RE:
PA state co-champion northern red oak |
wad-@comcast.net |
Jul
01, 2005 21:36 PDT |
Bob,
Dale, ENTS
Revisited the old red oak, and some neighboring trees on a save
area of Edgemont township land in Delaware county Pa. Had to get
a laser on it, with all this talk.
I am usually close on measurements with a clinometer versus a
laser, although I use the laser all the time now. When I go back
and check my old numbers, they are usually close.
Edgemont red oak
17.9 CBH she has grown in a couple of years, good sign
96.1 ft tall off by ten from the clinometer of 106
99' avg spread a little wider than last time.
336 total points.
In this same area I measured several other trees, all single
stem forest trees, the above red oak is on the edge of the
woods. If you have read Mike and Jess' latest post these trees
will seem small, but here it goes. They are tall for around
here.
beech
12.1 x 95.4
9.9 x 94.3
shagbark hickory
7.5 x 118.2
mockernut hickory
8.2 x 112.5
I may be able to get some better shots in winter for height.
There are a couple of girthy tulips in there with tops missing
too.
Some other trees I visited were listed in the Penn Trees book of
1982
Found the Windmere sycamore
25.2 x 90.2 114 spread by 105 spread. measured at 4.5' too
Found the Darlington white oak
19.3 x 96.0 93' spread
Found the Strode white oak
20.1 x 81.9 84 spd
It was a good day to be off from work.
Scott
|
RE:
PA state co-champion northern red oak |
Dale
J. Luthringer |
Jul
04, 2005 18:16 PDT |
Scott,
That N. red oak is quite a dandy! Very nice, VERY NICE!
Your 7.5ft CBH x 118.2ft high shagbark is a new height record
for PA. I
bet we'll eventually find them in the low 130's eventually. I
just
haven't had much luck of getting into any decent stands of them
up my
way.
Are the Windmere sycamore, Darlington & Strode white oaks
singles?
Those are some sweeeet trees!
Great job and documenting these beauties.
Dale
|
RE:
PA state co-champion northern red oak |
wad-@comcast.net |
Jul
05, 2005 03:44 PDT |
Dale
Both of the white oaks were singles. The sycamore was more
difficult, as it did branch above 4.5', but was very difficult
to tell just how it grew. This tree was documented in 1932, then
again in 1982 as being 250-300 years old. It's habit is typical
of those found in flood plains in this area. Still an impressive
big tree.
Scott
|
|