A cultivar of Lawson's Cypress Chamaecyparis lawsoniana
You wouldn't know which one? It's been annoying me for a while now.
This can be the slow growing cv. 'Columnaris'. Is known when this tree was planted?
No known planting date, although there is a picture of it from 15-20 years ago and it hasn't grown too much since then.
Looking at the other Lawson's cypresses in this park it is a full matured tree. I would say it is no longer a tree off undetermined species, but a Chamaecyparis lawsoniana 'Columnaris'
Curiously the name 'Columnaris' is used in Britain and Ireland (and in America judging from googling the name) for a quite different cultivar with grey, mostly vertical sprays and a narrow (columnar) habit. On older trees there is a marked change in habit at 4m up, where the sprays become like the type's (but stay the same dull grey). Martin, as 'Columnaris' was a Dutch clone originally, are you saying that the original plants resembled this one?
I would have just said that the Gosford tree is a poorly-grown and scruffy 'Erecta Viridis', but it could well be a scarce, slower-growing named clone.
In 1976 there was a big example of 'Gracilis Pendula' at Gosford, presumably labelled - a Veitch clone. This should have been an open, weeping tree, so I don't suspect this tree is a scion from that one.
Could very well be erecta viridis, will check shoots with the other erecta viridis in the forest.
Podocarpus sp., perhaps P. salignus (though the leaves are a bit short for this)
Thanks, yes I think P. Salignus leaves are too big, will upload a clearer picture..... Possibly nubigenus?
Doesn't look like P. nubigenus, which has shorter, stiffer, denser leaves. How large is the plant? If just a small, young plant it could well still be P. salignus, as when young (up to maybe 1-2m tall?) they do have shorter leaves like this.
Hi, there are two trees both about 8 or 9 metres tall at the max...
OK! So some other Podocarpus . . . not easy!
Wouldn't P. totara be the obvious species?
Unfortunately, there are no historic Alan Mitchell records for these younger plantings at Gosford. Do we know where the Forest Service (?) may have been sourcing them from?
I will have to get down on Saturday to get a clearer picture of the tree and foliage. Would be hard to know where the Forest Service would have sourced these from as there haven't really been any plantings since and there may not be any records.
Another must visit in the future
There is a majestic elm at Övraböke, Halmstad, Sweden, as reported by Lars G Andersson in 2011. He believes it to be a pollarded tree, now abandoned, with an impressive girth of 10,6 metres. Looks multistemmed but still quite a monumental specimen.
I hope to visit this location some day but it's a long trip for me so it's unknown when I get the opportunity. I thought I might share it with you if someone are in the neighbourhood for some reason...
Lars G Anderssons coordinates: https://www.google.se/maps/place/56%C2%B055'03.8%22N+12%C2%B054'13.7%22Efirstname.lastname@example.org,12.9037396,195m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x0:0x0
Can be found athttp://www.tradportalen.se/Observations.aspx#
Good suggestion, thank you.
Few weeks ago on the way north, we were in Båstad for the "Suntelbuche" (Vresbok) in the Norrvikens trädgård. We passed Halmstad and the area were Övraböke is.
I found three Ulmus > 10 m girth on Trädportalen. One between Rumskilla and Bodnaryd which are both on my list for next week. It looks that the one near Eksjö is on private ground (Google Earth).
Don't know if I succeed in adding more trees om my list now, depends on more than my own intention. Let's see what happens. At least good to know so I can put them on my list anyway for future visits.
Kind regards, Maarten
Did you register the Suntelbuche/vresbok here?
Good luck in finding interesting trees on your journeys!
Not yet, coming soon. 2013 we visited two in Northern Ireland and 2009 one in Germany (MT 13135). Hannover (MT 3409) is on the list. See also Suntelbuche on de.wikipedia site.
Best whishes, Maarten
I see some of the trees you registered are near Gävle. Is it possible you maybe register the apple tree when you come in that area? I read the tree is still standing and 24/7 watched.
