Sierra Nevada Spain

jasoncapecod

Well-known member
I am in Granada Spain. We decided to make a detour for a half day skiing at Sierra Nevada ski resort.
The pics are in order of the day's events
77964012c4cd1e984c50459f808c73f9.jpg

673ead5da276649133ca579961aeb584.jpg

c841e19d2916cc56f5e82611a3744830.jpg

581d55c1475fcd1e7a134205a519cec8.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Nice. I'm particularly liking the gigantic microwave dish in photo number 2. I see those in the wilderness all the time!
 
That's supposed to be a substantial area, big enough to hold World Cup events I think. Snowfall is probably erratic, though it's high and should preserve well.
 
jasoncapecod":16w2zegi said:
It was cool to drive two hours and be sitting on the beach in Marbella
Some of us can do that anytime. Both pics below from Jan. 26, 2008
file.php

file.php

Unfortunately around here the skiing part of this exercise has mostly been on manmade groomers the past few years.
 
Interesting map. Even that far south the tree line appears to be below the 2,100 meter base elevation. Is North America the only continent where trees grow in high elevation snowy climates?
 
jasoncapecod":3brm54v3 said:
Where is the tree line in northern Japan?
At Niseko latitude 43 I would say about 3,000 feet. In Hakuba latitude 37 about 6,000 feet. On Mt. Fuji latitude 35 about 8,000 feet. In all cases those numbers are about 4,000 feet lower than in North America. An extremely snowy microclimate can lower the tree line, which I'm sure is the case in Hokkaido.
 
Tony Crocker":ao6i912g said:
jasoncapecod":ao6i912g said:
Where is the tree line in northern Japan?
At Niseko latitude 43 I would say about 3,000 feet. In Hakuba latitude 37 about 6,000 feet. On Mt. Fuji latitude 35 about 8,000 feet. In all cases those numbers are about 4,000 feet lower than in North America. An extremely snowy microclimate can lower the tree line, which I'm sure is the case in Hokkaido.
That's a very west coast-centric point of view. In New England at latitude 44 it's around 4000 feet, which is not 4000 feet higher than at Niseko, and I'm certain that variations in indigenous species of trees can explain the minute difference between the two.
 
Tony Crocker":jirp3mq6 said:
Interesting map. Even that far south the tree line appears to be below the 2,100 meter base elevation. Is North America the only continent where trees grow in high elevation snowy climates?
Let me understand this.... You're actually assessing tree line from an artist's rendering of an interpretation that has ski runs and lifts as its primary objective???

You might want to take a look at this page - in particular the table that lists world-wide tree-line elevations:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_line
 
MarcC":33gllcsa said:
You might want to take a look at this page - in particular the table that lists world-wide tree-line elevations:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_line
That's an informative article. I do note a contrast in tree line between Sierra Nevada Spain and Yosemite at similar latitude of almost 4,000 feet. The Spain comment "precipitation low in summer" is not terribly illuminating since California summers are not exactly wet.

The most common reason quoted for tree lines, cold vs. warm summers, does explain most cases, and in particular the unusually high tree lines in the US Rockies vs. anywhere else in the world at comparable altitude/latitude.

The 9,500 quote for Japan Alps seems high, as I personally saw it at 6,000 in Hakuba and 8,000 farther south on Mt. Fuji. Chronic high winds could depress the tree line on Fuji, but the highest Japanese Alps peaks are right behind the Hakuba ski areas.

The Hawaii comment, "no local tree species with high tolerance to cold temperatures," applies to many Southern Hemisphere locations, notably Australia.

The Wiki article makes the Northeast a bit of a puzzle, as summers are both warm and wet, which it says are the key contributors to tree growth. Wind is probably the explanation for a lower than expected tree line in the Presidential Range of NH.
 
I somehow knew it wasn't a microwave dish, but I didn't really know what to call it!
 
Back
Top