On the 4th Bob Van Pelt posted a list of some of the longest unsupported branches he has documented in west coast trees. This is something we could measure for our impressive trees in the east. He is focused on unsupported branches, but I think we could include branches that are lying on the ground or artificially propped could be measured and included so long as these facts were noted. Scott Wade commented that he has only measured one long limb, a pecan with a 78 foot limb, but there are sycamores he has measured with 80 foot limbs, although one was propped with a crutch. Carl Harting and I measured a white oak limb on Lencer drive just north of Cook Forest at 68 feet. I would measure limbs as the maximum distance from the center of the trunk in one direction, or from where it branches from the main trunk if the tree is seriously tilted.
Sounds like a great idea! The first ones I think of are those huge
limbs on the Angel Oak. I also remember Will commenting on a long limb
on an oak at Biltmore during the Black Mountain Gathering.
JP
On Dec 16, 7:05 pm, "Edward Frank" <edfr...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On the 4th Bob Van Pelt posted a list of some of the longest unsupported branches he has documented in west coast trees. This is something we could measure for our impressive trees in the east. He is focused on unsupported branches, but I think we could include branches that are lying on the ground or artificially propped could be measured and included so long as these facts were noted. Scott Wade commented that he has only measured one long limb, a pecan with a 78 foot limb, but there are sycamores he has measured with 80 foot limbs, although one was propped with a crutch. Carl Harting and I measured a white oak limb on Lencer drive just north of Cook Forest at 68 feet. I would measure limbs as the maximum distance from the center of the trunk in one direction, or from where it branches from the main trunk if the tree is seriously tilted.
I like the idea of measuring the longest limb of trees with conspicuously long limbs. The challenge is not trivial for limbs that are partially obscured. More on this topic to come.
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Edward Frank" <edfr...@comcast.net>
> ENTS,
> On the 4th Bob Van Pelt posted a list of some of the longest unsupported > branches he has documented in west coast trees. This is something we could > measure for our impressive trees in the east. He is focused on unsupported > branches, but I think we could include branches that are lying on the ground or > artificially propped could be measured and included so long as these facts were > noted. Scott Wade commented that he has only measured one long limb, a pecan > with a 78 foot limb, but there are sycamores he has measured with 80 foot limbs, > although one was propped with a crutch. Carl Harting and I measured a white oak > limb on Lencer drive just north of Cook Forest at 68 feet. I would measure > limbs as the maximum distance from the center of the trunk in one direction, or > from where it branches from the main trunk if the tree is seriously tilted.
On the 4th Bob Van Pelt posted a list of some of the longest unsupported
branches he has documented in west coast trees. This is something we could
measure for our impressive trees in the east. He is focused on unsupported
branches, but I think we could include branches that are lying on the ground or
artificially propped could be measured and included so long as these facts were
noted. Scott Wade commented that he has only measured one long limb, a
pecan with a 78 foot limb, but there are sycamores he has measured with 80 foot
limbs, although one was propped with a crutch. Carl Harting and I measured
a white oak limb on Lencer drive just north of Cook Forest at 68 feet. I
would measure limbs as the maximum distance from the center of the trunk in one
direction, or from where it branches from the main trunk if the tree is
seriously tilted.
"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It
is the source of all true art and all science." - Albert Einstein
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org
You are subscribed to the Google Groups "ENTSTrees" group.
To post to this group, send email to entstrees@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe send email to entstrees-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
----- Original Message ----- From: dbhg...@comcast.net To: entstrees@googlegroups.com Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 7:54 PM
Subject: [ENTS] Re: Long Limbs
Ed,
I like the idea of measuring the longest limb of trees with conspicuously long limbs. The challenge is not trivial for limbs that are partially obscured. More on this topic to come.
Bob
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Edward Frank" <edfr...@comcast.net>
> ENTS,
> On the 4th Bob Van Pelt posted a list of some of the longest unsupported > branches he has documented in west coast trees. This is something we could > measure for our impressive trees in the east. He is focused on unsupported > branches, but I think we could include branches that are lying on the ground or > artificially propped could be measured and included so long as these facts were > noted. Scott Wade commented that he has only measured one long limb, a pecan > with a 78 foot limb, but there are sycamores he has measured with 80 foot limbs, > although one was propped with a crutch. Carl Harting and I measured a white oak > limb on Lencer drive just north of Cook Forest at 68 feet. I would measure > limbs as the maximum distance from the center of the trunk in one direction, or > from where it branches from the main trunk if the tree is seriously tilted.
-----Original Message-----
From: entstrees@googlegroups.com [mailto:entstrees@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of dbhg...@comcast.net
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 7:54 PM
To: entstrees@googlegroups.com
Subject: [ENTS] Re: Long Limbs
Ed,
I like the idea of measuring the longest limb of trees with conspicuously
long limbs. The challenge is not trivial for limbs that are partially
obscured. More on this topic to come.
Bob
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Edward Frank" <edfr...@comcast.net>
> ENTS,
> On the 4th Bob Van Pelt posted a list of some of the longest > unsupported branches he has documented in west coast trees. This is > something we could measure for our impressive trees in the east. He > is focused on unsupported branches, but I think we could include > branches that are lying on the ground or artificially propped could be > measured and included so long as these facts were noted. Scott Wade > commented that he has only measured one long limb, a pecan with a 78 > foot limb, but there are sycamores he has measured with 80 foot limbs, > although one was propped with a crutch. Carl Harting and I measured a > white oak limb on Lencer drive just north of Cook Forest at 68 feet.
> I would measure limbs as the maximum distance from the center of the trunk
in one direction, or from where it branches from the main trunk if the tree
is seriously tilted.
