林地基本信息 Basic info
位置 Location：科尔沁后旗努古斯台镇白音淖尔嘎查 Baiyinnaoer Gacha, Nugusitai, Keerqinhouqi
面积 Area：1203亩 / 80.2 hectares
树种 Species：杨树 Poplars
*截止至2022年12月底，林地中1008亩归属于悦诗风吟五年公益林及小清新林
*Up to December 2022 , 67.2 hectares of this plot are attributed to innisfree forest
图 1. 2016年林地卫星图，2016-1（青），2016-2（蓝）
Image 1. 2016 Forest satellite map, Plot 2016-1 (cyan) and 2016-2 (blue)
林地生长数据 Forest Growth Data
2016年，MTP项目与内蒙古通辽市科尔沁左翼后旗林业局合作，在2个沙荒地进行了生态修复，造林树种包括杂交杨树、榆树和樟子松。2016-1、2016-2两块林地相邻，立地条件类似；林地道路网络完善，抚育条件优良，整体保存状况良好。
Cooperating with the Forestry Bureau in Keerqinzuoyihou Qi, Tongliao, MTP contributed to the ecological restoration of 2 sandy land plots in 2016, including scotch pines, poplars and elms. The two plots were adjacent to each other and had similar standing conditions. And the plots also had a well-developed road network, excellent nurturing conditions, and was in good overall condition.
图2. 2016年两块林地的保存率变化
Image 2. Changes of the survival rates of 2016 two forest plots
两块林地的保存状况已趋于稳定，未出现大面积死亡或补植现象；保存率的轻微波动主要源于采样区缩减带来的数据误差，该误差处于可接受范围。2016-2林地在2025年度的成活率为78%。
Survival rates in the two plots have reached a steady state, with no significant die-off or additional replanting required. Slight variations in survival data are mainly due to the downscaling of sampling sites rather than actual tree loss, and these fluctuations are within acceptable limits. In 2025, the overall survival rate of 2016-2 Forest was 78%.
图3. 2016-2林地具体生长数据
Image 3. The growth data of Plot 2016-2
图4. 两块林地各树种树高均值对比
Image 4. Comparison of average tree heights of all tree species in two forest plots
树高变化和去年的趋势相同，两块林地的各树种均值都在增长；樟子松的增幅较大；榆树在2021年之后逐渐稳定，进入增长期。
The trend in tree height remains consistent with that of the previous year, with the average heights of all species in both plots showing growth. The increment in pines is particularly pronounced. Since 2021, the elms have gradually stabilized and entered a steady growth phase.
图5. 两块林地各树种地径均值对比
Image 5. Comparison of average basal diameters of all tree species in two forest plots
图6. 两块林地各树种胸径均值对比
Image 6. Comparison of average DBHs of all tree species in two forest plots
从上图可见，樟子松的地径和胸径均值显著增加，仍处于快速生长期；杨树生长增速逐渐放缓，地径、胸径增幅趋于稳定；榆树则逐步进入增粗生长期，两项指标显著提升。
As illustrated in the figure above, the average basal diameter and DBH of pines have increased significantly, indicating that it remains in a rapid growth phase. Conversely, the growth rate of the poplars has gradually decelerated, with increments in basal diameter and DBH stabilizing. Meanwhile, the elms have progressively entered a thickening phase, characterized by a significant rise in both metrics.
整体来看，三个树种均处于生长期，但生长节奏差异明显：杨树虽为速生树种，当前阶段以高生长为主、粗生长较慢；樟子松保持快速增粗态势；榆树则刚进入粗生长加速期，反映出不同树种的生长节律特性。
Overall, all three species are in their growth phase, though their growth rhythms differ significantly. As a fast-growing species, the poplars are currently prioritizing height growth over radial growth. In contrast, pines maintain a rapid trend of basal thickening, while the elms have just entered an accelerated phase of diameter growth. These observations reflect the distinct phenological and growth rhythm characteristics inherent to each species.
林地情况说明 Forest Description
林分生长状况整体评估：
杨树：生长态势基本健康，部分植株树高生长迅速，但林分生长存在空间异质性——局部区域植株高大健壮，部分区域则长势较弱（表现为树高、胸径均低于林分均值）；榆树：生长状况较前期有明显改善，整体长势趋于稳定；补植的樟子松：苗木生长状况良好，成活率及生长量均达到预期。
Overall Assessment of Forest Growth Condition:
Poplars: The growth trend was generally healthy, with some individuals exhibiting rapid height growth. However, the stand showed spatial heterogeneity—trees in certain localized areas were tall and robust, while others showed weaker growth (with height and DBH falling below the stand average). Elms: The growth condition had improved significantly compared to the previous period, with the overall vigor trending toward stability. Pines: The seedlings were in good condition, with both survival rates and growth increments meeting initial expectations.
主要干扰因素与管理建议：
林下发现少量放牧活动痕迹，部分杨、榆林木出现树皮啃食现象（主要集中在树干基部0.5-1.2米高度范围），局部林木韧皮部损伤。需进一步加强抚育管理与封育保护：增设防护围栏、加大巡护频次，同时结合林木生长阶段开展针对性修枝、除草作业，促进林分健康生长。
Primary Disturbance Factors and Management Recommendations:
Minor traces of grazing were observed within the understory. Some poplars and elms showed signs of bark gnawing, primarily concentrated at a height of 0.5–1.2 meters from the base of the trunk. In certain areas, this had resulted in damage to the phloem of the trees. It is necessary to further strengthen nurturing management and enclosure protection: specifically, by installing additional protective fencing and increasing the frequency of patrols. Simultaneously, targeted pruning and weeding operations should be conducted based on the current growth stages of the trees to promote healthy stand development.
图7. 2016-2林地航拍图，2025.10.24
Image 7. The aerial photo of Plot 2016-2, October 24, 2025
林地赞助商列表 Forest Sponsor List
