Search found 12 matches


Re: Keystone XL Pipeline - THE ANSWER ! ! !

John Denver sang out the answer, in the lyrics below:
"Blow Up Your TV"

"She was a levelheaded dancer on the road to alcohol,
I was just a soldier on my way to Montreal.
Well, she pressed her chest against me about the time the jukebox broke.
She gave me a peck on the back of the neck, and these are the words she spoke.

Blow up your TV, throw away your paper, go to the country, build you a home.
Plant a little garden, eat a lot of peaches, try and find Jesus on your own.

I sat there at the table, and I acted real naive.
Cause I knew that topless lady, she had something up her sleeve.
She danced around the room awhile and she did the hoochy coo.
Yeah, singing a song all night long, telling me what to do.

Blow up your TV, throw away your paper, go to the country, build you a home.
Plant a little garden, eat a lot of peaches, try and find Jesus on your own.

Well, I was young and hungry, and about to leave that place.
Just as I was going. she looked me in the face.
I said "You must know the answer," she said "No, but I'll give it a try."
To this day we've been living our way, here is the reason why.

We blew up your TV, threw away your paper, went to the country, build us a home.
Had a lot of children, fed 'em on peaches, they all found Jesus on their own."
by Don
Wed Nov 05, 2014 11:37 pm
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Eastern White Pine site in Newaygo County, MI


The numbers you post are quite reasonable. On good white pine sites, lots of trees growing in close proximity and in the age range to 100 to 150 years can be between 120 and 140 feet in height while having diameters of only 26 to 30 inches. The trees fatten out quicker on super sites, but as competition reduces the number of stems per acre on the more moderate sites, individual pines move up into the 30 to 40-inch diameter class.

Doug Bidlack is originally from Michigan and goes there frequently. Hopefully, he'll get to those pines in the not too distant future. Thanks for letting us know about them.

by dbhguru
Wed Dec 09, 2015 7:39 pm
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Eastern White Pine Growth Rates and Research Opportuniti


Sorry I haven't gotten back to you on your last post. You make many good points, all worthy of further discussion.

First, let me say that my current belief is that the Mohawk pines warrant a scientific study, even if a limited one. But, the Mohawk pines are not as exceptional for the species as I once thought. They do show us what happens in the lower elevation Massachusetts Berkshires on favorable white pine sites with ample protection. It is good white pine country, but what have I encountered elsewhere? It is time to put it all together.

Summary of White Pine Observations

Gaines, I have measured white pines over a large geographical area for over 20 years now. During this period, I have observed a few geographical areas with sites harboring exceptional white pines, sufficient to believe that in colonial days, there would have been lots of tall tree sites. For example, a large swath of northern Pennsylvania fits this description. Conversely, other geographical areas seem to be duds, e.g. much of southern New England's coastal region. So without further adieu,let me start with New England.


Before they blew down, Connecticut's Cathedral Pines had one tree at 172 feet and quite a few over 150. In the 1980s, the trees were described as old field pines around 230 years old with a few exceeding 300. The Cathedral Pines were New England's flagship trees. Nearby, a Nature Conservancy property named Bally Hack had a few large pines,with one to about 144 feet and very old, but the Bally Hack pines had nothing to compare with the Cornwall site. Elsewhere, the state of Connecticut maintains an area known as the Gold Pines. The stand is okay, but nothing extraordinary - nothing over 140 feet, but plenty over 130. I've measured a few isolated Connecticut white pines to the mid-130s, all in the western side of the state. I've seen nothing in the eastern side of the state of consequence.

Rhode Island

I've found nothing in Rhode Island. Pines in the 120s are pretty much it, and nobody has ever reported white pine sites for me to go look at in that state. When I've been down there, I see a lot of weeviled trees.

New Hampshire

The Granite State should claim the species as its state tree in my humble opinion, more so that Maine. There is a private site in Claremont NH along the Connecticut River with between 60 and 80 pines over 150 feet. Four or 5 over 160. One is close to 170. The pines are about 150 years old. Elsewhere in the Granite State, I've measure 3 white pines in the Hanover area to between 150 and 155 feet. There are lots of NH sites with pines above 125 feet, but so far other sites with the charismatic 150s have eluded me. Reports of 260-footer once having grown in Lancaster are not credible.


Vermont has been a disappointment. I've broken 150 feet on only one pine in the entire state. That lone tree grows in the Marsh Billings Rockefeller National Historical Park. A half dozen others there exceed 140 feet. Elsewhere I've broken 130 feet on only three sites. I think there was once a fairly impressive population of big pines.