A combined list. As I see it, the longest limb would only be measured for those trees with exceptionally long limbs. Most species would not be represented at all, and only those with the longest limbs would be measured for those species that were represented. It would not be something measured for every tree, so the number of examples on the list would be relatively small.
Ed Frank
"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science." - Albert Einstein
do you know what BVP does? That seems like a good place to start...at the very least a good discussion. I'm glad you brought this up because I was just recently thinking about it. I'm hoping to measure some Michigan AF champion trees when I visit my parents for Christmas. I was planning on measuring the longest limb on each tree. I was thinking to do this for each tree species, not just the ones with the longest limbs and I was also planning to have separate measures for longest unsupported limb and longest supported limb.
--- On Tue, 12/16/08, Edward Frank <edfr...@comcast.net> wrote:
> From: Edward Frank <edfr...@comcast.net> > Subject: [ENTS] Re: Long Limbs > To: entstrees@googlegroups.com > Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2008, 5:52 PM > Bob,
> I can't decide if the starting point should be where > the limb emerges from the trunk or from the center of the > tree. I go one way then the other.
I don't know what BVP does. He did mention the idea when we were down in the Smokies this spring, but not any details. For now if I had a candidate, I would measure both until it was decided. The white oak I mentioned was 71 feet from the center of the trunk and 68 feet from the surface of the trunk.
George ask about lists for individual species or a combined list for longest limb. I don't think the longest limb is really all that definitive of a measurement for use in describing a tree species, but more along the lines of something that is simply interesting. I really think the best way to characterize the crown size is by doing an average crown spread measurement. I think the spoke method is the best way to do it. I try to encourage people to measure crown spread for any large tree, but then at the same time I find myself lax in doing it in my own measuring trips. I will try to do better, and hope others will do the same.
Edward Frank
"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious.
It is the source of all true art and all science." - Albert Einstein
----- Original Message ----- From: doug bidlack To: entstrees@googlegroups.com Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 9:58 PM
Subject: [ENTS] Re: Long Limbs
Ed,
do you know what BVP does? That seems like a good place to start...at the very least a good discussion. I'm glad you brought this up because I was just recently thinking about it. I'm hoping to measure some Michigan AF champion trees when I visit my parents for Christmas. I was planning on measuring the longest limb on each tree. I was thinking to do this for each tree species, not just the ones with the longest limbs and I was also planning to have separate measures for longest unsupported limb and longest supported limb.
--- On Tue, 12/16/08, Edward Frank <edfr...@comcast.net> wrote:
> From: Edward Frank <edfr...@comcast.net>
> Subject: [ENTS] Re: Long Limbs
> To: entstrees@googlegroups.com
> Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2008, 5:52 PM
> Bob,
> I can't decide if the starting point should be where
> the limb emerges from the trunk or from the center of the
> tree. I go one way then the other.
I collect shed antlers and use a measuring system to score them. There are
several measurements required, length of main beam, tine length, and
circumference of beam. It's very similar to measuring trees. To get the
tine length you would measure from the top of the main beam to the tip of
the tine so if the tine represents the limb you would measure from were it
emerges from the trunk. Just a thought.
George.
From: entstrees@googlegroups.com [mailto:entstrees@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Edward Frank
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 8:52 PM
To: entstrees@googlegroups.com
Subject: [ENTS] Re: Long Limbs
Bob,
I can't decide if the starting point should be where the limb emerges from
the trunk or from the center of the tree. I go one way then the other.
Ed
"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious.
It is the source of all true art and all science." - Albert Einstein
I like the idea of measuring the longest limb of trees with conspicuously
long limbs. The challenge is not trivial for limbs that are partially
obscured. More on this topic to come.
Bob
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Edward Frank" <edfr...@comcast.net>
> ENTS,
> On the 4th Bob Van Pelt posted a list of some of the longest unsupported > branches he has documented in west coast trees. This is something we
could > measure for our impressive trees in the east. He is focused on
unsupported > branches, but I think we could include branches that are lying on the
ground or > artificially propped could be measured and included so long as these facts
were > noted. Scott Wade commented that he has only measured one long limb, a
pecan > with a 78 foot limb, but there are sycamores he has measured with 80 foot
limbs, > although one was propped with a crutch. Carl Harting and I measured a
white oak > limb on Lencer drive just north of Cook Forest at 68 feet. I would
measure > limbs as the maximum distance from the center of the trunk in one
direction, or > from where it branches from the main trunk if the tree is seriously
tilted.
I am also planning to measure average crown spread as well using an asterisk-like pattern. For now I'll measure longest limb to trunk center and surface of trunk to the nearest foot.
Doug
--- On Tue, 12/16/08, Edward Frank <edfr...@comcast.net> wrote:
> From: Edward Frank <edfr...@comcast.net> > Subject: [ENTS] Re: Long Limbs > To: entstrees@googlegroups.com > Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2008, 7:14 PM > Doug,
> I don't know what BVP does. He did mention the idea > when we were down in the Smokies this spring, but not any > details. For now if I had a candidate, I would measure both > until it was decided. The white oak I mentioned was 71 feet > from the center of the trunk and 68 feet from the surface of > the trunk.
> George ask about lists for individual species or a combined > list for longest limb. I don't think the longest limb > is really all that definitive of a measurement for use in > describing a tree species, but more along the lines of > something that is simply interesting. I really think the > best way to characterize the crown size is by doing an > average crown spread measurement. I think the spoke method > is the best way to do it. I try to encourage people to > measure crown spread for any large tree, but then at the > same time I find myself lax in doing it in my own measuring > trips. I will try to do better, and hope others will do the > same.
