Lee,
You've taken the bull by the horns in addressing the routine mis-measuring of standing trees. If all those tall tree figures were measurements of standing trees, then we can expect that many measurements were in error, but by how much? Also, are there records of great trees in the height range we've been talking about that were measured on the ground? Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lee Frelich" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 4:11:33 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [ENTS] A Large Tree article in 1849 Bob: I think trees get taller today at a given age for equivalent site conditions than during the 1700s and 1800s. The climate is much warmer now, and growing season length is clearly an important influence on tree height, in addition to evenness of water supply, and good nutrient supply (N, P, Ca, Mg, etc.). There are still quite a few sites with good water and nutrient supply that are sheltered from wind, and no one has proven that pollution and high grading have affected maximum heights, except in a few areas. There are probably fewer tall trees today because we don't have the acreage of old forests as in pre-European settlement times On sites with deep rich soils, there would be no reason for a white pine to grow 300 feet tall unless the hardwoods were at least 200 feet tall. That seems more like a romantic dream of what the presettlement landscape might have been like than reality. Given that today trees are routinely mismeasured up to 50% above their true heights (although 20% errors are more common), even though we have standard units of measurement, accurate equipment, and widely dispersed descriptions of how to measure trees, I don't see any reason to believe these old claims of 250 or 300 foot white pines. Lee [email protected] wrote: > Don, Dan, et al, > > We seem to want to thrash this one around a little more. Well, there > is no harm in that. > > Dan, the point about the 400-foot Doug fir is well taken. However, a > point to remember about white pines is that this eastern species grows > in fairly well drained sandy to sandy-silty soils and there is plenty > of that still around the New England countryside. When you get really > rich soils with ample moisture, you don't get white pines. This > doesn't prove that there aren't other environmental factors involved, > but the point does need to be taken into consideration. Thinking about > possible factors that might adversely impact growth today, I can > immediately think of two. I am unsure of how susceptible white pines > are to current levels of air pollution and then there are chemical > compounds and elements in the soil, i.e. soil pollution. Maybe Lee has > a take on pollutants. > > Tim, > > Looks like you let Pandora out of the box when you cited that > newspaper article. I'm glad you did because it opened the door to a > more serious discussion about the limits of growth of each species > that interest us. One species that I am especially interested in is > fraxinus americana. I'd like to think that western Massachusetts is > one of the geographical regions that especially favors the species. > Sweet Thing agrees. > > Bob > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Carolyn Summers" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 7:13:54 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern > Subject: Re: [ENTS] A Large Tree article in 1849 > > I think he’s right. I believe in the 300-footer. Maybe part of our > resistance to believing is our incredible sadness that we weren’t > there to see it. > -- > / //Carolyn Summers > 63 Ferndale Drive > Hastings-on-Hudson, NY 10706 > 914-478-5712 > / > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From: *"Miles, Dan" <[email protected]> > *Reply-To: *<[email protected]> > *Date: *Tue, 17 Nov 2009 18:40:00 -0500 > *To: *"[email protected]" <[email protected]> > *Conversation: *A Large Tree article in 1849 > *Subject: *[ENTS] A Large Tree article in 1849 > > ENTS- > > This article reminds me of the story of a 400 ft. tall Douglas-fir cut > down in Seattle around the turn of the 20th century. I thought this > was a tall tale told by my grandfather until I did a little research > and just found out it was probably true. Even for a Doug Fir > (extraordinary specimens still grow to 300 ft.) a hundred feet taller > seems incredible by today’s standards, though there are still > thousands of acres of virgin, old-growth forest in the Pacific > Northwest, as I can attest to from personal experience. However, > little of it is on fertile soil in protected valleys. Before > millions of acres of the best tree-growing land was taken, perhaps one > in a billion ancient firs grew to 400 ft., whether by genetic > potential, conditions, or pure chance. That isn’t likely to happen again. > > As for New England’s white pine country, surely we will never know how > fertile the best soil was, as it was the first to be exploited and > degraded centuries ago, along with the taking of all of the best > pines. How then can we evaluate the possibility of a 300 ft. pine > based on incomparable current conditions and populations, and on a few > unreliable records? How many ancient eastern white pines are there > left growing under ideal conditions on which to base a comparison? I > think none. I vote that one-in-a-billion 300 ft. tall eastern white > pines once lived! > > Now follow this link: > > http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_tall_can_a_Douglas-fir_grow > > and you’ll see reliable-looking records for several Douglas-firs over > 400 ft. tall cut down as late as the 1920’s. > > Dan Miles > -- > 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]