There is also facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/radda.appeltradet?fref=ts where I can follow this case and find sometimes links to newsfacts like this one.http://www.arbetarbladet.se/opinion/insandare/lat-det-bli-ett-julappeltrad
It's a few hours away from me, but I'll try to give it a visit and take some photos but I can't say when, quite busy right now with work and familythings etc... Hopefully it will be left standing for a litle while longer...
This looks to be a Abies koreana
Greetings, Martin Tijdgat
Hello, thanks for this, I wasn't sure as the cones were at the very top of the tree.
Not quite right for Abies koreana, looks more like Abies × arnoldiana (hybrid between Abies koreana and Abies veitchii) to me.
Thanks, that is a new one for me. How do you keep A. Koreana and A. X arnoldiana apart?
The hybrid is of course intermediate between the parents. Leaf length / width ratio (A. koreana has shorter, broader needles, A. veitchii longer, slenderer needles), and the degree of white below (A. koreana more vivid white often covering the full width of the underside, A. veitchii less vivid white and usually in two bands with the green midrib showing easily) are the best features to look for.
They set fire on one of the best oaks in Europe!
I just got the news today from my friend Krzysztof Borkowski from Poland that Chrobry oak has set on fire:
I hope it will survive, but the pictures look very bad.
It is very sad news. The Chrobry oak is one of the most impressive oak trees in Europe. Why are people doing this!?
Indeed very sad and incredible that people do this. This is indeed one of the most impressive oaks I have ever visited.
I'm afraid I'm in despair with the human race!
The heat involved is likely to have cooked the sapwood and cambium layer, I am not hopeful it will survive. The Sherwood Oak in Nottinghamshire was also set on fire in the past, but it has survived.
Jeroen Pater and I visited this oak at a day in November 1999. At the same day we also visited the oak Napoleon in Zabor, somewhat more to the north-east, wich had a girth of even 10.45 m and was the biggest circumferenced oak of Poland at that time. It was also hollow and a few years later this oak also was set on fire. It survived, but the burning was repeated after a few years and the oak died.
The biggest girthed tree of the Netherlands, a hollow Sweet Chestnut (see Kastanjedal ) also was set on fire several times, the last time in 2005 and till now has survived.
So I hope Chrobry will stay alive as well.
die Eiche in Hornoldendorf (Außenmauer des Ritterguts) wurde vor zwei Jahren auch in Brand gesetzt. Letztes Jahr hat es noch so ausgesehen, als ob sie es wohl nicht überlebt. In diesem Jahr, als ich dort war, hat sich wieder recht viel grün gezeigt. Und zwar an Ästen, die noch 2013 kahl waren. Sie scheint sich also zu erholen. Vielleicht schafft es ja diese Eiche hier auch so wie die in Hornoldendorf. Hoffen wir also mal.
This may be a good reason not to publish record tree locations (though trees like the oak in question cannot be kept secret).
I don't think keeping trees a secret is a good idea. They give Chrobry a value of 4.300000 (I think) zlotty. That is a lot of money. If the Chrobry oak is that expensive, why did they not put smoke and heat detectors inside.
I think a better solution is to some how close the gabs of a hollow tree, so nothing that can burn can get in. It won't work with all hollow trees, but I think it will work with a lot of them. I think is is very hard to burn a tree that has a trunk with no gabs.
Yes Kouta I agree
Sadly keeping champion trees secret from the public is the only way to protect them from vandalism. But in this case the tree was so well known it was impossible. As I have said before, in the UK there are many rare plants, where location details are kept deliberately vague to ensure protection.
The recent climbing damage to the 66m Douglas fir in Scotland (not deliberate vandalism) I feel is a wake up call not to give exact location details for champion trees and giving the 'wider' general public this information is a risk to them. But recording and uploading them is perfectly acceptable on MT.
I hope those responsible are caught and prosecuted!
Lets hope the tree survives
Indeed this tree was to famous to hide it from the public. But, the other very big oak in Poland, called Napoleon at Zabor, was not well known, in fact it was a rather secret tree standing at a lonely place to be found only by insiders along a small sand road. It was set on fire very probable by local young boys and I suppose this also was the case with the Chrobry oak, like with the "Kabouterboom", the big Sweet Chestnut in Holland.
