ae

-

Urpueblinssds — of
ler Hole,

BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN

K
Oo

MEMOIRS

VOLUME II

THE VEGETATION OF LONG ISLAND

Part I

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK
A STUDY OF GRASSLAND AND FOREST

BY

NORMAN TAYLOR
/

CURATOR, BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN

IssUED JUNE II, 1923
BROOKDYING Ne yes) Ue S.A

LIBRARY
NEW YORK
BOTANICAE

GARDEN

PREFACE.

This is the first of a series of papers on ‘‘ The Vegetation of Long Island,”
which it was intended should be issued under one cover. To issue them
as separate parts, as they are completed, now seems the better plan as not
much has ever been written on this phase of Long Island plant life, and
practically nothing at all upon the environmental factors which determine it.

Studies of the well-nigh world wide contest between grassland and
forest are so common that it should be said that the peculiar climatic and
topographic conditions at Montauk alone make necessary the publication
of another such paper. As will be seen, the response of the vegetation at
Montauk is in many ways unique.

The attempt to put into plain English what appears to be the vegetative
history of Montauk, without using the multitude of terms that etymologic-
ally adroit ecologists have given us, may seem to demand some apology
from my colleagues. But a glance at recent ecological literature shows
that many of these terms are not yet free from confusion or controversy,
whereas English still possesses the incomparable advantage of being under-
stood not only by most ecologists, but by others.

In gathering instrumental data, in the identification of critical species,
and in other ways, I have had assistance from various people whose special
services are acknowledged in the different sections of the book. I am
particularly pleased to make grateful acknowledgment to my friend and
colleague, Major Barrington Moore, who has shown constant interest and
helpfulness during the work, and especially during several trips to Montauk.
To my assistant Helen Smith Hill I am under great obligation fo: efficient
help in carrying through most of the details of instrumental work, of ex-
perimental cultures for testing the moisture-holding capacity and wilting
coefficient of many soil samples, and in many other ways. The photo-
graphs, except where noted otherwise, were taken by the writer.

NORMAN TAYLOR.

CONTENTS

MPL AMMAN ARES LOPOSTADNY.... 2-200 cas amen nw ccs ss ebee cane
Elistonyas it ecords its early vegetation... . 22... 0; cess cece ccens
AL ULEPIZG I) ROS 95.35 SCRER ORO Oe Aen RGIe 56 Benet Aes aor migmte ets oan senate
“Tint IDWS: <6 <5 See Sen rn SCI Pt Ie on ee eaten
SO MEME LESSEN CSPI yore echo ae ia fous bis ainia 3/5) acre ye Suef o1cNlars sreteVers ah wie) nies el brdlatereiesé

Low kettleholes: open stage.

Low kettleholes: the beginnings of woody vegetation.

Low wooded kettleholes.
EMMRHETANVOOGS Lc soc cose base vee Os
Contact of grassland and forest.

(he RRS Gace Gi (Gree Hoy ts le eee Ses ARE Ronee etree eee te ene

Climax forest and open grassland.

a Taaaa ig A MUCSIR LAE CS NE oe ot cs ayaie ¢. ove ievemaysid ons ijarshiveo& ciavsisiere wOlace waite 4 ore
Soe aT Fe RE Ds Se 5, cabs Maka ve, ave\ lave aca /asai-sv ace ays wiasakagdt aisoa-sigin& ouehebeperecm ara ae
Sy ee To IO FR «aimee a Uhiss cha’ oats oS: eh ferayoieie © ale,» Hhotdtorobavtcare, nie Uis eie deleiere.

eee aa T gtr PE os 2A Ne alc lSa aiatdes edad since a Sudig’s 6 ndsig Bhetedealea’s

PARAS UT:

EIR ES ONCE ee Sole Noa ci cs aids ego iele ves Sino ow SES ole 6 Omit Alene Od ee Sele eees

‘paremysea UU] OY} Wor UOTdI1 dy} Jo eUIeIOURd pasuapUOd JO} @

aMBIJ 98S ‘SoINjJVayj 19YyIO pue d9snoyIYSI] ‘suorjeys prvns 4seOd ‘s]1e14 “spror jediourid Surmoys ‘ynequoyy jo deyy “1 TANS

Salis g

| sari yeh mtd o4 6914 Cy

oF]
4

Be PLelsy

Nin)
‘presen 5

aie we ‘9 vapeyind
uo ) a) oO < ure é r a
3 we ; = O\
ew Be \ SN
oe 58 AS
SS 25
vw ° ars

AUG 2 +1960

MONTAUK AND ITS TOPOGRAPHY.

One hundred and thirteen miles from New York on the eastern extremity
of the south fluke of Long Island is the peninsula of Montauk, famous
since 1640 when Captain Lion Gardiner founded Easthampton, the present
township of which includes Montauk.

In approaching it by train from New York, one passes, during the last
few miles of the ride, through an apparently ancient oak forest, about four
miles in extent, known from the earliest days as the Hither Woods. Quite
suddenly the train debouches from these woods onto the open Downs,
skirting the edge of a beautiful crescent bay, upon the beach of which the
fishing hamlet of Montauk is picturesquely scattered. This tiny village,
largely depopulated of its fishermen in the winter, is the last station on the
railroad, and is seven miles by road from the lighthouse at Montauk Point,
which is the easterly extremity of New York State.

The topography of Montauk is dominated by the kettleholes, and the
areas between them, which in the case of treeless sections are known as
The Downs, and give the whole Point a characteristic aspect. For miles
one sees nothing but rolling hills, deceptive as to size and the depth of the
kettleholes between them, mostly bare of trees, from the easterly edge of
the Hither Woods, to just east of Great Pond.

J. A. Ayres who visited Montauk, and wrote an account of it in 1849,
writes of the general aspect of the place as follows:

“Southeast, we have a very fair representation of the hills of Montauk.
Of these nills it is almost impossible to convey a correct idea. Rounded
and rolling, but in many cases quite steep and abrupt, not arranged in
ridges, but scattered apparently at random; with no level land among them,
but deep cup-shaped hollows seeming like reversed copies of the hills
themselves; bare of trees and covered only with a smooth turf, as close as
though it had been shorn, their appearance is suz generis. We cannot place
ourselves on any part of the extent which bears the name Montauk, without
fully understanding the propriety of the name. It is in truth a ‘Hilly
Land.’”’ From Nommonock to Wamponomon* the rolling surface is un-
broken, except by the ponds and one or two small spaces which are by

courtesy called plains. The highest of these hills, in the western part of
the peninsula, are those on which we are standing.”

* Old names for the hills just east of Napeague, and for the “Turtle Hills” on which
the Lighthouse now stands at the extreme Point.

7

8 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS -

The bottoms of four of these kettleholes are permanently occupied by
water, viz.: Fort: Pond, near the town; Great Pond,* the largest lake on
Long Island, with a very considerable island near one end of it; Reed Pond
which is little more than an offshoot of Great Pond; and Oyster Pond, the
most easterly of all. Both the latter are small bodies of water, Great Pond
is about two miles long and one wide, comprises 1300 acres, and occupies
most of the center of the Point, while Fort Pond is of irregular shape and
is about a mile in its longest dimension.

The kettleholes occupied by these ponds are the largest on the Point,
most of the others not exceeding 6 to 8 acres, and scores of them only
a few square rods in extent. Those kettleholes without ponds in them
show all gradations between practical dryness and a water table that is
only just above or beneath the surface. The nearness of this water table
to the bottom of the kettlehole is reflected in the type of vegetation now
found in them, or that is developing in some of those whose progression
from early stages to final vegetative covering is still under way.

*Called in most old records and on some modern maps Lake Wyandannee. So
in Dr. Dickinson’s panorama, figure 2.

EiSTORY OF THE POINT AND EARLY CONDITION
OF ITS VEGETATION.

Casual visitors to Montauk are charmed Ly the wildness of the place,
the desolate moor-like Downs, the depths of the kettleholes, some destitute
of woody vegetation, others dark and even mysterious in their wooded
interior. The feeling that the vegetation has always been so, and that
from the earliest times the Indians, whose relics are common enough on
the Point, must have roamed through a region such as our modern pe-
destrian sees, is natural enough.

While this may not be wholly true, it appears from a study of the
records* of the earliest settlers that there has always been, within historic
times at least, a distinct separation of grassland and woodland. While
not necessarily of the same extent today as when the Indians of Montauk
agreed with the settlers of Easthampton, on May 22, 1658, as to the use
of the Point, there can be little doubt that some forest land, certainly the
Hither Woods, and great areas of grassland, such as characterize it today,
covered large areas.

In this first written agreement between Wyandanch, the chief of the
Montauk Indians, and the settlers of Easthampton, it is stated that the
latter had granted to them the privilege of ‘‘pasturing their cattle on
Montaukett (the old name) for seven years.” At the end of that:period,
and after his death, his daughter, Sunk-squa, made the following agree-
ment with Easthampton on October 4, 1665.

“1. The bounds of the town east to the Fort-pond, and all the rest to
the end of the island, to belong to the Indians; but not to be disposed of to
any other than the people of the town.

“2. The inhabitants forever to have full and free liberty at any time to
cut grass on said lands, and for feeding of cattle, but not till the corn, planted
by the Indians, shall be taken off.

“3. If cattle trespass on the Indians, by reason of not keeping up the
fence, the town to make satisfaction; and if Indian dogs do damage to
cattle, they to make satisfaction.

*T am glad to make acknowledgment here for the use of the admirable collections of
the Long Island Historical Society, which have been diligently searched for authentic
records of the early condition of the vegetation, not only of Montauk, but of other parts
of Long Island. To Miss Emma Toedteberg, the librarian, I am particularly grateful for
making many helpful suggestions in the course of this part of the work,

9

10 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

“a, Indians not to set fire to the grass before the month of March,
without consent of the town. In consideration of all which, the town
engages to pay, yearly 40 shillings to said Sunk-squa and Indians, their
heirs and assigns.

‘‘Made and agreed to before me, Richard Nicoll.

“Matthias Nicoll, Sect’y.”’

The italics are mine.

As the town of Easthampton, which included all of Montauk, was
settled in 1640, it is thus only twenty-five years later that the management
of the peninsula becomes a matter of record, between the settlers and the
Indians, who were friendly.

These records show that there was evidently a very considerable part
of the peninsula in grassland at that time, but as to woodland, it is not so
clear. There are, however, frequent references in these old records to
the Hither Woods, which still exists at about the place designated in these
early chronicles.

By the end of the century conditions at Montauk needed to be redefined
and a new agreement was entered into between the Indians and the town
of Easthampton. It gives us such a good picture of conditions in 1702, or
sixty years after the first whites came to that end of Long Island that it is
inserted here complete.

“The said Indians are to fence in as a general field what land they see
cause upon the Northneck [near Culloden Point] which lies between the
Fortpond to the westward and the Greatpond to the eastward, for their
planting field; and wholly to leave the land to the eastward of the Greatpond
unto the English; and the said Indians shall from year to year lay and
keep open their field or fields for the said town’s cattle to feed upon (ex-

_cepting only some small fields which they may keep inclosed for winter
wheat or grass not exceeding thirty acres;) and the time of the said field
or fields shall be laid open is to be upon the tenth or fifteenth of October,
and so to continue open until the twenty fifth day of Aprilafter. The said
Indians making and continually keeping and maintaining a good sufficient
fence about all their fields at their own expense, cost and charges.

“That if the said Indians or their posterity as long as they live upon
Meantauk [another old spelling] shall cause to leave that field and remove
to the eastward of the said Greatpond, then they shall wholly quit the
Northneck, and shall have liberty to fence in a field from the southward-
most part of the Greatpond running southward to a small round swamp
near the dich bars; [the present Ditch Plain] and so from thence to run in
at the southeast part of the oyster pond; and to plant and improve the land
on the northward part of the said line of fence; and they and their posterity
after them shall have liberty, as often as they see cause, to exchange their
field from one side of the said Greatpond to the other; still sufficiently

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK II

fencing their fields at their own costs and charges, and observing the rules
of laying them open as is before prescribed.

“And the said Indians and their posterity shall have liberty to keep
upon the said land two hundred and fifty swine, great and small; the said
Indians paying all such damage to the English as they shall sustain by the
rooting of the said swine; and to keep horse kind and neat cattle not
exceeding the number of fifty in all, and to get hay to winter them; but they
are not to take any horse kind, cattle or swine to keep for any other person,
nor to sell, give or any way dispose of any grass or hay to any person
whatsoever; nor shall they have liberty to permit or let out any land to
any person, either to plant, sow, or any other way to improve.

“That the said Indians and their posterity after them shall have liberty
to make use of so much of that timber of the town on this [west] side of the
Fortpond [the Hither Woods] as they shall need to fence in their general
field, after they have used all the fencing stuff that is upon the Northneck,
if the English do not lay out that land into parcels or lotments and improve
thesame. In testimony hereof, we the parties to these presents have here-
unto set to our hands and fixed our seals enterchangeably, this 3rd day of
March 1702/3.”

From this it appears that there was certainly both timber and grassland
at Montauk, both east and west of Great Pond, but ten years later there
can be no doubt about the shortage of timber, for records of the town of
Easthampton, dated April 7, 1713, have this to say about the question;

“Also in regard of the scarcity for timber at Montauk for the enclosures
and for the prevention of its being destroyed or improved to wrong uses,
it is ordered by the said Trustees that whosoever shall presume to fell or
cut down tree or trees standing on any part of Mentauk [another old
spelling] or carry or any way bring off from Mentauk any part of its growth
by land or water except such as have authority so to do by virtue of some
former deed or contract cr by permission from the Trustees for the time
being, he or they for so offending shall forfeit to the use of said Trustees
for each and every tree felled or cut down aforesaid the sum of ten shillings
and for each and every load of timber any way carried off as aforesaid
the sum of forty shillings.”

At the end of the year, in casting up the accounts of expenses of Mon-
tauk, which was a common pasturage, appear two significant items, thus:

To Jeremiah Miller for carting 1,000 feet sy id:
Ol boards to Miontankseer eee cine 5 6
To Stephen Leek for carting 2,000 feet
of boards to Montauk............ 1g) ©)

In fact in 1676 there were already signs that our ruthless ancestors
began to see where their methods would lead them, for David Gardiner
in his ‘Chronicles of the Town of Easthampton”’ says:

“The rapid diminution of timber had attracted attention as early as
1676, when at a Court of Sessions held at Southold, by his Majesty’s

12 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

authority, it was ordered ‘that no person not having an allotment and
thereby a right.in the commons should cut timber in Easthampton.’ It
now became necessary to provide against the frequent fires, which were
found more destructive than the trespasses of individuals, and in 1710,
the Trustees were authorized to call out the inhabitants to assist in extin-
guishing them. Upon the erection of the church a few years afterwards,
it was found necessary to resort to Gardiner’s Island for timber of sufficient
size for the frame.”

Besides this unmistakable evidence of the presence of forest, the pro-
tection of which had already become a matter of concern, the village records
give us many hints of the importance of the grassland at Montauk. On
June 20, 1744, they authorized ‘“‘Captain Baker to build a house for the
shepherds west of Fort Pond.’”’ And forty-three years later there appeared
in the town records the following, under date of January 22, 1787. (Re-
cords of the Town of Easthampton 6: 252. 1889.).

“1st. That all the hither end of Montauk west of the fort pond, shall
be improved, to keep sheep for the benefit of the proprietors, and that all
the cattle and horses shall be kept to the eastward of the said fort pond.

2d. That sixty-four sheep shall be allowed to go on one whole share,
and in the same proportion for a greater or less right, and that four sheep
shall go on and be entered in lieu of one neat beast, and that the lambs
shall be entered on right, the same as grown sheep, by the first Wednesday
in November, or be liable to poundage as grown sheep, and that all sheep
that shall be found grazing on said land of Montauk not having right or
not being duly entered, shall ke impounded, the owner or owners of all
such sheep so impounded paying two shillings for each sheep so impounded.”

During the Revolution we get a vivid picture of the amount of grazing
for on July 5, 1775, ‘The people of East and Southampton pray Congress
that Captain Hurlbert’s company, now raising for Schuyler’s army, may
remain to guard the stock on the common lands of Montauk (2,000 cattle
and 3 or 4,000 sheep) from the ravages of the enemy.’’ This was granted
by Congress on July 31, 1775, Eut in spite of it the British took the cattle
from Montauk on August 23, 1779.

That there may have been forests at Montauk greater than those found
at the present time is indicated by Thompson in 1839, in the first volume
of his ‘‘ History of Long Island’ (page 307) where he says: “‘[The] Peninsula
of Montauk, containing as it does more than 9,000 acres, constitutes a
considerable portion of the town (Easthampton). The timber once so
abundant has now greatly depreciated.’’ Such records of Thompson, and
they have many times been repeated by Prime, Furman, Ross, Gabriel and
other historians of Long Island, may be more true thantheyrealized. While
within historic times there is scarcely any evidence of great changes, as to

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 13

the distribution of grassland and forest at Montauk, there may well have
been much greater areas of forest in pre-nistoric days. Further details
of this will be found in the summary.

Not only the disturbance of the vegetation in the seventeenth and
eighteenth centuries, and the grazing which has continued ever since (now
much reduced in volume from what it was during the Revolution) but
still another upheaval of the vegetation occurred during tue Spanish-
American war in 1898. At that time thousand of troops were quartered
there and practically all the land between Fort and Great Pond was covered
with troops and their equipment. It was also used as an aviation station
during the Great War, but, so far as disturbance of the vegetation is con-
cerned, on a much reduced scale. During 1921 and 1922, however, part
of the area east of Fort Pond was used as a training ground for artillery
regiments, whose manoeuvering and shooting destroyed large tracts of the
Downs vegetation.

Montauk is a region, then, that has been through many phases in the
disturbance of its vegetation, and in interruptions to the natural fulfillment
of its vegetative destiny. Thisiis now going on, in some places rapidly,
and in others hardly at all, as the sequel will attempt to show. One inter-
esting fact about the vegetation of the whole Point, in spite of all these
disturbances, is the comparative scarcity of weeds of introduction, which
are noticeably fewer than in other parts of the Island. This is due to their
failure, with one or two exceptions, to compete with the wild vegetation,
which over great areas of the Point, consists of singularly close-knit, so-
called ‘closed’ associations, and to the minute fraction of the Point now
under cultivation, scarcely ten acres.

From what has preceded it would appear that the present vegetation of
Montauk is to be viewed as exhibiting various stages in the development
or perhaps replacement of forest covering as that is possible on the open
downs, and in the face of environmental conditions to be considered later.
The wind, the lack of moisture on the upper part of the downs, its presence
close to the surface in many kettleholes,—all these play a pane in deter-
mining the rapidity and the type of this process.

Several well marked types of vegetation are to be seen “ite now, anda
description of these, with some notes on their probable position in the
scheme will be given in the following account of ‘‘*The Downs,” ‘‘The
Kettleholes,” ‘‘The Hither Woods,” and the “ Region East of Great Pond.”’

These four have been selected because in them are to be found ecological
problems, that are probably of more interest than anything else on Long
Island. In them are well illustrated the all but world wide conflict of

14 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

grassland and forest. What the determining factors are behind that con-
flict will be dealt with, having in mind that much experimental work still
remains to ke done in unfolding the true story of the conflict. We may see
and describe the results of it, hint, perhaps at the probable major factors
of the struggle, but only by experimental work on the direct action of the
wind, and some other environmental influences can we hope to come at a
true explanation.

These do not necessarily comprise all the vegetation types to be found
at Montauk, there are the ponds, for instance, or the salt marshes, and
sand dunes. The latter, however, are not greatly different from similar
places all over Long Island, and for that reason descriptions of them will
not be repeated here.

THE VEGETATION TODAY.

THE Downs.

Some Englishman familiar with the Downs of Sussex and neighboring
counties must have first applied the term to the rolling, apparently grass-
covered, hills of Montauk. Except for the lack of chalk, the similarity to
the South Downsisremarkable. Of course the plants in the English locality

-are different, but topographically, and so far as the general appearance of
the vegetation is concerned the areas are quite similar, except that the
Montauk Downs are all smaller and lower. The Downs in England are
probably very primitive and, as suggested by A. G. Tansley, in ‘‘ Types of
British Vegetation,’”’ (pages 173 and 174) were never forested. He writes
of the grassland association that, “It is unlikely that primitive man was
responsible for the disforestation of such great areas of the chalk upland
as are marked by traces of his existence, and the conclusion is therefore
indicated that much of this grassland is primitive, or at least has existed
since the conditions of climate resembled at all closely those at present
obtaining.”

It is scarcely credible that the Montauk Indians, with the crude im-
plements which they were known to have had before the advent of the
whites, could possibly have cleared such extensive areas as the English
found covered by open Downs (approximately 6,000 acres), if most of it
was primitively covered with woods.

And even if there had been some ancient cutting by the Indians, it may
well be that at Montauk, as on the coast of Denmark, afforestation is im-
possikle on certain specially exposed parts of the peninsula.

At the present time the dominant plant of the Downs is the grass
Schizachyrium scoparium, which is of wide distribution over the greater
part of the United States, and on Long Island is dominant mostly on these
Downs, and on the Hempstead Plains. It is this plant that makes the gen-
e1ally grass-like covering of the Downs, and tinges with purplish-russet
colors a landscape that is wonderful in September and October.

