Categorizing Tree Growth Habits

Categorizing Tree Growth Habits	Edward Frank
	Nov 21, 2007

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Categorizing Tree Growth Habits
http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees/browse_thread/thread/dce4d1ec55fe19eb?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Nov 21 2007 9:43 am
From: "Edward Frank"

ENTS,

We have been talking about multitrunk trees recently. I am going to add a section on the ENTS website that will include a listing of the largest multi-trunk trees. At the top of the list will be the Seven Sisters Live Oak documented by Larry Tucei. Toward that goal it is necessary to make an attempt to define the various growth habits of trees. Below are my ideas, and if you have input or revisions to the grouping please post your ideas for discussion.

Category 1: Single Trunk This is the standard growth form of most trees consisting of a single large trunk growing from a simple root mass below ground. Measurements for this form are defined by the Tree Measuring Guidelines of the Eastern Native Tree Society by Will Blozan. It should be noted that if the tree branches below 4.5 feet, then the girth is measured at the narrowest point below the lower branching. Shrubs have been described by some definitions as smaller woody plants with multiple stems at ground level. Many shrubs however, when they are of larger size, will have a single stem at ground level that can be measured using the criteria for trees in general. (I have often wondered if smaller species might better be measured at some lower height than 4.5 feet, since this represents a large proportion of their size and tends to under-represent the size of the stem/trunk. Comments?) Sometimes, especially in open areas, small sucker shoots may grow around the base of larger trees. These are not considered as multiple stems as they tend to be very small and short lived.

Category 2: Multi-trunk Trees This is the second largest category of tree forms. These are trees and shrubs that have more than one stem growing from a single root mass. These generally form when the original stem of the tree was damaged, broken, or browsed by animals. This results in new stem sprouting from the root mass. In general these stems are all of similar age and size. Trees commonly growing in flood plains, such as Silver Maple and Willow, commonly are damaged during floods and this may be the most common growth form of the species. Trees growing as second growth forest after timbering operations also have a higher than normal incidence of multiple trunk trees due to damage of small trees during the operation and from stump sprouts. The different stems of these multi-trunked trees often flair outward. The girth of the multi-trunk stem mass should be measured at a height of 4.5 feet. If the trunks flair outward the girth should be measured at the narrowest point below 4.5 feet and the height above the ground noted. The number of individual stems making up the measured girth should be noted, in addition any stems not included in the girth measurement should also be noted. Where possible the girth of the largest single stem should be measured at 4.5 feet or at whatever height it becomes separate from the multi-trunk mass for comparison with single trunk trees. The height of the largest stem, and the crown spread of the multi-trunk mass should also be measured. A website from Great Britain http://www.treeregister.org/measuringtrees.shtml is the first site I have found that tries to define how to measure multi-trunk trees:

Category 3: Clonal Coppice Some tree species form coppices in which the initial tree sends out lateral root branches, or rhizomes, and new tree stems sprout from these lateral roots. This process continues and the result is a clonal cluster of trees derived from a single original tree. Common examples of these coppices include the mound-like sumac colonies and rhododendron patches. This spreading by roots is not the only method of propagation for these colonies, as they also produce seeds. It may be difficult or impossible to distinguish whether something is a clonal coppice, or simply a cluster of individual trees growing close to each other based upon simple observation alone. However there are some clues that can be used. In a clonal coppice the trees typically are oldest in the center and younger toward the edges. Also if the species is sexually dimorphous, meaning that there are distinct differences between the male and female fruiting bodies and that the individual trees are either male or female, if it is a clonal coppice all of trees will be of the same sex. If they are of different sexes, then it is a cluster of different trees. In a clonal coppice, the largest individual tree should be measured for comparison with single trunk trees. In addition the number of stem in the coppice should be counted, and the area of the coppice should be noted.