The Ordway Pines in Norway Maine are old trees. One lone pine exceeds 150 feet and a couple of others are above 140. Elsewhere there are a number of sites with pines in the 130 to 135-foot class as documented by Dr. Charlie Cogbill in the 1980s. He was measuring the heights with a clinometer, but he measured enough in different locations to lend credibility to that class of height. Maine is a large state, but much of it is industrial timberland, or better yet, industrial wasteland. Elsewhere, the idea of letting trees grow for a century or more is not part of the culture.


We have MTSF with 131,William Cullen Bryant with 20, and Ice Glen with 4. All other sites have only one. The total for all of Massachusetts stands at 159 great whites reaching 150.

New York

The Adirondacks are where most of the 150s grow that we have measured. There are likely half dozen sites outside the Dacks with one or two 150s. In the Dacks, we have 4 sites that we've documented with a single pine reaching 150. But I expect there are a number of sites hidden across the state that make it.


The Keystone State is a white pine goldmine. Of course, Cook Forest State Park leads the list, having the absolute tallest great whites in the Northeast, but they are older trees with many exceeding 250 years and probably a few surpassing 350. There are plenty of younger pines there approaching 150 feet, probably at ages of between 125 and 150 years. In addition to Cook Forest, we have Anders Run, Hearts Content, and several other sites with ones and twos. The potential is enormous.

New Jersey

We have not documented any 150s in the Garden State.

Observations on Annual Growth

I often see growth rates at the tops of the pines that exceed the numbers quoted in the Silvics sources for the assumed ages but then I see plenty of stands that conform. I'm interested in teasing out the broader patterns as opposed to committing a lot of energy on one or two sites. One must choose the trees to measure carefully when time and resources are limited.

My present plan is to select a small number of pines from each of several sites as indicative of what the pines can achieve on those sites. As initial data are gathered, the direction to then take should become clearer to us. It will be a while before I can get to the measurements, but it will happen.

by dbhguru
Mon Nov 10, 2014 6:57 pm
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Pinus taeda (Loblolly Pine) Listing

All- I just finished putting together a Loblolly Pine Listing. If you have and additions please let me know. I plan to also do one with Blad Cypress and Long Leaf Pine as well. Here are a couple of photos from my latest trip up to Noxubee NWR a week ago. I have a lot to report on coming soon. Loblolly Enis Road 3.jpg The tree was short to 115' but the 13' 2" Circumference isthe largest in the state that I have measured. Loblolly Enis Road 2.jpg Loblolly Pine Listing.xlsx Larry
by Larry Tucei
Wed Nov 18, 2015 9:00 pm
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Camp Creek, GA LiDAR


LiDAR data for northeast Georgia shows one of the greatest concentrations of high hits near the mouth of Camp Creek on the Chattooga River. That location is not surprising given that the next watershed to the north is Cliff Creek, home to the tallest known trees in Georgia, and the general abundance of tall conifers in the Chattooga River watershed. Most of the high hits are on a steep, north-facing slope. White pines on such topography often produce very high LiDAR hits as they lean slightly down-hill leading to the canopy height (which is what LiDAR actually measures) significantly exceeding the tree height. However, my dad and I visited Camp Creek in 2005, and found trees up to 165’ (see for site description and measurements). So we knew a trip back to Camp Creek wouldn’t be a complete wild goose chase. Also, a 207’ hit demanded checking, even if suspect.

Last September we returned to Camp Creek. The gently rolling terrain of the surrounding Appalachian foothills and alternating bands of oaks and pine give little hint of the dark, moist, hemlock filled ravines that line the Chattooga River. After measuring a high LiDAR hit in an adjacent ravine and in the process stumbling into a small grove of tall, but frustratingly difficult to measure, shortleaf pines, we arrived at the creek. Liverworts cover ever boulder in the stream and add to the sense of moisture that pervades the shaded area. High on north facing slope, scattered white pines thrust their crowns out of the shade and into the sky. Below them, hemlocks and an understory of rhododendron cloak the 30 to over 40 degree slope.