While Schizachyrium scoparium is dominant, there is associated with it
a group of herbs that during different seasons, and because of their color,
give definite character to the Downs: Antennaria plantagintfolia early in
the season makes great areas of white cottony flower masses; in August and
late July, myriads of Polygala polygama, with racemes of rose-purple

15

16 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

Rhode Island : Gin Beach : Block Isfend Sound : Lake Wyandannce: Prospect Hil Bfock ISland = [Ah
Indian, Burial place + stepping stones

ao Oty tothe copse

e ceontepannund 7:

. entered tan ere
GR-moorScomely and compact

; _ dk |pepperidge eRerzy beech maple
Gnrdeved Pan ee .OT Vlew mop -

FIGURE 2. Panorama of Montauk. Fromfnth

(sometimes white) flowers give midsummer color to the hills, which are
often splashed at the same time with scattered patches of the white-flowered
Sericocarpus asteroides. A little later untold millions of A galinis acuta, with
small purple flowers, give a new note of color, followed by the violet-colored
or often paler, Jonactis linartifolius, with its aster-like ray flowers. Pages
of description could be written of this ever changing panorama of flowers
over the Downs, to the possible exclusion of a detailed account of the
composition of this vegetation.

Considering first the herbs, which make up nearly all the vegetative
covering of the Downs, it appears possible to separate them into groups as
to their frequency of occurrence. In the following list the dominant
species comes first, followed in order of frequency, by those which, while
still very common, are subsidiary:

Schizachyrium scoparium

Juncus Greenet ,
Deschampsia flexuosa

Sorghastrum nutans

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 107/

“Third Housz 'Prentice :Hoyt:Agnew : Bluffs = Montauk Association : Ocean: Ditch Plainlife Saving Stati
Duval : Montauk shoal Buoy

SE SR.
ing, grassy downs, 80to
5 Zo to 60 fect
DOR : on, Moraine, fe ofacier -wi

Fy = eis, ey. .~ a+: Cwind of; Be
ght tonke Into (from midale of second story? Pollo os Ken Roles.

adly contributed by Dr. R. L. Dickinson.

Polygala polygama
Sericocarpus asteroides
Antennaria plantaginifolia
Agalinis acuta

It is surely not without significance that these herbs are all perennials,
able to endure the winter with some degree of certainty, and that all show
some measure of protection against the wind. In the case of the grasses,
and of Juncus Greenet, Polygala polygama, and Agalinis acuta, the leaves
are so narrow as to Offer little resistance to the wind; and partly in Serico-
carpus, and wholly in Antennaria plantaginifolia the leaves are practically
flat on the ground and offer no resistance at all.

These eight plants make up the great mass of the herbaceous vegetation
of the Downs. By weight and mere bulk they far exceed all the rest of the
herbs put together, for as will be shown presently, many other species found
there are rare and some have only been seen a time or two. The fitness of
these eight species for their particular role in the covering of the Downs
is worth some consideration. Their adaptability to winds has already been

18 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

noted but some account of their distribution and habits of growth may
throw light on their peculiarly effective place in the vegetation of these
rolling hills.

The grasses Schizachyrium, Deschampsia, and Sorghastrum, mentioned
above, and Juncus Greenet, are all plants that grow in close, dense tufts,

FIGURE 3. General view of the Downs at Montauk. The dark spots are mostly bay-
berry thickets (Myrica carolinensis). The dominant grass is Schizachyrium scoparium.

or clumps, and do not tend to make a true turf, of which, because of this
habit, and the admixture of other species, there is practically none at
Montauk. In a region so grass-like in character, the predominance of
species that do not make real turf is somewhat curious. Perhaps of sig-
nificance is the presence of the lichen, Cladonia rangiferina, which often
carpets the Downs and through which all the species are apt to force

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 19

their way. All these grasses and Juncus Greenet, one of our only dry-land
rushes, are plants of wide distribution outside of Long Island.

In the case of Polygala polygama, while it is of wide general distribution,
locally it seems to be confined to the coastal region of Long Island and
Staten Island. It is nowhere more common than at Montauk, where the
usually uncommon white-flowered form is certainly not rare. Its great
profusion among the grassland vegetation is perhaps due to its stiff wiry
stem and foliage, so that it appears to be peculiarly unpalatable to cattle.

Sericocarpus asteroides, the tallest of all these primary species on the
Downs, has also the broadest and most succulent leaves of all of them. So
many are basal, however, and lie practically flat on the ground that they
neither offer resistance to the wind, nor can they be nibbled by cattle.
Perhaps the salvation of this white-flowered composite is its tough stem,
only sparingly furnished with leaves, and its habit of nearly always growing
isolated, not making such attractive grazing as the grasses, which, while
they make no turf, are often found in dense clumps a foot or more in
diameter. This plant is otherwise known through the eastern part of the
United States.

Much the same is true of the survival of Antennaria plantaginifolia,
with the additional fact of the soft white, almost velvety, covering of the
leaves. This not only retards transpiration in a region where this is very
rapid, but also protects the plant from cattle, who never seem to touch it.
The plant is common throughout eastern North America.

While these eight species make up the mass of the herbaceous vegetation
on the Downs, they are, of course, associated with many other plants,
some of them common enough, others only scattered. These secondary
species of herbs, arranged in the order of their frequency, are as indicated
below:

Ionactis linariifolius

Agrostis alba
Whether native in the north, or naturalized from Europe, this
grass is at Montauk a relic of the great herds of cattle in the
past. A good illustration of an introduced plant thoroughly
mixed with the native vegetation.

Chrysopsis falcata

Crocanthemum canadense

Crocanthemum majus

Euthamia tenuifolia

Lechea villosa

Solidago nemoralis

20

BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

Much reduced in size over plants from the central part of the
Island.

Aster patens
Also A. phlogifolius, if that species, so far as Montauk specimens
are concerned, be more than a mere form of A. patens.

Baptisia tinctoria i
The tallest herb on the Downs, and very noticeable, as it is
dotted all over the Point and every individual is made con-
spicuous by its stiff dome-like habit, instead of being merged in
the general mass of the vegetation.

Carex Muhlenbergii

Chrysopsis mariana

Aster ericoides

Hieracium scabrum

Aster multiflorus
Often making exclusive patches, and rarely over six inches high,
usually less. Its stunted wind-wrenched habit of growth is one
of the most characteristic transformations of species at Montauk
that are elsewhere taller and normally developed. Its dense
masses of tiny white flowers, often flat on the ground, emphasize
strikingly at flowering time, the reaction to the wind of this
Aster.

Polygala viridescens

Potentilla canadensis
Also the form known as P. pumila.

Solidago rugosa
Much reduced in size over plants near the bottom of kettleholes,
where the species is more abundant than on the Downs.

Viola fimbriatula

Kneiffia Allenii
A plant long thought to be endemic at Montauk, but now found
elsewhere on Long Island. Its golden yellow flowers, low habit,
and very general distribution over the Downs add a note of
color in midsummer.

Galium pilosum

Cyperus filiculmis

Panicum columbianum

Achillea Millefolium
Another relic of man. A beautiful pink-flowered form is some-
times met with, particularly on the Downs just east of Great
Pond.

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 2a

Anaphalis margaritacea
Sarothra gentianoides
Panicum Scribnerianum
Hieracium marianum

While the foregoing lists of the primary and secondary herbs include,
broadly speaking, the herbaceous vegetation of the Downs, other species
are, of course, found there. These occasional specimens, erratic in their
distribution, sometimes seen only once, add interest to the flora, without
being of much importance in the development of it. A list of these species
follows. All have been seen at least once, some are locally quite common.
These are not arranged according to frequency of occurrence:

Sisyrinchium atlanticum and S. arenicola
Blephariglottis lacera

Ibidium gracile

Polygonella articulata

Potentilla monspeliensis

Lespedeza capitata

Cathartolinum striatum

Cathartolinum medium

Hudsonia tomentosa

Oenothera Oakesiana

Oenothera muricata

Bartonia virginica

Koellia incana

Koellia mutica

Trichostema dichotomum

Linaria canadensis

Plantago aristata; rather rare as an introduced plant.
Hieracium Gronovii ;
Eupatorium hyssopifolium

Eupatorium Torreyanum; also found near Culloden Point, but rare.
Solidago bicolor

Solidago juncea

Cirsium horridulum*

* This plant furnishes a good example of the possible changes in herbaceous vegetation
of the Downs. Dr. Arthur Hollick who visited the region in 1890 wrote (Bull. Torrey Club
18:256. 1891) that ‘Some four years since [1886], so my driver informed me, a few plants
of Cnicus horridulus made their appearance near the western edge of the hills. The pre-
vailing winds scattered the seeds toward the east, until now [1890] it has complete pos-

session over miles of what was formerly fine pasture land.’’ Today nothing like such
frequency is to be found.

22 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

Aster dumosus
Leptilon canadense
Erigeron pulchellus
Erechtites hieracifolia.

These, with the primary and secondary species, make an essentially
complete list of the commoner herbs of the Downs. Other species could
be included,* and more undoubtedly will be found, but for our general
purpose of presenting as complete a picture of Montauk vegetation as
possible, these will serve. So far as the Downs are concerned, Baptisia
tinctoria is the tallest of these herbs and becomes therefore much more
conspicuous than its actual frequency would suggest.t Practically all the
other species, at least so far as their wind-swept habitat at Montauk has
developed them, are low and hug the ground. Indeed so closely is this
done, so perfectly does the open Downs’ vegetation cover the hills, that,
with the exception of these sentinel-like domes of Baptisia tinctoria, the
hills of grassland look from a distance as though they were mown. Every
undulation of the ground is shown and almost nowhere, as in so many of
our landscapes, is the topography obscured by the vegetation.

The beauty of the Downs vegetation, so relatively limited as to species,
and yet so perfectly fitted to its environment, should not blind us to the
fact that the region is within the general forest area of northeastern
America, that forest cover is found in considerable quantity in the Hither
Woods, the North Neck Woods, Point Woods, and in many of the kettle-
holes. Whether or not these bare downs were once covered with forest,
large areas of them today appear in a state of stable equilibrium. Woody
vegetation on these wind-swept hills appears next to impossible, and yet
there are evidences that some form of woody vegetation is making an
attempt to cover at least part of what is now grassland.

There are to-day hundreds of tiny patches of ““bush’”’ scattered over the
Downs, some only a foot or two in diameter, others covering, especially in

* One curious failure of a rather typically grassland plant to become established at
Montauk is the case of the bird’s foot violet (Viola pedata). This plant, which occurs in
tremendous profusion on the Hempstead Plains, has never been recorded from Montauk.

+ Mrs. Theodore Conklin, who has lived on the Point for many years told the writer ~
(1920) that it is only since the Spanish American War in 1898, that Baptisia tinctoria has
been found on the Downs. She relates that a few years after the soldiers left, the autumn
and winter winds swept great quantities of the ‘tumblers’ against the side of “‘ Third House,”’
her home for many years. This was unknown before1898. Thecase of Cirsium horridulum
has already been mentioned, so that we have, within thirty years, two conspicuous plants
that have [perhaps only temporarily] usurped these Downs, without changing the domi-
nantly grassland character of the vegetation.

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 23

the lee, square rods in extent. To what chance of nature, or freak of the
wind, to possible fires, or to the idle grazing of cattle, the origin of these
tiny patches of bushes is to be attributed, no one can say. It is certainly
true that they are more frequent and larger toward the bottoms of the
kettleholes into which the Downs vegetation frequently penetrates, and
in the lee. Their striking dark green foliage, against the purple and tan
of the grassland, is obvious for a mile or two.

Before considering what role these patches of ‘‘bush’’ can play in the
vegetation scheme of Montauk, let us record the species that make up these
little islands of thicket in an ocean of grassland. Almost without ex-
ception, the major portion of these islands is made up of the Bayberry
(Myrica carolinensis), very often associated with which will be Rosa carolina,
and perhaps the whole mass bound together with Rubus procumbens (which
often scrambles out into the grassland), or Smilax glauca. It is not without
interest that both these binders make prickly forage, and that in nearly every
one of hundreds of such patches of ‘“‘bush”’ that were examined, one or
both of these vines was to be found. Both the Rose and the Bayberry,
under normal circumstances, would be several feet tall, here they are rarely
more than a foot. There are scores of places where the wind keeps these
flattened down so that while the patch of bushes may be many feet across,
the shrubs will be only six inches high. Sometimes, but not very often, a
slight undulation, a fortuitous boulder, with which the Point is strewn, or
an effective lee will invite greater growth of these bushes. Such accidents
seem always to be utilized to the full, and where they are operative enough,
a species of Shad Bush (A melanchier intermedia) will often get a foothold.

From this stage in the development of a patch, which may start with a
single sprig of Bayberry, and end with a forlorn and stunted tree in the
center of it, no one knows how long a time may have elapsed. Certainly
in some of these patches such gnarled and stunted trees are to be found.
They are never much over four feet tall, towards the tops of the Downs,
and in many of the patches destroyed utterly by the wreaking of the wind.
But the fact remains, that occasional trees do start in such patches, and
that they certainly start nowhere else on the open Downs. The process
is infinitely slow, the number of failures is large, and the number of patches
of bush that seem the same, year after year, is rather striking evidence that
even with the slight protection of Bayberry thickets, trees can hardly
start and maintain themselves on the open Downs. Nevertheless, such
protected spots, bleak though they appear to be, do sometimes nurture a
young oak, or black cherry, or very rarely, a gray birch (Betula populifolia),
and thus justify their existence as a stepping stone to something bigger,
if not more picturesque.

24 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

Upon this conception, the Downs show infinite gradations between, as
after temporary slides of sand and gravel, perfect nakedness and the
attempt to produce some sort of woody vegetation. Because such a large
part of Montauk Point is occupied by these open Downs, where available
water is scarce, and the exposure to the winds is terrific, all expectation of a
rapid development of forest is certainly hopeless. Where that one element,
water, is added, as in the kettleholes, and there is protection from the wind,
the change is abrupt and convincing. With almost perfect drainage, a
little less than the average Long Island rainfall, but with twice the wind,
with no shade, and even now a few cattle at large, the wonder is not that
the Downs has developed a struggling tree here and there, but that it
has not stayed permanently and exclusively grassland. At least some
evidence from the plants points the other way, and as we shall see, there
are other phases of the Montauk vegetation, beside the Downs, which seem
to argue that vegetation, like the grassland, or the patches of “bush,” or
the kettleholes, is a complex organism that is born, develops, and ultimately
reaches a climax of its career before death, or transition to something else.
In such a scheme the Downs vegetation is in one of the earliest, and it
may well be arrested, stages of development, where thé grassland pre-
dominates, slightly more developed where patches of ‘‘bush’’ have started,
still farther along where such patches have nurtured a small tree, which
in the end, may form a nucleus for a new type of growth, made up of shrubs
and trees, which is near the climax condition. It should not be overlooked
that while the climax seems to be the forest, it is the youngest, because the
most recently developed, of all the types of vegetation now found on the
Downs, as the grassland is the oldest. Large areas of grassland have no
Myrica in them, and in spite of a rainfall that should permit forest covering,
may be edaphically incapable of producing it. Such areas, with apparently
permanent grassland on them, are certainly examples of an arrested climax.
Rainfall would normally permit forest cover, but wind velocity and in-
sufficient retention of water on the slopes are inhibiting factors that are
strong enough to stop, or make incredibly slow and difficult, the develop-
ment of forest cover.

No account of the Downs would be complete without note of two
interesting plants that have been introduced. The cloudberry or mountain
bramble (Rubus Chamaemorus), at home in the Arctic, and on alpine
summits of New England, was found between the Inn and Culloden Point
on August 21, 1908, by Dr. William C. Braislin, who deposited specimens
in the herbarium of the Museum in Brooklyn, since housed at the Brooklyn
Botanic Garden. Diligent search has since failed to disclose this plant,

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 25

that at Montauk is hundreds of miles south of its true home. Migratory
birds, known to make overnight flights from Labrador to Montauk, are
supposed to be responsible for its introduction.

The other plant, probably introduced through human agency, is
Echinacea pallida, found in 1914, and again in 1917, on the most exposed
Downs, but by nomeans common. Its natural range is far to the westward
on the plains of the middle west. Its rose-purple flowers nearly suggesting
a single dahlia are very striking in their unfamiliarity at Montauk.

THE KETTLEHOLES.

The whole of Montauk Point is dotted with these depressions, some
nearly a hundred feet deep, others mere swales, and the four largest covered
with water, as discussed earlier. While the bottoms of none of the kettle-
holes, except, of course, the ponds, appear to be below sea-level, practically
all the lowest of them has fresh water either near the surface, or, in the
early part of the season, above it, forming a temporary pond, a few inches
deep. The position of this water has a good deal to do with the vegetation,
as will appear presently.

All of them agree in one particular, their sheltered seclusion from the
wind in the bottom, often forming a welcome, if a warm haven for the
summer tramper. The contrast between the bare wind-swept Downs and
the bottoms of these kettleholes is tremendous. For details of the dif-
ferences of the open Downs and the kettleholes, as sites for vegetation, see
the section devoted to the wind in the chapter on “Factors of Control.”
So many of them are covered with trees and shrubs that casual visitors are
inclined to think all of them are, which is actually far from the truth.
Many are, some partially, others without a shrub or tree. While a general
similarity in appearance seems to be true of those that contain woody
vegetation, actually there are many variations, both in the species that
occur in different kettleholes, and in the frequency of occurrence of those
species that are common to all of them. Some of the deepest have consider-
able growth of the red maple or the sour gum, and in others ate are not so
moist, different species of oaks predominate.

If the forest is to be the ultimate covering of protected parts of Montauk,
as it actually is now of Gardiner’s Island, and, from historical records
would appear to have been on at least some of the Point before disturbance
by man, then those kettleholes that now have small editions of the forest
in them are to be considered as more nearly approaching the climax con-
dition than anything else on the Point. In other words, it should be
possible to find gradations between kettleholes that have no trees or shrubs

26 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

to those that are full of them, and such early and late stages of develop-
ment should be accompanied by at least some transitional stages.

A study of a good many of these kettleholes makes it seem probable
that just these conditions are to be found today. Why some have
been so delayed in their development as to show even at this late day

FIGuRE 4. Pool in kettlehole near Culloden Point. Note amount of water and
vegetation in it in September 1920, when this photograph was taken. In August, 1918,
the water reached the edge of the kettlehole. See figure five for water-level in July, 1921.
(Photograph by Barrington Moore.)

only the initial stages of it, is not very clear. In those where there is too
much standing water, or where it does not recede early enough in the
season, there is practically pond or pond-side vegetation that may be found
over any part of Long Island. This is due to a too high and too steady
water-table. Many other low kettleholes, however, have no standing water,
and in practically all the cases where this has been observed the sides of
the kettlehole (the Downs) come down very steeply, suggesting at once
that material enough from these steep banks has filtered down to the bot-
tom. This would not, of course, change the level of the water-tabkle, but it
would, and I think, has covered this over with silt a few inches deep in some
cases and perhaps a few feet in the largest and most steep-sided of them.
In contrast to this, the ponds that have been examined practically all have
shallow banks, and it may well be that the presence or absence of standing

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 27,

water is due to shallow or steep sides to the kettleholes. When it is re-
membered that no two kettleholes are topographically the same, few if
any of similar depth, it is not surprising that a variety of conditions is to
be found. There is, of course, one qualification to this statement regarding
the presence of water in the kettleholes. Hundreds of shallow ones, too

Bred reluded & photog rach

WY, Be
es

po ea
ing i

| nit. "hi

Es = {
Sea

"a ip Nii eee

Wim? yet i

uly Roche qa" 7% ae
(2) Dicklnica. 7

FIGURE 5. pei and ink sketch contributed by Dr. R. L. Dickinson of the same
kettlehole as shown in figure four. Note condition of water on July 31, 1921, when the
sketch was made and position of water in September, 1920. In August, 1918, the kettle-
hole was filled with water.

near the tops of the Downs to be near the general watertable of the Point,
have no water near their bottoms, and most of these contain no trees but
stunted ones such as are found among the patches of ‘‘bush’’ described
with the Downs. Some, also, of these upland kettleholes, often mere
depressions, have only characteristic grassland vegetation in them.

Whether or not this be the true explanation of the presence or absence
of water in the kettleholes, the fact remains that all low ones are in one of
three categories: open water, seasonal ponds that dry by midsummer, or a
water-table that is below ground-level.

The purely seasonal nature of many of these kettleholes is well illustrated
by one of them between the Inn and Culloden Point. On August 13,
1918, the bottom of the kettlehole was filled with water. In September,
1920, the same place had, as the accompanying photograph shows (Fig. 4),
less than half as much water. On July 31, 1921, the water had reached the
same level as in 1918, well shown by the sketch (Fig. 5) kindly made of the

28 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

place by Dr. R. L. Dickinson on that day. He shows the relative size of
the body of water in 1918, by indicating the position of it in the center of
the pool. Such changes cannot fail to affect the speed of establishment and
the composition of the vegetation.

FIGURE 6. Open stage of kettlehole. Center with Eleocharis obtusa. The white-
flowered plant toward the margin is Eupatorium perfoliatum. Note shore lines of seasonal
fluctuations of water level.

In those where water is fugitive or lacking at the surface, the following
is presented after a study of many kettleholes in all stages of development.

LOW KETTLEHOLES: OPEN STAGE.

Low kettleholes without woody vegetation are still occasionally to be
seen, but in all those examined there was standing water a few inches deep
in early June, but practical dryness by midsummer.

In such kettleholes there are usually well marked zones of vegetation
dominated by some characteristic plant, or assemblage of them, and in the
one illustrated (Figs. 6 and 7) all the lowest and therefore wettest part of
itwas covered by Eleocharis obtusa. This small sedge is succeeded, towards

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 29

its edge, by a fringe of vegetation made up of the following species, the
dominant ones first, and the others in the order of their frequency:

Gratiola aurea

Hypericum boreale

FiGuRE 7. Details of marginal zone of vegetation in open stage of kettlehole. Ewupa-
torium perfoliatum, Stetronema lanceolatum, Xyris flexuosa, and Gratiola aurea, are among
the commonest plants. Open Downs beyond.