Category 4: Clonal Colonies This in many ways is the same process as described for clonal coppices, but on a far larger scale. The primary type example of a clonal colony is the aspen. Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspen says: All the aspens (including White Poplar) typically grow in large colonies derived from a single seedling, and spreading by means of root suckers; new stems in the colony may appear at up to 30-40 m from the parent tree. Each tree only lives for 40-150 years above ground, but the root system of the colony is long-lived, in some cases for many thousands of years, sending up new trunks as the older trunks die off above ground. For this reason it is considered to be an indicator of ancient woodlands. One such colony in Utah, given the nickname of "Pando", is claimed to be 80,000 years old, making it possibly the oldest living colony. Some aspen colonies become very large with time, spreading about a metre per year, eventually covering many hectares. They are able to survive intense forest fires as the roots are below the heat of the fire, with new sprouts growing after the fire is out. The Pando colony in Utah contains an estimated 47,000 stems and occupies 107 acres. The shear scale of these colonies suggests to me that they are not only quantitatively different from the simple clonal coppice, but represent a fundamentally different class of growth form. In the case of these clonal colonies, again if the species is sexually dimorphous, and most aspens and poplars are dimorphous, all of trees in the colony will be of the same sex. In addition they will typically all change colors in the fall, and sprout leaves in the spring at the same time. For measurements purposes, the largest individual specimens should be measured for comparison with single trunk trees, the area of the colony should be mapped, and the number of individual stems in the colony estimated.

Category 5: Conjoined Trees Sometimes two trees may grow to large size adjacent to each other and grow together. These may be of the same species or even trees of two different species. I am calling these conjoined trees. (This is the first of several oddball categories).

Category 6: Fallen Trees There are cases where an individual tree has fallen, from wind events or other causes. On these fallen trees the upright branches form new vertical trunks, and roots may sprout from the surface of the tree where it touches the ground. These are unusual and should be considered on a case by case basis. Jess Riddle wrote: "I most often see smooth barked species in floodplains forming new trunks after falling. In Congaree National Park, American holly and ironwood commonly produce vertical shoots after falling." Lee frelich reports: "Black spruce also does this. On very rare occasions white pine and balsam fir can do it, but apparently only in boreal forests with deep moss. I have seen hemlock spread out like a carpet across the forest floor in the snow forest in the Porcupine Mountains, MI, after saplings were knocked over by heavy snow accumulation, but am not sure if its rooted in places other than the original trunk. The willows in MN floodplains (black willow, peach leaf willow) sometimes also turn into a row of trees after blowing over." These are unusual specimens and no standard protocol for documenting them would be workable. They need to be considered on a case by case basis.

Category 7: Tree Complexes Lee Frelich described some white cedar growing in swales in the Door Peninsula of Wisconsin: "Many ancient white cedars line the swales, and many more are fallen into the swales, but remain alive, with the individual branches turning upright to become new trees, which then blow down a few hundred years later in many directions, and their branches become trees as well, the whole tangle a historical puzzle that may be hundreds or even a thousand or more years old. I call these cedar complexes. Sometimes it isn't even clear if they (genetically) are one tree; if another tree falls across a downed cedar, it can graft to the other tree." Situations such as this where there are a tangled mass of trees, re-sprouting, grafting, and other processes can have no better name than a complex. They need to be documented on a case by case basis.

Category 8: Banyan Tree There are several examples of this tree planted as an exotic in the United States. http://www.panoramas.dk/fullscreen7/f23-banyan-tree.html It is a member of the fig family. http://www.haryana-online.com/Flora/barh.htm "(Ficus bengalensis), a remarkable tree of India and tropical Africa sends down from its branches great numbers of shoots, which take root and become new trunks. A single tree thus may spread over a large area and look like a small forest. This tree, belonging to the family Moraceae, is considered to be sacred in some places in India. A specimen in the Calcutta botanical garden is more than 100 years old. It has a main trunk 13 feet (4 m) in diameter, 230 trunks as large as oak trees, and more than 3,000 smaller ones. The largest banyan tree known is on the island of Sri Lanka. It has 350 large trunks and over 3,000 small ones. The banyan often grows to a height of over 21 meters and lives through many ages. " I would consider this to include any tree that produces multiple trunks through the growth of aerial roots that grow to form new trunks.

Edward Frank

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Nov 21 2007 3:25 pm
From: Steve G

Ed-

Another possible category might be the mangroves of S Florida--sort of
related to banyans in habit, but with multiple stilted roots rather
than multiple stems.

Steve

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Nov 21 2007 7:39 pm
From: "Edward Frank"

Steve,

Thanks for the suggestion. A listing of unusual form should be included.
Another one I was thinking about are large epiphytic trees. I saw a 40 foot
western hemlock growing on a western red cedar in Olympic National park.
Other epiphytic examples are scattered around infrequently everywhere. There
is no special measurement criteria, because they are each unique situations.
For the large stilted roots - what would you suggest? Measure the spread of
the arched roots? What about the bald cypress knees? Note have far they
extend from the main trunk?