We headed straight up the slope to the highest LiDAR hit, and when we arrived 100’ above the elevation of the stream we found a trio of pines that appeared slightly older than most on the slope. Unfortunately, a terrain error appears to have exaggerated the height of these trees. To add injury to insult, recent droughts (probably) damaged the trees. The crown of the tallest of the three had died back and broken off at ~130’, where it was about a foot in diameter. The tree was never close to 207’, but might have surpassed 160’. Other high hits on that slope were free from data errors and healthier, but all of the ones we visited leaned downhill enough to exaggerate canopy height relative to tree height. However, Camp Creek also has one alluvial flat dominated by white pines, and LiDAR heights better reflected tree height in this area. The previously measured 165’ white pine grows at the edge of that flat, but forest in the flat was unmeasured.

Camp Creek is now the forth site in Georgia known to support trees over 170’ tall. The mockernut hickory, dogwood, hophornbeam, and shortleaf pine are all within six feet of their respective state height records. The silverbell, though dwarfed by the 170’ pines that it grows directly underneath, is a new state height record.

Many LiDAR hits in Georgia over 170’ remain to be ground-truthed, but almost all are on steep slopes along large streams. Cliff Creek and Camp Creek are nearly unique in containing alluvial flats that support productive, white pine dominated forest, and the extra nutrients and water in those flats may explain the greater height of trees along these two streams. However, I am somewhat surprised the height difference isn’t even greater. The 166.7’ pine may impress me the most of any tree we measured that day. It grows above the alluvial flat on a somewhat gentler (perhaps 20 degree), but apparently much drier section of slope. Rather than hemlocks, that tree shoots out of a perhaps 100’ high canopy of drought tolerant hardwoods. If a pine can exceed 160’ on a site with regular drought stress, why don’t they regularly exceed 180’ on moister sites? White pine height seems to vary much less with topography than most tall species in the southern Appalachians.

by Jess Riddle
Sat Sep 21, 2013 9:21 pm
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Eastern White Pine Growth Rates and Research Opportuniti


As you know, tuliptrees grow very fast, and heights of 140 feet or a more in 50 years are achieved in the Southern Appalachians on the most fertile sites, with eventual heights possibly approaching 200 feet. I have not seen any specific study of the "curve" as such, but I do know that generally their growth peaks relatively early like white pine and most other eastern hardwood trees, and declines as the trees reach 35 to 50 years old, and continues to decline as the tree ages. I have never seen any estimate of the 'residual" height growth of very old trees. But, contrary to what you might see in some sources, tuliptree reaches fairly advanced ages of up to 400 years and possibly more. It doesn't have the straight line on a graph past the age of 50 as does Norway spruce.

by gnmcmartin
Tue Dec 15, 2015 8:24 pm
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Upper Peninsula, Michigan


The short scrubby jack pines Bob shows in Michigan are characteristic of the south (from the point of view of the boreal forests, Michigan is 'the south'). In the boreal forest it is a tall slender tree, as shown in these pictures in northern Minnesota ('the north').

Mature jack pine forest in the Boundary Waters, MN, Photo by Bud Heinselman


190 year old jack pine being invaded by cedar (olive green along water edge) and black spruce (photo Lee Frelich). Forests this old are unusual and succession is starting to occur.


Here is the interior of a mature jack pine boreal forest with feather moss about 10 inches deep on the forest floor.


And, since this is a fire dependent forest type, with high intensity crown fires every 50-150 years (unlike the scrubby jack pines further south which are not serotinous), here are pictures after the fire. Note the cones on the lower branches (look like small knobs) and high in the crowns, which create considerable density in the crown even after the needles have fallen off. (Photos by Bud Heinselman).



Here is a jack pine forest 3 years after fire (Photo Bud Heinselman). Note that the forest came right back from a black moonscape to dense regeneration.


Non-boreal (Bob's pictures from Michigan) and boreal jack pine (these pictures) are very different in growth form, ecological function, and adaptation to fire. The forest Bob showed probably has open cones, more frequent fires and more variety of jack pine tree ages.

by Lee Frelich
Fri Jun 24, 2011 12:49 pm
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Porcupine Mountains


Piece 'a cake. Expect it pronto.


The Porkies provide a visual feast like few others in the East. The mountains are not large. They rise to elevations of over 1,900 feet from Lake Superior just over 600. However, this is enough elevation change to provide a taste of mountains. There are wolves in the Porkies. They are truly wild. The entire Park. I've heard different quotes for the acreage of "virgin timber" from 30,000 to 35,000. Pick a number, but it is a lot. The entire wilderness park is 60,000 acres, about the size of Quabbin - but oh, what a difference.

by dbhguru
Sat Jun 25, 2011 8:46 am
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Tribute to Grandpa, Joyce Kilmer, and The Big Tree

Greetings to fellow tree hunters.