> Edward Frank
> "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the > mysterious. > It is the source of all true art and all science." - > Albert Einstein
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Edward Frank" <edfr...@comcast.net>
> Doug,
> I don't know what BVP does. He did mention the idea when we were down in the > Smokies this spring, but not any details. For now if I had a candidate, I would > measure both until it was decided. The white oak I mentioned was 71 feet from > the center of the trunk and 68 feet from the surface of the trunk.
> George ask about lists for individual species or a combined list for longest > limb. I don't think the longest limb is really all that definitive of a > measurement for use in describing a tree species, but more along the lines of > something that is simply interesting. I really think the best way to > characterize the crown size is by doing an average crown spread measurement. I > think the spoke method is the best way to do it. I try to encourage people to > measure crown spread for any large tree, but then at the same time I find myself > lax in doing it in my own measuring trips. I will try to do better, and hope > others will do the same.
> Edward Frank
> "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious.
> It is the source of all true art and all science." - Albert Einstein
> ----- Original Message ----- > From: doug bidlack > To: entstrees@googlegroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 9:58 PM
> Subject: [ENTS] Re: Long Limbs
> Ed,
> do you know what BVP does? That seems like a good place to start...at the > very least a good discussion. I'm glad you brought this up because I was just > recently thinking about it. I'm hoping to measure some Michigan AF champion > trees when I visit my parents for Christmas. I was planning on measuring the > longest limb on each tree. I was thinking to do this for each tree species, not > just the ones with the longest limbs and I was also planning to have separate > measures for longest unsupported limb and longest supported limb.
> --- On Tue, 12/16/08, Edward Frank <edfr...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > From: Edward Frank <edfr...@comcast.net>
> > Subject: [ENTS] Re: Long Limbs
> > To: entstrees@googlegroups.com
> > Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2008, 5:52 PM
> > Bob,
> > I can't decide if the starting point should be where
> > the limb emerges from the trunk or from the center of the
> > tree. I go one way then the other.
I don't know what BVP does. He did mention the idea when we
were down in the Smokies this spring, but not any details. For now if I
had a candidate, I would measure both until it was decided. The white
oak I mentioned was 71 feet from the center of the trunk and 68 feet from the
surface of the trunk.
George ask about lists for individual species or a combined list for
longest limb. I don't think the longest limb is really all that definitive
of a measurement for use in describing a tree species, but more along the lines
of something that is simply interesting. I really think the best way to
characterize the crown size is by doing an average crown spread
measurement. I think the spoke method is the best way to do it. I try to
encourage people to measure crown spread for any large tree, but then at the
same time I find myself lax in doing it in my own measuring trips. I will
try to do better, and hope others will do the same.
Edward Frank
"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the
mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science." -
Albert Einstein
do you know what BVP does? That seems like
a good place to start...at the very least a good discussion. I'm glad
you brought this up because I was just recently thinking about it. I'm
hoping to measure some Michigan AF champion trees when I visit my parents for
Christmas. I was planning on measuring the longest limb on each
tree. I was thinking to do this for each tree species, not just the ones
with the longest limbs and I was also planning to have separate measures for
longest unsupported limb and longest supported limb.
> From: Edward Frank <edfrank@comcast.net> > Subject:
[ENTS] Re: Long Limbs > To: entstrees@googlegroups.com >
Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2008, 5:52 PM > Bob, > > I
can't decide if the starting point should be where > the limb emerges
from the trunk or from the center of the > tree. I go one way then
the other. > >
Ed >
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org
You are subscribed to the Google Groups "ENTSTrees" group.
To post to this group, send email to entstrees@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe send email to entstrees-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
You'd have to measure to the trunk - it's the only aspect of the length that you can actually MEASURE. How could you measure to the center? You can't guess or calculate where it is. On many trees, the center of the pith is very far from the geometric center of the bole.
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Edward Frank" <edfr...@comcast.net>
> Doug,
> I don't know what BVP does. He did mention the idea when we were down in the > Smokies this spring, but not any details. For now if I had a candidate, I would > measure both until it was decided. The white oak I mentioned was 71 feet from > the center of the trunk and 68 feet from the surface of the trunk.
> George ask about lists for individual species or a combined list for longest > limb. I don't think the longest limb is really all that definitive of a > measurement for use in describing a tree species, but more along the lines of > something that is simply interesting. I really think the best way to > characterize the crown size is by doing an average crown spread measurement. I > think the spoke method is the best way to do it. I try to encourage people to > measure crown spread for any large tree, but then at the same time I find myself > lax in doing it in my own measuring trips. I will try to do better, and hope > others will do the same.
> Edward Frank
> "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious.
> It is the source of all true art and all science." - Albert Einstein
> ----- Original Message ----- > From: doug bidlack > To: entstrees@googlegroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 9:58 PM
> Subject: [ENTS] Re: Long Limbs
> Ed,
> do you know what BVP does? That seems like a good place to start...at the > very least a good discussion. I'm glad you brought this up because I was just > recently thinking about it. I'm hoping to measure some Michigan AF champion > trees when I visit my parents for Christmas. I was planning on measuring the > longest limb on each tree. I was thinking to do this for each tree species, not > just the ones with the longest limbs and I was also planning to have separate > measures for longest unsupported limb and longest supported limb.
> --- On Tue, 12/16/08, Edward Frank <edfr...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > From: Edward Frank <edfr...@comcast.net>
> > Subject: [ENTS] Re: Long Limbs
> > To: entstrees@googlegroups.com
> > Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2008, 5:52 PM
> > Bob,
> > I can't decide if the starting point should be where
> > the limb emerges from the trunk or from the center of the
> > tree. I go one way then the other.
