If that was the moment I measured then there is lean in the pole.

Critical attention to the manual measuring process is a good thing, I'm 
better prepared to do a more accurate job next time.

Excellent photos, thanks John!
-AJ

John Eichholz wrote:
> ENTS,
>
> I was a nice day, as usual when out in the woods.  the tape drop 
> results were a surprise.  I can add some more information about the 
> work we did.  First, attached is a photo of the pole location at the 
> time of measurement.  It is blurry, since I was using a 55mm lens.  
> The tip that the pole was at was the exact one I measured.  From where 
> the photo was taken, the line of sight to the crown was about 57 
> degrees.  You can also make out Andrew as he leans out with the pole.  
> The top we measured was part of the main leader, which leans 
> uphill/downstream from the trunk.  When the tape reached the ground, 
> it was perhaps 10' from the trunk due to the lean, and it did seem 
> pretty straight.  I used a clinometer to sight level from the tape to 
> the upper point of the base.  I got 137.9', and added 16' for the pole 
> adjustment and 2.2' for the distance from the upper base to midslope = 
> 156.1.  Using the midpoint between the upper and lower base of the 
> tree allows the cbh readings to be accurately repeatable. 
>
> I measured the tree from several locations, each time to the same tip 
> and to a pin located at 4.5'h.  From each location my readings were 
> repeatable, but I did have a range of results:  158.4', 157.5' and 
> 156.3'.  There is definitely some experimental error, especially with 
> such long baselines where the clinometer accuracy can have a greater 
> effect on the result.  I would report the middle height, 157.5', in 
> this case.  I suppose a 1.4' error is plausible in the tree, and 
> perhaps equally plausible in the ground-based measurements.  Bob's and 
> my readings were remarkably consistent, using different instruments, 
> and using photos of the crown we were able to agree on the tip we 
> considered the highest.  This might just be a case of maximum variance 
> between tape drop and laser method measurement.
>
> Bob reported on the sugar maple find already.  Nearby that tree was 
> another, 120.2'h, in an area that seemed to have more maples than 
> average for the site.  I also found two hemlocks over 119', one next 
> to the Thoreau Pine and one opposite the trail on the way out.  There 
> is bound to be at least one more 120'+ hemlock somewhere in there.
>
> Here is a link to a couple more pictures of the climb:  
> http://s835.photobucket.com/albums/zz274/treetop314/
> Bart and Freddie, I can send you a CD of the rest of the photos if you 
> like.  These are the best ones, though.
>
> John
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 8:39 PM, <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>     ENTS,
>
>     Well today was a big day for the Massachusetts group of dedicated
>     Ents. At my request, Andrew Joslin and two companion We also
>     measured the Thoreau pine from as many locations as possible. Our
>     ground-based measurements ranged from 157.1 to 158.4 feet. John
>     and I thought the most probably height for the tree to be 158 feet. 
>
>     To cut to the chase, Andrew's tape drop came to 156.1 feet. John
>     and I were surprised, but that is the best measurement we have, so
>     the big tree is no longer in the 160 Club. However, John
>     established a new mid-slope baseline for girth using the Will
>     Blozan method. Thoreau's girth is an even 13.0 feet. So, the
>     Thoreau pine moves into another girth class. Lose some, win some.
>
>     John went farther out the ridge while Andrew and team were getting
>     themselves positioned in the top of the pine. John measured a
>     sugar maple to 124.7 feet, a new height record for the Dunbar
>     Brook maples. The Rucker Index stands at 123.7 today. Its all time
>     high is 124.1. I found a tall ash upslope from Thoreau and the
>     Grandfather pine. Its dimensions are girth = 7.2 feet, height =
>     128.9 feet. Not bad. I remeasured the Grandfather pine and got
>     144.7 feet. That is a believable number, given Will Blozan's climb
>     a couple of years ago. I think he got around 143.5 feet or so.
>
>
>
> -- 
> 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]

Reply via email to