Ed

Comments by Don Bertolette in Red

Category 1: Single Trunk This is the standard growth form of most trees consisting of a single large trunk growing from a simple root mass below ground. Measurements for this form are defined by the Tree Measuring Guidelines of the Eastern Native Tree Society by Will Blozan. It should be noted that if the tree branches below 4.5 feet, then the girth is measured at the narrowest point below the lower branching.

It has been common practice among foresters to define a forked tree as one that branches below 4.5' above root collar, and to take measurement of both forks above swelling

Shrubs have been described by some definitions as smaller woody plants with multiple stems at ground level. Many shrubs however, when they are of larger size, will have a single stem at ground level that can be measured using the criteria for trees in general. (I have often wondered if smaller species might better be measured at some lower height than 4.5 feet, since this represents a large proportion of their size and tends to under-represent the size of the stem/trunk. Comments?)

What point is there to establish a standard (4.5')? Follow the standard, they're NOT underrepresented, they're accurately measured...it may be that an * is needed to explain divergence from a standard...

Sometimes, especially in open areas, small sucker shoots may grow around the base of larger trees. These are not considered as multiple stems as they tend to be very small and short lived.

Category 2: Multi-trunk Trees This is the second largest category of tree forms. These are trees and shrubs that have more than one stem growing from a single root mass,

below 4.5' in height.

These generally form when the original stem of the tree was damaged, broken, or browsed by animals,

or coppice reproduction from falling (natural or man-caused)

This results in new stem sprouting from the root mass. In general these stems are all of similar age and size,

but will often reduce to developing one, or a few dominant stems.

Trees commonly growing in flood plains, such as Silver Maple and Willow, commonly are damaged during floods and this may be the most common growth form of the species. Trees growing as second growth forest after timbering operations also have a higher than normal incidence of multiple trunk trees due to damage of small trees during the operation and from stump sprouts. The different stems of these multi-trunked trees often flair outward. The girth of the multi-trunk stem mass should be measured at a height of 4.5 feet. If the trunks flair outward the girth should be measured at the narrowest point below 4.5 feet and the height above the ground noted. The number of individual stems making up the measured girth should be noted, in addition any stems not included in the girth measurement should also be noted. Where possible the girth of the largest single stem should be measured at 4.5 feet or at whatever height it becomes separate from the multi-trunk mass for comparison with single trunk trees. The height of the largest stem, and the crown spread of the multi-trunk mass should also be measured. A website from Great Britain http://www.treeregister.org/measuringtrees.shtml is the first site I have found that tries to define how to measure multi-trunk trees:

Stems developing from a very large stump, will have a very large hollow...this would falsely inflate a 4.5' height dbh measurement. I agree with the GB website to some extent, at least a good point to discuss from. But I don't think you interpreted it correctly...they suggest two measurements of a tree forking below 4.5' (well 5' in their case), one at narrowest point below fork and above base being sure to make note of height taken at, and two, measurement of individual stems at a point were the swelling immediately above the forking diminishes, and making note of those. I would not think it appropriate for ENTS to measure live oaks girth where a cross-sectional plane taken at height measured wasn't 'all wood'. To be more specific, were the tree measured at knee height with 7 stems/piths all 12" in diameter above swelling, it should be recorded as 1)species ~ live oak, girth at 2' above root collar, with seven stems of 12" diameter.

Category 3: Clonal Coppice Some tree species form coppices in which the initial tree sends out lateral root branches, or rhizomes, and new tree stems sprout from these lateral roots. This process continues and the result is a clonal cluster of trees derived from a single original tree. Common examples of these coppices include the mound-like sumac colonies and rhododendron patches. This spreading by roots is not the only method of propagation for these colonies, as they also produce seeds. It may be difficult or impossible to distinguish whether something is a clonal coppice, or simply a cluster of individual trees growing close to each other based upon simple observation alone. However there are some clues that can be used. In a clonal coppice the trees typically are oldest in the center and younger toward the edges. Also if the species is sexually dimorphous, meaning that there are distinct differences between the male and female fruiting bodies and that the individual trees are either male or female, if it is a clonal coppice all of trees will be of the same sex. If they are of different sexes, then it is a cluster of different trees. In a clonal coppice, the largest individual tree should be measured for comparison with single trunk trees. In addition the number of stem in the coppice should be counted, and the area of the coppice should be noted.

