Bob, Okay, tree pride and ENTS spirit suggest that we need T-Shirts, banners, pins, and rings. Anyone want to initiate an ad hoc committee?
Gary On Nov 15, 2009, at 3:54 PM, [email protected] wrote: > Gary, Ed, Paul, Tim, Jack, et al, > > It is tempting to Ents to read about giant trees growing in the > past, the likes of which we don't see today. There is a romantic > element in thinking nostalgically about the reported big trees of > yesteryear. Our problem is that the sources of information about > those trees, which we must rely on, are not only uncorroborated, but > inconsistent with anything remotely close to what we see today. Past > accounts are often newspaper stories or their equivalent. How can we > put in credence in those loose accounts when we can't even trust > documents like the National Register of Big Trees. Over the years > that highly respected, and often quoted, document has had egregious > errors in it. American Forests has been informed about many of the > errors and allowed them to remain for fear of alienating > contributors to the register. > > At one time or another, virtually all of the ENTS super measurers > have been witness to extremely mis-measured trees reported by > surface-wise credible sources. I am reminded of a white pine in > Shelburne, MA that was reported to Jack Sobon and myself some years > ago. We were told it was 175 feet tall as reported by a service > forester of DCR. You'd think an experienced field forester could > take one quick look at a white pine and distinguish it from a merely > tall pine. You'd think. Well, it didn't happen. > > Measurement errors and misjudgments of height are constantly being > promulgated from otherwise reputable sources. This is why ENTS does > not except tree height measurements coming from non-ENTS sources. > So, if we're wary of even the National Register, why would we give a > past newspaper account of a highly unlikely measurement much > credibility? Because it is the fun to think of the possibility. I > fall prey to the temptation too. But we must be on guard if we're to > be the arbiter of credible big tree reports. To reinforce this > point, Andrew Joslin has come face to face with one of those mis- > measured trees from an otherwise credible source. A big silver maple > grows on the grounds of Harvard's Arnold Arboretum. It is stated to > be 134 feet tall, if I remember correctly. The claims is at least > 130 feet. I think Andrew measured it to 108. However, even though he > exercised the highest level of diplomacy in informing them of the > closer measurement, Andrew failed to get Arnold Arboretum to take a > second look at their tree. Personal prides are obviously involved. > However, people in the future may read of the 130+ foot silver maple > that grew on the grounds of the prestigious Arnold Arboretum. I > suspect that they would find it illogical to challenge the report. > After all, if the Arboretum staff can't measure trees accurately, > who can? Do we have news for them? > > This all brings me to a final point. As ENTS tree measuring methods > gain wider acceptance, it is incumbent on us to strengthen our > resolve never to back off our resolve to seek ever more accurate > measurements. It is what we do and it is what we should be proud of. > But have said this, it is still loads of fun to speculate about > great trees of the past and try to determine yesteryears maximums. > Now have you heard about that 200-foot dogwood that once > grew .................. > > Bob > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Edward Frank" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 2:34:04 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada > Eastern > Subject: Re: [ENTS] A Large Tree article in 1849 > > 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 f > alling. The extreme length of the tree from the stump to the t > op 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] > -- > 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]
