Paul, How is the LIDAR work going?
Gary On Nov 15, 2009, at 9:54 AM, Paul Jost <[email protected]> wrote: > That's why I think that it may have been a 150'+ double which would > be realistic and would provide total cut log lengths of about twice > the height.... > > PJ > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Gary A Beluzo > To: [email protected] > Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 8:43 AM > Subject: Re: [ENTS] A Large Tree article in 1849 > > I concur when you aver! > > Gary > > On Nov 14, 2009, at 10:00 PM, Bob <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Ed, Tim, Gary, Don, et al, >> >> White pines that rise significantly above the surrounding >> canopy are at extra risk from wind events. So our mythical 300- >> hundred footer would have had to be in an area that received plenty >> of protection from the wind. Additionally, it would have needed to >> be in an area that possesses the right kind of soil for tall white >> pines (sand-silt), receives sufficient moisture, etc. But even if >> these conditions were met, what would be the incentive for a pine >> to continue growing to eventually reach such an improbable height? >> Competition? White pines reach their greatest heights in stands >> (with rare exceptions). So our mythical pine would have likely had >> company. The 300-footer would have had 250-footer companions. The >> scenario becomes wildly improbable. >> >> Bob >> >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Nov 14, 2009, at 6:26 PM, "Edward Frank" <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Tim, >>> >>> I always enjoy reading these historical accounts, whether they are >>> deemed accurate or not. If you come across more, please post them >>> to the list. I like the response regarding genetics as well. I >>> must comment however when he talks about some variations have no >>> specific benefit. Well - there might be some examples, but >>> looking at things from the perspective of paleontology, there are >>> very few genetic variations that do not have some adaptive purpose >>> and if they have an adaptive purpose, then they are selected for >>> or against. Things that might not have a "purpose," if I were to >>> postulate that left or right handedness did not have a purpose, >>> then the degree of variation between the two variable opposites >>> tend to be minimal so that selection would not prefer one to the >>> other. >>> >>> Tree height has a very distinct purpose and is selected for >>> dependant on the particular environmental conditions. Therefore >>> the height parameter in one area of the range is different than >>> in other areas of the range. Trees in that portion of the range >>> fall within the heights genetically selected for in that region. >>> In other cases the genes for a variety of different conditions are >>> all present and environmental conditions turn one set of genes on >>> and another off, dependant on conditions. An example is a fish in >>> some Mexican caves. When found in darkness in the depths of the >>> caves, they do not grow eyes, while the same species in surface >>> pools do grow eyes. Parent that are eyeless will spawn eyed fish >>> if moved to the light, and eyed parents will spawn eyeless fish if >>> they are moved to the dark. I don't believe that there is enough >>> variation in genetic height potential to grow a 300 foot tall tree >>> in New England. >>> >>> The other consideration is one of environmental conditions. >>> Overall tree heights seem to correlate with latitude, taller trees >>> are more southerly and shorter trees are found more northerly. I >>> wonder also about weather conditions. The tops of many of the >>> taller trees do not seem to be stopped by reaching a growth limit, >>> but rather a point at which the rate of breakage under the weather/ >>> climatic conditions equal the rate of growth. This is >>> especially true once the trees emerge from the generalized canopy >>> height. So perhaps tree height is not only limited by their own >>> genetics, but limited indirectly by the genetics of the trees with >>> which they share the forest. A tree growing among taller species >>> may grow higher than a tree growing among shorter species. >>> Anybody have any comments? [If so maybe we should start a new >>> subject] >>> >>> Ed Frank >>> >>> >>> >>> Check out my new Blog: http://nature-web-network.blogspot.com/ >>> (and click on some of the ads) >>> -- >>> Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org >>> Send email to [email protected] >>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en >>> To unsubscribe send email to [email protected] >> >> -- >> Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org >> Send email to [email protected] >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en >> To unsubscribe send email to [email protected] > -- > Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org > Send email to [email protected] > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en > To unsubscribe send email to [email protected] > -- > Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org > Send email to [email protected] > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en > To unsubscribe send email to [email protected] -- Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org Send email to [email protected] Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en To unsubscribe send email to [email protected]
