Top Ten stuff   Robert Leverett   Jun 03, 2002 04:29 PDT  Colby:        I'm responding via ENTS. Your message is too good not to be shared. First, the Ice Glen acreage that we comb for the big trees is 30 acres at most. If we allow for some unexplored corners, we could raise the number to 40, but not more. The Shagbark was re-measured a couple of times and I went with the lower figure, thus my 131.2 feet. Beyond these comments, I'll let others digest your thoughts before extending the thread, with one final comment. Your observation that "Averaging ten species is very convenient, and seems to strike a balance between a handful of exceptional specimens running away with the prize, and southern diversity taking unfair advantage." seems very much on target. I like your method of site ranking better than any I've proposed in the past. Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: "Colby Rucker"  Sent: Sunday, June 02, 2002 11:14 PM Subject: Top Ten stuff Bob, Sounds like you had a good long tramp around the Glen. I entered the new numbers on the top ten list, but got a slightly higher average. I had the Shagbark as 131.7' by Leverett & Knuerr 12/15/01 (vs. 131.2' ), and different addition. Averaging ten species is very convenient, and seems to strike a balance between a handful of exceptional specimens running away with the prize, and southern diversity taking unfair advantage. With a decent number of sites on the list, it's interesting to see how specific areas rank, and speculate on why. For starters, I looked at the # 10 tree for each site, and noticed that CCW & MTSF were not only taller than the sites ranked lower, but taller than a couple above. This goes to that "deep depth" factor - lots of species over 100 feet. Belt Woods is quite the opposite. Although the visual impact is rather overwhelming, the tall-tree diversity is very low, with the #10 tree being at the bottom of the list. If the list were based on just five species, the list would be quite different: Sevier 158.1, Congaree 152.7, Belt 145.8, Tamassee 145.8, Cook 141.9, Cohutta 140.0, Mohawk 139.8, Kelly 138.0, Chase 137.6, IceGlen 136.2, L.Pinnacle 130.0, Long Cane 129.7, Monroe 129.0, Grren Lake 126.5, Beall 126.1, Corcoran 124.8. If we take the average of the smaller five (trees #6 through # 10), we see that "deep depth" factor again. Sevier 142.1, Congaree 131.3, Tamassee 125.9, Kelly 124.1, Chase 121.4, Mohawk 119.7, Long Cane 118.7, Cook 118.2, Belt 116.2, LPinnacle 115.8, Corcoran 114.7, IceGlen 114.2, Beall 113.8, Cohutta 109.8, GreenL 109.5, Monroe 105.4. In the above list, Mohawk & Chase improved their rankings, as did Long Cane, LPinnacle, IceGlen and Corcoran, suggesting considerable diversity in the upper canopy. Although we are aware that the loss of a single outstanding tree could change the numbers, that single tree does represent, as best as we can determine, the potential of that species at this time, so it's reasonable. If the lost tree is the last of its kind, it suggests that the forest structure has changed, and there's no longer a niche for that species. Of course, numbers aren't the whole story, but it's interesting. The GSMNP averages go down as we split up the immense acreage. Big is better because there are more trees, more diversity, and more variety of habitat. This goes back to the problem at Belt; 43 acres makes a great grove, but there's little diversity of habitat. Chase Creek is bigger, and has a great deal of diversity. Some of its trees are older, but most are younger than Belt. The Collington soils are the same. In a section of national forest with thousands of acres, both sites might be in the same study area. Such hypothetical combining gives us a "dream team," with five species from each area, as it turns out. The average would be 136.81, which is just behind Congaree. Yes, that's a bit unfair, and a plug for Maryland trees, but what it really means is that the numbers for GSMNP and Congaree are somewhat misleading. We can see that temperature, rainfall, and old growth aren't the whole story. If we split those areas up until the acreage and the diversity of habitat were not greater than MTSF or CCW, the rankings wouldn't change, but the numbers would be much closer. Enough! I've gone on too long. Maybe you can make something out of it. Also, what's the acreage at Ice Glen? Colby   Home