I have joined this discussion with a love for trees, poetry, and also a tree to share. My father has always had a love for trees. His late uncle owned over one-hundred acres in north Ironwood, where he used to teach my dad the different species when he was young. My mother's dad had a favorite poem he would receit, and of course, it is the poem "TREES", by Joyce Kilmer. I kept his framed copy of this poem, and a friend who went through a hard time with an addiction, drew a picture of a tree for me, and I've inserted it in the frame.

One day, on a sunday afternoon, a friend introduced me to the largest tree I have ever seen in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan.The tree is actually in town, nessled in a grove of pines. The tree is known about, but as I understand it is not registered. I hope that in the creation of this post, it will become that. I visited the tree yesterday, which was Sunday December 20th, 2015. I brought my father along and he snapped some photos of me next to this significant tree.

We believe it to be a German Poplar. I am not an expert so I will start with what I can tell you. The pines around it are tall and spindly, and it towers above them from afar off. My only measuring apparatus was my arm lengths, and at 70" I went around it four times plus four feet. We tried to get a photo of my arm spread in front, but as you know in photography, the tree shrunk significantly due to camera angles. The tree has two smaller of the same species near it, and with my rustic measuring system, they would be circumferences of 26'-27+', 13+', and 10'.

Here is my tribute to the famous poem, and the reminiscent picture in honor of my grandpa, and the big tree in Ironwood, MI.

Monday, June 9, 2014
To Be A Tree

When I was young I saw the stars

As I stared from my mother's arms.

I felt the majesty of height,

And the fury of windy night.

Which blew me from my leafy bed,

To the ground so cold.

No longer held, I clung unto

The gritty dirt below,

And stretched a twig up at the sky

Towards the glory I once knew.

The rain splashed down,

And sun peaked through,

And after that the snow.

This wiry little sapling sprawled,

The heavy burden on me now..

But spring did come and summer too.

Soon another winter I'd seen through.

Until a tall but spindly fellow

With leafy head did crest,

High above the muddy trail

Peering the heavens with the rest.

Time did place her ring on me,

Every year she married me.

Until I grew fat from earthy grub

And my strong limbs were stretched.

My own little seedlings I have now.

They dance in the breeze above my brow.

For now, we together gaze stars above.

As I cradle fragile nests of love.

But soon the wind will shake them free,

To try their hand…

To be a tree. ~joel

Photo on 12-21-15 at 1.50 AM (2).jpg
by Treedom
Mon Dec 21, 2015 4:51 am
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Fork Ridge Tuliptree- new eastern height record!!!

Fork Ridge Tuliptree climb

All the variables needed for the climb of the tall tuliptree Ian Breckheimer located last May finally came into place. An NPS research permit, good weather, and competent arborists convened last week for the initial ascent and modeling of the super-tree. The expedition members were Josh Kelly, Hugh Irwin, Michael Davie, Mike Riley, Nich Maidment, Aaron Knoblet, Ana Poirier, and I. I should note that this group consisted of a collaborative effort of FIVE tree care companies! Ian Breckheimer and his father Steve, whom found the tree, also joined us later in the day.

The hike in was around four miles (6.7 km). We set up a base camp and decided to go ahead and haul the climbing gear in to the tree, verify the height, and if time permitted, rig it with ropes for the next day of measuring. We decided to access the location of the tree from an adjacent ridge, opting for a descent to the site rather than a potential nasty bushwhack up a steep slope with heavy packs. This added a good bit more hiking but left the unknowns to a minimum. Unfortunately, Ana lost a boot during the first stream crossing and she and Josh stayed back to try to locate it.

All I had to go on was a GPS point that Josh gave me. He was not in the climbing group that went up for the rigging so we entered unknown territory. The slope was ridiculously steep and the effort to stay upright was compounded by the weight of the gear. In a semi-controlled slide we dropped off the ridge and down into a steep, rich cove. The transition from dry ridge top to lush, tall cove forest was abrupt. We scouted ahead and spotted what we thought may be the tree. Nope; farther down we went. We did not know what to expect- except we knew it was a large tree.