Proserpinaca pectinata
A mud form as found in September, probably a submerged
aquatic when water is present.
Viola lanceolata
Persicaria pennsylvanica
Echinochloa Crus-galli
A relic of grazing days? Native of Europe.
Cyperus dentatus
Scirpus debilis
Ilysanthes dubia
Juncus bufonius.

30 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

These ten species make up the bulk of the vegetation between the
lowest part, occupied exclusively by Eleocharis obtusa, and the band of
vegetation nearest the margin.

This marginal zone of vegetation occupies ground that, while well
below the surrounding Downs, is high enough so that it is only covered
by water for a short time in the spring. The plants here, therefore, do
not suffer for water, nor are they smothered by it, as happens frequently
in some kettleholes with uneven bottoms, or other conditions that permit
too much standing water.

The vegetation of this marginal zone can best be shown by pointing
out the dominant species toward the contact with the open Downs on the
one hand, and toward the center of the kettlehole on the other, where it
touches the zone for which the species have already been listed. In the
following list of species the first and last are dominant nearest the inner
and outer edges of the zone respectively. The others are arranged in order
of frequency, reading from the top down for those nearest the inner edge
of this marginal zone, and from the bottom up for those nearest the Downs.
Toward the middle of the list are those species that are pretty commonly
distributed all through this marginal zone.

Euthamia tenuifolia
Dominant in that part of the marginal zone nearest the center of
the kettlehole.

Steironema lanceolatum

Often appearing dominant in midsummer from its wealth of con-

spicuous yellow flowers.

Gratiola aurea

Viola lanceolata
Very often making large patches where it is locally dominant,
but general and common through the lower part of the marginal
zone.

Eleocharis tenuis

Rhexia virginica

Athyrium thelypteroides

Eupatorium perfoliatum
One of the tallest herbs in the kettlehole.

Xyris flexuosa

Hypericum boreale

Juncus acuminatus

Stachys hyssopifolia
Nearest the form known as S. atlantica

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 31

Ludwigia alternifolia
Cyperus dentatus
Scirpus debilis
Iris versicolor
Polygala cruciata
Lycopus americanus
Agrostis perennans
Glycine Apios
Oenothera muricata
Agalinis purpurea
Panicum virgatum ©
Dominant in that part of the marginal zone nearest the Downs.

These plants, with those already mentioned, make up, generally speak-
ing, the vegetation of these low kettleholes that have no woody plants in
them. The species in certain kettleholes differ somewhat, the individual
frequency of the species even in the same kettlehole may differ in different
years, but in dozens of them that are in this stage of development, the
plants are mostly those indicated. One wide divergence from the type of
a kettlehole in approximately this stage comes to mind not far from the Inn,
where the bottom of the kettlehole is packed with Decodon verticillatus
and Hibiscus Moscheutos, the Marshmallow, in about equal parts. An-
other, much nearer the Ditch Plain Coast Guard Station (see the map,
Fig. 1) has exclusively Hydrocotyle umbellata in it.

In a few cases the first appearance of a woody plant is to be noted.
In every case where only one shrub has been found it is invariably Spiraea
latifolia or Cephalanthus occidentalis. These two bushes are certainly the
pioneer ones at Montauk in populating kettleholes otherwise without woody
vegetation. The appearance of either or both these bushes near the margin
of a kettlehole does not, if, as often happens they are solitary or rare, change
the general character of the place which is essentially a low, open kettle-
hole without woody vegetation. The appearance of woody plants in
sufficient quantity to change, ever so slowly, the character of the kettlehole
is an event of almost dramatic importance in the vegetation of the Point,
and requires special mention.

LOW KETTLEHOLES: THE BEGINNINGS OF WOODY VEGETATION.

Many kettleholes at Montauk are in the condition just described, or are
verging upon a still later stage in their development, when woody plants
make a definite and apparently rather aggressive bid for occupancy.

32 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

Where this is pronounced the kettlehole may be found dotted with bushes,
while in those just emerging from the purely herbaceous state, the few
bushes found appear to be putting up a losing fight.

The permanent appearance of even a few bushes seems, in the kettle-
holes that have been examined, always to be associated with a lack of
standing water, except perhaps in the early spring after the melting of
snow. Whether the silting in of material from the banks is the true ex-
planation of the disappearance of standing water or not, it is certainly true
that in those kettleholes where water is fugitive or beneath the ground level,
certain definite changes occur, followed by an encroachment of woody
vegetation. The accompanying photograph shows a kettlehole in just
this stage. A little water was found in it in June, none after. (See
Figures 8 and 9.)

Its banks are very steep and the assumption that silted material has
raised the floor of it enough so that shrubs will not smother from excess
water, seems reasonable. It may also be that fires, which would scarcely
affect herbaceous vegetation, would destroy pioneer shrubs in such places,
thus greatly retarding the transition from an open kettlehole to a partially
wooded one.

That there is always an orderly progression from open kettleholes to
those about to be described, in which woody plants get a firm foothold, is
probably not true. Some have been found where the process is arrested,
due to unusually wet seasons or perhaps to fire, and one finds only dead
shrubs, and a partial recrudescence of the purely herbaceous vegetation.
But that this progression is going on, that bushes, and finally the dense
wooded thickets of the climax type are ultimately developed, seems to be
demonstrated.

The vegetation of a kettlehole of this developing type, where woody
plants seem for the first time to have a firm foothold, is of interest, in view
of the final stages to which it appears to point with rather definite directness.

As the photograph (Fig. 8) shows the center is dotted with dead clumps
of Scirpus cyperinus, with here and there, in the higher places on the floor,
a live one. Detailed studies of the remaining herbaceous vegetation in
such kettleholes resulted in the following list of plants. The dominant
species is given first, and in order of frequency, the others:

Triadenum virginicum
Gratiola aurea

Sium cicutaefolium
Lycopus rubellus
Onoclea sensibilis

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 33

Iris versicolor

Steironema lanceolatum

Juncus acuminatus

Scirpus cyperinus

Scirpus americanus

Persicaria hydropiperoides
Hundreds of tiny seedlings of this were also found creeping
towards the center of the basin.

Eupatorium perfoliatum

Carex scoparia

Rhexia virginica

Ptilimnium capillaceum

There are sometimes other species found in kettleholes of this sort,
especially large patches of Aster novi-belgii in some of its forms, but they
are erratic and do not seem to occur with the regularity of those listed above.

A nearer photograph (Fig. 9) of the same kettlehole shows the arrange-
ment and distribution of the shrubs among the assemblage of herbs men-
tioned just above. Towards the center of the kettlehole all the bushes are
Cephalanthus occidentalis, whether dead or alive. As the photograph shows
some are dead, due often to water smothering, which may sometimes occur
in the center of the kettlehole even after bushes have gotten a foothold.
Towards the edges of the kettlehole, and in addition to the dominant
Cephalanthus cccidentalis, four species of bushes entirely new to the kettle-
holes are found in considerable profusion. Of these Rosa virginiana is the
commonest, Rubus frondosus next, and much more rarely Vaccinium corym-
bosum. Occasional plants of Ilex verticillata are found and, nearly on the
edge of the Downs, Spiraea latifolia, which as we have seen is also found in
kettleholes otherwise entirely without woody vegetation. These shrubs,
and often Eupatorium perfoliatum, are often intertwined with Convolvulus
repens, also a new plant in such developing kettleholes.

In a kettlehole southeast of the Inn toward the upper end of a deep
gully that runs easterly from the road from the railway station to the site
of the aviation camp (Great War 1917-1918), a curious variation of the
encroachment of woody plants is to be found. The kettlehole is steep-
sided and, in the early summer covered for at least a foot by water with a
specific acidity of 30+. There is a marginal fringe of Clethra and Ilex
verticillata neither of which is common, but the center of the kettlehole is
full of Cephalanthus occidentalis. This is unquestionably a later stage in
succession than those previously noted.

34 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

Kettleholes in this stage of development give an entirely different aspect
to the landscape from those that have already been described, where low
herbaceous plants predominate. The advent of shrubs, which is followed,
of course, by trees, can be interpreted only as one more step in that process

FiGurE 8. General view of the beginnings of woody vegetation in low- kettlehole.
For details see text and Figureg9. Inthe foreground the dominant Downs grass Schizachy-
rium scoparium comes right down to the edge of the kettlehole. The white flower is Eupa-
torium perfoliatum.

of final woody covering going on very slowly, it is true, but none the less
surely. The final stage or climax of the vegetation is found in the densely
wooded, mysteriously dark and silent kettleholes, popularly supposed to
be malaria-ridden, and into which few care to penetrate. These heavily
wooded kettleholes are so much more conspicuous than the others that

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 35

have been noted that they attract more attention and are often assumed to
be the characteristic condition of all kettleholes. The preceding account
will have failed of its purpose if it is not now understood that these con-
spicuous wooded kettleholes are themselves the result of the development

FIGURE 9. Details of figure eight. Clumps of Scirpus cyperinus. The shrubs are

mostly Cephalanthus occidentalis, and Rosa virginiana, more rarely Vaccinium corymbosum
and Spiraea latifolia.

of the vegetation from the pioneer, and easily exterminated assemblages
of plants found in kettleholes with long-standing or fugitive water, through
a somewhat tentative woody stage to a climax of relatively permanent
trees and shrubs with their associated herbs.

36 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

LOW WOODED KETTLEHOLES.

Dense masses of trees and shrubs, hopelessly tangled with Smilax, or
Poison Ivy, or Virginia creeper,—this is the first impression one gets of the
bottoms of most of the kettleholes at Montauk. Many of these are prac-
tically impenetrable without considerable cutting, and all of them are
“cut off’ by the wind. So universal is this action that many of the kettle-
holes appear to have their trees pruned or treated as a landscape architect
might do for a definite effect. Trees and tall shrubs, such as the poison

FiGuRE 10. General view of wooded kettlehole at Montauk. (Photograph by
Barrington Moore.)

sumac for instance, reach varying heights, depending on the depth of the
kettlehole, which brings their tops just under the range of the wind that
constantly sweeps above them. This often gives a wind-wrenched appear-
ance to many trees, and very old specimens have a remarkably ancient and
sturdy aspect, as though everything possible had been done to break
through that impassable barrier, the depressing effect of which is so notice-
able, and from which the depths of these wooded kettleholes provide the
only real refuge.

Another feature of these wooded kettleholes that attracts attention is
the sharp contact between them and the open Downs. The accompanying

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 37

photograph (Fig. 11) well illustrates this, which is characteristic of those
wooded kettleholes that have consistent topography,—that is, where the
‘moisture conditions are uniform enough to allow of practical similarity of
woody vegetation, quite up to the edge of the Downs. In some, spurs of
the kettlehole, with a higher level than the general floor, extend out into
the surrounding Downs. In such cases the contact is obscured, and
typical thicket vegetation replaces either type. This condition is not so
common as the one illustrated which is characteristic of scores of the
kettleholes at Montauk.

While the general aspect of these kettleholes is so uniform, and while,
in the sequel, a list of their characteristic species will be given that is very
generally typical many curious interlopers are to be found in some of them.
If all the kettleholes at Montauk, probably some hundreds, could be studied
as closely as the ones that have resulted in this account, there is little doubt
that more species would be added to those known from the region. It is
a commonplace, however, that the discovery of such would not in the least
change the general aspect of the vegetation, nor the development of it to
this climax. And it is because of this developmental phase of the vegeta-
tion, more than the discovery of a species new to the Point, that so much
time has been spent in a description of it.

The characteristic species of these densely wooded kettleholes are
given below. Under Trees, Shrubs, and Herbs, the dominant species is
given first, and then the others, in order of their frequency:

Trees

Acer rubrum
The form more nearly approaching A. carolinianum.

Nyssa sylvatica
This and the red maple are dominant in practically all the low
kettleholes.

Amelanchier intermedia
Frequently twenty feet tall and with trunk three inches in di-
ameter.

Crataegus pruinosa

Fagus grandifolia

The last two are rare, and from the point of view of frequency, the
first two are the significant species, as they dominate and give character
to the kettlehole. Because of the depressing effect of the wind, the crowns
of all these trees and the shrubs to be mentioned presently, are much con-
gested and the canopy of foliage is thus so dense that it is almost dark in
the interior. Some idea of the darkness may be realized by recording the

38 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

fact that in the heart of some of the largest of these wooded kettleholes
there is no ground vegetation at all. This lack of herbs and their flowers
merely accentuates the deep gloom of these dense stunted little forests.
In the center of them one finds only the heavy canopy of foliage just over-
head, and the dank carpet of dead leaves under foot. The accompanying

FIGURE I1. Sharp contact between edge of wooded kettlehole and open Downs. The
flower on the Downs is the beautiful little purple-flowered gerardia (A galinis acuia).

photograph (Fig. 12) gives some idea of the tangle of shrubs and trees in
one of the wooded kettleholes viewed from the inside.
Shrubs
Amelanchier intermedia (bush form)
Aronia atropurpurea
Clethra alnifolia

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 39

Azalea viscosa
Viburnum venosum,
and much less fre-
quently V. dentatum
Sambucus canadensis
Rosa palustris
Vaccinium atrococ-
cum
Ilex verticillata
Padus virginiana Mill.
(Prunus serotina
Ehrh.) as a shrub.
Toxicodendron vernix
These with the
trees mentioned
above, form next to
impenetrable growths
through which it is
almost impossible to
force one’s way. It
often happens that
their branches are in-
extricably bound to-
gether by vines of
Smilax rotundifolia,
Vitis aestivalis, Par-
thenocissus quinque-
folia and Toxicoden-
dron radicans. The
difficulty of getting
tnrough them, cou-
pled with the almost
funereal gloom of their

interiors has made
these wooded kettle- FIGURE 12. Interior view of wooded kettlehole. For details
see text. (Photograph by Barrington Moore.)

‘holes an object of
suspicion among some of the natives, and even among more sophisticated
visitors.
Herbs
Toward the center, very often none.

40 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

Unifolium canadense

Uvularia sessilifolia

Osmunda claytoniana

Dryopteris noveboracensis

Boehmeria cylindrica

Iris versicolor (in deep shade)

Impatiens biflora

Eupatorium verbenaefolium

Galium Claytoni

Aster cordifolius

Arisaema triphyllum

Fragaria virginiana

Euthamia tenuifolia (toward edges)

Aster multiflorus
Not at all like the form found on the Downs. These protected
plants frequently 3 feet tall.

Viola cucullata
Toward edge of kettle hole; rare

Solidago serotina

Aster novi-belgii
In addition to the typical form others are found to which varietal
names such as elodes and atlanticus have been applied.

Aster spectabilis (toward edges)

In many of these wooded kettleholes Rubus hispidus is very common as
a ground cover and, except at the center, is very likely to run in and out
among the stems of other plants, increasing the difficulty of walking. Dark
moist places in these kettleholes are often carpeted for square yards by the
beautiful feathery moss Climacium americanum Kindbergu. Of course, at
the actual contact of the herbs of the kettlehole and the Downs there is
nothing like such a sharp line as the photograph shows for the woody plants.
There is often some encroachment of the Downs’ herbs, in usually much
changed form, into the kettlehole.

All wooded kettleholes are not of this type, as some with higher eleva-
tions have oaks predominating in them, but even in these the red maple
and sour gum are often found toward the center. The shrubs and herbs
are much the same in all wooded kettleholes, but the lists given by no means
tell all the story, for occasional species are found in many kettleholes and
nowhere else on the Point. Ranunculus delphinifolius is one for instance.
The discovery of others is practically certain as the kettleholes vary a good
deal in depth, in the configuration of the surrounding Downs, and in

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 41

exposure where there is a break in these, and in other particulars. The
main fact of significance seems to be that the wooded kettleholes exhibit a
climax condition of the vegetation, comparatively stable so far as changes
are concerned, and in this respect unlike any of the vegetation types thus
far dealt with. For we have seen that the most protected parts of the
Downs may become invaded ultimately by patches of bush, which them-
selves sometimes lead to higher bushes and possibly, but rarely, to stunted
trees. Where there is protection from wind this may result in considerable
areas of scrub or forest. This has happened, notably toward Gin Beach,
a region near the north (lee) end of Great Pond. Here there are consider-
able areas of stunted oak woods that appear to have started in the method
suggested in the preceding paragraphs.

Most of the kettleholes at Montauk could probably be sorted into the
different categories that have been described, or into easily recognizable
variants of them. One or two curious exceptions are interesting, however.

In an upland kettlehole between the Inn and Culloden Point there is
practically no Downs vegetation, but the floor of it is packed with Trio-
steum perfoliatum, interspersed with a thicket-like growth of Euthamia
tenutfolia, Solidago rugosa, Panicum clandestinum, Asclepias syriaca, and
an occasional bush of Rosa carolina. Triosteum perfoliatum besides this
Montauk record is known only from a rich woods at Orient, then not for
a hundred miles to the west and again in rich woods which is its usual
habitat. Its occurrence in such profusion in this upland kettlehole, only
just out of range of the wind, and in full sunlight, is curious.

The other kettehole is Great Pond, near the north end of which there is
an island. This is just above the water level of the lake and contains the
tallest trees at Montauk. In fact the appearance of this densely wooded
island suggests an unbroken occupancy by the forest. ‘The forest floor here
is quite like that of other forests, and not at all like the undergrowth of the
wooded kettleholes already described. Because of these conditions a list
of the plants found there is given:

Quercus coccinea
Quercus alba

Quercus velutina
Quercus rubra
Hicoria sp.
Amelanchier sp.
Viburnum venosum
Corylus americana
Hamamelis virginiana

42

BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

Cornus alternifolia
Sambucus canadensis
Benzoin aestivale
Parthenocissus quinquefolia
Vitis aestivalis
Toxicodendron radicans
Aralia nudicaulis
Pteridium aquilinum
Vagnera racemosa
Geranium maculatum
Syndesmon thalictroides
Phryma Leptostachya
Lysimachia quadrifolia
Scrophularia leporella
Solidago altissima
Solidago rugosa
Mariscus mariscoides
Pluchea camphorata
Hibiscus Moscheutos
Phragmites Phragmites
Typha angustifolia

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 43

FIGURE 13. Lee contact of Hither Woods and open Downs. Note the vanguard of
pioneer oaks creeping out from the edge of the forest, and, for comparison, the abrupt edge
of the ordinary wooded kettleholes (Fig. 11).

THe HITHER Woops.

If other evidence as to the gradual afforestation of some parts of Mon-
tauk were lacking there would still remain the Hither Woods, and its eastern
or lee contact with the Downs, to confirm the point. Nowhere else on
Long Island is there such a splendid illustration of the encroachment of a
forest over the grassland as at the northeasterly contact between these
woods and the Downs, about a mile west of the village.

The Hither Woods, predominantly oak, present an extraordinary ap-
pearance when compared with other forests on Long Island. The woods
extend for about four miles west of Montauk and they are dense. Ap-
parently they have always existed, since the earliest record of the first
settlers at Easthampton speaks of them. J. A. Ayres who visited the

44 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

region in 1849 wrote then of woods at Montauk, as follows: “There are two
tracts of woodland, known as ‘“‘the Hither Woods,” and “‘the Point Woods.”
Solitary and decaying trunks over all the country show that not many
years since it was covered much more extensively and perhaps wholly with
forest.”

There is all the appearance today of great age for certainly the trees
look very old. Many times they are not over forty feet tall, so that it is
not their height that suggests age. Festooned as many of them are by
lichens, and the forest floor under them often carpeted with Cladonia fur-
cata racemosa, they stand “‘like the druids of eld,” clad in the misty grayness
of antiquity. The frequency of trees that have toppled over as they died,
and lie rotting on the leaf-carpeted ground—all these, with the undisturbed
look of the place, give one just such an impression of long occupancy for
this forest, as the historical records indicate.

While the woods are thus a striking feature of the landscape, it is their
lee contact with the open Downs that is of chief interest in considering what
is the role of this forest in the vegetation history of the Point. So that we
can better understand the composition of this forest, and as a record of
what sort of growth it is that seems to have such an aggressive fringe, the
following list is submitted. The species are arranged under Trees, Shrubs,
and Herbs, and under each of these groups the species are listed in the order
of their frequency.

Canopy trees

Quercus velutina
Quercus alba
Quercus coccinea
Quercus rubra (rare)

Undergrowth

Kalmia latifolia }
3 dominant
Gaylussacia baccata
Sassafras Sassafras rare,only young plants seen
Padus virginiana
Vaccinium angustifolium
Ilex opaca
Amelanchier canadensis
Amelanchier nantucketensis
Parthenocissus quinquefolia
Smilax rotundifolia
Vaccinium vacillans, frequently with V. angustifoliwm making
large exclusive patches

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 45

Undergrowth
Herbs

Aralia nudicaulis
Epigaea repens
Melampyrum lineare
Trichostema dichotomum
Chrysopsis mariana
Aster patens

FIGURE I4. Pioneer oaks going out over the Downs from the lee side of Hither Woods.

Solidago bicolor

Carex pennsylvanica

Danthonia spicata, mostly in openings

Crocanthemum canadense

Crocanthemum dumosum

The foregoing gives a fairly complete idea of the composition of the

Hither Woods near the edge of it, and the same general condition is found
some mile or more west of the contact. Quite unlike the contact between
the low wooded kettleholes and the Downs, which is very sharp, the Hither
Woods—Open Downs contact on the eastern edge is by no means so, as
our illustrations show (Figs. 14 and 15). There is in fact so much penetra-
tion of the Downs by these pioneer woody plants that just at this point there
seems unfolding before us a bitter struggle for supremacy between these
different types of vegetation, and the grassland is putting up the losing

46 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

fight. The evidence of this contest for new land, as it comes to that in
the case of the trees, seems clear enough and to illustrate it, a section ex-
tending from pure grassland (east) to pure forest (west) has been studied in
considerable detail. Because topography is such a vital factor in supplying
shelter from the wind a rough cross-section of the hill is given to show the
conditions at the point the section was taken.

