SC update   Jess Riddle
  Apr 14, 2004 08:57 PDT 

A few months ago Clemson University created a new website for the South
Carolina Champion Trees list,
<http://www.clemson.edu/champtree/SouthCarolinaChampionTree.htm>. Two
Clemson students visited all of the trees in 2002 and '03 to update the
list, which prompted the new listing. To reduce error, they viewed the
trees form multiple directions to triangulate the point on the ground
below low the high point. From there, they used a tape and clinometer to
measure the height; I don't know if they used a fixed baseline or not. In
addition to measuring the trees, they photographed all of them. Multiple
photographs of each tree are available on the website, which also allows
multiple ways of searching the database.

The register is surprisingly nice in some aspects. I would not call any
of the listed heights absurd or unrealistic for the species, a statement I
cannot make regarding some other big tree registers, and the list contains
surprisingly few multiple stemmed trees and few misidentified trees. In a
few cases, such as paw paw, the old champion appears to have fallen, so
the largest remaining individual of the species at the location was
measured as the new champion. That a resulted in a few small species
having extremely small champions a few species, but those species have
avoided not having a champion at all. I'm also impressed by how many old
champions they were able to relocate given how poor the directions are
that accompany many nominations.

Including the pictures also allows others to see how impressive some of
the champions are. The river birch, American elm, winged elm, Carolina
hemlock, hercules-club, black jack oak, cherrybark oak, post oak, shumard
oak, willow oak, sourwood, and flowering dogwood are all especially
impressive trees. The shumard oak in particular may warrant Ents taking
more detailed measurements. The tree appears to have less basal flair
than most of the large cherrybarks, and is not much smaller in
circumference or height; consequently, the tree appears to be a good
candidate for volume measurement to produce a benchmark for bottomland
hardwoods and see how they compare to trees in other environments we have
measured in terms of volume. The site can also let people see why the
Congaree is highly regarded as a big tree site. The blackjack oak is
another surprising tree. When I saw the bark and branch structure in the
first photograph of the tree, I thought some others species of oak had
been misidentified, but the leaves confirm that the tree is an unusual
blackjack oak. The scarlet oak may be another unusual that deserves to be
included with the most impressive champions, but the photograph shows the
tree to structurally resembling a shumard oak. The site where the tree
grows also supports a disjunct population of baldcypress, so bottomland
oaks probably grow in the area.

The updated list also provides some new information on the John De La Howe
tract, previously discussed on this list. The photograph clearly show the
champion, listed as 10'1" cbh, to be multistemmed and the height has been
reduced from 140' to 115'.

The list also provides some supplementary information on Wadakoe Mountain,
one of the finest tall tree sites in SC with a 138.92' Rucker Index and 20
species reaching 100'. The champion white ash, yellow buckeye, slippery
elm, hackberry, and yellowwood all grow on the mountain. The hackberry
and yellowwood champions are not surprising since hackberry does not occur
naturally at any other site in the state and I have heard of only one
other site with yellowwood. Several other trees at the site could be
nominated as state champions including a 2'6" cbh x 59.3' x 20' hackberry
I measured a week and a half ago at the site. A nearby red mulberry
reached 4'2" cbh and 55.9' tall. The crowns of the two trees extend above
the top of one of the two main ridges on the south side of the mountain,
but river cane and trumpet creeper are common in the immediately vicinity.
Tuliptree, black locust and black walnut dominate the canopy in that
area. The only other trees I measured that day were a 7'9" x 123.4'
sweetgum and a 7'10.5" x 152.4' tuliptree.

Jess Riddle
Re: SC update   Colby Rucker
  Apr 14, 2004 12:35 PDT 

Jess,

Thanks for sharing the South Carolina tree list. It's surprising how much
states differ in how they measure, what information is offered, and the
format. Not all the South Carolina specimens are unusually large, but the
effort to provide variety and visual interpretation is outstanding. The
numerous photographs are particularly interesting to those of us who keep
wondering about multiple trunks and misidentification in all the lists.

The Quercus falcata looks like pagodaefolia, and Q. robur looks kinda
pointy-leafed, maybe Q. cerris.

My biggest criticism is the instructions for measuring trees. Spread
shouldn't go through the trunk; three points don't line up, and a tall
leaning pine might not have any spread. It's a physical and psychological
impossibility to measure minimum spread. Maryland has it right - spread is
the average of the two greatest spreads that are at right angles to each
other, period.

On a slope, averaging two circumferences taken 4.5 ft. above the high and
low sides will give an inflated value, because CBH lies on a concave curve,
and also because exposed roots on the low side will cause the lower
circumference to be taken too low, and therefore inflated. Taking "CBH"
below BH because of an obstruction at BH destroys any uniformity in
measuring, which is why the rule of 73 is needed.

Of course, you know all this. For S.C. to follow AF is putting their head
in the sand. Someone has to take the lead.

Yes, more trunk volume measurements would be interesting. Have you taken
any with your rangefinder? Some mammoth tuliptrees just have big hollow
butts, but some hold their size as they go up. Diameters at various heights
are simple and illuminating.

Thanks again.

Colby