Yes you would need to calculate the center of the tree. We approximate this when we measure the base on a slope of when you measure the crown spread. It makes sense to measure from the surface of the trunk, but my problem with that is when a a tree forks and a branch takes off horizontally from the fork. Where do you start the measurement? At the point where it forks? At the point where the branch takes off form the fork? How many branchings back do you consider it to be the start of the limb? What about the idea of reiterations and how do they relate to limb length? How do you deal with trees that are leaning? A long lean in one direction could add twenty feet to the length in the direction of lean. So it is not as straight forward as you might think. Extrapolating to the center of the tree at its base would provide a relatively consistent reference point for all measurements and would be repeatable for everyone. The problem with leaning trees is that it would offset from the center of the trunk at the base.... The starting point of the limb could be considered at the surface of the trunk at say breast height, but that seems to be as arbitrary of a point as any other.
The last option,surface of the trunk at breast height, is the way I a leaning at the moment, with the "branching point" for leaning trees as the base point. Odd situations would need to be dealt with individually. So I am soliciting options form people who has thought out these situations. The way BVP is doing it may be the best way, I don't know at this point.
Ed
"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious.
It is the source of all true art and all science." - Albert Einstein
----- Original Message ----- From: paulj...@tds.net To: entstrees@googlegroups.com
Cc: dbhg...@comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 9:58 AM
Subject: [ENTS] Re: Long Limbs
Bob,
You'd have to measure to the trunk - it's the only aspect of the length that you can actually MEASURE. How could you measure to the center? You can't guess or calculate where it is. On many trees, the center of the pith is very far from the geometric center of the bole.
I think BVP measures from the trunk. At least, that is what I think he did for the long limb of the Pinchot sycamore. What does Will think? Will?
Bob
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Edward Frank" <edfr...@comcast.net>
> Doug,
> I don't know what BVP does. He did mention the idea when we were down in the > Smokies this spring, but not any details. For now if I had a candidate, I would > measure both until it was decided. The white oak I mentioned was 71 feet from > the center of the trunk and 68 feet from the surface of the trunk.
> George ask about lists for individual species or a combined list for longest > limb. I don't think the longest limb is really all that definitive of a > measurement for use in describing a tree species, but more along the lines of > something that is simply interesting. I really think the best way to > characterize the crown size is by doing an average crown spread measurement. I > think the spoke method is the best way to do it. I try to encourage people to > measure crown spread for any large tree, but then at the same time I find myself > lax in doing it in my own measuring trips. I will try to do better, and hope > others will do the same.
> Edward Frank
> "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious.
> It is the source of all true art and all science." - Albert Einstein
> ----- Original Message ----- > From: doug bidlack > To: entstrees@googlegroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 9:58 PM
> Subject: [ENTS] Re: Long Limbs
> Ed,
> do you know what BVP does? That seems like a good place to start...at the > very least a good discussion. I'm glad you brought this up because I was just > recently thinking about it. I'm hoping to measure some Michigan AF champion > trees when I visit my parents for Christmas. I was planning on measuring the > longest limb on each tree. I was thinking to do this for each tree species, not > just the ones with the longest limbs and I was also planning to have separate > measures for longest unsupported limb and longest supported limb.
> --- On Tue, 12/16/08, Edward Frank <edfr...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > From: Edward Frank <edfr...@comcast.net>
> > Subject: [ENTS] Re: Long Limbs
> > To: entstrees@googlegroups.com
> > Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2008, 5:52 PM
> > Bob,
> > I can't decide if the starting point should be where
> > the limb emerges from the trunk or from the center of the
> > tree. I go one way then the other.
If a branch forks, it's still part of the branch. Where the branch starts at a fork in a trunk is possibly subjective, but so is breast height and the opinion of "where the acorn sprouted." Errors of a few inches one way or the other on a branch length of many feet typically end up being insignificant.
You have to decide what are you actually trying to measure. Is it the extent of horizontal tree growth relative to where the acorn sprouted, or is it the length of the piece of wood that is the branch which itself can be removed at that length by cutting, or is it the equivalent horizontal component of the length of such a branch? For a field measurement without climbing the tree, it would be easiest to measure the last one by choosing spots on the ground underneath, with a clinometer at 90 degrees and then measuring the distance between the marks, much as we do with the tree spread measurement.
By the way, the longest white pine branch that I recall seeing was on the order of 40-50 feet. It broke a few years ago during a storm event before I could return to measure it. A few other trees in that area have similar spreading form but haven't reached that magnitude yet.
Yes you would need to calculate the center of the tree. We approximate this when we measure the base on a slope of when you measure the crown spread. It makes sense to measure from the surface of the trunk, but my problem with that is when a a tree forks and a branch takes off horizontally from the fork. Where do you start the measurement? At the point where it forks? At the point where the branch takes off form the fork? How many branchings back do you consider it to be the start of the limb? What about the idea of reiterations and how do they relate to limb length? How do you deal with trees that are leaning? A long lean in one direction could add twenty feet to the length in the direction of lean. So it is not as straight forward as you might think. Extrapolating to the center of the tree at its base would provide a relatively consistent reference point for all measurements and would be repeatable for everyone. The problem with leaning trees is that it would offset from the center of the trunk at the base.... The starting point of the limb could be considered at the surface of the trunk at say breast height, but that seems to be as arbitrary of a point as any other.
The last option,surface of the trunk at breast height, is the way I a leaning at the moment, with the "branching point" for leaning trees as the base point. Odd situations would need to be dealt with individually. So I am soliciting options form people who has thought out these situations. The way BVP is doing it may be the best way, I don't know at this point.
Ed
"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious.