Beginning at A (Fig. 15) the top of the bare Down, there is much the
same condition as that noted under the general description of the Downs,

Se task West —>

A

Bare Towns

¢
Yther Woods

aes VX
BAUS f
Ss uae

FIGURE 15. Diagrammatic section from the Hither Woods (west) to the bare open
Downs (east), about I mile west of Montauk Village. The hill at A is about 50 feet high.

A. Bare Downs, with herbs and scattered clumps of stunted bushes.

B. Tension zone with occasional Oaks and much greater profusion of shrubs which
are taller than at A.

C Edge of Oak forest at the Hither Woods For associated shrubs and herbs under
these trees see text.

but with this difference. Here there are more numerous and larger patches
of stunted bushes, and these are not of the species there described. Two
of these new shrubs are interesting as being common bushes and of normal
height a short distance away in the protection of the Hither Woods. At A,
however, both Comptonia peregrina and Gaylussacia baccata are not over
eight inches high, and frequently they make patches 30-50 feet across.
That these and Amelanchier canadensis have ‘‘escaped”’ from the Hither
Woods onto these open Downs, seems a conclusion almost axiomatic. All
of them, and other woodland species, to be noted presently, have been
found on the Downs only at this contact with the Hither Woods.

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 47

These three shrubs, with their associated plants, serve as pioneers for
the serious invasion of the grassland by the forest. On the top-most part
of the Downs these three shrubs are found only in rare patches. But as
one goes down the hill toward B they increase in size and frequency tre-
mendously, merging finally at C with their more usual prototypes that occur
in and along the edge of the Hither Woods.

The interlacing of these two elements along this contact makes one of
the most interesting features of the vegetation of Montauk. On the top
of the hill, A, are mostly bare Downs with quite typical Downs species.
Then as one gets closer to the woods there is the progressive disappearance
of true Downs species, the flourishing of ‘“‘escapes’’ or pioneers from the
woods, overtowered presently by the vanguard of the oaks, for which, in a
sense, they have been preparing the way. It is, of course, not such a
simple matter as the ease of description might indicate. Many local
irregularities, such as breaks in the Downs, exposure to the winds and so
forth may arrest this process or modify it. In fact along certain places,
where the Hither Woods is close to and exposed directly to the sea winds
these stragglers from it out into the Downs are practically unknown, as
we shall see presently. But where there is even slight shelter there is
always the condition that has been noted.

At and near B (Fig. 15) where the struggle between the Downs’ plants
and the pioneers from the woods is most intense the following plants were
found, arranged in order of frequency. Those that are of the Downs con-
tingent are in zfalics, while the Hither Woods element is printed in bold
face type. A few plants of general distribution over Montauk, or-of no
special significance in the struggle for occupancy are in ordinary type.

Gaylussacia baccata
Rubus flagellaris
Comptonia peregrina
Agrestis alba
Deschampsia flexuosa
Rhus copallina
Asclepias amplexicaulis
Schizachyrium scoparium
Padus virginiana
Amelanchier nantucketensis
Aster patens

Euthamia tenutfolra
Chamaecrista fasciculata
Rosa palustris

48 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

Anaphalis margaritacea
Chrysopsis falcata
Crocanthemum majus
Moehringia lateriflora
Myosotis virginica
In certain places at the bottom of this slope there are large, practically
exclusive, growths of Comptonia peregrina. Over a considerable part of

FIGURE 16. Open grown specimen of black oak (Quercus velutina) at the edge of
Hither Woods, three feet in diameter at breast height. (Photograph by Barrington Moore.)

this area there is an impenetrable tangle of Rubus procumbens scarcely over
three inches tall and a conspicuous inhabitant of the patches of bush over
the rest of the Downs.

Among the miscellaneous growth, made up of elements from the Downs
and the woods, and both actively attempting to appropriate the ground,
there is evidence that the pioneers from the woods are winning. The
most convincing features of this aggressiveness of the woods’ plants are the
numerous oaks which push out from the woods and find at least sufficient
congeniality to persist in this tension area. Everywhere where the con-
ditions produced by pioneer plants from the woods have made the escape
of these oaks possible, they aresure tobefound. This aggressive expansion
must end in a considerable curtailment of the Downs area ultimately.

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 49

The oaks reach really exposed places toward the tops of the Downs
only rarely, and with apparently great difficulty. But as in many other
things, nothing succeeds like success, and once the start is made, it seems
only a matter of time, due to increasing protection from the wind as the
growth becomes gradually thicker, when the open Downs itself will be
inundated by this ever encroaching woody invasion, infinitely slow as time
goes, but from all the evidence available, as certain as the tides. Just
how fast this is going on only a study over a series of years would show.
But it does seem as though this contact between the Hither Woods and the
Downs was perhaps the most energetic of all the different types of vegetation
that seem to have as their common goal the afforestation of parts of the
Montauk Peninsula, if that is climatically and edaphically possible.

There are some hints as to the rate of this encroachment of woods over
grassland. About 400 feet west of the present contact with the open
Downs, and in the midst of the dense shade of surrounding oaks is a dead
Juniperus virginiana, which appears to have died within the last ten years.
Increment borings show it to be at least eighty years old when it died, and
adding ten years since death gives us about 90 years since it was a seedling.

This could hardly have started in the shade of the forest, and would,
if it followed ordinary procedure, have started out in the open, or more
likely still, in the area that then corresponded to the present fringe of the
forest. Since that time the forest has gone out over the Downs about
four hundred feet, submerging and ultimately killing the cedar. In other
words, the evidence from this dead cedar would indicate a rate of forest
movement of 400 feet in about 100 years.

Atthe present contact, but quite out in the open, and Paes 100 feet
from the forest edge, there are scattered young oaks, as shown in the
photograph (Fig. 14). One, a Q. velutina, 14 feet tall, 6 inches in diameter,
proved by core extraction to be 15 years old. By no means all the area
between it and the edge of the woods, is yet occupied by pioneers from the
forest, so that in the 15 years since it started there has not been any great
speeding up of the process.

There is also other evidence, from the oaks themselves, that the Hither
Woods have not always been as extensive as they now are. Many trees,
particularly near the margin of the woods, show unmistakable evidence of
having, in their young stages at least, developed in the open. The ac-
companying illustration (Fig. 16) shows a branching system that no forest
grown specimen of oak could have produced. We could, from this evidence
alone, say that most certainly the Hither Woods are spreading wherever
possible, and that the branching of nearly all the oaks that have been

50 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

observed near the edges of the woods confirms the point. True forest-
grown specimens of oaks are found only toward the center of the woods
or in hollows.

The evidence along the eastern edge of the Hither Woods that they are
gradually spreading still more eastward seems conclusive to the writer,

FIGURE 17. Wind clipping at the edge of the oak forest on the windward side of
Hither Woods. Photo January, 1923.

and the explanation also appears to be indicated that this encroachment
over the grassland can be accomplished only to leeward, which means gener-
ally to the eastward. Perhaps the best illustration of this wind control of
the invasion of grassland by woods is furnished by the south side of the
Hither Woods at Montauk. Facing the sea, they are subject to the violent
southwest winds of summer, and the forest wall is abrupt (Fig. 17). No

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 51

vanguard of pioneers spreads out over the grassland for on these exposed
Downs no pioneer can stand up.

Whether the violence of this wind is actually reducing the size of the
forest only marked plots studied over a series of years would prove. The
present site, and probably the general extent of the Hither Woods has
existed from very early days, as David Gardiner, in his ‘Chronicles of the
Town of Easthampton’ writes of the early condition of the country thus:
“To the east of this [Napeague] was Montauk, a high and hilly region of
rich land, where resided the tribe of that name, over whom Wyandanch
exercised control. Along the whole sea coast of the town, the border of the
upland produced a scrub oak, but the trees being gradually protected by
each other, from the violence of the winds which reached from over the
wide spread ocean, enlarged in height and size as they receeded. The oaks
were the predominant tree; they were of large growth, and, in the openings,
of very extended branches.”

There are, however, numerous historical references to the diminution
of these woods, none of which are of any real value, as none that has been
seen are for marked plots. It is certainly true at the present time, that on
this southern side, there is no attempt worth mentioning of the forest to
creep out over the Downs, such as we have seen it do on the more or less
protected east side.

About half way from their western end, not over half a mile from the
beach, the contact is very abrupt. The woods at this point consist of
Quercus alba and Q. coccinea dominant, with a small mixture of Padus
virginiana, Hicora sp., and a few shrubs such as Rubus nigrobaccus, Rhus
copallina, Rosa virginiana, and Gaylussacia baccata, tied together with
Virginia Creeper, Smilax glauca and S. rotundifolia.

The herbs and other undergrowth under this forest, which is about
one-half the usual height, although obviously mature as evidenced by the
old trees that fall naturally, are the following, arranged in order of frequency.

Lysimachia quadrifolia
Rubus hispidus
Deschampsia flexuosa
Solidago rugosa

Aster ericoides
Nabalus trifoliolatus
Acalypha virginica

Just beyond are the open Downs with vegetation typical of such places.
In them only a rare white oak seedling is to be found, usually not over a
foot high, its few leaves browned and wind-scorched. Stragglers from the
forest such as Gaylussacia baccata and Rubus nigrobaccus, mixed with such

52

BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

FIGURE I9. Age in years
at each cm. of diameter
growth of the scarlet oak
(Quercus coccinea) on the
windward and leeward sides

_of the Hither Woods. Upper

curve = wind ward side, lower
curve = leeward side.

FicurE 18. Rate of growth of
the scarlet oak (Quercus coccinea) on
the windward and leeward sides of the
Hither Woods, expressed in increase in
mm. of diameter at each ten year pe-
riod. The hardness of the wood pre-
vented deeper increment borings than
areindicated. Upper curve an average
of 20 trees on the leeward side; lower,
of 20 on the windward side.

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 53

typical Downs shrubs as Myrica carolinensis make small patches of ‘‘bush,”’
but conditions for invasion by trees, are so much more severe than at the
east end, that they present a practically impassable barrier to forest en-
croachment on this windward face.

In attempting to get more direct evidence of the effect of the wind on
the growth of the scarlet oak on the windward and leeward sides of the
Hither Woods, borings in many trunks were made. The cores so extracted
in each case came from trees about twelve inches in diameter. Those
taken from trees on the windward side of the woods were all taken in the
direction of the wind, to overcome any irregularity, by averaging, that
might result from the effects of the wind on eccentricity.

On the leeward side of the forest the trees average 28.8 mm. diameter
growth in the last ten years, as against 18.4 mm. during the same decade
on the windward slope. For the ten years previous to this the scarlet oak
averaged 43.1 mm. in the lee and only 24.3 mm. where exposed.

To put the case in another way, it took the trees in the lee and those
exposed to the wind very different periods in which to develop similar
girths, if, indeed the exposed trunks will ever catch up with their better
protected brethren. The accompanying charts (Figs. 18 and 19) show
their growth curves and relative rate of growth graphically.

THE REGION EAST OF GREAT POND
(“THE Point Woops’’)

As we have seen, the wind seems to be the chief factor in checking the
spread of woody plants, first in the open Downs, where the patches of bush
are at first small and weak, then in the kettleholes, where, if they are not
low enough to be within reach of water and at the same time out of reach
of the wind, their woody vegetation is sparse; and lastly, along the edge of
the Hither Woods where initial attempts of the trees to really capture
outlying bare Downs are stopped or retarded by the wind. It might
readily be supposed that if there were a place at Montauk where protection
from wind was perfect, or at least greater than elsewhere on the Point,
this should exhibit quite other types of vegetation than those already
described. That there is such a place and that it does have an entirely
different aspect from anything else at Montauk will be sufficiently clear
from the following.

From Prospect Hill to the Point there is a long stretch of country which,
at least to the south, is more or less in the lee, so far as west and southwest
winds are concerned. All along the sea from just east of Ditch Plain to the

54 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

Lighthouse there are high bluffs rising from the sea sometimes as much as
75-100 feet, which is a considerable height for Montauk. There is thus a
large area more or less in the lee stretching from east of Prospect Hill to
the Lighthouse and from just back of the coastal bluffs more than half way
to the shore of Gardiner’s Bay. Not all of this area is covered with shrubs
and trees, but the better part of itis. So dense is the growth in many places
that it is practically impenetrable. Trees up to thirty feet are common
enough in the lower parts of this region and only on the very top of some of
the highest Downs is the expected grassland vegetation found. The density
of the growth, diversity of the species found there is immediately noticeable
to the casual traveler, after he leaves Great Pond to go toward the Light-
house. Where before one has been traveling over little more than easily
diverted trails over the grassland, from where the woods begin to the
Lighthouse, the road winds in and out among hills, it is true, but here they
are mostly covered with a dense growth of woody plants. No very careful
study has been made of this region, the largest in area and probably the
richest in species of plants at Montauk. One reason for this is the difficulty
of getting about, and the other is that here the process of forestation is so
far along that there is not the interest as in other parts of Montauk, where,
as it were, things are in the making, rather than as at this place, they are
very nearly made over. It is only because of the wind, which, while con-
siderably reduced in its action, is by no means impotent, that this woody
growth at Montauk Point is not higher. It may well be ultimately as
high as the forest on Gardiner’s Island, and before the great storm of 23
September, 1815, it was said to be so. (See the section on climate in
“Factors of Control.’’)

As a record of what has been observed in these woods at Montauk
Point, which as here defined means the region from Prospect Hill and the
cottages east of Ditch Plain to the Lighthouse, the plants peculiar to or
characteristic of the Point have been so designated in the list of plants of
Montauk, which is the final section of this sketch.

No mere list of species, however, would convey an idea of the heavy
growth of shrubs and trees in this region of Montauk. The trees are mostly
as large as at Hither Woods, but the diversity of environment, for there
are several ponds, bogs, and swamps, is such that the number of different
species is greater than all other parts of Montauk combined. In the boggy
places, about the end of May this part of the peninsula is aflame with
Arethusa bulbosa, in fact it is more common here than elsewhere within the
observation of the writer.* It is here too that Kneiffia Allenii, a plant

* Mr. Edward S. Miller, who with H. W. Young, wrote a “Catalog of the Plants of
Suffolk County,” in 1874, and who lives at Wading River, reports that Arethusa is probably
more common in the bogs north of Manorville, than anywhere else on Long Island.

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 55

long thought to be endemic at Montauk is most common. Viburnum
venosum, a rare shrub, is also found here in the thickets and is by no means
scarce. In these woods too are found the common columbine, A quzlegia
canadensis, so common in the rocky places in the region north of New York,
but on Long Island exceedingly rare at a few other places on the north
shore.

Within this region too is the finest growth of the Mountain Laurel
known to occur on Long Island. Plants up to 20 feet, with stems three
inches in diameter are to be found by diligent search, an exact locality for
which prudence would not advocate divulging.

Perhaps the culmination of what the vegetation of Montauk will do,
if partly protected from the wind and given adequate water supply, is to
be found near the center of these woods. Here one may find as nearly
typical a Beech-Maple climax forest as can be found anywhere else on
eastern Long Island, except at Gardiner’s Island. Neither at Montauk,
nor, elsewhere on Long Island, is there a true representative of the Beech-
Birch-Maple forest type, so common over great areas northward.

None of the trees is over forty feet tall, however. Mixed with the beech
and Acer rubrum are scattered Nyssa, Quercus rubra, Quercus alba, Hicoria
glabra, Ilex opaca, and Hamamelis virginiana; the last two the largest of
any specimens seen on Long Island, nearly thirty-five feet high. The
Witch-hazel here has a maximum girth of twenty-one inches.

Through these trees meanders a sluggish stream flowing towards the
north, its shaded waters crammed with Vallisneria spiralis intermixed with
Fontinalis Novae-angliae. Along the shallowest of its banks are zones of
Arisaema triphyllum or Spathyema foetida, among which, or on somewhat
higher sites are masses of Viola pallens, Viola cucullata, and Thalctrum
revolutum. Other herbs scattered through the lowest part of these woods
are Osmunda cinnamemea and Athyrium Filix-foemina, which are rare, and
Vagnera racemosa. Somewhat above this lowest level, there is a zone of
herbaceous vegetation almost completely dominated by Anemone quinque-
folia and, scarcely less so by Trientalis borealis. Almost no shrubs are
found at this point, only Benzoin and Sambucus canadensis, surviving the
dense shade of these woods.

All along the north side of these woods the region is very nearly typical
Downs, such as that described earlier in this account. One difference,
however, is that in this region near the Point there is so much low land and
the substratum is sufficiently acid, that cranberries are more plentiful than
in almost any other part of Long Island. This has been true for over a
hundred years as the following, from the town records of Easthampton of

56 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

April 7, 1789, shows: ‘Voted and agreed on by major vote, on the day
above-said, that if any person or persons shall and doth rake, pick or any
other way gather any cranberries on any of the lands or meadows belonging
to the proprietors of Montauk or the town commons at any time before the
second Tuesday in October next, ensuing at sunrise, he, she, or they so
offending shall forfeit and pay the sum of eight shillings, current money of
New-York, per bushel, to be recovered before any Justice of the Peace in
and for the county of Suffolk.”

There are, of course, many commercial cranberry bogs on Long Island,
notably in the region between Manorville and Riverhead that are larger
than any at Montauk. But as wild growths, the Montauk bogs are the
most extensive.

In this region there is a curious relic of introduction in a large grove of
Ailanthus trees at the southeastern edge of Reed pond. It comprises at
least three acres and the trees are vigorous. Borings from their trunks
indicate approximately even age which appears to average about sixty-
five years.

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK

37

FIGURE 20. Wind wrenched specimen of the sour gum (Nyssa sylvatica) with an
Osprey’s nest. (Photograph by Barrington Moore.) See also figure 17.

FACTORS OF CONTROL.

THE CLIMATE.

The most active determinant in the recent development of the Montauk
vegetation appears to be the wind, of which there is a greater movement
there than at any other point on the Atlantic coast.* Indeed the wind is
so terrific, of such long-continued gale force, that after a few visits one is
apt to think that the wind is the only factor controlling the present distribu-
tion of the vegetation.

While there is no weather station at Montauk, the figures for Block
Island, which is sufficiently close [16 miles] to warrant the statement that
the conditions are about the same, have been studied. An average over
a period of years shows that the total wind movement at Montauk (Block
Island) is 155,975 miles per year. This is nearly double that of the middle
of the Island, the nearest Weather Bureau station for which is New Haven,
and which shows an annual wind movement averaging slightly over eighty
thousand miles. In other words, the wind blows twice as much at Montauk

* Tt should be said that Sandy Hook is a close second to Montauk, perhaps because of
the funnel-like action of the Hudson Valley, in conjunction with the normal sea breezes.

58 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

as it does at Port Jefferson, for instance. During many months the wind
movement at Montauk averages thirteen thousand miles (about six thous-
and at Port Jefferson) and hourly velocities of 60, 65, 72, 74 and 80 miles
are not uncommon, while the wind has been known to blow as much as
84 and 86 miles an hour during severe storms. The high record at Port
Jefferson is 61 miles an hour.

Another feature of the wind at Montauk, surpassing all other stations
along the Atlantic coast, is that there average 109 separate winds in each
year, of over fifty miles an hour velocity. Even comparative periods of
calm, punctuated by such gales, must have a profound effect upon the
vegetation.

These separate winds that blow over fifty miles an hour come more fre-
quently, of course, during the winter months. Eighty of them come during
December, January, February and March, while the others are scattered
through the rest of the year, June and July excepted, which appear to be,
on the average, free from them. The scarcity of evergreens,—there is
only a single stunted pitch pine, and very few cedars,—may well be due to
the bunching of these winds during a period when, unlike deciduous trees,
their transpiration demands are most difficult to meet.

Most of these figures of wind movement are taken from an article by
Spencer Lee Trotter on “‘ Local peculiarities of wind velocity and movement
along the Atlantic seaboard,—Eastport, Me., to Jacksonville, Fla.”” which
appeared in the Monthly Weather Review for November 1920, and from
earlier records of the Weather Bureau. These records are too copious to
quote here, but summarizing from them shows the following for the wind
movement at Block Island (Montauk):

YEARLY WIND MOVEMENT AT MONTAUK

1912 159,591 miles 1918 153,774 miles
1913 153,982 ‘“ 1919 155,084 “
1914 159,979 “ 1920 160,848 ‘“
1915 UGViaia WY 1921 155,801 “‘
1916 160,504 “ 1922 155,488 “

1917 156,203 “

It should be remembered in this connection that all the figures from
Montauk (Block Island) are based on instruments only forty-six feet above
sea level, which is lower than at any of the coastal stations which Mr.
Trotter has tabulated. Many of the hills at Montauk are at least twice
that height above sea level, and a few three times that height. If the
measurements of Stevenson as to the increase of wind with altitude operate

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 59

at Montauk as they did at Edinburgh,* then there may well be an increase
of from 20% to 50% in wind movement over the greater part of the Downs,
and practically all the vegetation has been subjected to wind movement
considerably in excess of the figures given in the table.

FIGURE 21. Wind wrenched specimen of white oak (Quercus alba) on windward edge
of Hither Woods. There are hundreds of such specimens along the seaward edge of the
woods, which extends about four miles west-southwest of Fort Pond.

But not only is the strength and distribution of the winds that sweep
over Montauk of significance,—their direction is even more so. Sum-
marizing again from the Weather Bureau records, it transpires that except
for the occasional ‘ Northeaster,’ the bane of boatman, all these great winds

* Journ. Scot. Meteorl. Soc., new series 5: 348. 1880; quoted by Schimper, not seen
by me.

60 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

are west, northwest or southwest. For days on end the white-capped Fort
Pond Bay, just off the village, and the thundering of the surf on the seashore
are ever present reminders of the force and steadiness of these westerly
and southwesterly breezes. In the winter they are apt to be northwesterly.