You've done your homework here Ed, but I don't think it matters whether an aspen has adjacent reproductive clones, or not...if there is a record breaker in the milieu, then it just gets measured according to the 4.5'H standard....only certain species do this (most notably Populus tremuloides), and it's understood that there may be clones nearby.

Category 4: Clonal Colonies This in many ways is the same process as described for clonal coppices, but on a far larger scale. The primary type example of a clonal colony is the aspen. Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspen says: All the aspens (including White Poplar) typically grow in large colonies derived from a single seedling, and spreading by means of root suckers; new stems in the colony may appear at up to 30-40 m from the parent tree. Each tree only lives for 40-150 years above ground, but the root system of the colony is long-lived, in some cases for many thousands of years, sending up new trunks as the older trunks die off above ground. For this reason it is considered to be an indicator of ancient woodlands. One such colony in Utah, given the nickname of "Pando", is claimed to be 80,000 years old, making it possibly the oldest living colony. Some aspen colonies become very large with time, spreading about a metre per year, eventually covering many hectares. They are able to survive intense forest fires as the roots are below the heat of the fire, with new sprouts growing after the fire is out. The Pando colony in Utah contains an estimated 47,000 stems and occupies 107 acres. The shear scale of these colonies suggests to me that they are not only quantitatively different from the simple clonal coppice, but represent a fundamentally different class of growth form. In the case of these clonal colonies, again if the species is sexually dimorphous, and most aspens and poplars are dimorphous, all of trees in the colony will be of the same sex. In addition they will typically all change colors in the fall, and sprout leaves in the spring at the same time. For measurements purposes, the largest individual specimens should be measured for comparison with single trunk trees, the area of the colony should be mapped, and the number of individual stems in the colony estimated.

Just off the top of my head, I have to question whether ANY species of tree survived successive ice age waves in Utah over 80,000 year period...extrapolations on clonal colony growth aside.

Category 5: Conjoined Trees Sometimes two trees may grow to large size adjacent to each other and grow together. These may be of the same species or even trees of two different species. I am calling these conjoined trees. (This is the first of several oddball categories).

Now this one I like...I have seen this before and agree...it's an oddball category!

Category 6: Fallen Trees There are cases where an individual tree has fallen, from wind events or other causes. On these fallen trees the upright branches form new vertical trunks, and roots may sprout from the surface of the tree where it touches the ground. These are unusual and should be considered on a case by case basis. Jess Riddle wrote: "I most often see smooth barked species in floodplains forming new trunks after falling. In Congaree National Park, American holly and ironwood commonly produce vertical shoots after falling." Lee frelich reports: "Black spruce also does this. On very rare occasions white pine and balsam fir can do it, but apparently only in boreal forests with deep moss. I have seen hemlock spread out like a carpet across the forest floor in the snow forest in the Porcupine Mountains, MI, after saplings were knocked over by heavy snow accumulation, but am not sure if its rooted in places other than the original trunk. The willows in MN floodplains (black willow, peach leaf willow) sometimes also turn into a row of trees after blowing over." These are unusual specimens and no standard protocol for documenting them would be workable. They need to be considered on a case by case basis.

They very seldom attain much size, as the connection to the roots usually negates effective nutrient/moisture transport mechanisms. Several species in the west do this, and extremes do occur, but seldom larger than normal structure.

Category 7: Tree Complexes Lee Frelich described some white cedar growing in swales in the Door Peninsula of Wisconsin: "Many ancient white cedars line the swales, and many more are fallen into the swales, but remain alive, with the individual branches turning upright to become new trees, which then blow down a few hundred years later in many directions, and their branches become trees as well, the whole tangle a historical puzzle that may be hundreds or even a thousand or more years old. I call these cedar complexes. Sometimes it isn't even clear if they (genetically) are one tree; if another tree falls across a downed cedar, it can graft to the other tree." Situations such as this where there are a tangled mass of trees, re-sprouting, grafting, and other processes can have no better name than a complex. They need to be documented on a case by case basis.

