| Lots'a
Gizmos |
dbhg-@comcast.net |
| Jul
18, 2003 15:36 PDT |
ENTS:
How many items of equipment does a serious
tree measurer need for field work
when the budget won't support really sophisticated instruments?
While there is
no single right or wrong answer to this question, but I think
I've gone
overboard. I really do. The following is a list of my current
possessions that
I use in tree measuring and site documentation. My friends will
testify that I
carry many of them with me, explaining why I look so ridiculous
at times. Too
many items? You all be the judge. I just took inventory of my
stuff. Please be
advised that the following list is absolutely authentic.
Items for field work:
3 clinometers
(new one just came in, all Suuntos, all work
well)
5 laser rangefinders
(3 Bushnells: 400, 500, and 800 mtrs, 1 400
mtr Optilogic, 1 400 mtr Nikon)
1 optical rangefinder
(a piece of junk, but fun to fiddle with)
3 diameter tapes
(two in English units, one in metric)
2 basal area measurers
(1 prism, 1 Cruzall)
1 16-inch increment borer
3 hand magnifiers
(a tiny one, and two larger ones, largest has
compartment for batteries)
2 combination altimeter-barometer-chronometers
(1 French model, 1 Suunto - just came in -
really neat)
2 engineer's compasses
(one Brunton)
1 GPS receiver (old Magellan. Need new
one-whatever Paul Jost says I need)
1 scientific calculator
(lots of features, but not as many as Paul
Jost's)
1 300-foot tape measurer
1 pair of self-adjusting binoculars
(for canopy observation)
1 stop watch
(never know when a sporting contest might
suddenly arise in the woods that
needs to be timed)
numerous belt pouches
(I'd rather not say how many, but my friend
Gary's says I need more)
spare batteries
various inspect repellants,
(none of which work very well)
Soon to be added are soil testing items so
Gary and I can determine soil
classifications with greater precision.
Well, there you have it. Overkill?
Bob
|
| RE:
Lots'a Gizmos |
NR,
Cook Forest |
| Jul
18, 2003 16:23 PDT |
Bob,
I didn't see that 16" increment borer at Zoar... do I dare
ask where it was?
Skin-So-Soft from Avon (the clear oil, not the white stuff)
seems to be the best working insect repellant for me. It doesn't
keep the bugs from landing on you, but it does deter them from
biting for about 1-2hrs even when sweating profusely. It not
only keeps the bugs away, it keeps your skin soft and supple
(the more important reason for our more aged big tree
enthusiasts). You see, you don't want a bug repellant that
totally keeps the bugs off of you. Why? It's all a part of the
training... "Discipline Check" as my old Marine Corps
Drill Instructor would call it. You have to be able to put up
with critters crawling on you while taking those highly accurate
shots (measurements)... the "one shot-one kill"
approach. I believe a direct correlation could be made with the
amount of insect swatting in relation to patience in attaining
accurate readings...
Folks, Bob is the real McCoy. There's no other person I know
strapped down with so much equipment as he goes into the woods.
Yes, good ol' "Quick Draw Leverett". You'll never know
what laser he'll use on his holster to one-up you on a tree
height!
Bob, I'm going to have to get you a set of 'deuce gear' for
Christmas.
Dale
|
| RE:
Lots'a Gizmos |
dbhg-@comcast.net |
| Jul
18, 2003 17:34 PDT |
Dale:
I confess I still have a hemlock core stuck in
my increment borer. Dave
Orwig told me to heat it in the oven to dry out the wood. I
have't gotten
around to it, but will.
John Knuerr may have the right idea on
accommodating lots of equipment. He's
gone in for vests and pockets. I like that approach. I'd like to
walk into the
woods looking like a Christmas Tree humming the tune to "Oh
Tanenbaum (sp), Oh
Tanenbaum" .... The new words might be "Oh laser beam,
Oh laser beam...."
I do pretty well tuning out the mosquitoes.
