I'll send you a letter in 28 years and tell you how it turned out ;) Anyway nice find on the Red Oak. In the Hocking Hills I found one over 130 foot and figured there had to be a taller one than the closest plausible looking specimen I stumbled over. Also, the 13' 8.6' cbh Tulip tree was an interesting looking tree. It was sitting in a shallow rill above the ravine with the tall trees. It was odd looking because the crown still had the tight clean branch form of a young tree, a little balding bark at the base and yet was really big.
On Nov 22, 2009, at 10:57 PM, Steve Galehouse wrote: > Randy, ENTS- > > Yes, the Tulip I measured to 159.4' had a dead patch on the down- > slope side is definitely the one you measured to 162.6'--you have > the mountain-goat ability as someone 28 years younger to explore the > possibilities from a better vantage point! I'm sure it's the same > tree. The Bitternut is really nice also. I'll re-figure the R. I. > with your measurements. This makes the area even more impressive and > exceptional; I always thought the trees where I grew up were tall, > but I never knew for sure until ENTS. > > On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 9:55 PM, Randy Brown <[email protected] > > wrote: > 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] > > > -- > 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]
