What would you do? Redwood challenges part 1

General discussions of measurement techniques and the results of testing of techniques and equipment.

Moderators: edfrank, dbhguru

#1)  What would you do? Redwood challenges part 1

Postby John Harvey » Tue May 10, 2016 3:50 am

I figured I would post some scenarios here to gather some opinions and show some of the challenges in wrapping some of the redwoods here in California. Ill start with an easier one and I'll make it tougher from here on out. Truth be told, 98% of the nations largest trees are excluded from nomination to the AF champion tree list because...as Highlander says, there can be only one.

So here we have a tree I'll call, The Floodplain Tree. Myself and fellow BBS contributors Yinghai Lu and Max Forster came upon this tree in Redwood National and State Parks, as Mario likes to say. So I'll start with a couple questions:

1. When does leaf litter, "duff" (fallen needles), debris wash and so on constitute as ground level in your opinion or does it ever?

2. When do you abandon 4.5 feet above the base for a wrap? Lets say a large burl exists at this point or the entire base is a burl(s).

I know what I did to wrap this tree but I'm curious what you would do. Obviously I'm not in the habit of clearing years of fallen needles away from a trees base for many reasons and this tree is nowhere near what I've seen due to the fact it sits on a floodplain and may have it's needles washed clean from time to time. As you can see the tree has lots of burls at breast height and the one side is covered in growth. This side and the back are the most challenging portions as they heavily inflate the wrap and the duff blends the growth into the ground in some spots seamlessly. The burls on the back side are well above 6' tall.
Last edited by John Harvey on Wed May 11, 2016 1:41 am, edited 2 times in total.
John D Harvey (JohnnyDJersey)

East Coast and West Coast Big Tree Hunter

"If you look closely at a tree you'll notice it's knots and dead branches, just like our bodies. What we learn is that beauty and imperfection go together wonderfully." - Matt Fox
User avatar
John Harvey
 
Posts: 723
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 9:25 pm
Location: Northern California but from South Jersey
Has Liked: 352 times
Has Been Liked: 433 times
Print view this post

#2)  Re: What would you do? Redwood challenges part 1

Postby Don » Tue May 10, 2016 1:26 pm

John-
I can see that you are proposing a series that promises to challenge.
Taking my own medicine, I chose to use a "delineation tool", but to utilize it to establish a 'best fit' line for the cone that the trees bole defines, starting from the top (or what is available from the photo presented. Choosing the top-down delineation generally does a good job of defining where the tree's buttressing flares away (orange) from the 'linearity of the cone(yellow)'. I took the three delineated Floodplain Tree images, saved them in .jpg format and inserted them in a Powerpoint presentation.
               
                       
Slide1.jpg
                                       
               

               
                       
Slide2.jpg
                                       
               

               
                       
Slide3.jpg
                                       
               

At this point, I propose that taking the circumference/diameter at the approximate location of the orange delineations would provide the best measure of this tree.  If a fourth photo were included (think quadrants), it may be helpful. My thinking is that in respecting the tree (and our own humble height limitations), we might consider using a reticled monocular (with tripod mount similar to WIll Blozan's) in conjuction with a TruPulse to obtain a remote measurement of the diameter/circumference. Having four quadrant-ed images could discover/assess any eccentricity of its cross-section.
Practical considerations might include some manner of keeping the four separate orange delineations "matched" (I'm brainstorming here, thinking that several laser pointers could be employed to "placehold" the orange delineations to keep them in the same "plane")
As you go on to more challenging trees, perhaps non-standard forms, additional strategies may be necessitated...; ~ }
Don Bertolette - President/Moderator, WNTS BBS
Restoration Forester (Retired)
Science Center
Grand Canyon National Park

BJCP Apprentice Beer Judge

View my Alaska Big Tree List Webpage at:
http://www.akbigtreelist.org
User avatar
Don
 
Posts: 1452
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 1:42 am
Location: Anchorage, Alaska
Has Liked: 69 times
Has Been Liked: 228 times
Print view this post

#3)  Re: What would you do? Redwood challenges part 1

Postby MarkGraham » Wed May 11, 2016 12:28 am

John

For trees with burls I would do it this way:

First, I would use 4.5 feet above the ground as it is, would not brush anything away.  For the reasons you mention.

Second, stretch the tape all the way around the tree at the level you have determined is 4.5 feet above ground level.  Make the tape tight, no slack.  Note the circumference and calculate the diameter as C / pi.

Third, identify the burl that grows furthest out from the trunk and measure this distance, using ruler or calipers.  Subtract this distance from the diameter calculated in the second step and multiply the result by pi.   This is your "burl less" circumference.

Then one other point, as we know, diameter or circumference at 4.5 feet is one indicator for the massiveness of a redwood tree but diameters at multiple points up the trunk, especially at the point where the trunk assumes a columnar shape (functional diameter) will more accurately predict the mass of the tree.  But that is really hard to do so the diameter at 4.5 feet is a decent proxy and it is certainly a uniform way to evaluate sizes of trees.

Mark
User avatar
MarkGraham
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2016 11:19 pm
Location: Oak Park, IL, USA
Has Liked: 27 times
Has Been Liked: 17 times
Print view this post

#4)  Re: What would you do? Redwood challenges part 1

Postby mdvaden » Fri May 20, 2016 9:59 pm

John,

I'd have to show you in a grove my approach. It may vary some from Atkins, but I did a lot of redwood with Chris. We would almost always remove anything out of the way that was needles.

Then what lies beneath? Is it compost? Is it soil? Really didn't seem to matter. Just push down firm on the rest so it compresses somewhat firm, and I'd say we are now dealing with soil.

Burly base?

Sometimes we would decide grade by the ground level 10 feet away from the trunk. Sometimes not. Subjective? Yes - but a very experienced subjective.
M. D. Vaden of Oregon = http://www.mdvaden.com

200 Pages - Coast Redwoods - http://www.mdvaden.com/grove_of_titans.shtml

Portraits & Weddings - http://www.vadenphotography.com
User avatar
mdvaden
 
Posts: 767
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 7:30 pm
Location: Oregon
Has Liked: 8 times
Has Been Liked: 224 times
Print view this post


Return to Measurement and Dendromorphometry

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron