the layman(that would be me), that is, it looks for all the world like something took a swipe at the eastern seaboard(amongst other places???) at roughly the P/H boundary. If you're sayin' it ain't a duck, the arguments will necessarily have to be ironclad. Or maybe handed down from the mount. Coulda's and woulda's are great for purposes of discussion, but.....

Again, you'll forgive my skeptcism???

Certainly I forgive your skepticism; you should see the arguments we soil scientists get into amongst ourselves (there's an old saying that if you put 2 soil scientists into a pit, you get 3 opinions).

Remember that pines are not climax vegetation anywhere on the coastal plain. They are colonizing species, and depend upon fire, or other disturbance, to keep out competing hardwoods. Palynological evidence shows that Oaks and Hickories were the dominant arboreal species on the coastal plain of the Carolinas during the Pleistocene, and dry, sandy uplands are climaxed by Oaks, Hickories, and Dogwood today as well. Indians burned large areas to open up the forest and improve hunting (as well as to make garden space for themselves), and pines came in. Even today, foresters have to burn areas periodically to keep them in pines.