Michael Davie and I were leading the group and at the same time we saw “the tree”. This time, it was obvious! It was also a lot bigger than I imagined, especially in the crown. Just to be sure we roughly measured the height. Various expletives echoed in the steep cove as both Mike and I measured the height of the tree to over 190 feet (58 m). Yep, we found it!
Whole tree from upslope HI001.jpg
Tall canopy HI001.jpg
The rest of the group tumbled down and we assessed the tree. I was most worried about rigging it and climbing among the large amount of deadwood present. Josh Kelly had thought the lowest branch was around 85 feet (26 m). Well, the first fork was closer to ~102 feet (31 m); the second at ~115 feet (35 m). Neither was suitable in the slightest for rigging the tree; they were too tight and too large to scramble over even if we could get a line set there. Also, potential pitches between the upper branches were few and far between. I explored with the laser scope and found the only available spot for an ascension rope. It was solidly 160 feet (49 m) above the base. This height is beyond any human capacity to hand-throw and out of the reasonable range of conventional rigging devices such as slingshots.
Canopy gnarlage HI001.jpg
Fortunately, I anticipated this being the case and with the help of my son, Aven, built a pneumatic throw-weight launcher. This device uses compressed air from a bike pump to propel a 12 ounce throw-weight with a thin line attached to it. The bag with thin trailing line is launched into the tree, over a suitable branch, and then a climbing line is attached and pulled through. This allows us to ascend up the rope, not the tree itself. Traditionally, at least in eastern trees, a pole-mounted slingshot is used. But we needed something easier to carry, more predictable and capable of greater range. Our collapsible device had launched the throw-weight and line 300 feet (91 m) vertically in testing. Now it was time for the real test.

I located a spot with a clean shot to the intended branch fork. As most arborists familiar with tall tree climbing know, the first shot is always a “calibration shot” and often results in a deployment tangle nightmare of throwline. I had full intention of a blown shot, so while the others were getting out their cameras to film the “real shot”, I opened the valve. Much to everyone’s surprise the bag sailed cleanly through the intended fork and clear out the other side of the tree! With a bit of finagling with some minor tangles the tree was rigged. A single shot rigged the tallest tree yet climbed in the eastern US!
Whole tree southeast WB001.jpg
We only had 300 feet (91 m) of static rope so we had to anchor one end upslope to allow the other end to reach the ground for climbing. With my rigging fear in the past, we had time to climb the tree and return to camp before dark. I was the only one who went up, and I did an initial inspection and tried to come up with a plan for the next day. Shortly before I ascended Ian and Steve joined us. Ana and Josh also had just arrived after an unsuccessful attempt to find her wayward boot. She hiked in Josh’s way-too-big sandals stuffed with socks and duct-taped to her feet.

The hanging rope illustrated how the tree slightly but significantly leaned and also how offset the top was. I was not sure which top was the tallest but we were definitely rigged on the correct leader. The tree forked into three main tops. All of these were stout and alive with new leaves just emerging.

I ascended the rope and watched the trunk taper a bit and then remain virtually unchanged for over 80 feet (24 m). The bark was thick and indicative of an old tree. The first limb fork was huge since the trunk was still nearly four feet thick. Epiphytic birches were present in the debris of the closely squeezed fork. No rope would ever have fit in there without locking up. Same for the next fork, which was the top of the main trunk. This point was 115.5 feet (35.2 m) above the base and 46.5” (1.18 m) diameter.
Will ascend IB001.jpg
Above the last fork the three main tops spiraled and spread apart. There were virtually no more straight sections as the tops wound their way upwards. Huge pieces of deadwood teetered and shook as I climbed into the crown. I left the ascension rope and switched to a double-rope climbing technique. At 175 feet (53.3 m) I stopped climbing higher and scouted the tops. The lead I had climbed was not the tallest point but within a foot or two. I decided I could reach the tallest point with a pole the next day for the tape drop. I set my line, descended to the other rope and rappelled down to the ground. We also identified and set the midslope position with pins. The tree was ready!

We left the gear hung in the trees and dropped down the cove to check out the stream crossing as a possible better option for the return the next day. It was a far better option, and much quicker.