Quite as much as these marine reminders of the wind is the peculiarly
effective response of the vegetation to it. Gmnarled and often dead trees
(Fig. 21), or trees and shrubs that are normally many feet tall but at
Montauk are prostrate or stand up only a few inches, are mute evidence of
this ceaseless power of the wind. Other rather striking reminders of this
are the individual response of certain herbs, such as prostrate habit, cushion-
like clumps, or one-sided growth, and the failure of certain shrubs and all
trees to grow on the tops of the Downs, and their practical confinement to
the bottoms of kettleholes or other protected places among some of the
taller Downs.

Some quantitative expression of the effect of this wind on the vegetation
is so far unavailable, except the records of the rate of growth of the scarlet
oak on the windward and leeward sides of the Hither Woods, an account of
which will be found in the section, ‘‘Hither Woods”’ (Figs. 18 and I9).

But.beyond the purely mechanical effect, which is everywhere obvious
at Montauk, practically nothing is known of the effect on transpiration and
other processes of plant activity of violent gales.*

Once, in 1625, a great storm visited all the northeastern Atlantic coast
and reports, mostly apocryphal, tell of severe damage. But on September
23, 1815, a southeast gale of such intensity as to destroy “one half of the
forest trees and fruit trees,’ occurred and there are ample records of it.T
The Long Island Star, a weekly newspaper, quotes in its issue of October 4,
1815, a letter from a correspondent at Sag Harbor, dated September 24:

* There are many references to the mechanical effects of wind on vegetation, particu-
larly of violent storms or hurricanes, notably: by C. T. Simpson, Plant World 6: 284-285.
1903; by G. H. Kroll, Bot. Centrl. Beih. 30!: 122-140. 1913; by B. F. Hoyt, Amer. Nat
20: 1051-1052. 1886; by G. Eisen, Zoe 3: 1-11. 1892; by H. von Schrenk, Trans. St.
Louis. Acad. Sci. 8: 25-41. 1898; by J. Dufrenoy, Comp. Rend. 69: 174-175. 1917.
There is also an account of the effect of the wind on the trees along the Californian coast
in W. L. Jepson’s “Silva of California,” 2: 40-44. 1910. Some ofthese and many others
are summarized in Schimper’s monumental “‘ Plant Geography” (English version, Oxford,
1903.) More recently, Leonard Hill (Proc. Royal Soc. Ser. B 92: 28-31. 1921) has
written on “‘ The Growth of Seedlings in Wind.”’

{+ I am indebted to Mr. Jonathan Gardiner, now in his eightieth year, for first calling
my attention to this. Mr. Gardiner, who lives at Easthampton, lived for many years on
Gardiner’s Island, and has heard several first hand accounts of this storm from people
who lived at the time. For the possible effects of salt laden winds destroying vegetation
during this storm see also an article by J. B. Beck, Am. Journ. Sci. 1: 388-397. 1819.

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 61

“Yesterday we experienced one of the most tremendous gales ever ex-
perienced in this climate. It blewahurricane. Trees are strewed in every
direction about our streets. . . . The lighthouse on Montauk is so injured
that no light can be kept in it until the lantern be repaired.’”’ The same
paper said, on October 11, and on October 18, that the lighthouses on Gull
and Little Gull Islands were also out of commission, due to the storm.
Mr. Gardiner reported to the writer that men who had visited Montauk
after the storm told him that much timber had been destroyed at the
Point Woods, and in fact, all over Montauk Point. But the blowing down
of trees such as unquestionably occurred can not have made very much
difference in the relative proportion of grassland and forest at Montauk.
The records already quoted show that from the earliest days there had al-
ways been, within historic times at least, large areas of Montauk in grass-
land. If anything, this storm would tend to increase the area of this. It
may well have blown down the tallest trees at the Point Woods, none of
which at present is over forty or fifty feet in height,—most of them much
lower.

While the wind is the most striking of the climatic features of Montauk,
the peninsula is both cooler and drier than any other part of Long Island,
In an account of the climate of Long Island as it is related to the vegetation.
which will be presented elsewhere, the details of these factors are given.
Summarizing from them the Montauk records show the following:

TEMPERATURE
Mean temperature 49.5° which is 95.1% of the warmest Long Island station.
Yearly effective tem-
perature, = total above
43° 3536° which is 80.7% of the warmest Long Island station.
Effective temperature be-
fore May 31 B10. which is only 49.1% of the warmest Long Island
station, and is the explanation of the ‘‘late spring”’
at Montauk, which, in the flowering of certain
plants is from ten to fifteen days behind Brooklyn.
Frostless period 218 days which is longer than for any other Long Island

station.

The retarding of spring and the length of the growing season at Montauk
are both affected by the temperature of the sea water. This is from 6 to
10° cooler at Montauk than at the western end of Long Island during the
period April 15 to June 9, while during the period from November I5 to
December 25, it is usually slightly warmer than for the western end of the

62 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

Island.* Full details of the temperature of the sea water at the eastern
and western ends of Long Island will be published later in another con-
nection. .

The Livingston and Shreve direct summation of normal daily mean
temperature for the period of the frostless season shows for Montauk
(Block Island):

Above 0° F. Above 32° F. Above 39° F.{ Above 50° F

12,946 5:970- 4,444 2,264

RAINFALL (INCLUDING SNOW)

Annual 41.79 inches, which is 89% of the wettest Long
Island locality.
Amount of rainfall during the pe-
riod of effective temperature 27.02 inches, which is 91% of the wettest Long
Island locality during this period.

EVAPORATING POWER OF THE AIR.

Of the different types of evaporimeter it was decided to use the Living-
ston black and white atmometer, largely because the readings from them
are more easily comparable to the results of other workers.

All the records were taken with instruments mounted in the usual way,
but the bottles in every case (except one to be noted specially) were buried
up to the neck. Some of the records were taken before the mercury valve
to prevent intake of water had been proposed, but in these records daily
readings were made for rather brief periods in September 1919, and May
1920. During 1921 the instruments ran continuously from July 15 to
September 24, and in 1922 from July 27 to August 18. Both the 1921 and
1922 readings were made at intervals of several days, with mercury valve
instruments.{ In all cases the accompanying graphs (Figs. 22-25) have
been translated to the rate per day (the number of cc. per day) of evapor-
ation.

* There is a brief account of the sea breeze on eastern Long Island and of the effect
of this cool sea water on the climate of the Island, both by Ernest S. Clowes of Bridgehamp-
ton in Monthly Weather Review for July 1917. They show very clearly the effect on the
temperature, particularly near the shore, of the sea breeze blowing in from the cool water.

{ The nearest figure to the so-called “effective temperature’ used above, which is
merely the addition of all the degrees of temperature in excess of 43°, which has been used
by many other workers as a basis.

{The 1921 instruments were supplied with a mercury valve held in place by glass wool.
A decided improvement in this was devised by Mr. Frederick A. Musch of New Haven,
who kindly made a series of readings for me in the pitch pine region at North Haven,
Connecticut. Mr. Musch’s ingenious modification of the usual tubing made the mercury
valve a most satisfactory device for the Livingston atmometer. See Science 57: 26-28.
1923.

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 63

During 1919 and 1920 the instruments were set out as follows:
1. On open exposed Downs.
2. At the contact of the Downs with a wooded kettlehole, and about
six feet from the wooded fringe of it.

Ht :
/ ; t

a2
we

8

Q2ce
Gest Set Set Set der
q F cna é

bs 3 Tune

= q es a \

FiguRE 22. Evaporation, White Atmometers. Montauk, Long Island. September
5-9, 1919. May 29-June I, 1920.

Onjoses cows...

At their contact with wooded kettleholes. —--—-——-—-

In Bayberry thicket. -------------

Under canopy of wooded kettlehole. --—-------~--

Fire had destroyed the bayberry thicket between the 1919 and 1920 readings, so this
station is omitted from 1920 graph.

3. In the middle of a bayberry thicket, but as none of the bushes
was over one [foot high, the instruments were set so that they
were not shaded by them.

4. On the forest floor of a wooded kettlehole.

As these 1919 and 1920 graphs show (Fig. 22) there is, as might be ex-
pected, a steady increase in the rate of evaporation from the wooded kettle-
hole to the open Downs, but what they do not tell us is that nowhere on
Long Island, as subsequent readings have proved, is there such a violent

64 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

contrast between the site producing a forest and a closely adjoining one
unable, or only very tardily able to do so. Most other Long Island at-
mometer readings show, of course, a decided difference in the evaporating
power of the air as between [usually artificial] openings and the forest.
But at Montauk, as these and the graphs of 1921 show (Fig. 24) that dif-
ference is often two to three hundred per cent. There is involved in the
kettlehole readings, as in all forest atmometer records, the question of how
much they reflect the effect of the forest canopy, and how much the actual
difference in site. In other words, whether the forest readings indicate a
contributing cause or merely the effect of the forest itself. An interesting
sidelight on this is furnished by the 1920 figures, where, because of the late-
ness of spring at Montauk, the forest canopy had only just begun to really
intercept the sunlight. Yet the difference between the Open Downs station
and the wooded kettlehole, even during this period, is substantially what
it proved to be when the canopy had reached its midsummer density.

The graph for 1921 (Fig. 24) shows an even greater difference between
the open Downs and the wooded kettlehole, in some weeks the difference
being over five hundred per cent. Taking the figures of the wooded kettle-
hole as indicative of a reasonably favorable environment for forest growth
and reproduction, those of the open Downs suggest an environment at
least five times as severe, so far as evaporation is concerned. Such a
contrast of environmental conditions, even excluding the occasional fires
that sweep over the Downs, would be more than sufficient to explain the
mutual exclusiveness of these two dominant sorts of plant covering at
Montauk. The shade of the wooded kettlehole prevents the entrance of
grassland (of course certain species of individual grasses are in all kettle-
holes, and a few Downs species occasionally do get into them), while the
exposure of the Downs to such conditions as these graphs show, effectually
prevents nearly all encroachment from the wooded kettlehole out to the
open.

One or two features of the atmometer readings of 1921 demand special
mention. While atmometers are not supposed to be a measure of wind
velocity that is included in the totality of climatic factors which beats upon
these instruments. In the case of Montauk the wind velocity is greater
than for any other Lond Island station, where atmometer readings have
been made. The total evaporation from white atmometers at these dif-
ferent places on the Island, all in the open, and exposed simultaneously was,
from July 15 to September 24, 1921:

Miomtaule es stictiyae cincin shad cisctins Sonte bs ctovars ata ees Smee reer che ey one oe 1459.9cc.= 100%
Crystal Brook, North shore opposite New Haven................... 1352.2 cc.= 92.6%

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK

‘s[I@Jap IOJ 3X9} 99S “Yoorg [eISAID pur aaosy Arsay_D ‘wIeIOD ev 919M pasesAL 919M YOTYM pues] Suoy]
[21799 UT SUOT}}s JoJOUIOWTYZe BY, ‘*Aep tod uorjesodeAa jo “90 ul aie ssuIpeay “1z6l ‘“pa8e1aav useq savy YoIyM ‘purys] suoT jo
suoljziod ]v.17u99 dy} Woy sSurpeot usdo ay} 07 poseduiod ‘suMOd YNe}UOJ 94} UO SBuIpvos JoyoWIOWZe 94M “Cc AUNTY

(Zbh ene. - Z|
b dag 19S hie
ces ;
Salas |
Pees ;
St
*suot3eqg uedo
*yoo1g
Teysf{ip pue scorn
Array ‘wer09g Jo e8e1aay ———
aaa.
ors fea ia ;
[’
___ "0074846 vedo so

*ymB4 00K

66 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

Cherry; GrovevonFirellsland) Beaches ener ter anes eee eae I31I.4cc.= 89.8%
Comim, in Gamer OF ILome Iisleinel. op no0cocesboccdnbncoconnccoosoce 1234.2cc.= 84.5%

Crystal Brook is in the center of a heavy oak forest and the open station
there was selected because it was sheltered from the drying southwest wind
of summer. Coram is in the pitch pine region and exposed to this wind,
while Cherry Grove is out on the barrier beach, and in full exposure to the
winds from the sea. And yet the figures are all within 16% of one another,
so that while the conditions of Montauk, judging by the vegetation, are
totally different from the other localities, this lack of forest growth, in so
far as it is due to wind, is certainly not expressed by the readings of the
white atmometers. While the evaporation is higher than for anywhere else
on Long Island, it is not so much higher as the vastly different vegetative
condition of the Point would suggest it should be.

The accompanying graph (Fig. 23) shows by unbroken and broken
lines the details of how the white atmometers in the open at Montauk
differed from the other Long Island stations in the open, which have been
taken at Coram, Crystal Brook and Cherry Grove and averaged.

Black atmometers were exposed in all the stations, two feet from the
white instruments, and appear from the readings to be a more sensitive
and perhaps better indicator than the white ones. While neither the white
nor black atmometers profess to be an accurate measure of transpiration,
the curve of either or of their difference (so called solar radiation) has a
very general correspondence to the transpiration of twelve trees as shown
by Bates.* To that extent at least the Livingston atmometers, while not a
measure of transpiration are a pretty good indicator of its variation over
longer or shorter periods, and in average conditions of growth where wind
velocity is more normal. In fact, Burns has shownj that “ Evaporation-
transpiration coefficients based on unit of dry weight . . . show that re-
sponse of the plants agree more closely with the black atmometer than with
the white atmometer.”” The curves in the paper by Bates, already referred
to, also show greater correspondence between the Livingston black at-
mometer and transpiration, than with any other type of evaporimeter
with which he experimented, except the all-metal device which he describes
there.

In the light of the statements of Burns and Bates the evaporation from
the black instruments at Montauk during the four day period July 25-28

* Bates, C. G. A new evaporimeter for use in forest studies. Monthly Weather
Review 47: 283-294. I919.

+ Burns, G. P. & Hooker, F. P. Studies in tolerance of New England trees II. Re-
lation of shade to evaporation and transpiration in nursery beds. Bull. Vermont Agr.
Exp. Sta. 181: 235-262. I914.

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 67

inclusive (1921) is instructive. As the graph shows, the rate per day of
the white instrument for that period was 26.5 cc. During the same time
the black instrument touched 49.3 cc., and in fact throughout the season,
the black, as would be expected, was consistently higher than the white.
But weather conditions during those four days ought not to have produced
such black readings, if current theories about that instrument are correct.
At Montauk this was the condition as to the main climatic features of these
four days, during which no rain fell. -

Total wind
Max. Movement and Vapor Pressure Actual sun- Total Possible
1921 Temp. Direction Inches shine hours sunshine hours
July 25 74. 442 mi. SW .646 5.1 14.6
26 79 389 mi. SW a7B2 10.9 14.5
27 “eh 472 mi. SW -700 6.0 14.5
28 76 627 mi. SW a7 ils 11.3 14.5

During two days of that period sunshine did not exceed 76% of the
possible, while during the other two it was not over 40% of the possible
and yet it is precisely sunshine that is supposed to affect the black instru-
ment most acutely. As the graph shows, this four day period had a higher
rate of evaporation than any other part of the season in spite of a partial
lack of sunshine during two of the days, and a serious lack of it on the other
two. But during those days the total daily movement of wind, and the
hourly velocity, were higher than for many days after. For the sake of the
record, I append the rate of the black atmometer on the Montauk Downs,
the maximum temperature, the vapor pressure, and wind velocity per
hour, for the “high spots”’ on the 1921 graph, together with actual and
possible amount of sunshine.

Direction and
highest velocity Average

Mean maximum of wind during vapor Actual Possible
Reading temp. of each Evaporation periodofat- pressure sunshine sunshine
ending period. perdayincc. mometerreading inches hours* hours
July 28 76 49.3 SW 40 mi. an .698 8.3 14.5
Aug. 12 75 35.8 SW 32. hour .617 8.7 13.9
Aug. 18 73 40,0 SW 34 +552 7.5 1307,
Sept. 9 76 43.0 SW 22 6556 9.1 12.8
Sept. 24 71 45.0 SW 42 -497 II.2 Liga

* The actual hours have been calculated on the basis of taking the readings for each
day of the period ending on the dates in the left hand column, and averaging them. The
figure, then, means that during the period of atmometer readings ending with each date,
each day had on the average the number of hours sunshine given in the next to the last
column,

68 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GAREND MEMOIRS

Taking into consideration that the days were considerably shorter
toward the end of the readings, it is certainly of significance that at each
period of high winds the black instrument shows marked increase in its
rate of evaporation. And if, as Bates and Burns have shown, it is a better
measure of actual transpiration than the white instrument, it may well be
that from the peak readings of the black instruments at Montauk we get
the best expression of the most unfavorable environmental conditions on
the Downs, and the best picture of, at least the probable effect of wind as
it keeps down the establishment on these Downs of almost everything but
grassland and bayberry thickets. No one who has visited Montauk when
one of these southwest summer winds is blowing, and the temperature is
high (for Montauk) can ever fail to be impressed with the unfavorable
effect it must be having on transpiration and growth. Coupled with soil
conditions, to be described presently, it is undoubtedly the chief factor in
keeping things as they are on the Downs.

This high rate of evaporation and probably also of transpiration coin-
ciding with high winds does not conform to the results of Briggs and
Shantz.* They found that evaporation and transpiration were much
more sensitive to sunshine than to wind, and in fact discount the latter as a
factor of importance. That conclusion appears to fly in she face of most
practical gardeners’ notions of the effect of wind on transplanted seedlings,
where, even if the ground be kept moist, wilting is more apt to occur in a
high wind than during a period of calm. An examination of the papers
cited shows that the highest wind velocity reached in their experiments is
13.5 miles per hour (given by them as 6 meters per second). It may well
be that such low velocities are much over-ridden by other factors such as
sunshine, as all their graphs show a remarkably close correlation between
transpiration, evaporation and sunshine, and almost no correlation between
these and changes of wind velocity.

The wind, however, scarcely begins to blow at Montauk until it reaches
at least twenty-five miles an hour, and it certainly appears from the records
that at velocities of more than that it does have a decided effect. Nor can
the “high spots” in the black readings be attributed to specially clear days
with a maximum of sunshine. The accompanying tabulations of the con-
ditions and the graphs show that high evaporation from the black instru-

* Jour. Agr. Res. 5: 583-649: 1916, on “Hourly Transpiration Rate on Clear Days
as Determined by Cyclic Environmental Factors;”’ Joc. cit. 7: 155-212. 1916, on “ Daily
Transpiration during the normal growth period and its correlation with the weather;” or
with loc. cit. 9: 277-292. 1917, on “‘Comparison of the hourly evaporation rate of atmo-
meters and free water surfaces with the transpiration rate of Medicago sativa.”

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 69

ment* may or may not coincide with the greatest possible sunshine, while
it nearly always does with high wind.

a
°o

FicuRE 24. Montauk atmometer readings, 1921. Upper series are on the open
Downs, lower in the shade of wooded kettlehole. Black lines = black instruments, dotted
lines = white instruments. The records are reduced to the cc. of evaporation per day.

* And also from the white instruments. But the blacks show much greater excess
of evaporation over the whites during high winds than at other times. The basis of the
argument ina nut shell is that black instruments reflect transpiration rates better than white
ones, and if this is true, as Bates and Burns would have us believe, then high wind move-
ment, as reflected by the meteoric rise of the black instrument, does so affect transpiration
as to be one of the chief limiting factors.

70 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

An examination of the graph of evaporation (Fig. 24) and of the details
of sunshine together with wind velocity, shows, during the period August
19-25, 1921, a good example of the fall of the evaporation rate of the black
instrument, in the face of better than the average rate of insolation. The
possible amount of sunshine during this period is 13.5 hours per day. The
actual sunshine for the period averaged 12.4 hours, which more nearly
approaches the possible amount than for any of the peak periods of the black
instrument. In the face of these seven days, when sunshine was nearly
at its maximum, there is, as the graph shows, a steadily falling rate of evapo-
ration from the black instrument. No rain fell during the period, and the
wind averaged but 22 miles per hour, while the mean maximum temperature
for the seven days was 70°. Comparison of these conditions with those of
the September 24 atmometer readings confirms the point. The maximum
temperatures then were one degree cooler, sunlight about one hour less,
and yet presumably, under the stimulus of a wind of 42 miles an hour
from the southwest, the black instrument climbed to 45.0 cc. of evaporation
per day.

The maximum temperature, rainfall, vapor pressure, wind velocity and
prevailing wind direction together with the possible and actual amount of
sunshine, for the period of these I921 readings is here recorded, most of
the details of which have been kindly placed at my disposal by the Weather
Bureau station at Block Island.

EVAPORATION BLACK AND WHITE ATMOMETERS AND Datty MAXIMUM TEMPERATURES)
PRECIPITATION, VAPOR PRESSURE, DIRECTION AND VELOCITY OF WIND, Hours
PossIBLE SUNSHINE AND Hours ACTUAL SUNSHINE.

