Sound, by Menzies, and all who have since explored the island speak with enthusiasm of the enormous trees
which clothe it, down to the water's edge.
British Columbia, Washington Territory, and Oregon, may eacli be divided, in a general way, into three
longitudinal strips of territory: i. That between the Pacific and Cascade range of mountains, which has a
moist climate and is a forest region, and includes another range known as the Coast ran«-e; 2. That between
the Cascade range and the Rocky Mountains, which is a dry, unfertile, and treeless region ; 3. The Rocky
Mountains themselves, the climate of which, again, is moist, although less so than that of the coast region.
So far as regards the coast region lying westward of the Cascade Mountains, we know, from the concurrent
testimony of every explorer who has written upon it—Douglas, Jeffrey, Lyell, Brown, &c. with
popular confirmation to any amount, that from beyond Fraser River, in the north, to Mount Shasta and
Scots Mountain in the south, it is more or less covered with dense forests, of which the chief inoredient is
the typical Douglas Spruce. It does not occupy the whole of this breadth, however. Dr Cooper tells us
(loc. ctt.), that while it forms the mass of forest growth on the dry gravelly soils, from an elevation of probably
3000 feet on the Cascade range, entirely across the valley to the summits of the Coast range (west of
which it is almost entirely replaced by other species), it is not found at all on banks subject to inundation.
The dry and treeless district between the Cascade range and the Rocky Mountain ranges, although
apparently a hollow, is in reality an elevated plateau, lying between the still more elevated ranges—a plateau
which is a continuation of the deserts farther to the south, lying between the Sierra Nevada (which is the
southern continuation of the Cascade range) and the Rocky Mountains.
One of the United States Pacific Railroad Exploring Expeditions traversed this region, and the
Reports (vol. xii., part 2) contain lists by Dr Cooper; 1. Of the plants collected east of the Rocky Mountains,
in which Abies Douglasii does not occur ; 2. Of those collected from the summit of the Cascade Mountains,
eastward to the Upper Columbia River, and northward to the 49° of N. lat., and in this list too A
Douglasii is absent; and 3. Of those collected west of the Cascade Mountains, in which it is included. So
far as these lists go, it would appear not to occur east of the Cascade Mountains.
But Dr Lyell also gives an account of the botanical products of the northern part of this intermediate
land, viz., that part of it lying to the east of Washington Territory and British Columbia and south of 50°
N. lat. and north of the Columbia River, which is very much the same as the route traversed by the United
States Exploring Expeditions (which furnished the materials of the list above referred to) ; and he tells us
that although this intermediate district is generally without trees, patches of them occur here and there in the
ravines, or on the banks of lakes and streams ; and Abies Mcnziesii is specified by him as one of the commonest
of the trees there found, and also as being found on the Galton Range of the Rocky Mountains. He
does not positively say that A. Douglasii is also found there, but he leads us to infer that it is so, for in speaking
of the general distribution of the trees over the whole region he says, immediately after noting the above
localities of A. Mcnziesii, that A. Dougtasii is usually found along with it; and adds, that it never attains
the same proportions east of the Cascade Mountains that it does on the other side. Hence it should follow
that it does occur east of these mountains; but Dr Lyell may not have paid particular attention to the limits
of its occurrence, and his allusion to its small size east of the Cascade Mountains may possibly only be to
the east flank of these mountains themselves ; for he mentions that it becomes stunted and dwarfish on exposed
prominences and at great elevations ; " it ceases to be common at an altitude of about 5500 feet above
the sea; but scrubby specimens were seen on the Cascades, nearly 2000 feet higher than that." Unfortunately,
none of the specimens brought home by Dr Lyell, and preserved at Kew, are from such stunted trees or exposed
situations. Those preserved are from the valley of the Columbia ; and we are thus unable to determine
a most important and interesting question, viz., whether these stunted specimens have the same characters
as the Mexican form. M. Bauerman, economic geologist, who accompanied an expedition into the same
regions in 1859, recently informed us that at Chief Mountain Lake he found the Douglas Fir creeping along
the ground like a Lycopodium wherever it was cut by the wind. It there crosses tile ridge of the Rocky
Mountains, but does not descend into the plains.