Last Saturday, I actually stood
in stinging nettles to measure a cottonwood. Ohhh, did I sting
and burn there
after.
Bob
|
| Re:
Lots'a Gizmos |
Rory
Nichols |
| Jul
18, 2003 18:02 PDT |
Hahaha. You guys are a hoot! How bad are stinging nettles? I
have been
hesitant in seeing what damage they can do to me.
Rory
|
| RE:
Lots'a Gizmos |
NR,
Cook Forest |
| Jul
18, 2003 19:45 PDT |
Bob,
Just make sure that John doesn't get you one of those vests that
the arms tie around your back...
no matter how good the pockets look.
Yes, the stinging nettles treatment does wonders for discipline.
I just had a short bout with them in Johnson Run N.A. earlier
this week. The key is not to scratch the affected area. If you
do, the itch and sting can become almost unbearable. If you can
take the pain for about 15 minutes, it goes away, but if you do
scratch, you might as well pick up a piece of bark to chew down
on to wait for the pain to subside.
Dale
|
| Love'ma
Gizmos |
dbhg-@comcast.net |
| Jul
20, 2003 15:50 PDT |
ENTS:
My friends gave me a really funny birthday
present last night. They gave me
a blow-up of a digital image of me with lots of instruments
hanging off my
belt. The picture wasn't just pretty funny, it was very funny.
But Hey, what
can I say, I love my gizmos and the combination
altimeter-clock-calendar-
barometer-chronometer I just got in the mail on Friday is the
cat's meow. My
new clinometer adds significantly to my capability to compensate
for instrument
error. Happily for me, all 3 clinometers are presently in
agreement.
I acknowledge the use of so many gizmos to be
overkill, but they give me
peace of mind. I've often claimed that I can consistently
measure tree height
to within +/- 1.0 foot, but to achieve that level of accuracy, I
can't just aim
and shoot and proclaim the result accurate to within +/- 1 foot.
I have to
measure repeatedly and in different conditions and then study
the pattern of
measurements. Eventually I arrive at a figure that falls within
+/- 1.0 feet
and often within +/- 0.5 feet. This approach to obtaining
accuracy is NOT the
same as shooting the target from the exact same location several
times and
getting readings that differ by say no more than +/- a
prescribed amount. This
latter process simply confirms that one's instruments are
registering
consistently and that they are being read consistently. It does
NOT prove that
the height of the target is being measured to within the
tolerance.
Here is a novel way of checking on the
accuracy of one's instruments taken
in combination, i.e. laser and clinometer. Find some telephone
or power poles.
Measure the horizontal distance from a point to a pole with a
tape measure.
From the measurement point shoot the hypotenuse distance with
the laser to the
top of the pole along with the angle. Multiply the cosine of the
angle by the
hypotenuse distance to get the horizontal distrance from the
measurement point
to the pole. If your instruments are working well, the number
you get should be
close to the taped distance. In ten trials using my second
clinometer and 800
meter laser, the average deviation I got was exactly 1 foot!
There are several measurements one can take
and calculations one can perform
to provide an understanding of crown architecture. For instance,
how often does
the high point of a tree fall directly over its base? Here is an
experiment to
check on that. Identify the tallest leader of a tree and line up
the high point
with the trunk. Shoot the hypotenuse distance and corresponding
angle. Multiply
the cosine of the angle by the hypotenuse distance to get the
level distance in
to the point directly beneath the high point. Now measure the
level distance to
the trunk and compare. I did that for 15 neighborhood trees and
found that the
high point averaged 5.6 feet away from the trunk. That isn't too
bad so that
carefully done, the percent slope method wouldn't be all that
far off. An
experienced eye can choose a tree's high point fairly
consistently as Tom
Diggins's percent slope-based measurements and I'm sure Bruce
Allen's confirm.
In the hands of the less experienced, the percent slope method
can and does
lead to very large errors for all the reasons we have discussed.
Bob |
|