Yes, when I first found this spot it looked like all spruce, lots and lots of spruce cones spread around. After id’ing and having id’ed a bunch of ’shrooms from there, it was noticed that there is some amount of fir mixed in with the spruce. But the first reporting of the area was all spruce.

Yes, the leaves are a very good character for checking the habitat. Luckily the firs are rather messy with their cone scales too, so they are always somewhere close by. In fact, I see one to the right of the stem.

Hello,

the needles lying on the gound are unmistakably all Abies needles. You can see the longitudinal line on the underside and the “suction cup” where the needle was attached to the twig. This point of attachement is thin and pointed in spruce, but round in fir.
So no doubt that there were mainly or even only Abies, as I can not make out any spruce needle in the picture.

Spruce and fir look the same from a distance, and even up close to a lay person. Fir needles are more flexible, flattish, and attached to their twigs in two rows, one on each side; spruce needles are stiffer, square in cross-section, and spiral around their twigs, so the twig-with-needles is bushy and round like a big pipe cleaner instead of flattish like a big stir-stick.

Obviously if both are mixed in an area it’s even trickier, particularly if one of them is infrequent. You could examine several trees, find they were all fir or all spruce, and think the other absent in that case.

As pointed out by the previous commenter there should have been Abies alba, but they are not easy to spot unless one looks carefully. In the area where I collected this species the ratio of Picea abies to Abies alba is 100:1.. In fact the only way to find the fir is to looking at the mushrooms. Then one can spot the fir cone debris.

pale yellow, nearly no zonation, and the marginal agglutinated hairs colourless (in scrobiculatus they are yellowbrown).
So there should have been Abies nearby, not only spruce!