So I think most of these hollow old trees are more at risk from local young people than from people from elsewere.
Moreover, in Poland many big trees, especially oaks, were set on fire, not only the biggest. I have seen in 2014 a few oaks with girth ranging from 6,5 to 8 metres that also suffered an arson and they usually grew in remote places.. So the largest trees should be preserved rather by fence, because cameras could be stolen indeed.. And it is a matter of local government that trees are conserved or 'unwanted', like here, Chrześcijanin (the Christian) Oak in Poland: street
All in all, I hope that miracle will happen and Chrobry will survive, but it is horrible that someone wants to destroy peaceful monumental trees..
Wow! This one escaped me on MT. I have been here several times and yes quite remarkable that trees of this size can be as big here as in Scotland or Wales, with only 900mm of rain! This tree may surpass the Douglas in Broadwood, Dunster?
Obviously the deeply weathered sandy brown earth soil type derived from the Lower Greensand has been a factor. A pity Southern England was not covered in Greensand as opposed to horrible chalk. There is something magical about this soil which I am interested in finding out about. Here in Oxon, Nuneham Courtenay also on Greensand grows big conifers with only 600mm of rain.
Big Western Hemlock too at Polecat.
I noticed the Sequoia had probably been hit by lightning above the cottage, presume this is the one Alan measured as 170' in his book? An overestimate perhaps?
Greensand is indeed the best soil in south-east England for tree-growth, and so many good tree sites are concentrated on it despite the tiny proportion of the country which it covers. I think the secret is that the grains are coarse enough to allow easy root-penetration but fine enough to be water-retentive. Soils washed down the from the Old Red Sandstone (Welsh Marches etc) and from ancient Scottish sandstone have just the same qualities. So, presumably, do loess soils in the Netherlands where trees can also grow very tall (without the benefits of much side-shelter from high hills as we have in England). Chalk is also much better than heavy clay, which covers so much of lowland England.
I have no idea how tall the Polecat Copse trees will grow. They are in a superbly sheltered spot and the two tallest have continued to produce long leaders through the 14 years I've known them, though they've lost their leaders once or twice and some others in the same line now have rough, bushy tops (but are still growing). Given the right soil, and shelter from dehydrating winds, Douglas don't seem to be troubled by drought or high summer temperatures. I don't know the local conditions for the 65m tree in the Massif Central of France but I would assume that summers there are hotter and drier than in Surrey.
That said, I suspect drought-stress rather than lightning for the loss of the top of the Giant Sequoia opposite Angle Cottage. Lightning would have been more likely to strike the higher tree-tops of the bank to the west. In 1995 we had a very dry summer near my home in Hastings and many of the taller Giant Sequoias died back a few metres (and have now recovered but rounded off).
Thanks. Yes I think the secret with Lower Greensand is the ability for trees to extract soil water much more easily due to the pores and matrix of the soil, coupled with a moderately acid ph and reasonable fertility. On a clay soil water holding capacity is obviously greater, but trees cannot extract it as well as on say Greensand due to the pores and soil matrix unfavorable for tree root growth and penetration. Subsequent capillary action of soil water through the soil is much better on Greensand. As it is a soft sandstone is must have weathered deeply as well. It also probably has no root depth restriction caused by an iron pan, which is frequent on acid sandy soils.
Ulmus and Quercus robur as an opposite example seems to love surface water gleys on clay vales.
It appears to me that Giant Sequoia much prefers sandy soils and the Bagshot Sand near my locality at Crowthorne and also at the Valley Gardens Near Windsor as you know grow big trees, despite only 600mm of rain, some 300mm less than at Polecat. Also Giant Sequoia and Douglas are adapted to grow on sandy well drained soils in their native habitat so it is no surprise.
The tree at Angle Cottage lost many metres due to crown dieback which I think is most likely lightning. Yes I have also seen Giant Sequoia die back due to drought, but I know that when lightning strikes Sequoias it often rarely leaves a scar on the trunk, possibly due to the insulation properties of the bark, however it sometimes does and I have seen trees blown apart in the most extreme examples. I know that Beech rarely leaves a scar and yet oak is badly affected. A difficult question and needs more research.
