Gary, Even if the tree were leaning severely, say at 60 degrees, the height would still be 260 feet with a length of 300. I doubt that a tree that tall could lean that much and still be stable - the top would be 150 feet from the center of the base.
Ed Check out my new Blog: http://nature-web-network.blogspot.com/ (and click on some of the ads) ----- Original Message ----- From: Gary A Beluzo To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 2:25 PM Subject: Re: [ENTS] A Large Tree article in 1849 Ed, That is the sentence that cued me. Again, even if the LENGTH of one route to the branch tops is 300 feet, that would be far less than the HEIGHT. Gary On Nov 15, 2009, at 11:53 AM, Edward Frank <[email protected]> wrote: Paul, The problem isn't with the number of logs taken out of the tree, The article says: A Large Tree. --- Mr. D. E. Hawks, of Charlemont, cut a Pine tree a short time since, of the following dimensions. It was 7 feet through 10 feet from the stump, and 5 feet through 50 feet from the stump. Twenty-two logs were taken from the tree, the average length of which were 12 feet. Fourteen feet of the tree were spoiled in falling. The extreme length of the tree from the stump to the top twigs was 300 feet! ---- Greenfield Gazette. Ed -- 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]