It is the source of all true art and all science." - Albert Einstein
----- Original Message ----- From: paulj...@tds.net To: entstrees@googlegroups.com
Cc: dbhg...@comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 9:58 AM
Subject: [ENTS] Re: Long Limbs
Bob,
You'd have to measure to the trunk - it's the only aspect of the length that you can actually MEASURE. How could you measure to the center? You can't guess or calculate where it is. On many trees, the center of the pith is very far from the geometric center of the bole.
I think BVP measures from the trunk. At least, that is what I think he did for the long limb of the Pinchot sycamore. What does Will think? Will?
Bob
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Edward Frank" <edfr...@comcast.net>
> Doug,
> I don't know what BVP does. He did mention the idea when we were down in the > Smokies this spring, but not any details. For now if I had a candidate, I would > measure both until it was decided. The white oak I mentioned was 71 feet from > the center of the trunk and 68 feet from the surface of the trunk.
> George ask about lists for individual species or a combined list for longest > limb. I don't think the longest limb is really all that definitive of a > measurement for use in describing a tree species, but more along the lines of > something that is simply interesting. I really think the best way to > characterize the crown size is by doing an average crown spread measurement. I > think the spoke method is the best way to do it. I try to encourage people to > measure crown spread for any large tree, but then at the same time I find myself > lax in doing it in my own measuring trips. I will try to do better, and hope > others will do the same.
> Edward Frank
> "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious.
> It is the source of all true art and all science." - Albert Einstein
> ----- Original Message ----- > From: doug bidlack > To: entstrees@googlegroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 9:58 PM
> Subject: [ENTS] Re: Long Limbs
> Ed,
> do you know what BVP does? That seems like a good place to start...at the > very least a good discussion. I'm glad you brought this up because I was just > recently thinking about it. I'm hoping to measure some Michigan AF champion > trees when I visit my parents for Christmas. I was planning on measuring the > longest limb on each tree. I was thinking to do this for each tree species, not > just the ones with the longest limbs and I was also planning to have separate > measures for longest unsupported limb and longest supported limb.
> --- On Tue, 12/16/08, Edward Frank <edfr...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > From: Edward Frank <edfr...@comcast.net>
> > Subject: [ENTS] Re: Long Limbs
> > To: entstrees@googlegroups.com
> > Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2008, 5:52 PM
> > Bob,
> > I can't decide if the starting point should be where
> > the limb emerges from the trunk or from the center of the
> > tree. I go one way then the other.
It seems to me that UNsupported limbs would be more helpful in
evaluating what the architecture of a tree could be rather than it
cosmetics (how's that for art-speak/)
miles lowry
On Dec 16, 6:05 pm, "Edward Frank" <edfr...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On the 4th Bob Van Pelt posted a list of some of the longest unsupported branches he has documented in west coast trees. This is something we could measure for our impressive trees in the east. He is focused on unsupported branches, but I think we could include branches that are lying on the ground or artificially propped could be measured and included so long as these facts were noted. Scott Wade commented that he has only measured one long limb, a pecan with a 78 foot limb, but there are sycamores he has measured with 80 foot limbs, although one was propped with a crutch. Carl Harting and I measured a white oak limb on Lencer drive just north of Cook Forest at 68 feet. I would measure limbs as the maximum distance from the center of the trunk in one direction, or from where it branches from the main trunk if the tree is seriously tilted.
For me it is more of a "fun" measurement than anything else. I have no preference for how it is measured so long as it can be consistently done. If someone else finds the measure to be useful, and that utility requires some particular measuring protocol, that is fine with me, just tell me what it is. What do you suggest?
Bob indicated he had some ideas, so I am curious to see what he has to say.
Ed
Errors of a few inches one way or the other on a branch length of many feet typically end up being insignificant.
You have to decide what are you actually trying to measure.
Your comment definitely introduces the reality check of comparing need
and want, or the possible and impossible.
Measuring to the center could be very unrealistic too, for trees that
naturally grafted codominent stems, or have very long limbs but
multiple leaders.
Even though the branch collar can prutrude to many lengths, I think
that the branch collar might be a sensible option from which to start.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Quote ...
"You'd have to measure to the trunk - it's the only aspect of the
length that you can actually MEASURE. How could you measure to the
center? You can't guess or calculate where it is. On many trees, the
center of the pith is very far from the geometric center of the bole.
In this case I might tend to agree that the branch collar is the place to measure. However I must strongly disagree that projecting to the center of the tree is unreasonable. Not only must you be able to to measure something, but there must be a common reference point so that when different people measure that aspect, they have an objective starting point. To get repeatable measurements taken by different individuals the subjective interpretation of where to begin must be minimized. The center of any reasonable regular object, such as a tree trunk can be reasonably approximated by different people and the variations between the approximations will be generally be small compared to whatever is being measured. The same is not true if everyone independently decides where to begin their measurements. If the tree trunk is approximately round then the distance from the trunk surface to the center is simply the girth/2pi.
If you are measuring the canopy spread of a tree you must include the width of the trunk in your measurements. The canopy does not stop and form an empty donut around the trunk. At the top of the tree the leaves extend over the area occupied by the base of the tree. So if the trunk dimensions are included in the canopy spread of the tree, then why should it not also be included in the measurement of individual branch length.
Branch length in this context I think should be measured in terms of horizontal offset from the innermost point to the outermost tip, rather than following the contorted path the branch takes to reach this outermost point. Using the branch collar as the starting point also eliminates the problems of leaning tree trunks.
