Big Creek

Moderators: edfrank, dbhguru

#11)  Re: Big Creek

Postby bbeduhn » Fri Apr 08, 2016 9:22 am

Big creek

The creek itself has reasonably tall trees but they mostly pale in comparison to the heights in the coves. One exception is a tall, low branching chestnut oak. It doesn't appear to be as tall as it is and looks shorter than what I'd seen in the coves but the laser said otherwise. I believe this was measured by Will at 143' in 2010.
               
                       
chestnut oak 1.jpg
                       
139.9' chestnut oak
               
               
               
                       
chestnut oak 2.jpg
                       
139.9' chestnut oak
               
               


Quercus montana   139.9' 127.1'

Betula lenta             100.9'

Betula allegheniensis  86.4'

               
                       
red salamander 6.jpg
                       
6" red salamander, measured sin/sin/laser of course!
               
               
Last edited by bbeduhn on Fri Apr 08, 2016 9:57 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
bbeduhn
 
Posts: 911
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 5:23 pm
Location: Asheville, NC
Has Liked: 1042 times
Has Been Liked: 450 times
Print view this post

#12)  Re: Big Creek

Postby bbeduhn » Fri Apr 08, 2016 9:54 am

Mouse Creek

I fought the rhododendron for a while but gave up before I got to the awesome upper coves of Mouse Creek. I'll approach from the top next time as Will suggested, "gravity helps with rhododendron". The tulip numbers are a mixed bag as the tops vary. Some are very easy shots and some have slightly larger crowns which may or may not reveal their true tops from below. I'd read that railroad grades ran all through the cove, leading me to believe that travel would be easy but the grades are more choked with rhodo than the slopes are. I just got a handful of numbers. Tulip and bitternut do better higher up and a few coves have yet to be explored by any ENTS.

The red oak was above me on the grade I hiked on initially. I came back out on a higher grade and it reveled itself from this grade. This tree has a better chance of hitting 160' than the red oak on the Whitewater River in SC. It appears to be quite young  (75-80 years). It's put on some girth since 2010, about 10". It slipped my mind to get a photo but Will posted one in 2010.

Lirio tulip         169.7' 169.0' 167.6' 166.8' 159.6' 159.1' 158.2' 156.3'

Quercus rubra   132.7'  155.7' cbh 12'2" or 146"  

Robinia pseudo   136.0'

Carya cordi         131.5'

Halesia monti      121.6'

Betula alleghen    88.3'

Prunus serotina   120.6'

               
                       
mouse creek 1.jpg
                       
Mouse Creek forest
               
               
               
                       
mouse creek 2.jpg
                       
Mouse Creek forest
               
               
User avatar
bbeduhn
 
Posts: 911
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 5:23 pm
Location: Asheville, NC
Has Liked: 1042 times
Has Been Liked: 450 times
Print view this post

#13)  Re: Big Creek

Postby dbhguru » Fri Apr 08, 2016 11:39 am

Brian,

  Heck'uva red oak. You had that one hid in the numbners. Tulips aren't slouches, assuming their fairly young. We're so used to 170s and 180s in the Smokies, that we're spoiled.

Bob
Robert T. Leverett
Co-founder and Executive Director
Native Native Tree Society
Co-founder and President
Friends of Mohawk Trail State Forest
User avatar
dbhguru
 
Posts: 3921
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 10:34 pm
Location: Florence, Massachusetts
Has Liked: 3 times
Has Been Liked: 1035 times
Print view this post

#14)  Re: Big Creek

Postby bbeduhn » Mon Apr 11, 2016 4:14 pm

I went back to Baxter Creek to see which tulip was the 185 footer. I don't know exactly what happened but every possible was measured and none fit the bill. Some better numbers did arise. The Rucker tulip and its next door neighbor are a little taller than I previously measured. I noticed a mighty fine silverbell along Baxter Creek that i missed before. It is one of only three known to top 130', and had been measured previously. A very old silverbell resides a bit further up the trail. Bitternut hickories are almost as ubiquitous as tulips. I missed quite a few on my initial visit. Some of the tulips are remeasures.

Lirio tulip   175.3' (by bend in trail) 173.8' & 172.1' (Rucker tulip group) 171.9' 170.8' 169.5' 168.7'
                  168.5' 168.6' 167.9' 167.0' 166.9' 166.4' 166.0' 165.3' 164.4' 164.3' 164.2' 162.8' 162.8'
                  161.6' 161.3' 161.0'

Magnolia acuminata  126.1' 124.2' 122.9'

Halesia monticoloa   131.3' 118.6' 117.3' 116.7' 113.4' 112.1'

Robinia pseudo    134.1' 126.0'

Quercus velotina  114.1'

Carya cordiformis   152.5' 143.8' 143.6' 134.7' 130.8'

Fraxinus americ      143.6' 130.9'

               
                       
rucker tulips 1.jpg
                       
Rucker tulips
               
               
               
                       
rucker tulips 2.jpg
                       
Rucker tulips 172.1' & 173.8'
               
               
               
                       
baxter silverbell.jpg
                       
Old silverbell
               
               
               
                       
baxter beech tulip.jpg
                       
Beech and tulip
               
               
               
                       
baxter apron tulip.jpg
                       
Tulip relic
               
               

For this message the author bbeduhn has received Likes :
Erik Danielsen
User avatar
bbeduhn
 
Posts: 911
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 5:23 pm
Location: Asheville, NC
Has Liked: 1042 times
Has Been Liked: 450 times
Print view this post

Previous

Return to Great Smoky Mountains National Park

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest