Chris, I agree with your synopsis. As an arborist myself DBH is the only factor that I routinely utilize- mainly for dosage rates. On occasion I will measure the height of a tree to determine if the tree can be felled whole (from ground level) within the constraints of the property or other plantings/structures. Determining that a tree is 10 feet too long to fell whole has saved me some potential messes!
Will F. Blozan President, Eastern Native Tree Society President, Appalachian Arborists, Inc. "No sympathy for apathy" -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Roddick, Chris Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2009 12:49 PM To: '[email protected]' Subject: RE: [ENTS] Re: Tree Climbing and tree Measurements Ed, As an arborist and a climber I try to make taking measurements as just part of the job when going up a tree. Dropping a tape from the top of a tree as many of you know is not always that simple, maybe why most arborist don't do it. Some arborist may only judge the height of a tree just by the length of their climbing rope double over a limb (if you have a 120'rope around a limb say 15' from the top, when you come down and you only have 10' of rope on the ground you have a 70' tall tree if my math is right) not too scientific. The biggest problem maybe is knowing the exact height of a tree is not really part of arboriculture. DBH is used for some treatments but not so much for height. Most climbers I know will just guess at the height to know how long of a rope to bring up and that's about it. There is one phenomenon, that when climbers tell stories about a difficult tree they worked on, the tree gets taller on each telling of the story. Could be the real reason we don't want to know. I work at the Brooklyn Botanic garden where we have a few state, city, and long island champion trees so we measure each tree as they need pruning or other work. I also like to keep records of all our trees, I feel its important for managing a collection, it also helps our tree care program with funding and research. Good measurements over time make our tree collections even more valuable and more useful for scientific research. Each tree we work on we try to document DBH, height, and a assessment of biological and mechanical health of stem and roots. The preferred way to measure height is to drop a tape from the top. We sometimes use a 16' extendable pole that collapsed down two less then 2'(it's use for power-line work). The pole helps when you can't get to the very top. But it still can be difficult in shade trees to know where the high point really is, even from up in the tree. In the winter months I find the rangefinder works even better for some shade trees with larger canopy. I think the more arborist that find out about ENTS and other groups may help motivate them to take a little time to measure more trees and look for champions and other notable trees. Just knowing that there are people out there that care about these things helps. Thank you for all your work ENTS, Chris Roddick Head Arborist Brooklyn Botanic Garden -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of James Parton Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 9:30 PM To: ENTSTrees Subject: [ENTS] Re: Tree Climbing and tree Measurements Ed, Sometimes there is a time to measure and document and sometimes it is just time to lay back taking it easy and just simply enjoy the forest for what it is. Both are enjoyable. Both have their place. JP On Dec 22, 6:58 pm, "Edward Frank" <[email protected]> wrote: > ENTS, > > I posted tie following message to a couple of tree climbing forums on Facebook. I would welcome the input of people here in ENTS as well. > > Tree Climbing and Tree Measuring > > I am curious why tree climbers as a group do not measure more trees. I have been corresponding with several people individually on the subject, and am now opening the conversation to the wider group. I am a member of the Eastern Native Tree Society,http://www.nativetreesociety.org- a groups described by one website as tree measuring fanatics. One respondent said (paraphrased): > > The majority of the folks .are coming from the realm of connecting with nature, in an almost philosophical way. They seem to look at the trees as friends and don't seem that interested in the trees stats. Kind of like hanging out with your friends, do you ask them how much they weigh or how tall they are? > > Other people suggested that there really are two groups of tree climbers - those that do it recreationally and those that do it as a business. It was suggested that those who do it for a business might not want to take measurements at the expense of work time. There is commonly "production pressure" that often makes it unfeasible for employees of many companies to take the extra time needed for accurate measurements. Many of those that climb recreationally might be more interested I the experience of climbing rather than the taking measurements. Another commented that many climbers do not climb to the very top, or near the very top of trees needed to do tape drops because of safety concerns especially when dealing with thin topped conifers. > > Personally I would disagree with the idea that measuring a tree detracts from the one with nature experience. As a caver I enjoyed mapping caves, because it forced me to take the time to see the small details I would have missed in a typical trip through the system. Likewise I find measuring trees in the forest gives me a richer and more meaningful trip than a simple hike. I am actively looking for different species of trees, of the relationships between them, of the structure and detail of the canopy, of the bark details, and signs of age. They are brought into focus by the process and time it takes to make measurements. I am sure the same would be found to be true for those that take the time to measure the trees they climb in more detail. > > One person suggested that often the girth is measured, but the heights are only estimated, and that is good enough. Perhaps there is not a realization of how badly off these estimates of heights might be, even when using standard forestry techniques of distance x tangent of the clinometer angle taught in most forestry courses. Errors are commonly in the range of 20%. I want to know how tall of a tree is being climbed, why are bad estimates good enough? (ENTS laser rangefinder/clinometer methods can accurately measure heights to within a foot of the actual height - but require some instrumentation). > > Would some written guidelines on the process of doing tape drops, or even the more complex trunk volume calculations be of interest or useful to recreational tree climbers? Or at least of interest to some climbers? Certainly it would bring more big tree discoveries to light if more climbers were measuring. > > I am looking for your thoughts ideas, and input on the subject. If you have something to say, please reply. You can message e individually if you prefer. > > Ed Frank > > "Beauty is a summation of the parts working together in such a way that nothing is needed to be added, taken away or altered." Elio Caretti -- 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]