Montauk Downs 1921

Max Evaporation
: Wind Wind Hours Hours | Vapor d
Temp- | Rain- : : per day
Date veloc- dir- Possible | Actual |Pressure Bn
era- fall : ; 2 : we GE
ity ection | Sunshine] Sunshine] Inches | ———~———
ture Black | White
July
15 74 -52 38 SW 14.8 0.9 .670
16 75 .OI 22 NE 14.8 6.7 .569
17 75 19 S 14.8 12.1 .631
18 74 26 SW 14.8 9.2 .646
19 75 .24 22 S 14.7 1.2 -700 29.8 | 13.3
20 79 1.28 25 W 14.7 10.7 .639
21 68 32 NE 14.7 22 .568
22 71 16 E 14.7 8.9 .530
23 73 16 E 14.6 11.7 575
24 76 24 S W 14.6 14.6 .676

_

1.06

37
elt

.29

.08

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK

Wind
veloc-
ity

Wind
dir-

ection

SW
SW
SW
SW
SW
S18)
S)

W

S W-W
E
SE
SW

SW
E
NW-NE

Hours
Possible
Sunshine

14.6
14.5
14.5
14.5
14.4
14.4
14.4

14.3
14.3
14.3
14.2
14.2
14.2
14.1
14.1
14.1
14.0
14.0
13.9
13.9
13.8
13.8
13.8
7;
13.7
13.6
13.6
13.6
13.5
13.5
13.4
ghy:l
13.4
12h}
13.3
13.2
Lae
13.2

naar

Hours
Actual
Sunshine

Vapor

Pressure
Inches

-646
Age.
-700

71

Evaporation
per day
in cc.
Black | White
49-3 | 25.9
28.7, || 19:5

7:8 4.7
28.4 | 16.5
35.8 | 22.9
25-3 | 16.0
40.1 | 27.6
B5:0n|e22.2
33.6 | 19.1

WE BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

Max. ; : Evaporation
ism || efi Wind Wind Hours Hours | Vapor per day
Dates |e fal] | Veloc- dir- Possible | Actual |Pressure in Ae.
tute ity ection |Sunshine | Sunshine] Inches | —WH—
Black | White
Sept

2 77 25 | SW 13.0 4.4 .716
3 83 30 W 13.0 11.8 .654
4 72 28 NE 13.0 9.9 .530

5 69 24 E 13.0 11.7 .512 26.4 | 17-5
6 73 .O1 16 SE 12.9 Bez .676
7 73 03 18 E 12.8 7-4 .616
8 74. 12 N 12.8 10.5 557
9 76 12 NE 12.8 9.4 -496

10 74 22 SW 12.7 12.7 395| 43.0 | 24.6
II 75 21 SW 12.7 9.8 -631
12 74 OI II S 12.6 0.0 .676
13 76 27 W 12.6 9.8 531
14 66 26 N 12.5 6.3 -408
15 72 .06 26 SW 12.5 10.6 538
16 67 19 NE 12.4 10.2 -439

17 aii .09 30 S-S W 12.4 BP -560 36.3 | 27.4
18 7 .O1 36 W 12.4 8.4 -525
19 66 36 N W 12.3 12.3 .376
20 65 20 NE 12.2 8.7 385
21 68 .19 32 SE 12.2 0.0 -465
22 74 15 42 SW 1D 9.4 -569

23 74 30 SW 12.1 12.1 505} 44.9 | 34.8
24 69 13 N 12.1 12.1 419

The 1922 readings, which were only made on the open Downs, extend
from July 27 to August 18. As the accompanying graph (Fig. 25) shows
this happened to be a much less critical period than the previous season,
and consequently does not have the significance of the much higher readings
of 1921. Asarecord of the general climatic condition during 1922 I append
a detailed weather report by Lieut. Roger W. Autry, the Camp Signal
Officer at Camp Welsh. The artillery regiments quartered at Montauk
during the summer of 1922 kept a meteorological tent in operation, with
observations taken at 8:30 A.M. and 2:00 P.M. It is from these records
which are complete except for Saturday afternoons and Sundays, that the
following is taken.

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK

73

EVAPORATION BLACK AND WHITE ATMOMETERS AND DIRECTION AND VELOCITY OF THE
WIND, TEMPERATURE, VAPOR PRESSURE, AND SKY.

Date

Montauk Downs, JuLY 21-AuG. 18, 1922.

Vapor
Pressure
(inches)

Evaporation per

Direction Mean
and Velocity| Tempera-

of the Wind ature
E-2 71.0
E-10 70.0
NW-8 67.0
S-6 79.8
SW-8 71.0
N-8 72.0
NE-6 74.0
NE-13 64.2
SE-17 68.0
SW-8 66.5
SE-1I2 69.7
NW-13 66.3
SSE-15 73.2
SSE-6 68.2
SSE-7 70.8
NW-14 67.0
SW-8 69.0
SSE-10 76.1
N-8 67.0
N-5 67.0
NE-7 64.8
N-7 65.6
SE-5 68.1
ENE-7 66.8
ESE-8 71.8
NW-7 69.5
SSW-12 71.5
SSW-16 74.9

fog

cloudy

partly cloudy
partly cloudy
clear

clear

cloudy
cloudy
cloudy

partly cloudy
clear

cloudy

_ cloudy

cloudy
cloudy
partly cloudy

clear
clear

fog
cloudy
rain
cloudy
cloudy
cloudy
cloudy
partly cloudy
clear
clear
cloudy
clear
cloudy
cloudy

day in c.c
“Black | White
24.1 20.6
29.4 18.6
24.0 15.7

74 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

Direction Meaa Vapor Evaporation per
Date |and Velocity; Tempern- | Pressure Sky day in c.c.
of the Wind ture (inches) Black | White
July : \
8-AM SW-14 69.1 .661 rain |
8-PM SW-9 71.6 -757 cloudy
9-AM NE-18 62. 517 cloudy
g-PM NE-15 66.3 536 cloudy 24.0 15.7
10o-—AM NE-16 63.7 -499 cloudy
10-PM NE-14 67.6 .536 cloudy
11-AM NE-20 63.1 -432 cloudy
11-PM NNE-22 63.0 -482 cloudy
12-AM NE-16 63.1 575 rain
12-PM == rain
13-AM — =e — partly cloudy
13-PM —. aaa — partly cloudy
14-AM W-9 69.8 .684 clear
14-PM SW-13 76.0 .707 clear ;
15-AM SSW-5 68.8 .684 fog 27.2 17.7
15-PM SW-12 71.8 -732 fog
16-AM SW-9 70.8 -707 clear
16-PM SW-21 74.0 757 clear
17-AM | . NW-4 75.0 -783 clear
17-PM S-4 80.5 783 partly cloudy
18-AM SW-14 70.0 Be clear

Lack of wind velocity, such as the table shows, is unprecedented for
Montauk, and, if the black instruments are as sensitive to wind as the 1921
readings appear to indicate, their low rate of evaporation during the 1922
period is understandable. So far do the readings of the black or white
instruments depart from the normal that the total evaporation from the
white atmometer in the open is actually exceeded by a similarly exposed
instrument at Coram. There the record from July 27 to August 28 totalled
179.4 cc. more than at Montauk! This excess at Coram is undoubtedly
due partly to higher temperature, as the central pine-barren region, at
least so far as maximum temperatures are concerned, is always consider-
ably warmer than Montauk. It is partly due also to the lower humidity
at Coram. Montauk, surrounded by water, is, in the absence of its usual
gales, a decidedly humid region, and during the 1922 readings, as the de-
tailed record shows, the wind never reached a velocity of even twenty-five
miles an hour. A glance at the velocities during the 1921 high readings
will confirm the statement there hazarded that wind velocity and the rate

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 75

of evaporation from the black instrument, if not transpiration itself, are

rather closely correlated.
I am glad to make acknowledgments to Dr. Robert L. Dickinson and to

Miss Maria B. Fairbanks for making many of the readings of the atmo-

15

10 ¢o
July
ral
FicurE 25. Atmometer records on Montauk Downs in 1922. Black line = black
instrument, dotted line = white instrument. The records are reduced to the number of

. ec. of evaporation per day.

meters; to Lieut. R. W. Autry for supplying the meteorological data during
the 1922 readings; and to Mr. George W. Eddey, in charge of the UES:
Weather Bureau at Block Island, for many courtesies. All this voluntary
assistance has been most helpful in accumulating the data on the climate of

Montauk.

76 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

FiGuRE 26. Roots of Myrica carolinensis, near Ditch Plain Coast Guard Station.
The roots penetrated 36 inches of fine sand. (Photograph by Barrington Moore.)

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 77

SOILs.

It is needless to go into the geology of Montauk* more than to say that
all of the surface of the peninsula is made up of glacial till of the Ronkon-
koma Moraine, and from this, of course, all the soils of Montauk have
been derived.

This geologically similar material is by no means matched by a similarity
of soils. Considering first the mineral soil, which is soil that remains un-
modified by the vegetation,—the subsoil of the gardeners,—it is at once
obvious that this differs in different parts of Montauk and under different
vegetative types.

Disregarding boulders, small stones and coarse gravel, the available
subsoil appears to be, under the typical Downs, a mixture of about 85%
coarse yellow sand, and 15% of fine sand with sometimes a slight admixture
of silt. It is into such a substratum that the deeper rooted perennials, such
as Baptisia tinctoria, and all the shrubs, always penetrate (Fig. 26). And
of all the Montauk soils these Downs samples are the least favorable for
plant growth, being practically wholly lacking in humus (Fig. 27).

In the wooded kettleholes, in the Hither Woods, or in the Point
Woods, the subsoil is very different. A glance at figure 28 shows, that on
the average, the subsoils under the forest are higher in fine sand or silt
than those under the grassland. In the case of the Hither Woods sample
the soil is not far in its mechanical composition from the open Downs, and
as the earlier description of that region has shown, the forest there is
stunted. It is unquestionably the combination of this poor soil .and
exposure to the winds which holds back the growth of the oaks in the
Hither Woods. How much this is retarded on the windward side of them
has already been shown.

These different subsoils} appear to have an important influence in
controlling the major distribution of the different vegetation types, always,
of course, in conjunction with, and subsidiary to, climatic factors. Upon
them depend the maintenance of the vegetative status quo. But the es-
tablishment and reproduction of either old or aggressively competing types
must depend upon the upper layer of the soil, in which all alike must first
root or germinate their seeds.

*For details of this see Fuller, M. L., The geology of Long Island, Prof. Paper
U. S. Geological Survey 82: 1-231. 1914.

{ In this, as in other parts of Long Island, my statements are based on many collections
under each type of vegetation, so that the remarks about soil possibilities must be under-
stood to refer to average conditions, rather than individual cases.

78 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

A

Colts eee eG men 2 SS ee ee eee

Fine Arma 2.66225 ta

FIGURE 27. (a) Subsoil under open Downs at edge of Hither Woods; 15% fine yellow
sand, 85% coarse yellow sand. (b) Subsoil under open Downs between Fort Pond and
Great Pond; 16% fine sand and silt, 84% coarse sand. (c) Symbols used to designate
size of soil particles in figures 27-30.

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 79

This upper layer, humus infested as it always must be, even in the
worst sites, is the soil as it has been affected by the decomposition of suc-
cessive generations of plants that have gone before,—again in the jargon
of the gardeners, the topsoil.

FIGURE 28. (a) Subsoil under the Hither Woods; 17% fine sand and silt, 83% coarse
sand. (b) Subsoil under wooded kettlehole; 90% of fine sand, 10% silt. (c) Subsoil
under Point Woods; 68% coarse light sand, 32% fine light yellow sand and silt.

On the Downs this surface soil, often of varying thickness depending on
the slope, is usually made up of much the same basic material as the mineral
soil under it, but as Fig. 29 shows, with a pretty large proportion of humus
in it. In the case of the surface soil under the woods, the same general
proposition holds true, with the exception of the surface soil under the
woods at Montauk Point. See figure 30.

These purely mechanical features of the soil are perhaps best measured,
so far as their effects upon the vegetation are concerned, by the Hilgard*

*See Hilgard, E. W. Soils, Chapter IX, pp. 188-266, on “The Water of Soils,”’

1919. Also “The Wilting Coefficient for Different Plants and its Indirect Determination,”
by L. J. Briggs and H. L. Shantz, Bull. Bur. Plant Industry 230: 1-83. 1912.

80 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

method of determining the moisture holding capacity of them, and the
Briggs and Shantz method of determining their wilting coefficient.

The moisture holding capacity of the subsoils of Montauk shows that,
under the open Downs, they average 33.4%, while under the forest, aver-
aging Hither Woods, Point Woods, the island in Great Pond, North Neck
Woods, and wooded kettleholes, the figure is 39.9%. The interesting thing

B

FIGURE 29. (a) Surface soil under open Downs near Hither Woods; 91% coarse sand
and humus, 9% fine sand and humus. (b) Surface soil under open Downs between Fort
Pond and Great Pond; 74% coarse sand, 26% fine sand, both darkened by humus, but not
as much as in the sample from near the Hither Woods (a).

about these figures is that both of them are well above those for other
regions of Long Island which sustain similar types of vegetation.

Taking the only other grasslands on Long Island we find the moisture
holding capacity of their subsoils, as compared to Montauk, is as follows:
Hempstead Plains 28.9% Shinnecock Hills 26.5%
Montauk Downs 33.4%

The Montauk figure is not only considerably higher than any other
grassland on the Island, it is even higher than the average of seventeen
pitch pine subsoils over the rest of Long Island, the moisture holding capac-

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 81

ity of which is 31.6%. Considering the pitch pine type of vegetation as
indicative of only slightly better conditions than the grasslands we are
confronted with moisture holding capacity figures that are better than the
average pitch pine soils, and yet a failure to produce this type of vegetation
at Montauk.

Cc

FIGURE 30. (a) Surface soil under Hither Woods; 90% humus and coarse sand, 10%
coarse sand. (b) Surface soil under wooded kettlehole; 66% coarse sand and humus,
34% fine sand and humus. (c) Surface soil under Point Woods; 90% coarse sand, 10% fine
sand, both only slightly darkened by humus.

In the case of the woodlands there is also a difference, as under eighteen
different stations on Long Island, all supporting an oak forest, the moisture
holding capacity of the subsoils averages 37.4%, while the figure for Mon-
tauk forest growth is 39.9%.

Both on the Downs, and in what woods occur at Montauk, there is
thus a soil condition better than in other parts of Long Island, and, as we
have seen, the failure to produce vegetation that might be expected to
result from such conditions appears to be due to factors of climate already
discussed.

Considering only the surface soils we have the following condition:

82 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

Grasslands Moisture Holding Capacity
Montauk Downs 43.0%
Hempstead Plains : 44.0
Shinnecock Hills 33.6

Forest
Montauk 70.57%

17 Pitch Pine stations on L. I. 83.9
18 Oak stations on L. I. 97.2
The wilting coefficient of Montauk soils, is as follows:

Subsoils Wilting Coefficient
Open Downs 4.7%
Forest 5.6

Surface soils
Open Downs 6.1%
Forest 15.1

Other grasslands on Long Island average for the wilting coefficient of
their surface soils 7.8%, which is close enough to the Montauk Downs to
be of little significance. As might be expected, the surface soil, on grass-
lands, once that type of vegetation has become established, ought not to
vary much from one place to another, for in every case we are recording
not the capacity of the soil itself, but rather how that capacity has been
affected by the vegetation which has captured it. That is why the wilting
coefficient of the surface soils of all these Long Island grasslands is so nearly
uniform.

While the fertility of Montauk soil is not known with any accuracy,
one criterion of it is the vegetable garden near the Inn. This is about two
acres, protected from most of the wind, and several years observation of
it appears to indicate average fertility. Certainly the soil there is no worse
than in hundreds of other gardens on eastern Long Island.

In attempting to see if the hydrogen-ion concentration of the soil has
any effect on the vegetation many scores of tests according to the method
of Wherry* have been made at Montauk.

Except for highly specialized habitats, such as cranberry bogs and salt
marshes, the general uniformity of the specific acidity of these soils is note-
worthy. From experience in making hundreds of these tests on other
Long Island soils, as well as at Montauk, it may be safely stated that soils
that range from a specific acidity of 3+ to 30+, or in most cases
even to 100, are without significance, as to influencing the distribution
of the major features of the vegetation. So far as individual species

* Wherry, E. T. Ecology 1: 42-47, and 160-174. 1920. Rhodora 22: 33-41. 1920.

Amer. Fern. Jour. 10: 15-22. 1920. Proc. Phil. Acad. Nat. Sci. 72: 113-119. 1920.
Smithson. Rep. 1920: 247-268. 1922.

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 83
are concerned, there appear to be limits, but they are usually rather
wide limits within which they prefer to grow. But evenhere the number
of exceptions makes it hazardous to say that they will only grow in
what appears to be their preferred habitat. And when it comes to
whole vegetation types, the case is hopeless, as within each may be
found an infinite variety of specific acidities, and nowhere that the
writer has studied, any uniformity of it as to amount. Practically the
only thing that may safely be said of the Montauk soils (excluding bogs
and salt marshes) is that they vary in specific acidity from 3+ to 30+,
and that this is without distributional significance, so far as the occurrence
or extent of major vegetative covering is concerned Another factor which
leads to accepting specific acidity with considerable caution as an active
determinant in the distribution of vegetative types, is that it is a measure
of what the decomposition of the plants has done to the soil, rather than a
measure of the specific acidity of the soil per se. The tests for subsoils
demonstrate this, as all over Long Island these vary only (with minor
exceptions) from 3+ to 10. The surface soils, due to decomposition
of the different types of vegetation supported by them, vary consider-
ably, but as at Montauk, only within limits of little significance. In
regions where there is a deeper accumulation of humus the variation is
of course greater and of much more significance, as for instance, in the
spruce forests in the north.

SUMMARY.

Montauk, which within historic times at least, has always been pre-
dominantly grassland, appears to be incapable of producing a forest,
except under conditions of protection from the wind, and where there is
available water. This, in spite of the fact that temperature, rainfall,
humidity, evaporation and physical characteristics of the soil are as good
as, or better than, those in the vicinity where forest growth is normal. The
region is well within the general forest area of the northeastern states, and
yet appears to be incapable of producing a forest, as that term is ordinarily
understood. Of all the environmental factors, the wind is unquestionably
the most important, and it may, upon subsequent experimentation, prove
to be the factor.*

*Tt is a local tradition that trees will not grow on the exposed Downs. To test this
twelve oaks (three each of four different species) were set out on the property of Guy
DuVal, Esq., with different exposures to the wind. It is too early to report upon their
condition, and as they are protected from fire and cattle, but not cultivated or watered,
their response to their environment will be of interest. I am grateful to Mr. DuVal for
this and for many other courtesies during numerous visits to Montauk.

84 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

While there is not much question that there have always been Downs
and wooded kettleholes, and that the Hither Woods have always been
about as they now are, there is at least some evidence that Montauk was
once more thoroughly timbered than it has been since the first whites came
there in 1640.

In 1849, J. A. Ayres wrote a book called ‘‘The Legends of Montauk,”
in which he says: ‘‘The limits of Montauk were once, perhaps, somewhat
greater than they are at present. On the north side near the Great Pond
are the remains of a pine forest which stood on ground now covered by the
sea. The roots remain buried in the sand and are visible.only on the
receding of the tide.’”’ The writer has never seen these during the last
ten years, and such evidence taken by itself would not be conclusive. But
Elias Lewis, in his ‘‘Ups and Downs of the Long Island Coast’’* says:
“At Montauk Point, north of the lighthouse, is a low swampy place over
which the tides sometimes rise. We are informed by Mr. J. F. Gould,
who was for many years keeper of the lighthouse, that stumps are laid bare
in front of this swamp, at the sea-margin, when the tide is extremely low.”’
As hundreds of similar cases are known on Long Island, where what is now
water or salt meadow was once forest, the Montauk records are, no doubt,
simply local corroboration of a pretty common phenomenon. ‘They all im-
ply that the forest, and of course the island itself, was once more extensive
than it now is.

That conception involves the proposition that the old coastal plain,
marked roughly by the present 100 fathom contour, which is now far out to
sea, supported a forest growth, which, through the submergence of this
plain, was destroyed. The unquestioned occurrence of stumps of this now
buried forest certainly supports this view.t At Block Island, Dr. Hollick
postulates the destruction of the forest that remained after the submergence
of this old coastal plain as due to man, but that, as the historical record
indicates, could scarcely have happened at Montauk. But whether re-
moved by the agency of man or the elements, the re-establishment of forest
over Montauk or Block Island, without the protection, which the old
coastal plain must have afforded, is practically impossible, except in locally
protected places. Nor does it need much protection from these severe
conditions to produce a forest, for at Gardiner’s Island, only ten miles away,
there is the finest deciduous forest growth on Long Island, if not in the whole
of New York State.

* Pop Sci. Mo. 10: 434-446. February 1877.

+ See Hollick, A. Trans. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 16: 9-18. 1898; Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci.
11: 55-72. 1898; Trans. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 12: 189-202. 1893; Bull. N. Y. Bot. Gard. 2:
392. 1902;and numerous papers by M. L. Fernald, who has adopted and greatly amplified
the view of the effect of this old coastal plain on the distribution of species along the
Atlantic coast.

PART II. FLORA OF MONTAUK.

It should be said at once that there has been no serious attempt to make
collections of all the species that grow at Montauk, nor are introduced
plants included here, unless they have entered into some of the vegetation
types treated in Part I. But during many visits there, and in the course
of a good deal of walking over the area, herbarium specimens were collected
as they were necessary for the identification of species in certain associations
of plants, or as their collection did not interfere with the study of the
vegetation. It is from the accumulation of these notes and specimens that
the following list has been made. While there can be no pretense that it is
complete, it does at least show what species make up the great bulk of the
flora of Montauk.

It is a pleasure to make acknowledgments to Mr. Kenneth K. Macken-
zie for identification of the sedges; to Professor A. S. Hitchcock and Mrs.
Agnes Chase for the grasses; to Dr. R. C. Benedict for the ferns and their
allies; to Mr. W. W. Eggleston for Crataegus; to Mr. Paul C. Standley for
Vaccinium; to Prof. E. S. Burgess for Aster; and to Dr. F. W. Pennell for
certain Scrophulariaceae and for Knetffia.

The names and specific identities, with a few trifling exceptions, are
those in the writer’s “Flora of the Vicinity of New York,” which, in es-
sentials, was based upon the ‘Illustrated Flora”’ of Dr. N. L. Britton and
the late Addison Brown.

