Steve, 

Great. It is a physically attractive guide. I'm laying out my many tree guides 
as I write this to do the relative comparison. 


Will's point about Sibley not contacting us and going with the usual sources 
that include extreme errors is curious. I'm sure others will weigh in with 
comments on this point. It isn't the least debatable that Sibley's data are 
drawn from sources that contain big errors. The question is how accountable 
should he be when most other tree guides do the same. 


Bob 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Galehouse" <[email protected]> 
To: [email protected] 
Sent: Sunday, December 20, 2009 9:51:05 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern 
Subject: Re: [ENTS] Sibley's new tree guide 

Bob- 

I saw this book at Costco, about a month ago, for $29, and I wish I had 
purchased it then--out of stock now. Paging through the book for just a couple 
of minutes, I was impressed. The best price I've found online is $24.46 plus 
$3.99 shipping. The pre-printed price on the jacket is $39.95. I'll get a copy 
this week from somewhere to give it a better look. 

Steve 


On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 7:58 AM, < [email protected] > wrote: 






Barry, 


It just came out. Copyright 2009. 


All ENTS, 


I've been asked by Ryan McEwan (that's Dr. McEwan from Dayton University) to 
write a book review for the Journal of the Torrey Botanical Society - a most 
honorable, prestigious society. The Society dates back to around around 1867, I 
think and is usually considered to be the oldest botanical society in America. 
It was created by John Torrey of Columbia University. I regard the invitation 
to write the review as a singular highest honor. 


Comments by the rest of you are most welcome. Ed, you are a veritable idea 
mill. Steve, you are a botanical encyclopedia. Lee, you are the chief 
scientist. Gary, you are a combination all the above. 


I'm presently planning to evaluate the book on two scales or levels: 


1. relative to other tree guides, and 


2. on its merits without reference to other guides - an absolute scale 


As a first first crack, I've composed the following evaluation matrix. 

        Category        Relative Grade  Absolute Grade 
        
Physical size of book           
        
Organization 

                
        General plant nomenclature 

        
        Choice of species 

                
        Species description 

                
        Drawings 

                
        Leaf            
        Bark            
        Tree profile            
        Flowers and fruits 

Range maps 

                
        Tree dimensional information            



All and all ideas/suggestions are welcome. 


Bob 


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Barry Caselli" < [email protected] > 
To: [email protected] 



Sent: Sunday, December 20, 2009 7:01:29 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern 
Subject: Re: [ENTS] Sibley's new tree guide 

I've never heard of this book, actually. 

--- On Thu, 12/17/09, [email protected] < [email protected] > wrote: 



From: [email protected] < [email protected] > 
Subject: [ENTS] Sibley's new tree guide 
To: [email protected] 
Date: Thursday, December 17, 2009, 2:21 PM 



ENTS, 


I just got The Sibley Guide to Trees that everybody has been raving about. My 
initial impression is that parts of it are good and parts are definitely not. 
Here is my first grading pass. 


Species Coverage : Okay for my purposes. Others Ents like Steve Galehouse are 
much better judges of coverage. I give an A-. 


Leaf Drawings : So far, I think pretty good. I give an A-. 


Flowers and Fruits : Okay. I give a B. 


Trunk and Bark : Not so good. I give a C+ 


Tree Profiles : Not good. Erratic coverage. I give a D+ 


Range Maps : Thumbnail presentations: I give a C- 


Dimension Data : I didn't expect the tree dimension information to be good. 
Apparently Sibley didn't have a clue as to which sources of information are 
reliable and which ones aren't. I think he pulled most of his numbers from the 
National Register of Big Trees plus miscellaneous sources. He obviously didn't 
do much serious research, so on tree dimensions he earns an F. 


Organization and Layout : Attractive. I give a B+ 


Well that's it for now. I don't minimize the mountain of work required to 
produce such an identification guide. Has the guide raised any bars? No, not 
from what I'm looking at. 


Bob 
-- 
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]

Reply via email to