I know that the Massif Central is the wettest place in France with up to 2000mm, but one has to remember that with higher temperatures the evapotranspiration and summer soil moisture defict would be greater than at Polecat, so perhaps only the available rainfall/soil water there will be only slightly greater?
Windspeed is much less in Surrey than in Somerset, so perhaps they will grow to 60m+ at Polecat.
"Giant Sequoia ... and I have seen trees blown apart in the most extreme examples
Seehttp://www.pinetum.org/lightning.htm for an example!
BANG!!! Wow that is an example, I have seen oak trees like this also.
Only visited this location once, 2011 and wish that I had had the laser then. Thank you for registering this Owen, it needed to be on here.
Is the Sequoiadendron near the cottage, here called 'King Kong' still likely to be 51 metres which you measured, assessed it as a few years ago or will it have added some height? I remember looking at this tree from angles and it would have been difficult to see the top and bottom to measure it. The Coast Redwood in the photo above is one at the top of the hill near the old big house but there is a taller one I am sure, immediately on the hillside above the 51 metre 'King Kong' Seqy. I took photos on an old mobile phone and have not been able to get the photos off it as don't have Bluetooth on my laptop. They would be 1.5MP photos so may not be that great. Anyway, this Coast Redwood looked pretty tall, slim and surely 40 metres plus. There is/was also a conifer plantation just the west of the 59 metre Douglas Fir grove, if I remember Larch and Spruce, Sitka snd Norway, which looked pretty tall.
Near Angle Cottage at Polecat Copse, the Sequoiadendron that died back around 2005 was the taller but slenderer of a pair. I had measured it at 48m in 2000 but may have underestimated - Alan's 170' c.1990 was presumably a bit too high. The fatter tree beside it (the one in 'Redwood World' has preserved its tip and had grown to 51m by 2011, but I can't guarantee how accurate this was either. I shall return with the laser in due course.
I was taken with how red the trunks were of the Douglas at Polecat, Sequoiadendron colour if not even more red, due to the drier air according to Owen.
Are the 44 metre Larches still there at the location in Surrey Owen?
I think 44m was Alan Mitchell's top height for the larches at Hascombe Hill in the 1980s. I visited in 2000 when I think I made one 43m. I plan to revisit sometime soon.
To Whom It May Concern
I am contacting you since at Reforestamos Mexico we deeply admire your work and commitment to the protection of the environment. Monumental trees is a great source of inspiration for Reforestamos Mexico and we would be extremely pleased if you would accept our offer to collaborate.
Reforestamos Mexico is a Mexican organization completely devoted to the protection of the forests, as natural natural treasure and cornerstone of national development. We believe that the future of our society is intimately linked to the survival of the forests. Particularly, we conceive forests a key promoter of economic growth, not only supplying goods and guaranteeing biodiversity, but also offering great opportunities for local communities and people that live within the forest. This is why we are engaged no only with the protection of woods, but also with the promotion of a new approach to natural resources and sustainable development that can encompass the environmental, social, political and economic dimensions.
We feel that Reforestamos Mexico and Monumental Trees share the same values, interests and missions. In fact, at Reforestamos Mexico we also have a project completely focused on the protection of majestic trees. This program aims at raising awareness on the importance of those trees for our country. Hence, we think that a synergy with you could enhance our actions. For this reason, we propose to mutually advertise our projects through websites and social networks of both Reforestamos Mexico and Monumental Trees, so that our common goal can be better and widely achieved.
I hope this exciting opportunity interests you.
I look forward to hearing your comments.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
This is a shame, B&I and European champion now ex champion. Did you put a message in Discussion about this Owen, I must have missed it if you did? Perhaps the top fell much more recently and the fallen wood was taken as firewood? A relative lived in Surrey and they had an open fire and used to go out regularly collecting firewood in the local woods, often taking a saw. With the high price of energy and fuel more and more people have been doing this.