Practically all, except the records of the very commonest species, are
supported by specimens. These are mostly in the herbarium of the Brook-
lyn Botanic Garden, while a few are in the collections at the New York
Botanical Garden. Several score are based on specimens collected by Mr.
William C. Ferguson of Hempstead, most of which he has presented to
our collections. All other records are based upon field observations of the
writer, or upon those of Mr. Ferguson. It is a genuine pleasure to ac-
knowledge this assistance from Mr. Ferguson, who has also made many
notes on the rarity or commoness of certain grasses, sedges, and some
other plants, which have been used in tabulations of the Raunkiaer
“Growth-Forms,”’ as these have been developed under the highly specialized
conditions at Montauk.*

* The specimens collected at Montauk as well as many others from different parts of
Long Island are all being studied with a view of getting out a ‘‘Flora of Long Island.”
The local Long Island collections of the Brooklyn Botanic Garden now number twenty

85

86 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

EXPLANATORY NOTE.

The letters contained in the notesabout the distribution of the different
species mean the following:
VR = Very rare
R R = Rather rare
R = Rare
V C = Very common
R C = Rather common
C = Common

Usually where localities are cited it means that there is a specimen
from that place, but, especially in the case of common plants, they are
more widely distributed than the citation to the definite localities would
appear to indicate. It is for this reason that the above plan has been
adopted.

For place names see the map at the beginning of this book. As there
defined “‘Montauk”’ means from the western end of Fort Pond to Great
Pond; “‘Montauk Point” from the eastern edge of Great Pond to the
Light house; and the “Hither Woods,” as from the very earliest days, is
applied to the forested tract west of Fort Pond.

Ferns and Fern Allies.

OPHIOGLOSSACEAE
Botrychium obliquum. Woods at Oyster Pond; V R.

OSMUNDACEAE

Osmunda Claytoniana. Wooded kettleholes; R C.
Osmunda cinnamomea. Kettleholes; thickets at Montauk Point; V C.
Osmunda regalis. Kettleholes. R C.

POLYPODIACEAE

Onoclea sensibilis. Kettleholes; Island in Great Pond; Montauk Point; R C
Dennstaedtia punctilobula. Kettleholes; Montauk Point; R C.

Dryopteris intermedia. Wooded kettleholes; R R.

Dryopteris noveboracensis. Wooded kettleholes; R C.

Dryopteris spinulosa. Kettleholes; Oyster Pond; R R.

Dryopteris Thelypteris. Kettleholes; V C.

Anchistea virginica. Kettleholes; R C.

thousand specimens, not counting collections of the writer (about three thousand), the her-
barium of Miss F. A. Mulford of Hempstead (about three thousand), several hundred
specimens presented by Mr. Ferguson, an equal number of Lieut. Alexander Gershoy, and
the herbarium of Miss A. E. Hamilton of Baldwin (1245 specimens).

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 87

Lorinseria areolata. Kettleholes; R.
Athyrium Filix-foemina. Wooded kettleholes; woods at Montauk Point;
RR.
Athyrium thelypteroides. Open kettleholes; R C.
Pteridium aquilinum. Hither Woods; wooded kettleholes; Island in Great
Pond; Point Woods; C.
EQUISETACEAE

Equisetum arvense. Waste places; C.

LYCOPODIACEAE

Lycopodium adpressum. Kettleholes; V R.
Lycopodium inundatum. Bog near Hither Woods; Montauk Point; V R.

Flowering Plants

PINACEAE
Pinus rigida. Dunes near Gin Beach; V R. Practically unknown except
for a single wind-wrenched, stunted tree growing in pure sand,
among Ammophila, Lechea, Hudsonia, and other dune species; but
not very near the beach.
Juniperus virginiana. Edge of Hither Woods; Gin Beach; V R.

MONOCOTYLEDONES
TYPHACEAE
Typha angustifolia. Edge of Fort Pond; Island in Great Pond; R R.

SPARGANIACEAE
Sparganium americanum. Open Kettleholes; C.
Sparganium eurycarpum. Montauk Point; R R.
Sparganium lucidum. Oyster Pond; south end of Great Pond; R R.
ZANNICHELLIACEAE
Ruppia maritima. Oyster Pond; R C, but not found in many places.
Potamogeton dimorphus. Montauk Point; R R.
Potamogeton diversifolius. Ponds; R C.
Potamogeton Oakesianus. Kettleholes Montauk Point; Oyster Pond; R.
Potamogeton pectinatus. Ponds; RR.
Potamogeton perfoliatus. Reed Pond; Fort Pond; R C.
Potamogeton pulcher. Pond near Ditch Plain; R R.

ALISMACEAE

Alisma subcordatum. Open kettleholes; V C.
Sagittaria latifolia. Open kettleholes; V C.

88 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

ELODEACEAE

Vallisneria spiralis. Stream in Point Woods; Reed Pond; R R, but
abundant where found.

POACEAE

Andropogon furcatus. Wide spread on the downs; C.

Schizachyrium scoparium. Dominant grass on the downs; V C.

Sorghastrum nutans. Downs and edge of Fort Pond; V C.

Paspalum psammophilum. Sand dunes; R R.

Paspalum setaceum. Downs near Hither Woods; R R.

Echinochloa Crus-galli. Open kettleholes; probably a relic of grazing.
Introduced. RC.

Echinochloa Waltert. Oyster Pond; R R.

Panicum clandestinum. Open but high kettleholes near Culloden Point;
RR.

Panicum columbianum. Downs; C.

Panicum Commonsianum. Downs; C.

Panicum depauperatum. Downs; V R.

Panicum dichotomiflorum. Oyster Pond; V R.

Panicum huachucae. Open downs; Hither Woods; R R.

Pamicum wmplicatum. ‘Thicket northwest of Inn; R.

Panicum meridionale. Hither Woods; open downs north of Inn; R R.

Panicum microcarpon. Oyster Pond, and edges of wooded kettleholes; R

CG.
Panicum Scribnerianum. Open downs; C.
Panicum sphaerocarpon. Downs; R C. 4

Panicum tennesseense. Wooded kettleholes; R R.

Panicum tsugetorum. Hither Woods; R C.

Panicum virgatum. Near Fort Pond and open kettleholes; R C.
Cenchrus carolinianus. Montauk Point; sand dunes; R R.
Anthoxanthum odoratum. Sparingly introduced; R R.

Aristida dichotoma. Culloden Point; R R.

Aristida purpurascens. Hither Woods; Downs; R.

Aristida tuberculosa. Beach; V R.

Cinna arundinacea. Oyster Pond; Reed Pond; C.

Agrostis alba. Freely introduced on the downs; Hither Woods; V C.
Agrostis marituma. Salt marshes; R R.

Agrostis perennans. Open stage of low kettlehole; C.

Ammophila arenaria. Dunes near Gin Beach; V C, but only at a few places.
Deschampsia flexuosa. Downs, and in Hither Woods; V C.

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 89

Danthonia spicata. Hither Woods; R.

Spartina Michauxiana. East of Inn; R.

Spartina patens. Fort Pond; V C, but only at a few places.
Spartina stricta. Fort Pond; R C.

Phragmites Phragmites. Island in Great Pond; V R.
Leptochloa fascicularis. Island in Great Pond; V R.
Eragrostis pectinacea. Downs; R R.

Poa pratensis. Downs; R R perhaps the result of grazing.
Poa triflora. VR.

Panicularia acutiflora. Kettleholes east of Inn; Montauk Point; R R.
Panicularia nervata. Wooded kettleholes north of Inn; R C.
Panicularia obtusa. Montauk Point; V R.

Panicularia pallida. Kettleholes; R R.

Elymus striatus. Oyster Pond; V R.

CYPERACEAE

Cyperus dentatus. Fort Pond and open kettleholes; Oyster Pond; C.

Cyperus diandrus. East side of Great Pond; R C.

Cyperus filicinus. East side of Great Pond; R C.

Cyperus filuculmis. Open downs; C.

Cyperus rivularis. Oyster Pond; V R.

Cyperus strigosus. Oyster Pond; V R.

Eleocharis acicularis. Fort Pond; V R.

Eleocharis Engelmannt. VR.

Eleocharis obtusa. Often the pioneer herb in low open kettleholes. with
seasonal ponds in them; V C.

Eleocharis palustris. Oyster Pond; Fort Pond; R C.

Eleocharis tenuis. Open kettleholes; R C.

Eleocharis tuberculosa. Oyster Pond; R R.

Eriophorum virginicum. Bogs at Montauk Point; R R.

Scirpus americanus. Open kettleholes; Fort Pond; V C.

Scirpus cyperinus. Open and partly wooded kettleholes; V C.

Scirpus debilis. Oyster Pond; open kettleholes; R C.

Scirpus robustus. Gin Beach; R.

Scirpus validus. Swamp;R R.

Dulichium arundinaceum. Most moist places; V C.

-Rynchospora alba. Oyster Pond; Great Pond; R C.

Rynchospora glomerata. Great Pond; Oyster Pond; Fort Pond; R C.

Mariscus mariscoides. Island in Great Pond; north of Inn; R C.

Carex alata. Open kettleholes; north of Inn; R R.

90 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

Carex albolutescens. Oyster Pond; Open kettleholes; R C.

Carex annectens. Kettlehole west of Inn; R R.

Carex blanda. Woods near Reed pond; R.

Carex canescens. East of Inn; R C.

Carex cephalantha. Near Culloden Point, on shore; Kettleholes east of
Inn; RC.

Carex comosa. Wooded kettleholes northeast of Inn; R R.

Carex crinita. Near Oyster Pond; R.

Carex flexuosa. East of Great Pond; R.

Carex folliculata. Montauk Point; R C.

Carex hormathodes. Pool, Montauk Point; Oyster Pond. C.

Carex Howei. Open kettleholes near Ditch Plain; R.

Carex laevivaginata. R.

Carex lanuginosa. Near Culloden Point, on shore; north of Reed Pond; R.

Carex leptalea. East of Great Pond. R.

Carex lupulina. Kettleholes east of Inn; R R.

Carex lurida. Fort Pond; Reed Pond; C.

Carex Muhlenbergii. Downs; C.

Carex pennsylvanica. Hither Woods; R R.

Carex rosaeoides. Wooded kettleholes north of Inn; R.

Carex scoparia. Bog near Hither Woods; Open kettleholes; bog at Mon-
tauk Point; mostly as to the form C. scoparia tessellata emmel WG,

Carex silicea. Oyster Pond; Sea beaches; C.

Carex stipata. Near Oyster Pond; R R.

Carex Swanti. Near Oyster Pond; R R.

Carex vesicaria. Culloden Point, on shore; V R.

Carex vulpinoidea. Oyster Pond; V R.

ARACEAE
Arisaema triphyllum. Rich woods, Montauk Point; wooded kettleholes;
Rene
Spathyema foetida. Low places in Point Woods; R R.
Acorus Calamus. Open kettleholes; Montauk Point; R R.
XYRIDACEAE

Xyris flexuosa. Low places; Montauk Point; R C.
ERIOCAULACEAE

Eriocaulon septangulare. Edge of Fort Pond; R R.
PONTEDERIACEAE

Pontederia cordata. Pool near Ditch Plain; R R.

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK gI

JUNCACEAE
Juncus acuminatus. Oyster Pond; Open kettleholes; R C.
Juncus articulatus. Brackish marsh, Fort Pond; V R.
Juncus bufonius. Low places; V C.
Juncus canadensis. Most low places; V C.
Juncus dichotomus. Fort Pond; open kettleholes; V C.
Juncus effusus. Scattered in low kettleholes; R C.
Juncus Greenei. Downs; V C. Its tufts rather conspicuous on the open
downs.
Juncus marginatus. Oyster Pond; kettleholes on Montauk Point; R R.
Juncoides campestre. Downs; RC.

MELANTHACEAE
Uvularia sessilifolia. Wooded kettleholes; Point Woods; C.

LILIACEAE
Lilium canadense. Oyster Pond; also near Fort Pond; R R.
Lilium philadelphicum. Oyster Pond; R R.
Lilium superbum. Along edges of ponds, marshes, Montauk Point; V R.
CONVALLARIACEAE
Vagnera racemosa. Island in Fort Pond; Montauk Point; R R.
Unifolium canadense. Point Woods; C.
Medeola virginiana. Point Woods; R C.

SMILACEAE
Smilax glauca. In thickets and kettleholes; V C.
Smilax herbacea. Oyster Pond; R R.
Smilax rotundifolia. In thickets and kettleholes; C.
AMARYLLIDACEAE
Hypoxis hirsuta. Point Woods; wooded kettleholes; R R.

IRIDACEAE
Iris prismatica. Meadows about Fort Pond; C.
Iris versicolor. Marsh near ‘“‘ Third House”’; low kettleholes; R C.
Sisyrinchium arenicola. Downs; C.
Sisyrinchium atlanticum. Open kettleholes; C.

ORCHIDACEAE

Perularia flava. Old collection, not recently seen; V R.
Blephariglottis ciliaris. Fort Pond; R.
Blephariglottis lacera. Open downs; R R.

g2 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

Blephariglottis psycodes. Reed Pond; V R.

Pogonia ophioglossoides. Most moist places; V C.

Arethusa bulbosa. Bogs at Montauk Point; V C, perhaps more so than
at any other Long Island locality, except in the region north of
Manorville.

Limodorum tuberosum. Bogs; V C.

Ibidium cernuum. Fort Pond; Montauk Point; R R.

Ibidium gracile. Downs; Montauk Point; R R.

DICODYVEDONES

SALICACEAE

Populus grandidentata.. Thickets and in wooded kettleholes; R C.

Populus tremuloides. Near Fort Pond; R R.

Salix cordata. Edge of Great Pond; R.

Salix discolor. Kettleholes, and sometimes on Downs; north of Inn; R R.

Salix nigra. Fort Pond; R.

Salix sericea. Fort Pond; R.

Salix tristis. Downs Montauk Point; R R. Nothing like so plentiful as
on other parts of Long Island, such as Hempstead Plains, for in-
stance.

MYyRICACEAE

Myrica carolinensis. Common on the Downs; V C.

Myrica Gale. Edge of Great Pond; R R.

Comptonia peregrina. Hither Woods; C.

JUGLANDACEAE

Hicoria alba. Wooded kettleholes; R R. C4)
Hicoria glabra. Hither Woods; Point Woods; R R.

BETULACEAE

Carpinus caroliniana. Near Reed Pond; V R.
Corylus americana. Wooded kettleholes near Inn; Island in Great Pond;
RR.
Betula populifolia. In some wooded kettleholes; often a pioneer in young
thickets; C.
(Alnus incana. Swamps in Point Woods; R R.
*) Almiis rugosa. Pool in Point Woods; R C.

FAGACEAE

Fagus grandifolia. In wooded kettleholes; Hither Woods; North Neck
Woods; R R.

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 93

Castanea dentata. Hither Woods, mostly dead; RC. Once a considerable
element in the forest areas of the region.
Quercus alba. Hither woods; wooded kettleholes, and many other places;
Wie.
Quercus coccinea. In all wooded places on Montauk; V C.
Quercus rubra. Hither Woods; Island in Great Pond; R R.
Quercus velutina. Most wooded places on Montauk; C.
CANNABINACEAE
Humulus Lupulus. Island in Great Pond; V R.
URTICACEAE

Boehmeria cylindrica. Wooded kettleholes; R R.
Boehmeria Drummondiana. Near Fort Pond; V R.

POLYGONACEAE

Rumex Acetosella. Downs; V C.. Introduced.

Rumex Britannica.; Between Reed and Oyster Ponds; R.
Rumex crispus. Downs and along roadsides; C. Introduced.
Rumex persicarioides. Kettleholes; Great Pond; Oyster Pond; V R.
Rumex verticillatus. Oyster Pond; Reed Pond; R R.
Polygonum buxiforme. Fort Pond; Downs; Reed Pond; C.
Polygonum maritimum. Beaches; V R.

Polygonum neglectum. Beach near Oyster Pond; R.

Tovara virginiana. Oyster Pond; V R.

Persicaria hydropiperoides. Low open kettleholes; V C.
Persicaria pennsylvanica. Low open kettleholes; V C.
Persicaria punctata. Downs and open kettleholes; C.
Persicaria setacea. VR.

Tracaulon arifolium. Edge of Pool, Montauk Point; R C.
Tracaulon sagittatum. Kettleholes; R C.

Tiniaria scandens. Thickets; C.

Polygonella articulata. Downs; R C.

CHENOPODIACEAE
Chenopodium rubrum. Waste places and roadsides; V R.
Atriplex arenaria. Fort Pond; R.
| Atriplex hastata. Beaches; R C.
| AIZOACEAE
Sesuvium maritimum. Shores of Oyster Pond; V R. The only other
stations for it known in New York State are at Easthampton and
Gardiner’ssIland. .

94 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

ALSINACEAE
Cerastium arvense. Downs; C.
Arenaria caroliniana. Hither Woods; V R.
Moehringia lateriflora. Near Hither Woods, at contact of woods and downs;
RR.
Honkenya peploides. Beaches; C.
Tissa marina. Fort Pond; R R.

CARYOPHYLLACEAE
Silene caroliniana. Near Fort Pond; R R.

NYMPHAEACEAE

Brasenia Schrebert. Pond near Ditch Plain; V R.

Castalia odorata. Most stable ponds; R C. The much smaller-flowered
C. odorata pumila is also found with the type, and a pink-flowered
form is not unknown.

CERATOPHYLLACEAE

Ceratophyllum demersum. Ponds, Montauk Point; V R.

RANUNCULACEAE
Aquilegia canadensis. Point Woods; Hither Woods; R.
Anemone quinquefolia. Point Woods; R C.
Anemone virginiana. North Neck woods; V R.
’ \Syndesmon thalictroides. Island in Great Pond; V R.
Ranunculus delphinifolius. Poolin wooded kettlehole near Gin Beach; V R.
Thalictrum revolutun. Point Woods; R R.

LAURACEAE

Sassafras Sassafras. Hither Woods; Wooded kettleholes; Point Woods.
RRS

Benzoin aestivale. Island in Great Pond; Point Woods; R R.

CRUCIFERAE
Lepidium densiflorum. Shores of Gardiner’s Bay; R R.
Cakile edentula. Sea beaches; R C.

DROSERACEAE
Drosera intermedia. Bogs; RR.
Drosera rotundifolia. Bogs; C.

HAMAMELIDACEAE

Hamamelis virginiana. Point Woods; Island in Great Pond; R R.

i i i

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 95

ROSACEAE

Spiraea latifolia. Early wooded stage of open kettlehole; C.

Spiraea tomentosa. Southeast of Inn; R R.

Potentilla canadensis. Edges of woods; Downs; C. The form known as
P. pumila is also found.

Potentilla monspeliensis. Downs; RR.

Argentina littoralis. Brackish marshes; C.

Fragaria virginiana. Point Woods; Wooded kettleholes; C.

Sanguisorba canadensis. Marshes; R C.

Geum canadense. Oyster Pond; R.

Rubus Chamaemorus. Between the Inn and Culloden Point; V R. See
page 24.

Rubus flagellaris. Hither Woods; R R.

Rubus frondosus. Hither Woods; wooded kettleholes; R C.

Rubus hispidus. Wooded kettleholes; V C.

Rubus nigrobaccus. Kettleholes; Hither Woods; C.

Rubus procumbens. Scrambling all over the downs and through most
thickets; VC. ©

Rosa carolina. Thickets; C.

Rosa palustris. Thickets; often on the downs; C.

Rosa virginiana. Thickets; V C.

MALACEAE

Aronia arbutifolia. Everywhere in low places; V C.

_ Aronia atropurpurea. In low places; C.

Aronia melanocarpa. Low places; V C.

Amelanchier canadensis. Wooded kettleholes; Hither Woods; Point
Woods; C.

Amelanchier intermedia. Point Woods; R C.

Amelanchier nantucketensis. Hither Woods; wooded kettleholes; R R.

Crataegus albicans. Oyster Pond; V R.

Crataegus Arnoldiana. Montauk Point; V R.

Crataegus intricata. Point Woods; V R.

Crataegus Crus-galli. Near Culloden Point; R R.

Crataegus pruinosa. Wooded kettleholes, and Point Woods; R R.

AMYDGALACEAE

Padus virginiana. In most wooded kettleholes; Hither Woods; Montauk
Romb= C.
Prunus maritima. Beaches and many places in interior; V C.

96 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

CAESALPINIACEAE
Chamaecrista fasciculata. Downs; RR.

FABACEAE
Baptisia tinctoria. Downs; V C. See note on page 21.
Meibcmia marylandica. Hither Woods; R R.
Meibomia obtusa. Gin Beach; Hither Woods; R R.
Lespedeza capitata. Downs; R C.
Lespedeza frutescens. Downs; C.
Lespedeza procumbens. Hither Woods; R R.
Lathyrus maritumus. Beaches; V C.
Strophostyles helvola. Thickets; R C.
Glycine Apios. Hither Woods; thickets; low open kettleholes; C.

GERANIACEAE
Geranium maculatum. Point Woods; Island in Great Pond; R R.

OXALIDACEAE
Xanthoxalis Brittoniae. Downs; RR.
Xanthoxalis cymosa. Downs; C.
LINACEAE

Cathartolinum intercursum. Downs; RR.
Cathartolinum medium. Downs; C.
Cathartolinum striatum. Low kettleholes; C.

POLYGALACEAE

Polygala cruciata. Low open kettleholes; Montauk Point; R C.
Polygala polygama. Downs; VC. Thewhite-flowered form rather common.
Polygala viridescens. Downs; C.

EUPHORBIACEAE
Acalypha virginica. Edge of Hither Woods; R R.

CALLITRICHACEAE
Callitriche heterophylla. Montauk Point; V R.

