James, I too hope the tree is there and that tall! I'll include it in a "potential Rucker" when I get the final numbers from Jess. We can also do a historic Rucker- the tallest hemlock is now stone dead.
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 James Parton Sent: Monday, January 11, 2010 7:51 PM To: ENTSTrees Subject: [ENTS] Re: Joyce Kilmer Memorial Forest LiDAR ground-truthing expedition 1-2010 Will, ENTS. I have always planned on re-visiting and re-measuring that pine I measured there almost two years ago. At the time I measured that pine I was very new to height measuring and still needed much honing on my skills. Still, that tree was really tall. An old scraggly fellow. I don't think my measurements are off that much but still I agree with Will in recommending a re-measure of it. Hopefully it has not fell. I got an e-mail from Josh Kelly stating " There is a 161' LiDAR hit quite near James' point. I reckon there could be a tall tree there. The point is at least 150' off the trail. ", So LiDAR may indeed show a tall tree at or near that location. I gave Will an approximate location but the tree cannot be missed from the trail, unless it is gone! Another thing I have noted to Will. Joy and I came out barely before dark. Measuring in twilight can be challenging and could intoduce error. But I hope on a re-measure my figure comes out close, or better yet dead-on! Another thing I would like to see. Joyce Kilmer Memorial Forest excels in large-girth trees. With my data, Jess's data etc shurely we can do a Rucker Girth Index. That I would like to see! James Parton On Jan 11, 6:43 pm, "Will Blozan" <[email protected]> wrote: > ENTS, > > Last week, I was invited to accompany Josh Kelly, Jess Riddle, and Hugh > Irwin on a trip to Joyce Kilmer Memorial Forest in Graham County, NC. The > purpose of the trip was spawned by some unusually high LiDAR canopy height > "hits" in fly-over data Josh had been reviewing. The data set included > several hits in the mid to upper 170's and a few over 180'. Past ENTS trips > to JKMF have not located heights of the magnitude indicated by the data > except for some white pines in the upper 160's and mid 170's. A pine > measured by James Parton in 2008 at 176' is the tallest tree known from this > forest relic, and needs a re-visit to substantiate its current condition. > The current LiDAR data does not indicate a tree of such height in the area; > perhaps it has fallen. > > In general though, most prior trips focused on the "Poplar Loop" in the > productive flats of the lower, heavily visited cove. Canopy heights of > 140-165', though impressive, were not exceptional. Thus, the extreme canopy > hits caused quite a stir in us southern Appalachian tree hunters! > > The main target was a small cove to the south of the famous Poplar Loop > Trail. The LiDAR data indicated a pocket of exceptionally tall and tightly > clustered trees. Josh had seen the area in the summer and was stunned to see > it was not in the old-growth section but an old clear cut near the homestead > of the prior owners of the tract. In the summertime clutter of leaves Josh > was able to substantiate that the trees were indeed tall but would need to > be visited when the leaves were off for best measurements. > > To get to the cove we proceeded off trail from the Poplar Loop and headed up > a small ravine. At the base of the ravine Jess spotted a fine pignut hickory > 10'1" X 141.1' tall. As we progressed further up the ravine I spotted > another pignut of similar size. This one scaled 10'10" X 142.7' tall. The > ravine offered more tall trees; one of the most impressive was another > pignut with perfect form. I shot up in the crown from below and realized it > would exceed 150'- a height that is quite impressive for the species. Jess > zeroed the base as I went upslope to measure the height. WOW! This slender > tree turned out to be 9'10" X 157.5' tall! > > Jess located a huge snag of a tuliptree that had fallen and the immense bulk > had slid down the slope quite a distance. White ash reached 12'4" in girth > and up to 130.7' tall, and also in this cove were a 14'3" X 166.1' tuliptree > and a 8'6" X 130.1' sugar maple. But stealing the show in the upper reaches > of this cove rimmed with frozen cascades was a large bitternut, 9'2" X > 150.3'. Second new species for the site over 150'! > > Having exhausted the tall tree resources of this small cove, we slide-sloped > with great difficulty over the frozen ground into another small cove. We > found nothing of significance in this one and proceeded on to the "hot > spot". We crested the ridge and WHAM! Shafts of arrow straight tuliptree and > other hardwoods dominated the deep but narrow ravine. There was so much > potential in this dense pocket it was hard to know where to start. We began > by shooting up into the crowns to seek out the tall ones and then consulted > the GPS points for the "hits" of tall canopy we were after. Jess was > exclaiming of straight up laser shots into the young trees of 55 yards > (165')! Jess and I stayed upslope to perform the height routines while Josh > and Hugh measured girth and GPS points of the trees. > > The LiDar data was filtered to only show points over 160 feet so shorter > trees- even though exceptional for the species- would not even show up. Thus > "hiding" in the tall forests of tuliptree were trees that don't quite make > it as tall but are none-the-less record breaking for the species. This was > the case with the first tree I measured in the hot spot. This was a black > cherry that looked really tall yet was obviously shorter than the tuliptrees > around it. I found a solid sighting position while Josh measured the girth. > Well, this tree shattered the former height record by 11 feet! At 152.2 feet > tall this tree is a new 150 club member! > > Josh and Hugh would walk in the base of the ravine and state that, according > to the LiDAR data there should be a 175' tree within 10 feet or so. Sure > enough, the LiDAR was dead-on. The 178 foot hit was also dead on, and the > 178.1 foot tree is now the tallest tree in JKMF and the second tallest > currently known (The Rucker Tuliptree, formerly 178.2', has died back from > the extreme frost of 2008). In all we measured six tuliptrees over 170' and > there are probably a few more in this one small cove. > > After detailed measurements of the tallest in the ravine we headed up a flat > cove to check out more hot spots and check out a 175' LiDAR return. On the > way Jess spotted a fine white ash that proved to be of exceptional height. > This tree fell below the 160' threshold but not by much! The 9'10" tree > reached an impressive 157.3' tall. More 170+ tulips were scattered in the > small cove we went up, the tallest 174.5'. Jess measured a cucumbertree to > 134.5' and I measured a decent white basswood to 139.7'. In this cove, aside > from the tuliptree, white ash and cherry nothing else made it into the > Rucker Index. > > We headed down to find the 175'+ point. We used the GPS to get to the spot > yet no tree of that height was found. However, a 135 foot tuliptree was > leaning heavy over a small ravine. Guess what? The leaning tree's top was > ~185 feet above the ravine! So, ground-truthing is still a very important > part of the LiDAR process and this error shows that it is certainly not > full-proof. Same happened with a leaning white pine on a steep slope. The > tree was only 149 feet tall but the ground was easily 170 feet below the > top. But, pretty dag-gone awesome to say the least! I was floored at the > height accuracy and the ground placement of the hits. Incredible! > > We wish to point out that no 170+ LiDAR hits in the old-growth have yet > proven to be legitimate; it looks as though the tallest trees in JKMF are > second-growth. This finding is mirrored in the Smokies and other sites as > well. What is also striking about this site is the impressive Rucker Index > is composed of trees in a very small area. This suggests that there is more > to be found in this impressive forest relic! > > So, the current Joyce Kilmer Memorial Forest Rucker Index stands at 15#.#: > > Will F. Blozan > > Josh Kelly > > Jess Riddle > > Hugh Irwin > > Eastern Native Tree Society