The next morning was cold but clear and we were relatively unencumbered by heavy gear. Five climbers went up for the volume modeling; Mike, Nich, Ana, Michael and I. I was the primary data recorder while the others traversed the crown and relayed the measurements. I had full intention of doing the 3D crown mapping this day but soon became overwhelmed with the complexity of the tree and the logistics of doing it without a survey laser. It was all but impossible in the amount of time we had.
Five aloft HI001.jpg
Five climbers AK001.jpg
Nich on far lead001.jpg
The focus thus changed to a tape drop and volume modeling of the entire tree. I climbed up near the top and with a 17 foot (5.2 m) pole was able to isolate and measure the highest twig. The highest point was not over anything solid- and originated on a twisted part of the main central lead. With a clinometer I transferred the measurement to the other lead that Mike Riley was on so we could drop the tape from there and have it as close to the trunk as possible. The tape was dropped and Josh was on the ground and “zeroed” it on the midslope tack.
Mike Davie in top001.jpg
Nich at top of main001.jpg
Mike Riley Ana Poirier in top001.jpg
We were anxious to know how tall the tree actually was. The “Boogerman Pine” at 188.9 feet (57.6 m) was the number to beat. The pine has had the reign as the tallest eastern tree since 1995. Well, the Boogerman has been surpassed. The tape drop of the great tuliptree was 191.9 feet (58.5 m)! This is the first tuliptree ever accurately measured to exceed 190 feet (57.9 m) and it now stands as the tallest native broadleaf tree known in all of temperate North America- surpassing a black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa) in Olympic National Park by over 10 feet (3 m)!
We went about the volume modeling for the rest of the day. It actually didn’t take all that long since there were not too many pieces to measure. Not having to monument them in three dimensions really did speed things up.
Will and Mike trunk wraps AK001.jpg
Basal measurements HI001.jpg
Climbing party HI001.jpg
Back at camp, Josh and I were speculating on the volume of the tree. I estimated ~2,600 cubic feet (73.6 m3) when it was thought to be 187 feet (57 m) tall. After the tape drop we both thought it may be closer to 3,000 cubic feet (85 m3). Admittedly, that is a lot of wood for a moderate sized tree. However, some of the hemlocks Jess Riddle and I had modeled for the Tsuga Search Project were surprisingly large for the relatively small basal dimensions. This is because although rather slender, they were very tall trees and had really long, slow-tapered trunks. Ditto on this tree- and our suspicions were correct.

Table 1: Sampled tree lengths, volume and relative distribution
Tree summary
Length (ft ) Length (m) Volume (ft3) Volume (m3) Percent
Main trunk 115.5 (35.1) 2,015.8 (57.1) 70.9%
Segments 438.32 (133.6) 791.3 (22.4) 27.8%
Branches 573 (174.7) 37.1 (1.1) 1.3%
Tree totals 1126.82 (343.5) 2,844.2 (80.6)

At 2,844 cubic feet (80.6 m3) this is not a small tree. It is likely larger than most other “big ones” of much shorter height. The large size of this moderate tree has us rethinking the size of some of the other big tuliptrees we know of but have heretofore not thought seriously about. Since they are short or have a short main trunk with a large crown we have regarded them as being smaller than a larger trunked tree. Curiously, the main trunk volume of this tree rivals the volume of some of the modeled giants with considerably larger diameters but shorter trunks. This, coupled with the relatively small crown of this tree still having nearly 800 cubic feet of wood has got our attention!

In addition to the climb, tape drop, and volume modeling completed by the climbers, Hugh, Ian and Josh worked on a .2 hectare (.5 acre) circular plot of the woody stems surrounding the target tree. The exceptional growing potential of the site is further demonstrated by the results of the plot which included the heights of the surrounding trees. Including the target tree, there are nine Liriodendron in the plot, all over 31” dbh. Two of the trees adjacent to the target tree are over 170’ tall (see table 2) – both tuliptree. There has been some discussion about this, but this plot certainly has eye popping above ground biomass. Whether old-growth stands such as this have higher biomass than second growth stands is a worthy topic of future research.

Table 2: Dominant and Co-dominant Trees in plot
Species DBH Height (feet)
Liriodendron tulipifera 49.15 (114.7 cm) 172.7 (52.6 m)
Liriodendron tulipifera 48.2 (122.4 cm) 172 (52.4 m)
Liriodendron tulipifera 54 (137.2 cm) N/A
Liriodendron tulipifera 41.7 (105.9 cm) 157.4 (48 m)
Liriodendron tulipifera 47.8 (121.4 cm) 167.5 (51.1 m)
Liriodendron tulipifera 42.8 (108.7 cm) N/A
Liriodendron tulipifera 55.5 (141 cm) 149.1 (45.5 m)
Liriodendron tulipifera 31.7 (80.5 cm) N/A
Liriodendron tulipifera 67.8 (172.2 cm) 191.9 (target tree 58.5 m)
Betula lenta 23.3 (59.2 cm) N/A
Tsuga canadensis 31.1 (79 cm) N/A
Fraxinus americana 34.2 (86.9 cm) 140+ (42.7 m)