ANACARDIACEAE
Rhus copallina. Wooded kettleholes; Hither Woods; V C.
Rhus glabra. Hither Woods and Point Woods; R R.
Rhus hirta. Hither Woods and Point Woods; V R.
Toxicodendron radicans. Nearly everywhere; V C.
Toxicodendron Vernix. Wooded kettleholes; V C.

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 97

AQUIFOLIACEAE
Ilex opaca. Point Woods; Reed Pond; Hither Woods; R R.
Ilex verticillata. Wooded kettleholes; Point Woods; V C.
ACERACEAE
Acer rubrum. In all wooded parts; VC. The form known as A. carolini-
anum seems to be the only one at Montauk.
; BALSAMINACEAE
Impatiens biflora. Wooded kettleholes; R R.
VITACEAE
Vitis aestivalis. Wooded kettleholes; C.
Vitis Labrusca. Wooded kettleholes; C.
Parthenocissus quinquefolia. Nearly everywhere; V C.
TILIACEAE
Tilia americana. Island in Fort Pond; V R.
MALVACEAE
Hibiscus Moscheutos. Brackish marshes; V C. Pale and even white-
flowered forms are also common.
HyYPERICACEAE
Hypericum boreale. Low open kettleholes; V C.
Hypericum canadense. Thickets at Montauk Point; R R.
Hypericum majus. Oyster Pond; RR.
Hypericum mutilum. Downs; C.
Hypericum perforatum. Downs and in open kettleholes; VC. Introduced.
Hypericum punctatum. Downs and in open kettleholes. VC.
Sarothra gentianoides. Downs; V C.
Triadenum virginicum. Most low open places; V C.
ELATINACEAE
Elatine americana. (Kettleholes; V R.

CISTACEAE

Crocanthemum canadense. Downs; Hither Woods; C.

Crocanthemum dumosum. Hither Woods; downs north of the Inn; R R.
Crocanthemum majus. Downs; C.

Hudsonia ericoides. Hither Woods; R R.

Hudsonia tomentosa. Beaches and sandy places; Downs; C.

Lechea maritima. Beaches and Downs; V C.

Lechea minor. Downs; Hither Woods; C.

Lechea villosa. Downs; C.

98 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

VIOLACEAE
Viola cucullata. Point Woods, and some wooded kettleholes; R R.
Viola fimbriatula. Open downs; C.
Viola lanceolata. Low open kettleholes; V C.
Viola pallens. Point Woods; V R.

CACTACEAE
Opuntia Opuntia. Near the Lighthouse; V R.
LYTHRACEAE

Rotala ramosior. Kettleholes; V R.
Decodon verticiilatus. In some low, nearly open kettleholes; C.

MELASTOMACEAE
Rhexia virginica. Low open kettleholes; R C.

ONAGRACEAE

Isnardia palustris. Low open kettleholes; C.

Ludwigia alternifolia. Low open kettleholes; C.

Epilobium coloratum. Oyster Pond; V R.

Epilobtum lineare. Near North Neck Woods; Point Woods; V R.

Oenothera muricata. Downs; Low open kettleholes; beaches and sandy
places; C.

Oenothera Oakesiana. Downs; Beaches and sandy places; C.

Kneifia Allenu. Downs; C.

Knetffia fruticosa. Kettleholes and open downs; V C. The forms to which
the names linearis and longipedicellata have been applied, also occur
at Montauk, but I have followed Dr. F. W. Pennell in considering
them as mere forms of the type.

Knetfiia pumila. Hither Plain; R.

Circaea lutetiana. Point Woods; Reed Pond; R R.

HALORAGIDACEAE
Proserpinaca pectinata. Open kettleholes near Culloden Point; R C.
Proserpinaca palustris. Open kettleholes near Culloden Point; R C.
Myriophyllum humile. Pools; VR.
ARALIACEAE
Aralia nudicaulis. Hither Woods; Island in Great Pond; R C.

AMMIACEAE

Hydrocotyle umbellata. Open kettlehole near Ditch Plain; Fort Pond;
Great Pond; R C.

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 99

Sanicula canadensis. Oyster Pond; R R.

Sanicula gregaria. Reed Pond; RR.

Sanicula marylandica. North Neck Woods; R.

Cicuta maculata. Low, open kettleholes; C.

Deringa canadensis. In rich woods, Reed Pond; R R.

Sium cicutaefolium. Wet places; R C.

Ptilimnium capillaceum. Low open stage of kettleholes; V C.

Heracleum lanatum. Rich woods; Reed Pond; R R.
CORNACEAE

Cornus alternifolia. Island in Great Pond; V R.

Cornus Amomum. Oyster Pond; V R.

Cornus florida. Point Woods; R R.

Nyssa sylvatica. Most wooded kettleholes; V C.

CLETHRACEAE
Clethra alnifolia. In most wooded kettleholes; Montauk Point; V.C
PYROLACEAE
Pyrola elliptica. Island in Great Pond; Hither Woods; R.
Chimaphila maculata. Woods near Reed Pond; V R.
MONOTROPACEAE
Hypopitys insignata. Hither Woods; V R.
ERICACEAE

Azalea viscosa. All wooded kettleholes; V C.

Kalmia latifolia. Hither Woods; Point Woods; R C—at these two places,
almost unknown elsewhere. At the Point Woods some of the
specimens are the largest seen on Long Island.

Xolisma ligustrina. Wooded kettleholes; Point Woods; R R.

Epigaea repens. Hither Woods; Point Woods; R R.

Gaultheria procumbens. Most wooded places; R R.

Uva-ursi Uva-urst. In Hither Woods, or along edges of them; R R.
Not covering bare ground by the acre, as it does at Napeague or on
Nantucket.

VACCINIACEAE

Gaylussacia baccata. Hither Woods and Point Woods, rare between; R C.

Vaccinium angustifolium. Hither Woods; Point Woods: R C.

Vaccinium atrococcum. Montauk Point; wooded kettleholes; R.

Vaccinium corymbosum. Nearly everywhere; V C.

Vaccinium vacillans. Hither Woods; R C.

Oxycoccus macrocarpus. Bogs, most common towards the Point; V C.

100 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

PRIMULACEAE

Samolus floribundus. Island in Great Pond; V R.

Steironema lanceolatum. ‘Thickets; low open Mela euieles: Ie (C
Lysimachia quadrifolia. In woods; V C.

Lysimachia terrestris. Low open kettleholes; V C.

Trientahs borealis. Point Woods; Hither Woods; R C.

GENTIANACEAE
Bartonia virginica. Kettleholes; Downs; R C.
APOCYNACEAE

A pocynum cannabinum. Thickets; R R.
Apocynum pubescens. Thickets; R R.

ASCLEPIADACEAE

Asclepias amplexicaulis. Hither Woods; R R.
Asclepias pulchra. Kettleholes; R C.
Asclepias syriaca. Thickets; C.

Asclepias tuberosa. Downs; R.

CONVOLVULACEAE
Convolvulus repens. Low open kettleholes; R R.

BORAGINACEAE
Myosotis virginica. On the Downs; R C.
VERBENACEAE

Verbena hastata. ‘Thickets; R C.
Verbena urticifolia. Reed Pond; R R.

LAMIACEAE

Teucrium littorale. Low open kettleholes; V C.
_ Trichostema dichotomum. Downs; Hither Woods; R C.
Scutellaria galericulata. Island in Fort Pond; V R.

Stachys hyssopifolia. Low open kettleholes; C. The form known as
S. atlantica, and scarcely distinguishable from the type, is also found.

Stachys palustris. Montauk Point; R R.

Koellia incana. Downs;R R.-

Koellia mutica. Downs; R R.

Lycopus americanus. Low open kettleholes; C.

Lycopus rubellus. Low places; R R.

Lycopus unifiorus. Low places; R R.

Lycopus virginicus. Low places; V C.

F THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK IOI
Mentha canadensis. Oyster Pond; R R.
Collinsonia canadensis. Reed Pond; V R.

SCROPHULARIACEAE

Linaria canadensis. Downs; R C.

Scrophularia leporella. In woods, and also in sand along north edge of
Great Pond; Island in Great Pond; R R.

Chelone glabra. Swamps in Point Woods; R R.

Mimulus ringens. Oyster Pond; R R.

Gratiola aurea. Low open kettleholes; V C.

Ilysanthes dubia. Low open kettleholes; R C.

Limosella aquatica. Oyster Pond; VR. The only known station on Long
Island.

Agalinis acuta. Downs; V C.

Agalinis purpurea. Downs and low open kettleholes; R C.

Melampyrum lineare. Hither Woods; Point Woods; R R.

Pedicularis canadensis. Downs and along edges of woods; Montauk Point;
RR.

LENTIBULARIACEAE

Uiricularia macrorhiza. Pools; V R.

OROBANCHACEAE
Leptamnium virginianum. Hither Woods; Reed Pond; R R.

PHRYMACEAE
Phryma Lepiostachya. Island in Great Pond; V R.

PLANTAGINACEAE
Plantago aristata. Downs;RR. Introduced.
Plantago major. Brackish marshes; R C. But only as to the form known

as P. halophila.
Plantago maritima. Montauk Point; R R.
RUBIACEAE

Cephalanthus occidentalis. Low wooded kettleholes; V C.
Galium circaezans. Woods; RR.
Galium Claytoni. Low open and sometimes in wooded kettleholes; V C.
Galium pilosum. Low open kettleholes; Downs; C.
Galium tinctorium. Thickets; R R.

CAPRIFOLIACEAE
Sambucus canadensis. Low wooded kettleholes; Montauk Point; R C.
Viburnum dentatum. Low wooded kettleholes; R R.

102 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

Viburnum venosum. In most wooded places; V C.
Triosteum perfoliatum. On open downs near Inn; also Island in Great
Pond; R R.

LOBELIACEAE
Lobelia inflata. Montauk Point; V R.

AMBROSIACEAE
Xanthium echinatum. Beaches; R C.

COMPOSITAE

Eupatorium hyssopifolium. Downs; C.

Eupatorium perfoliatum. Low open kettleholes; V C.

Eupatorium Torreyanum. Downs near Culloden Point; V R. Collected
by William C. Ferguson, and reported by him also (Torreya 22: 49.
1922) from Garden City and “Hempstead Plains.”’

Eupatorium trifoliatum. Thickets and woods; R R.

Eupatorium urticaefolium. Edge of woods, Reed Pond; R R.

Eupatorium verbenaefolium. Open and wooded kettleholes; R C.

Mikania scandens. Oyster Pond; V R.

Lacinaria scariosa. Downs near Hither Woods; R.

Chrysopsis falcata. Downs; V C.

Chrysopsis mariana. Downs; Hither Woods; C.

Solidago altissima. Island in Great Pond; Woods at Reed Pond; R.

Solidago bicolor. Hither Woods; Downs; R C.

Solidago caesia. Gin Beach; R R.

Solidago juncea. Downs; Montauk Point; R C.

Solidago neglecta. Bogs and low open kettleholes; V R.

Solidago nemoralis. Downs; C.

Solidago odora. Gin Beach; Reed Pond; R R.

Solidago rugosa. Thickets and kettleholes; V C. The plant known as
S. asperula appears to be common with the type.

Solidago sempervirens. Brackish marshes and sand dunes; C.

Solidago serotina. Wooded kettleholes; R R.

Solidago speciosa. Montauk Point; V R.

Solidago ulmifolia. Montauk Point; V R.

Euthamia graminifolia. Open kettleholes; V C.

Euthamia tenuifolia. Open and wooded kettleholes; downs; Hither Woods;
C. The form often called E. minor is also known.

Sericocarpus asteroides. Downs; Montauk Point; V C.

Aster cordifolius. Wooded kettleholes; C.

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 103

Aster divaricatus. Reed Pond; V R.

Asier dumosus. Downs; V C.

Aster ericoides. Open downs; Hither Woods; Point Woods; C.

Aster lateriflorus. Hither Woods; Reed Pond; R R.

Aster multiflorus. Wooded kettleholes; downs; C.

Aster novae-angliae. Near Prospect Hill; Reed Pond; R R.

Aster novi-belgit. Wooded and open kettleholes; R C. Also the forms
known as A. novi-belgii elodes and A. novi-belgu atlanticus.

Aster pamiculatus. Thickets;R R. Also as to form simplex.

Aster patens. Downs; Hither Woods; open kettleholes; C. Also well
represented as to the form A. phlogifolius.

Aster puniceus. RR.

Aster spectabilis. Wooded kettleholes; R R.

Aster subulatus. Salt marshes; R R.

Aster tenuifolius. Salt marshes; R R.

Aster undulatus. Hither Woods; V R.

Aster vimineus. Thickets; V R.

Erigeron pulchellus. Low kettleholes; occasionally on the downs; R R.

Leptilon canadense. Downs; RC.

Tonactis linartifolius. Downs; V C.

Baccharis halimifolia. Salt marshes; R R.

Pluchea camphorata. Brackish marshes; R R.

Antennaria neodioica. Hither Plain; R R.

Antennaria plantaginifolia. Downs; V C.

Anaphalis margaritacea. Open kettleholes; downs; V C.

Gnaphalium uliginosum. Shore of Oyster Pond; V R.

Helianthus strumosus. Reed Pond; V R.

Echinacea pallida. Sparingly introduced on the downs; V R.

Coreopsis rosea. Low open kettleholes; R R.

Bidens connata. Low open kettleholes; R R.

Bidens discoidea. Low open kettleholes; R R.

Artemisia caudata. Beaches; R C.

Artemisia Stelleriana. Beaches; R C.

Erechtites hieracifolia. Kettleholes; downs; R C.

Cirsium discolor. Downs; RR.

Cirsium horridulum. Downs; RC. See page 21.

CICHORIACEAE

Cynthia virginica. Downs; VR.
Krigia virginica. Hither Woods; V R.

104 : BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

Lactuca sagittifoia. Gin Beach. VR.

Hieractum Gronovit. Downs; R C.

HMieracium marianum. Downs; C.

HMieracium scabrum. Downs; C.

HMieracium venosum. Downs and in dry wooded kettleholes; V C.

Nabalus serpentarius. Point Woods; R R.

Nabalus trifoliolatus. Hither Woods; Culloden Point; Montauk Point; R R.

The list enumerates 495 species contained in 261 genera which may be
grouped as follows:

Genera Species
Ferns and fern allies Il 18
Gymnosperms 2 2
Angiosperms
Monocotyledons 59 147
Dicotyledons 189 328
Totals 261 495

While these 495 species undoubtedly make up the great bulk of the
flora of Montauk, 227 of them are either ‘““common,”’ “‘rather common”
or “very common,”’ and it is these elements which constitute the major
features of the vegetation of the point. As shown elsewhere, and as a check
of the foregoing list will verify, a trifle over 65 species are ““very common”
and it is these that give characteristic vegetative covering to great stretches
of the Downs and wooded kettleholes.

Some years ago the Raunkiaer “ growth-form’”’ scheme of sorting species
into different categories, according as they are suited to carry over their
unfavorable season, was applied to the writer’s “Flora of the Vicinity of
New York,’’ and to the 400 commonest species of the general flora of Long
Island.*

At that time the opinion was expressed that the scheme did not satis-
factorily indicate the response of either the total flora or of the four hundred
commonest species of Long Island to the climate. It was hoped that in
such a specialized region as Montauk the sorting would give us better
results. The following table shows how far short Raunkiaer’s scheme
comes of reflecting the climatic conditions there. The percentages are as
follows:

’

* Am. Jour. Bot. 2: 23-31. 1915. Mem. Brooklyn Bot. Gard. 1: 486-491. 1918.
The details of Raunkiaer’s growth-forms are given there, and will not be repeated here.

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 105

MGsMS* MC” SNe 2CHy > H Ge dali it

Normal Spectrum 6. T75t 20 ROU 275 Be De upelse
Flora Vicinity of New York ESAS FeO 3-55-29) 33:29). 20:23) L174, 13.
Total Long Island flora -89 4.37 6.34 2.77 5.89 33.15 20.10 10.90 13.94
400 commion species of Long

Island 150132 St5oN 425) 7.25/30. 21. 6.75 14.25
Total flora of Montauk TOMS SL O.9 32.08 L9:2 112) 1 St5
Commonest species of Montauk Dae ee LOM 5:7 Onlinyd0-3i 19.3.) 11.4) 14.5

(including C., R.C., V.C.)

The significant thing about these percentages appears to be this: They
agree pretty closely, except for the perfectly natural absence of tall trees,
with those of the total flora of the Island, and this in spite of the fact that
the climatic conditions of Montauk are very different from the rest of the
Island. Assuming, as we must, that the age of the flora of Montauk is
approximately that of the rest of the Island, we are faced with the proposi-
tion of a vegetative covering in marked contrast to Long Island generally,
the components of which are simply the usual aggregation of Long Island
Species, but grouped in such very different percentages from the rest of the
Island that the floral aspect of Montauk is unique. There are no en-
demic species there, and all but a handful of the rarest Montauk plants are
found elsewhere on Long Island. This general agreement of the flora
of Montauk with the rest of the Island, which the foregoing list of species
will easily verify, is perhaps what is to be expected. But the failure of the
growth-form percentages to reflect the very unusual sorting of these species-
components of the Montauk vegetation, is perhaps the best local illustration
of the failure of that scheme to reflect the response of plants to climate.
As shown elsewhere in this account, that response has been rather definite,
and has resulted in such a sorting of species that herbs vastly outnumber
woody plants as individuals. And yet neither for the total Montauk flora
nor for the chief species-components of its major vegetative features is there
any but trifling indication in the Raunkiaer percentages of this response of
the flora to the climate.

The absence of endemics there is perhaps of interest. Assuming again,
as I think we must, that the flora of Montauk, with the rest of Long Island,
began with what may, for the want of a better term, be called a definite
capital or stock in trade of species, that capital has not, in the thousands
of years that it has been subjected to the peculiar (for Long Island) con-
ditions of Montauk, changed its components in sufficient amount to have
produced endemic species. This comparative fixity of plant materials, it
might even be called the immutability of Montauk species gives decided

106 BROOKLYN BOTANIC GARDEN MEMOIRS

color to the many arguments that species originate very slowly, even al-
though conditions, apparently favorable for species segregation, such as the
undoubtedly severe environment at Montauk, are at hand.* It may
possibly be true also, that botanists who erect species concepts upon finer
lines than the current manuals, would see in the dwarf, stunted or wind-
wrenched specimens of the Montauk flora, a host of nascent species, in
which the present writer sees merely ecological variations, or response to
the local conditions there. A good illustration of this is the species that
occur both in the wooded kettleholes and out on the open downs. Luxuri-
ance in the one place and thwarted endeavor in the other to produce normal
growth are constantly met with in the flora of Montauk.

The age of this flora,—it is, of course, all post-glacial,—cannot be fixed
definitely. In an attempt to fix the relative age of different floras by the
percentages of monocotyledons and dicotyledons,j Harper has shown that
the former vary between 28% and 32.3% of the total flora in the glaciated
region which he has studied. The percentage of monocotyledons at Mon-
tauk, also a glaciated region, but subject to invasion from the adjacent
coastal plain, is 30.9%. Present ideas of the relative antiquity of mono-
cotyledons may, however, put a different interpretation upon the proportion
of them in any flora.

Another rather interesting feature of the plants of Montauk in relation
to the environment is the so-called generic coefficient of the flora.t In
brief this proposition is that in regions of diverse ecological conditions
there will be a relatively higher proportion of genera produced than in a
region of generally similar character. The plan has been tried for many
regions and everywhere the generic coefficient (the proportion of genera to
species in any given flora) is high where conditions are pretty uniform,
lower where the conditions are diverse.

For the regions nearest Montauk, considering both introduced and native
species the generic coefficients are as follows:

* This is in harmony with the statement of Professor M.L. Fernald at the recent meet-
ings of the Botanical Society of America. In his paper “‘The Antiquity of species as indi-
cated by Insular and Peninsular Floras of Eastern Canada” he postulates comparative
fixity of species over long periods of years—25,000 years.

+ Harper, R. M. A statistical method for comparing the age of different floras. Tor-
reya 5: 207-211. 1905.

t For an account of the details of this, first proposed by Professor Paul Jaccard, see
Bull. Soc. Vaudoise Sci. Nat. 37: 547-579. Igo1. loc. cit. 44: 223-270. 1908. New
Phytologist 11: 37-50. 1912. Rev. Gen. Bot. 26: 1-47. 1914. Also a paper by Pro-
fessor J. W. Harshberger on “‘ The diversity of ecologic conditions and its influence on the
richness of floras.’”’ Proc. Philadelphia Acad. Nat. Sci. 67: 419-425. 1915.

THE VEGETATION OF MONTAUK 107

Generic coefficient

Flora of Long Island* 35.0

Flora of the Vicinity of New York slic:

Connecticut Flora 31.9

New Jersey Pine-barrens 45.0
which should be contrasted with

Montauk 52.6

Perhaps better than any other statistical method of studying a flora this
Jaccardian generic coefficient reflects the uniformity of Montauk conditions
and the effect upon the flora of that consistent topography and climate.
As compared to the total flora of the vicinity of New York with 31.3%,
and the Flora of Long Island with 35.0%, the 52.6% generic coefficient of
Montauk is noteworthy as an expression by the flora of the relative eco-
logical diversity of the larger areas, as compared to the relative uniformity
of the smaller one. ‘

* Based on the manuscript ‘‘Flora of Long Island,”’ and doubtless not quite complete,

but there is little evidence that additions will change the percentage more than a point or
two.

FROM MONTAUK POINT.

I stand on some mighty eagle’s beak,

Eastward the sea absorbing, viewing,
(nothing but sea and sky),

The tossing waves, the foam, the ships in
the distance,

The wild unrest, the snowy, curling caps—
that inbound urge and urge of waves,

Seeking the shores forever.
Walt Whitman

e» 20 101

.

New York Botanical Garden Library
QK 129 .T33 gen
Taylor, Norman/

TTT
5 00032 6478

3 518