Bob, It can be easy to make a mistake on measuring. I have done it more than once. You are skilled at this so I know I can really #&@! up!
James P On Dec 30, 5:56 pm, Bob <[email protected]> wrote: > ENTS > > Well, today it was time to unravel the mystery on the shrunken > tuliptree on the Montpelier estate. What did Bob do wrong? I did make > the mistake that Lee described, i.e. Shoot one twig with the laser and > take the angle of another. > > Today it was get it right time. What a job! However, after many > shots, I settled on 166.1 feet, the exact height I got on my first > attempt on Sunday. There may be a higher point, but I can't confirm it. > > Monica and I walked the network of trails and I sampled the > tulips near the ridge top. There are many 150s in the legacy forest. > Here is a summary of all the tall tulips from 3 visits. > > 166.1, 163.0, 161.2, 161.0, 160.7, 156.4, 155.4, 153.8, 153.6, > 153.6, 152.8, and 144.1. > > I shot but did not record three additional tulips over 150. They > are all over the place. Also, I didn't find Will's tall tree, which is > another inthe 160 group and still the tallest. > > The 166.1 x 13.8 is the James Madison tulip. The 163.0 x 12.5 > is the Dolly Madison tulip. Both trees are easily located and could be > pointed out by a tour guide. > > Sent from my iPhone -- 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]
