Steve,
Here are the numbers I got from the trip. After we split up I went
back and went up the same ravine and measured some more trees ('Steep
Ravine' in the chart below:
Sand Run Akron (11/14/09)
cbh
Entry Cove
Tuliptree
?
153.3'
Tuliptree
?
145.1'
Slippery Elm
?
121.2'
Sand Run Slope
Sycamore
7'
10”
122.0'
Black Walnut
?
106.7'
Green/White Ash
11'
1.0”
131.8'
Basswood
7'
5.5”
116.8'
Tuliptree
9'
9.0”
142.7'
Cottonwood
7'
5.0”
125.4'
Steep Ravine:
Beech
7'
5.0”
132.0'
Tuliptree
?
151.9'
Tuliptree
14'
8.5”
162.6'
Bitternut Hickory
5'
11.0”
141.8'
Tuliptree
?
147.8'
Uphill Slopes
Tuliptree
13'
8.5"
~133'
Red Oak
9'
8.5"
129.3'
I measured the 162' tulip from the ridge top (It's the one with the
big dead patch in the base). I believe it's the same one you measured
to 159'.
The 151' tulip tree and the 141' Bitternut hickory were growing right
beside each other.
As an asside the tallest beaches I've found in Ohio are at Old Mans
Cave/hocking hills growing on opposite sides of the same cove. 8' 2"
x 135.8" & 7' 7.5" x 130.1'
(I measured both these trees on two separate occasions so they better
be correct)
On Nov 22, 2009, at 7:34 PM, Steve Galehouse wrote:
>
>
> Randy, ENTS-
>
> I returned to Sand Run this weekend and remeasured the beech--the
> best I could get was 132', but I think this figure is accurate. I
> explored up the ravine where the beech was found(actually hiked a
> ridge and came down through the narrow valley) and found some more
> fantastic tulip-trees, the largest was about 200-300 yards up the
> ravine from the beech. This tree was 14' 6'' CBH. I got a nearly
> straight up measurement of 52 yards at 85 degrees for 155.4', plus
> 4' for my eye level measured above grade for 159.4' (!). A nearly
> 160' height for a Tulip in N Ohio is pretty good, I think. Also
> found a 134.5' Red Oak.
>
> There is also grove of Tulip-trees at the base of the hills that has
> many trees in the 8'-10' CBH and 140'-150' range. All the trees in
> the summary below were found within about a half-mile of each other,
> and there are many more areas of the park to explore, so I hope to
> increase the R.I. with more searching. Species present but not
> measured yet are Hemlock, Basswood, Cucumber-tree, Tupelo, Sugar,
> Black, and Red Maples and Hackberry, plus others I'm sure. This area
> is very accessible, on the north end of Akron 30 minutes from the
> Ohio Turnpike; I would encourage any ENTS types traveling across
> Ohio consider a visit.
>
> Tuliptree 159.4 14' 6'' 41' 08.030 81'
> 33.697
> Red Oak 134.5 41' 08.139 81'
> 33.647
> American Beech 132 41' 08.177 81' 33.914
> Walnut 125
> Black Cherry 125
> Cottonwood 124
> Bitternut Hickory 123.7
> White Ash 123
> Sycamore 121.95
> Slippery Elm 121
>
> R I 128.95
>
> Black Oak 117.6
> White Oak 103
> Butternut 95
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Randy Brown <[email protected]
> > wrote:
> All,
>
> I've gone back through my notes on this beech tree. We shot the tree
> from the point of the view in the picture. The lower site line was
> 2˚
> @ 76.5 yards = 8.01'. Normally you add the lower site line because
> the base of the tree is almost always below your eye point when
> shooting on 'level ground'. However, as you can see in the picture of
> the tree, the base is actually uphill from the shooter. The
> foreshortening of the zoom lense of the camera makes this more
> noticeable than it was in person. I think there is a reasonable
> chance we should be subtracting 8' instead of adding, giving one
> 127.6'. I think we need to withdraw this number until this tree can
> be remeasured.
>
> Sorry Guys,
>
> On Nov 16, 2009, at 5:01 PM, Jess Riddle wrote:
>
> > Steve,
> >
> > Beech rarely dominant sites in the southeast, except at high
> > elevations. It does occur scattered at multiple sites with 170'
> > tuliptrees, but still struggles to reach 120'. I've never been to a
> > tall tree site where beech was the second tallest species.
> >
> > It would be great to see some black maple numbers from a fertile
> site.
> >
> > Jess
> >
> >
> >
> > On 11/15/09, Steve Galehouse <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >> From: Steve Galehouse <[email protected]>
> >> Date: Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 10:32 PM
> >> Subject: Re: [ENTS] Sand Run revisited
> >> To: [email protected]
> >>
> >>
> >> Jess, ENTS-
> >>
> >> I didn't realize the beech was that exceptional---its height must
> >> be due to
> >> its location in the valley and competition with the tuliptrees; I
> >> think
> >> Randy measured the circumference also. I'm no sure how frequent a
> >> tuliptree/beech association is in the south, but tulips are by far
> >> the
> >> predominant tree in this area, followed by beech. The latitude is N
> >> 41' 08.
> >> The aspect of the site was that of a relatively young forest in
> >> vigorous
> >> growth, with most trees having tall, straight, clean boles(see red
> >> oak
> >> photo), with hardly any gnarl factor, other than the 157' tulip in
> >> the
> >> earlier photo. The soils and topography must greatly influence the
> >> growth
> >> potential.
> >>
> >> Other measured trees were a bitternut hickory at 123.7', red oak at
> >> 124.7',
> >> slippery elm at 121', white ash at 123', and sycamore at 121.95'.
> >> As I
> >> mentioned earlier, sugar/black maples were relatively scarce, but
> >> in the
> >> 120' range. The canopy height in a general sense was 120-130'.
> >> Most of the
> >> mature tulips were 130-140'. Other nice trees were black and white
> >> oaks, and
> >> basswood, which I plan to measure later this year, as well as
> >> hemlock which
> >> are in a different area of the park.
> >>
> >>
> >> Attached are a Rucker height index, which will likely increase with
> >> different species, and a few more photos.
> >>
> >>
> >> Tuliptree 158.1 8'4'' N 41' 08.030 W
> >> 81' 33.697
> >> Bitternut Hickory 123.7
> >> Red Oak 124.7 N 41' 07.986 W 81'
> >> 33.728
> >> Slippery Elm 121
> >> American Beech 143.6
> >> White Ash 123
> >> Sycamore 121.95
> >> Walnut 106
> >> Butternut 95
> >> Cottonwood 124
> >>
> >> R.I. Height 124.1
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Steve
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> 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 entstrees
> [email protected]<Tulip-tree 159.4><Tulip-tree 159.4
> B><Tulip-tree 159.4 C><Beech 132' top.jpg><Ravine up.jpg><Ravine
> down.jpg><Red Oak 134.5'><Tulip-tree grove.jpg>
--
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]