Certainly where the "acorn sprouted" concept is more difficult to apply on larger western trees than it is with smaller eastern ones, but it is still valid. We have had this discussion before in ENTS and I argued for basic girth measurements to be made at breast height on the high side of the tree when it was on a slope. Ideally girth should be measured above basal flair, but there are practical considerations as well. Things that are hard to measure end up not being measured at all.
For the ENTS protocol the concept of the center of the tree is applied to a single trunk. For coppices or trees with co dominant stems, if the trunks have a separate pith at ground level they are considered to be separate trees for most measurement purposes. Thus the problem of where the center of the tree mass is simplified to the center of the particular trunk you are measuring. There are also criteria for characterizing multitrunk trees as a whole.
So the idea of extrapolating the center of a tree does not need a reality check, it is not unrealistic, nor is it impossible. The simplest measurement to make is not always the best, is not always the most repeatable, and not always the most useful for comparison purposes.
Ed Frank
"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious.
It is the source of all true art and all science." - Albert Einstein
----- Original Message ----- From: mdvaden To: ENTSTrees Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 12:34 PM
Subject: [ENTS] Re: Long Limbs
Your comment definitely introduces the reality check of comparing need
and want, or the possible and impossible.
Measuring to the center could be very unrealistic too, for trees that
naturally grafted codominent stems, or have very long limbs but
multiple leaders.
Even though the branch collar can prutrude to many lengths, I think
that the branch collar might be a sensible option from which to start.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Quote ...
"You'd have to measure to the trunk - it's the only aspect of the
length that you can actually MEASURE. How could you measure to the
center? You can't guess or calculate where it is. On many trees, the
center of the pith is very far from the geometric center of the bole.
I've attempted to apply different concepts of limb length over the years. I'm fine with the extrapolated center point method. I'm also fine with locating the point beneath the limb flare as the starting point. That point can be fairly consistently identified on the vast majority of eastern trees, although a few pictures are needed to get the idea across. One concept that I've experimented with a few times for limb length where an arching form adds considerable length is the parabolic length method. It is messy to compute, but more closely approximates the real length of the limb. An alternative is the slope distance of the limb via the Pathagorean Theorem. It is computationally much easier. I will put together an attachment that illustrates the horizontal offset method, the Pathagorean method, and the parabolic arc method for a hypothetical limb. When they see it, I think most people will run from the latter with the exception of the scientists, engineers, and mathematicians. The parabolic arc method isn't practical for most field work. However, if we have a great tree with a long curving limb that would be greatly shortchanged were we to go with the horizontal offset, the parabolic arc method offers us an alternative. It will take a little time to produce the attachment. I'm working with my wife's MAC and find myself hitting the wrong key about every other keystroke. It could drive a feller to drink.
In this case I might tend to agree that the branch collar is the place to
measure. However I must strongly disagree that projecting to the center of
the tree is unreasonable. Not only must you be able to to measure
something, but there must be a common reference point so that when different
people measure that aspect, they have an objective starting point. To get
repeatable measurements taken by different individuals the subjective
interpretation of where to begin must be minimized. The center of any
reasonable regular object, such as a tree trunk can be reasonably approximated
by different people and the variations between the approximations will be
generally be small compared to whatever is being measured. The same is not
true if everyone independently decides where to begin their
measurements. If the tree trunk is approximately round then the
distance from the trunk surface to the center is simply the girth/2pi.
If you are measuring the canopy spread of a tree you must include the width
of the trunk in your measurements. The canopy does not stop and form an
empty donut around the trunk. At the top of the tree the leaves
extend over the area occupied by the base of the tree. So if the trunk
dimensions are included in the canopy spread of the tree, then why should it not
also be included in the measurement of individual branch length.
Branch length in this context I think should be measured in terms of
horizontal offset from the innermost point to the outermost tip, rather than
following the contorted path the branch takes to reach this outermost
point. Using the branch collar as the starting point also eliminates the
problems of leaning tree trunks.
Certainly where the "acorn sprouted" concept is more difficult to apply on
larger western trees than it is with smaller eastern ones, but it is still
valid. We have had this discussion before in ENTS and I argued for basic
girth measurements to be made at breast height on the high side
of the tree when it was on a slope. Ideally girth should be measured above
basal flair, but there are practical considerations as well. Things that
are hard to measure end up not being measured at all.
For the ENTS protocol the concept of the center of the tree is applied to a
single trunk. For coppices or trees with co dominant stems, if the trunks
have a separate pith at ground level they are considered to be separate trees
for most measurement purposes. Thus the problem of where the center of the
tree mass is simplified to the center of the particular trunk you are
measuring. There are also criteria for characterizing multitrunk trees as
a whole.
So the idea of extrapolating the center of a tree does not need a reality
check, it is not unrealistic, nor is it impossible. The simplest
measurement to make is not always the best, is not always the most repeatable,
and not always the most useful for comparison purposes.
Ed Frank
"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the
mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science." -
Albert Einstein
Your comment definitely introduces the reality check of
comparing need and want, or the possible and impossible.
Measuring
to the center could be very unrealistic too, for trees that naturally
grafted codominent stems, or have very long limbs but multiple
leaders.
Even though the branch collar can prutrude to many lengths, I
think that the branch collar might be a sensible option from which to
start.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Quote ...
"You'd have to measure
to the trunk - it's the only aspect of the length that you can actually
MEASURE. How could you measure to the center? You can't guess or calculate
where it is. On many trees, the center of the pith is very far from the
geometric center of the bole. > > PJ > > ---- dbhg...@comcast.net
wrote: > > ============= > Ed, > > I think BVP
measures from the
trunk."
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org
You are subscribed to the Google Groups "ENTSTrees" group.
