|
== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 5 2008 7:04 pm
From: Andrew Joslin
Well I finally did it. My wife bought me a clinometer for my
birthday
in December and I ordered a Nikon 440 last week to complete my
measuring tool kit. While I was waiting for it to show up I looked
over the ENTS measuring guidelines. Being a math ignoramus it was
very helpful to read through the measurement documents including
Ed's
straightforward step-by-step instructions for the sine top, sine
bottom method. The 440 arrived today so I went out just before
sunset
and measured the tall Honey Locust behind my house. I've climbed it
many times and estimated the height to be around 86'. This was based
on rope length used to climb and then looking at the top from my
highest perch at around 78 ft. and guessing how many more feet there
were to the top twig. At times I've thought it might be a hair over
90 but I'd decided to be conservative.
So... after trying out the sine top sine bottom method I came up
with
93.44'. The dbh is 34.25". This tree has the form of a forest
grown
tree because it started growing very close to the north side of a 4
story house and shot straight up trying to get light, the crown
opens
up above the roof of the house and that's where the branch structure
of the tree really begins. I still can't quite believe it's 93+ feet
so I'll take some more measurements from different sides of the
tree.
This will be old hat to all you rangefinder users but I'm amazed at
the way the 440 can pick up on a twig at the top of the tree.
Holding
down the power button for continuous reading it's easy to see when
you're hitting the twig and when you're hitting air. To get the base
of the trunk I had to shoot through a picket fence which was
interesting. Using the continuous reading feature I could see when I
was hitting the fence and when I was getting through the spaces to
the tree. Really impressive.
My next question is should this Honey Locust be considered for the
Massachusetts tall tree list?
http://www.nativetreesociety.org/bigtree/mass_4_11_2006.rtf
I don't see Honey Locust on the list. Two arborist friends who've
looked at the tree say they've never seen a Honey Locust that big.
Next tree to measure is the alleged 126' Silver Maple in the Arnold
Arboretum a couple of blocks from me. I'm totally hooked. After that
I've got some white pines to measure like this one climbed on
Saturday:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/naturejournal/sets/72157603849242403/
I'm guessing it's in the 110' range, will be interesting to see what
the measurement will be, maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised:
Andrew Joslin
Jamaica Plain, MA
== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 5 2008 9:11 pm
From: "Edward Frank"
Andrew,
Excellent job! I am glad to see you take up the rangefinder and add
some
measurements to your photos and observations. Basically the only way
to
improve is to practice. You slowly get better at finding the top
amongst
all the similar looking branches. Scott is finding many of his big
trees in
Pennsylvania in the more urbanized eastern part of the state growing
on
older estates and in cities. This is in contrast to the forests in
the
western portion of the state which were timbered more heavily, while
in the
east specimen trees were saved as part of larger estates and
properties
rather than being logged. Perhaps the same is in Massachusetts. Good
luck
in the Boston/Jamaica Plain area. Also it would be great to have
good
measurements, photographs, and accounts of historical trees from the
eastern
side of the state.
Ed Frank
==============================================================================
TOPIC: First height measurement w/rangefinder
http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees/browse_thread/thread/605302a07fb3c237?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 6 2008 5:30 am
From: dbhguru@comcast.net
Andrew,
Yes, your Honey Locust goes to the top of the list. I'll add it to
my tallest species list for Massachusetts. Good job.
Bob
== 5 of 8 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 11 2008 4:52 pm
From: Andrew Joslin
Today I remeasured the Honey Locust in my neighbor's yard. I worked
a
little more slowly and double checked all readings before running
the formula.
My original report from 2/5 was 93.44'. After today's measuring
session I have 90.23'. I think the smaller number is the one to go
with.
I posted photos of my neighbor's Honey Locust which is the
tallest
documented Honey Locust in Massachusetts:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/naturejournal/sets/72157603927565145/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/naturejournal/sets/72157603927565145/show/
Andrew Joslin
Jamaica Plain, MA
== 3 of 9 ==
Date: Sun, Feb 17 2008 9:25 am
From: Beth Koebel
Andrew,
This honey locust appears to me like a varity/cultiver
that is thornless. The wild native Honey Locust
(Gleditsia tiacanthos) has thorns that can puncture
tractor tires.
Beth
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and
I'm not sure about the former....Albert Einstein
== 4 of 9 ==
Date: Sun, Feb 17 2008 2:48 pm
From: Andrew Joslin
Good observation Beth. I believe it is not the thornless cultivar,
apparently a very mature Honey Locust will slow down on thorn
production and will eventually stop producing them. I think this
tree
could be described as being in its dotage. I've been observing the
tree since I first moved into the neighborhood 20 years ago. When I
first looked at it there were a fair amount of thorns but I never
saw
it looking like a typical wild Honey Locust (with the intimidating
array of thorns). Every spring it still produces a small number of
thorns but they don't harden up and they come off by the time fall
comes around. I talked to the original owners of the house about it
and they said that the tree was heavily covered with thorns at one
time. Maybe one of the reasons the tree was never bothered by anyone
and allowed to grow so tall.
-Andrew
Date: Sun, Feb 17 2008 4:09 pm
From: Andrew Joslin
When I first joined ENTS I mentioned a large Eastern Cottonwood
located in the Charles River floodplain on the Newton/West Roxbury
line. I've gone back to look at the tree many times and was
impressed
with its height and volume. I guessed that it was over 100'. I was
wrong. Today I measured it with a rangefinder and came up with
92.87', the DBH is 50.5". It's a hefty tree. I think I can milk
a few
more feet out of it with a repeat visit, I don't think I was hitting
the very top branches. Very challenging (as all you measurers know)
to get a shot at the highest twigs through the forest canopy and a
clear shot to the base from the same position.
Next in line for measurement is the fat Tulip Poplar in West
Roxbury,
then the Silver Maple in the Arnold Arboretum which is listed in
their brochure as 126'. Right now I'm thinking it doesn't clear
100',
will be interesting to find out. I'd be happy to be proved wrong, if
it's 126' that would be fine too.
-Andrew
|