It appears the crown volume of these trees is considerable and adds up to some serious volume. The “Greenbrier Giant” in Tennessee comes to mind immediately. This is a fat, stumpy tree but it has an immense crown. Another big tree in Deep Creek that we took some time to measure may fall into this category. This giant is 21’1” CBH (6.4 m) and 179 feet (54.6 m) tall. It has a rather short trunk but what a crown! This tree could very well rival the huge 4,013 cubic foot (113.6 m3) Sag Branch Tuliptree that has the current reign as the largest tuliptree known.
Giant tree JK001.jpg
These superlative titles of height and volume may soon pass to trees yet to be discovered within a new study just initiated by ENTS. This three year study of superlative tuliptree in the Smokies (NC side only) is a permitted study. Locations of the trees cannot be given on publically accessible sites such as the ENTS BBS. However, all ENTS are encouraged to participate in this project and assist in the field efforts.

Thus, the climb of the Fork Ridge Tuliptree is the beginning of a new understanding of the species. It is also the tip of the iceberg- as it is quite likely that we have not found the tallest one yet. LiDAR strongly suggests taller trees may out there. They are remote and it will take some serious effort to document them all.

The National Park Service plans to submit a press release next week about this tree and the work of ENTS. This should get some great exposure for the park and the resources it protects, as well as the important work we ENTS are doing in the eastern forests.

Submitted by Will Blozan (with special thanks to Ian and Josh) on behalf of the ENTS LiDAR and NPS Tuliptree study crew
by Will Blozan
Fri Apr 29, 2011 11:00 pm
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Atlantic White Cedar death and high retention powerlines

Couldn't the powerline cut alone be responsible for this? Some conifers don't fare very well when they go from a shady forest environment to an open or partly open situation. I don't know if Atlantic White-cedar (AWC) is one of these species. I know of one powerline cut in AWC forest in North Reading, MA but I can't remember if all the trees along the cut were dying. It seems like they might have been...I'll have to go and check the place out again.

by DougBidlack
Thu Dec 18, 2014 10:30 am
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Boogerman Loop and "new" 180' white pine


Today I took a group from Ontario Canada into the Smokies for their first foray into the Cataloochee Valley. We did the Boogerman Loop Trail with the goals of seeing the Boogerman Pine and the Sag Branch Tuliptree. Even though foot bridges were out and the morning was cold we had a successful trip. As I predicted the hemlock carnage upstream is now flowing down and taking out bridges. I call these "Tsugnamis".
Icy crossing.jpg
I am please to report that the Boog suffered no noticeable crown damage this past windy winter. I measured the girth for Matt's list which was 111.5 cm (43.9") diameter. This tree has not perceptively changed in diameter since it's discovery in 1993. I did not measure the height as the regrowth from the death of the hemlocks was so thick and I doubt it has changed since last measurement- at least not within the resolution of the handheld instruments.
The Boog 1.jpg
We next saw the HUGE chestnut oak on the west prong of Sag Branch which is a whopping 123.0 cm (48.4") diameter and ~140' (42.7 m) tall. This tree has a lot of wood and may be among the largest specimens known.
Sag Branch chestnut oak.jpg
After the oak we went to the Sag Branch Tuliptree which is doing splendidly. NO new crown damage and lots of live tops and new leaves.
Sag Branch Tulip 1.jpg
Sag Branch Tulip 2.jpg
The find of the day was not a new find but a remeasure of the "Palmer Pole". This large white pine has been a bugger to measure but now that the hemlocks have all died visibility is great. Michael Davie and I have tried several times to measure this great tree but were thwarted by thick brush and dense hemlocks. No good sightings could be made. As we approached the tree from the west I could clearly see the crown and the high point. All previous measurements were to side branches due to the steep angle and poor visibility. Well, this large 115.7 cm (45.6") tree is an outstanding 183' (55.8 m) tall! This make tree #9 over 180' for the species and the 5th tree in the Smokies. Sweet!!!!!
Palmer Pole 1.jpg
Palmer Pole 2.jpg
by Will Blozan
Fri Apr 26, 2013 6:21 pm
Jump to forum
Jump to topic