There
There is a gap of about 350 miles, extending all over North California, running down the coast region
west of the Sierra Nevada, in which the Douglas Spruce apparently does not now occur; we can find no
mention of it in any traveller's description of that district. Douglas travelled northwards from San Francisco
through part of it, but in none of his letters does he speak of it (unfortunately of this period there is no
journal of his travels). Hartweg (Hon. Sac. Free., vol. iii.) went from San Francisco up the Sacramento to
Bear Creek; and although he specified all the Conifers he met with, the Douglas Spruce is not among them
W. Murray and Beardsley traversed Northern California in various directions in their expedition», and they
never met with the Douglas Spruce until they reached Scots Mountain, a little to the south-west of Mount
Shasta. In the Pacific Railroad United States Explorations is given a list of plants collected by Mr James
Snyder under the direction of Dr G. G. Beckwith, United States Association, in an expedition made under
his charge, from Great Salt Lake, Utah Territoiy, directly west to the Sacramento Valley in California, anil in
that list the Douglas Spruce does not occur. Again, Brown, the collector of the British Columbia Botanical
Association, says (Fanner, 18th May ,866) that in South Oregon A lies Douglasii is becoming rather rare,
until it almost disappears in California. On this point several questions occur; 1st, Whether the statement is
well founded ; for, looking to the quantity of Douglas Fir timber which is said to be used in Sacramento and
other Californian cities at a distance from Santa Cruz, or any forests of the tree known to the south of San
Francisco, it seems probable that it must exist nearer at hand ; zd. Supposing it to be true, whether this
disappearance is due to the work of man, or if there is a natural gap which has existed there for unknown
ages, and is perhaps referable to the operation of geological causes; and 3d, Whether it extends to the Sierra
Nevada as well as the lower country between it and the coast We have no actual testimony on this point,
but Dr Bigelow (" United States Pacific Railroad Expedition," vol. iv„ 17) says that it grows almost in every
mountainous region of California, from the coast to the highest range of the Sierra Nevada. The gap may
probably therefore be limited to the non-mountainous parts of North California. At the same time it is
right to mention that Dr Bigelow, of course, does not speak from a personal knowledge of the whole of the
Sierra Nevada, and that, as regards that range in North California, negative evidence is against him.
Another question is, whether the trees to the south of the gap are of the same species or variety as those to
the north of it. As to this point there seems little doubt that they are the same.
Of course the Douglas Spruce does not occur in the Salt Lake deserts.
Our information as to the botany of the Rocky Mountains, between Bitter Root Mountain and Pikes
Peak-47" to 39' N. lat. of the Rocky Mountains-is voy limited, but, such as it is, it does not contain any
notice of A ties Douglasii. There is a very similar gap here to that in California; indeed, there is a great
break in the Rocky Mountains themselves, from a little to the south of the 46" N. lat. to a little to the north
of the 43' N. lat., and in this break they have sunk almost to the general level of the countiy, and seem scarcely
to deserve the name of mountains. We should expect that the typical Douglas Spruce (supposing it to be
the typical form) which Lyell saw, stunted, on the Rocky Mountains, at about 48' N. lat. (if we rightly interpret
his statement to mean that he did find it there), would accompany the mountains on their southward course
until this break occurs; and that that break of 2 or 3 degrees would sever it from the Mexican form, which
is plentiful about Pikes Peak, on the Rocky Mountains, in 38' N. lat, and which we do not doubt (although
we have no information about it) continues to accompany the mountains in their northward course until
they reach the break above mentioned at about 43° N. lat.
In the Kew Herbarium there are specimens from Independence Bluff, near the sources of the River
Platte, Pikes Peak must be close to that habitat, for the sources of the Platte circle round the Peak; and
Dr Parry, in an account of his ascent of that mountain (Transactions of the Academy 0/ Science in St Louis,
vol. ii„ p. 120, 1S63). says that Abies Douglasii is also common there; and Dr Engelmann (same Iran sac.
Hons, p. 212) gives Fontaine-qui-bouit, at the base of Pikes Peak, as a locality where " P i c a Mention, with
Tsuga Douglasii, reign as monarchs of the forest."
The reader must not suppose, from this expression, that the "monarchs" of which he speaks are of the
^ -1 D dimensions