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   Home