To post to this group, send email to entstrees@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe send email to entstrees-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
I am sure there are differences in perspectives on how to best characterize trees and forest sites between the eastern United States and western United States. Indeed there are likely even more more divergent views from different areas around the world. This reflects the different character and features of the forests in different areas. We have being talking on and off about creating a Western Native Tree Society to parallel the mission of ENTS, but focused on western locations and trees. At one time I even generated a separate website structure for WNTS before folding it back into the ENTS website. http://www.nativetreesociety.org/entstrees/index_wnts.html
Initially the idea was discussed back in 2001. Don Bertolette was one of the first people that Bob Leverett attempted to draft into spearheading the organization. Bob Leverett wrote: "The idea for WNTS was born in Aug 2001 on the patio of my daughter's prior home in Ogden, Utah. The idea was spawned between Don Bertolette, yours truly, and my daughter Celeste. .. as all who visit there and know, the Rocky Mountain west is a vast place with a lot of arid, semi-arid, and high altitude landscape. Big trees can be in rugged box canyons that are almost impossible to get to. Pack trips are required to get to some of the best places. And interest in big trees is spread pretty thin among westerners - especially in small western towns. Don has a big challenge on his hands and will need all the help he can get. For my part, I plan to focus my attention on the Black Hills. I am very familiar with them and from this summer's past trip that included the Black Hills, I realize that there is a story to be told and modified Rucker indices to be calculated (forget about a 10-species index). I'll likely spend a good deal of time in the Utah Wasatch and Uintahs also. That should keep me occupied. Anybody want dubs on other areas?"
As ENTS continues to grow we are picking up a scattering of people across the western United States and Canada. I believe if someone wanted to take on the task of forming and running a Western Native Tree Society, the membership of a regionally focused would increase dramatically. There are amazing finds being made in the forests out there on a regular basis. There is a strong environmental movement to preserve trees, There is an active industry interested in managing the forests. There is a top scientific community involved in forest and tree research in the west. Are any of you up to the task or interested in forming such an organization?
The core concept must be that the measurements and descriptions included in your data sets must meet high quality standards that produce results useful to the scientific community. That is the primary reason we are so focused on measurements in ENTS. We must get the measurements right, or they are useless in the long term. If any you are interested in pursuing this idea, I can help you set up a discussion list on Google, and get you started on a website. The ENTS website isn't fancy, but it is designed to serve as an archive of the members trips and findings and of our various debates. If these materials are not archived and organized so they are accessible, they are simply lost into the aether. Initially you could set up a website on a university account or free host, or even get a paid hosting account. The ENTS site costs me about $8 a month. So I am looking for takers on establishing a sister organization to ENTS in the western US, or even in other areas of the world.
Ed Frank
"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science." - Albert Einstein
Ed, ENTS, I think measuring the limbs of some of the larger trees is
way cool! I'll send in a couple of Live Oak measurements, and some
photos. I would measure from the point where the limb meets the
trunk. Larry
I whole-heartedly agree. WNTS is an organization that needs to become a reality with local leadership. The river gorges and canyons hold immense promise throughout the Rocky Mountain zone. In my visit to Idaho this past summer, I saw many gorges and canyons with Douglas fir, white spruce, Englemann spruce, etc. that are just begging to be measured and documented. One Doug fir I measured in a small gorge on the western slopes of the Caribou Range reached 140 feet and appeared to be about 11 feet CBH. I'm hoping to return to the gorge. There are many stands of tall trees in Idaho waiting to be documented by serious tree measurers.
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Edward Frank" <edfr...@comcast.net>
> Mario and other western ENTS,
> I am sure there are differences in perspectives on how to best characterize > trees and forest sites between the eastern United States and western United > States. Indeed there are likely even more more divergent views from different > areas around the world. This reflects the different character and features of > the forests in different areas. We have being talking on and off about creating > a Western Native Tree Society to parallel the mission of ENTS, but focused on > western locations and trees. At one time I even generated a separate website > structure for WNTS before folding it back into the ENTS website.
> http://www.nativetreesociety.org/entstrees/index_wnts.html
> Initially the idea was discussed back in 2001. Don Bertolette was one of the > first people that Bob Leverett attempted to draft into spearheading the > organization. Bob Leverett wrote: "The idea for WNTS was born in Aug 2001 on > the patio of my daughter's prior home in Ogden, Utah. The idea was spawned > between Don Bertolette, yours truly, and my daughter Celeste. .. as all who > visit there and know, the Rocky Mountain west is a vast place with a lot of > arid, semi-arid, and high altitude landscape. Big trees can be in rugged box > canyons that are almost impossible to get to. Pack trips are required to get to > some of the best places. And interest in big trees is spread pretty thin among > westerners - especially in small western towns. Don has a big challenge on > his hands and will need all the help he can get. For my part, I plan to focus my > attention on the Black Hills. I am very familiar with them and from this > summer's past trip that included the Black Hills, I realize that there is a > story to be told and modified Rucker indices to be calculated (forget about a > 10-species index). I'll likely spend a good deal of time in the Utah Wasatch and > Uintahs also. That should keep me occupied. Anybody want dubs on other areas?"
> As ENTS continues to grow we are picking up a scattering of people across the > western United States and Canada. I believe if someone wanted to take on the > task of forming and running a Western Native Tree Society, the membership of a > regionally focused would increase dramatically. There are amazing finds being > made in the forests out there on a regular basis. There is a strong > environmental movement to preserve trees, There is an active industry > interested in managing the forests. There is a top scientific community > involved in forest and tree research in the west. Are any of you up to the task > or interested in forming such an organization?