Agreed...another odd-ball category

Category 8: Banyan Tree There are several examples of this tree planted as an exotic in the United States. http://www.panoramas.dk/fullscreen7/f23-banyan-tree.html It is a member of the fig family. http://www.haryana-online.com/Flora/barh.htm "(Ficus bengalensis), a remarkable tree of India and tropical Africa sends down from its branches great numbers of shoots, which take root and become new trunks. A single tree thus may spread over a large area and look like a small forest. This tree, belonging to the family Moraceae, is considered to be sacred in some places in India. A specimen in the Calcutta botanical garden is more than 100 years old. It has a main trunk 13 feet (4 m) in diameter, 230 trunks as large as oak trees, and more than 3,000 smaller ones. The largest banyan tree known is on the island of Sri Lanka. It has 350 large trunks and over 3,000 small ones. The banyan often grows to a height of over 21 meters and lives through many ages. " I would consider this to include any tree that produces multiple trunks through the growth of aerial roots that grow to form new trunks. How does this differ from a clone?

Edward Frank

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Wed, Nov 21 2007 8:39 pm
From: "Edward Frank"

ENTS,
Don Bertolette made the comments above about my various categories. To avoid my deadly wrath he did not intersperse his comments in the text, but sent them as a separate document. I have forwarded these comments, marked in red for those who receive individual emails, and broken out into separate paragraphs and underlined for those of you receiving digests or viewing from the Google Site. I welcome further comments, and will consider them, although I do not promise to incorporate them all into the definitions. My replies are listed below.

Category 1: a) Measuring at both below and above the low branch - Just measuring the diameter of each fork is not part of the ENTS protocol. It seems reasonable to me, to measure both above and below the fork, but I am not trying to revise the standards for measuring single trunk trees. b) I think there needs to be standards for measuring trees overall so that different measurements from different areas can be compared. What I am looking at in this regard is that if you use the measurement standard of the narrowest point on the trunk below the first branching, and you are looking at a forest of stunted trees, such as are shown growing atop Mt. Greylock, then each tree will be measured at a different height, because they all surely branch below 4.5 feet. Establishing a standard measurement point at say 1 foot, for specimens shorter than some value - say 10 feet - would allow better comparisons of these small dwarfed trees or other trees and shrubs of smaller size between each other. They could also be measured at 4.5 feet, but what does that really tell us about the tree? The scale of measurement needs to be appropriate to whatever it is you are trying to measure. I am all for standardization, but not in favor of blindly following an inappropriate standard.

Category 2: a) I don't understand what the phrase below 4.5 feet in height means in this context - it seems to be changing the meaning of what I am am saying. b) I like this addition. c) This concept is fine also, but we are looking at multi-trunked trees in this category, so in this case they did not by definition reduce to a single stem or they would not be multi-trunked. Perhaps some rephrasing would be appropriate. d) I did not misinterpret the GB article as I did not use it a a guideline for what I was proposing. I referenced it to allow others to look at it for further suggestions. As for the example - yes I would list the circumference of the tree including the air space occupied by the former stump. Otherwise I would also state the number of stems, measure the girth of each stem, and indicate that they formed a hollow ring I would not discount the girth of the entire ring simply because the ring was hollow. Perhaps I am wrong about this, and I will think about it.

Category 3: a) Yes of course you would measure the largest individual in the clonal coppice, The other measurements - counting the number of stems, and the area they occupy is an attempt to describe the coppice as a whole. If you were to consider these coppices to be a single organism because of how they formed, then these measurements are appropriate. Even if you don't consider them to be one organism, documenting a discrete growth pattern for the coppice is still worth doing. Only certain species do this - yes, but that is not a good reason not to consider them to be a separate category.

Category 4: I am not arguing whether or not this aspen clonal colony is is fact 80,000 years old, I am just quoting a source that asserts that idea. Similarly mesquite rings are purported to reach 50,000 years, and so forth. I am not completely convinced of these age extrapolations. I will be happy to delete that portion of the description to alleviate any disagreements on the point.

Category 6: I have seen these features and think they are interesting. They may be short lived, and not generally reach large size, but they are a valid form and I included them on the list. I don't think Don disagrees with the idea that they are a different oddball form.

