Quoted from the current Joyce Kilmer Discussion:

"Gaines,

I have a 170 footer in Big Creek; 69 years at BH. The Kilmer trees may
only
be 75 years old.

Will F. Blozan "

So, yes I know of the trees, but Will is the one who saw the core and
I trust his info. I suppose I miss-spoke by stating the age of that
tree as 69 because it surely took a couple of years for it to reach
breast height.

The site is one that is well known to both ENTS and wildflower
enthusiasts:  Baxter Creek (lower Big Creek, Great Smokey Mountains
NP).  The site is north facing, low elevation (1700-2400), with a long
growing season, abundant rainfall, and moderate temperatures.  Spring
ephemeral wildflowers generally peak from April 10-15.  The forest
community is probably best described as the Low, Rich subtype of Rich
Cove Forest.  Rich site species like Solidago flexicaulis, Asplenium
rhizophyllum, Dryopteris goldiana, and Trillum luteum are found in the
herb layer while yellow wood (Cledrastris kentuckea) and other rich
site tree species are present.  The Greenbrier Fault and its various
siltstones, sandstones and shales runs right up Baxter Creek and Big
Branch and these parent rocks definitely contribute some calcium to
the soil, which is scarce in the Blue Ridge.  It's a great site, come
down to NC sometime and let us show you around.

Cheers,
Josh


On Jan 12, 6:16 pm, Gaines McMartin <[email protected]> wrote:
> Josh:
>
>    Wow!  You know of a tuliptree 170 feet tall after 69 years?  Tell
> me about it and the site.  I can believe it, but I would like to have
> the details.  Site indexes are not based on the fastest tree one can
> find, but are based on an average of several (I can't remember exactly
> the methodology) of the tallest dominant trees.  140 feet in 50 yeasrs
> for tuliptree is documented.  Now that may not be an absolute maximum,
> and it may not be a statement about the absolute fastest growing tulip
> tree that has been found. 169 feet in 69 years does not contradict
> what I know about the maximum growth potential of tuliptree.
>
>    --Gaines

Reply via email to