> The core concept must be that the measurements and descriptions included in your > data sets must meet high quality standards that produce results useful to the > scientific community. That is the primary reason we are so focused on > measurements in ENTS. We must get the measurements right, or they are useless > in the long term. If any you are interested in pursuing this idea, I can help > you set up a discussion list on Google, and get you started on a website. The > ENTS website isn't fancy, but it is designed to serve as an archive of the > members trips and findings and of our various debates. If these materials are > not archived and organized so they are accessible, they are simply lost into the > aether. Initially you could set up a website on a university account or free > host, or even get a paid hosting account. The ENTS site costs me about $8 a > month. So I am looking for takers on establishing a sister organization to ENTS > in the western US, or even in other areas of the world.
> Ed Frank
> "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious.
> It is the source of all true art and all science." - Albert Einstein
I am sure there are differences in perspectives on how to best characterize
trees and forest sites between the eastern United States and western United
States. Indeed there are likely even more more divergent views from
different areas around the world. This reflects the
different character and features of the forests in different areas.
We have being talking on and off about creating a Western Native Tree Society
to parallel the mission of ENTS, but focused on western locations and
trees. At one time I even generated a separate website structure for WNTS
before folding it back into the ENTS website. http://www.nativetreesociety.org/entstrees/index_wnts.html
Initially the idea was discussed back in 2001. Don Bertolette was one
of the first people that Bob Leverett attempted to draft into
spearheading the organization. Bob Leverett wrote: "The
idea for WNTS was born in Aug 2001 on the patio of my daughter's prior home in
Ogden, Utah. The idea was spawned between Don Bertolette, yours truly, and my
daughter Celeste. .. as all who visit there and know, the Rocky Mountain
west is a vast place with a lot of arid, semi-arid, and high altitude landscape.
Big trees can be in rugged box canyons that are almost impossible to get to.
Pack trips are required to get to some of the best places. And interest in big
trees is spread pretty thin among westerners - especially in small western
towns. Don has a big challenge on his hands
and will need all the help he can get. For my part, I plan to focus my attention
on the Black Hills. I am very familiar with them and from this summer's past
trip that included the Black Hills, I realize that there is a story to be told
and modified Rucker indices to be calculated (forget about a 10-species index).
I'll likely spend a good deal of time in the Utah Wasatch and Uintahs also. That
should keep me occupied. Anybody want dubs on other areas?"
As ENTS continues to grow we are picking up a scattering of people across
the western United States and Canada. I believe if someone wanted
to take on the task of forming and running a Western Native Tree Society,
the membership of a regionally focused would increase
dramatically. There are amazing finds being made in the forests out there
on a regular basis. There is a strong environmental movement to preserve
trees, There is an active industry interested in managing the
forests. There is a top scientific community involved in forest and tree
research in the west. Are any of you up to the task or interested in
forming such an organization?
The core concept must be that the measurements and descriptions
included in your data sets must meet high quality standards that produce results
useful to the scientific community. That is the primary reason we are so
focused on measurements in ENTS. We must get the measurements right, or
they are useless in the long term. If any you are interested in pursuing
this idea, I can help you set up a discussion list on Google, and get you
started on a website. The ENTS website isn't fancy, but it is designed to
serve as an archive of the members trips and findings and of our various
debates. If these materials are not archived and organized so they are
accessible, they are simply lost into the aether. Initially you could set
up a website on a university account or free host, or even get a paid hosting
account. The ENTS site costs me about $8 a month. So I am looking
for takers on establishing a sister organization to ENTS in the western US, or
even in other areas of the world.
Ed Frank
"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the
mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science." -
Albert Einstein
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org
You are subscribed to the Google Groups "ENTSTrees" group.
To post to this group, send email to entstrees@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe send email to entstrees-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
It seems that the extant (straight line) of the limb would negate any
computation of "path length". All combined woody structures- be it a curve
or straight section- would yield the result of "x" limb extending "x"
distance in space.
Will F. Blozan
President, Eastern Native Tree Society
President, Appalachian Arborists, Inc.
-----Original Message-----
From: entstrees@googlegroups.com [mailto:entstrees@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of dbhg...@comcast.net
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 3:43 PM
To: entstrees@googlegroups.com
Subject: [ENTS] Re: Long Limbs
Ed,
I've attempted to apply different concepts of limb length over the
years. I'm fine with the extrapolated center point method. I'm also fine
with locating the point beneath the limb flare as the starting point. That
point can be fairly consistently identified on the vast majority of eastern
trees, although a few pictures are needed to get the idea across. One concept that I've experimented with a few times for limb length
where an arching form adds considerable length is the parabolic length
method. It is messy to compute, but more closely approximates the real
length of the limb. An alternative is the slope distance of the limb via the
Pathagorean Theorem. It is computationally much easier.
I will put together an attachment that illustrates the horizontal
offset method, the Pathagorean method, and the parabolic arc method for a
hypothetical limb. When they see it, I think most people will run from the
latter with the exception of the scientists, engineers, and mathematicians.
The parabolic arc method isn't practical for most field work. However, if we
have a great tree with a long curving limb that would be greatly
shortchanged were we to go with the horizontal offset, the parabolic arc
method offers us an alternative.
It will take a little time to produce the attachment. I'm working with
my wife's MAC and find myself hitting the wrong key about every other
keystroke. It could drive a feller to drink.
----- Original Message ----- From: Will Blozan To: entstrees@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 10:15 PM Subject: [ENTS] Re: Long Limbs
Bob,
It seems that the extant (straight line) of the limb would negate any computation of "path length". All combined woody structures- be it a curve or straight section- would yield the result of "x" limb extending "x" distance in space.
Will F. Blozan President, Eastern Native Tree Society President, Appalachian Arborists, Inc.