Category 7: How do these differ from a clone? Not by very much, except the connections between the different trunks are above ground rather than underground. These are generally viewed as a single tree with a large dominant trunk and many minor secondary trunks. Growth of new trunks from descending aerial roots is a clearly different mechanism than growing sprouts from lateral roots, although the net effect is similar.

I want to thank Don for his comments and consideration of the proposed categories. They are not set in stone, and I will think about his comments more as the process continues.

Ed Frank

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Wed, Nov 21 2007 9:16 pm
From: James Parton

Ed,

Would Fused trunked trees be included as multi-trunked trees or single
trunked? Some trees are obviously two grown together as one but
others can be so complete to appear as a single trunked specimen. In
the file upload section I uploaded a picture of a European Beech on
the Biltmore Estate.

It is listed as a champion tree. At first glance
it appears as a single trunked tree. Will brought it to my attention
awhile back about it being a fuzed specimen. In time trees as this may
become indistinguishable from trees that have always had a single
trunk.

James Parton

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Wed, Nov 21 2007 10:28 pm
From: "Edward Frank"

James,

One thing I left out of my descriptions was the basic rule of piths, If a
tree has a single pith at ground level, it is a single trunk tree. If it
has two or more piths at ground level, and all the stems are growing from a
single root mass, it is a mutlitrunk tree. In your question the tree
could either be multitrunk which is the most likely, or it could be
conjoined trees, in which two completely separate trees grew together.
There will always be a problem of determining if a tree trunk represents a
single stem or multiple stem, especially if the tree is large and the
potential multiple stems have fused into one. The person doing the
measurement must simply use their best judgment. The results may not be
perfect, but short of cutting down the tree, it is the best that can be
hoped for by simple observation. If the two stems, are of the same species,
and there is no clear evidence they really are two separate trees that are
conjoined, then it will be best to consider the example to be a
multitrunk tree rather than a conjoined tree. While it is possible that
more than two trees could become conjoined, that is very unlikely, and if
there are more than two trunks of the same species, the specimen is almost
without exception a multi-trunk tree.

Most of the measures we are using are derived directly or indirectly from
measurements used for decades or centuries in the logging industry. They
were developed as practical tools for the use of lumbermen and foresters.
They are an excellent place to begin evaluating the forest and individual
trees. However when evaluating an individual tree as a biological entity,
we must consider are these the best way to measure a particular parameter of
a tree? The height of the girth measurement is an example. At 4.5 feet we
have a reasonable measure and no good reason to change it for most trees.
But it is still an arbitrary measurement designed initially to be a
convenient measurement to help determine the number of board-feet in a tree.

I am therefore encouraging people to try to think out of the box, about how
best to measure some aspect of trees, how to create these tree habit
categories, and how individual trees are related to the forest as a whole.

Edward Frank

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Wed, Nov 28 2007 11:24 pm
From: DON BERTOLETTE

Ed-
You've taken on a significant challenge, and made great headway!

Regarding measure of single-trunked trees, my thoughts follow:
It's a task that tradition has made simple, but has surprising complexity. Trying to keep to the simple solution, your concern for measuring those trees that aren't trees normally, but go beyond the shrub status that the plant displays in its 'young-growth' habit has brought you to suggest a 1.5 measuring height...I think, in the belief of establishing a standard like 'dbh' has become.

It occurs to me that perhaps one of the reasons (outside of, 'well, breast height is a convenient height to measure) that 'dbh' has become the standard was how effective it was as a height for measuring so many trees, above their butt swell.

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 29 2007 12:30 am
From: dbhguru

Ed,

I think the categories you listed are logical. I can't improve on them. Assuming others agree, the challenge for us is to identify other standard measurements that capture something important about species, especially those that don't conform to the regular rules. In terms of current girth standard, we're stuck with the 4.5-foot DBH convention and I'm okay with it. However, I like the proposed 1.5-foot standard for the dwarfs. That height makes sense to me. The 4.5-foot standard does not for trees in the 12 feet and under height class.

There is another convention that we might want to rethink and that is how one takes a girth measurement of a tree on sloping ground. Will Blozan and Jess Riddle have an interesting, and I think useful, way of determining where on the trunk to take the measurement. However, I will defer to Will to explain it. I plan to adopt Will and Jess's method when I get back out into the forest.

The Infamous

Bobby Leverett

Home