This one takes over as the tallest, did you take any photos of it Owen?
No, I visited Busbridge Lakes in pre-laser, pre-camera days and used a hypsometer made of flint. I must return. I'm moderately confident it is indeed 38 - 39m, if still intact.
Hello Owen, looking forward to seeing the tree if it is still there and 38/39 metres. What is the next tallest after that, 36 metres I saw when checking on the Register. The trees in the location at Southwell, Nottinghamshire reported by Richard Goodrich were not 37 metres, 31 metres was the tallest in that location that I recorded with the laser and I could visibly see that it was the tallest. I didn't spot the reported 31 metre Hornbeams at the roadside but they will not be 31 metres if they are as the 31 metre Chestnut stood up higher than the other trees in the group. They could be perhaps 27 or 28 metres if they are there.
Yes, two 36m trees at Boughton House (Northants) this summer, one of which I added to this site. We can discout the old Humberside records.
wow, this oak tree has been grafted twice!, and I have never seen this before.
Has anyone noticed this before on large trees?
The old Quercus coccinea trees in the Netherlands are usually grafted once and quite high on the stam, on Q. rubra or Q. palustris.
Double grafting has been common practice with fruit trees as apple, pear and Cydonia.
In Dutch the method is called "tussenstam"-method.
Great finding and good picture, Nardo!
I've only seen double-grafting of Pyrus salicifolia 'Pendula' and on what in Britain were sold as 'Sheraton' cherries. (Roots Prunus avium, trunk P. serrula, crown P. serrulata cv. They don't live long.) In SE England many older Quercus coccinea are also grafted on Q. rubra and I had assumed they were 'Splendens', a clone distributed by the Knap Hill Nursery in Surrey. They have bigger axillary tufts under the leaf vein-joints, almost like Q. palustris. I don't know whether the Knap Hill Nursery also distributed to the near Continent or if there was a similar clone sold there as grafts.
I'm not sure it is double-grafted, it may just be a coincidence with the bark pattern on the burrs. The adjacent Scharlach-Eiche (Quercus coccinea) '19854'
is clearly not double-grafted.
I just looked at the tree on Google Street View, which shows it well from the other side. Only one graft line!
Hallo Leo en/of Jeroen.
Ik ben vandaag opnieuw langs geweest ij deze machtige platanen. Dat heb ik wel vaker gedaan, maar ik vond het steeds niet de moeite waard om ze te meten. Toen ik me realiseerde dat de laatste meting uit 2009 stamt, dacht ik dat ik deze bomen de eerste de beste keer dat ik in Amsterdam zou zijn, moest opmeten. Vandaag heb ik dat gedaan. Tot mijn spijt zijn de resultaten weer niet corresponderend met jullie eerdere metingen. De boom met de lage zijtak Ahornblättrige Platane (Platanus × hispanica) '1874'is volgens mijn metingen dunner dan de ander Ahornblättrige Platane (Platanus × hispanica) '1876'. Ik wil graag de juiste maten opvoeren. Kan het zijn dat jij/jullie destijds de metingen hebben verwisseld?
Ik heb een aantal oude foto's uit 2012 verwijderd. Ik denk dat het beeld daardoor helderder wordt met de nieuwe geüp
In juni 2006 waren Leo en ik met hoofdstedelijk bomenconsulent Hans Kaljee bij de bomen en hebben ze gemeten, zie de foto met mij. Die meting staat echter niet op MT. De meting uit 2009 is van Leo, ik was daar niet bij. Als jij nu een andere boom als dikste meet, kan het zijn dat Leo foto en meting heeft verwisseld maar ik maak vaker vreemde groeispurts mee bij bomen die moeilijk zijn te verklaren.
Heb je overigens je eigen foto's verwijderd?
Uiteraard heb ik alleen mijn eigen foto's verwijderd. Dank voor je opmerking over de groeispurt.
hallo Wim, ze zijn allebei gegroeid maar de een meer dan de ander, dat kan best hoor, bovendien zijn beide metingen niet op exact dezelfde plaats uitgevoerd, omdat er geen stippen op de stam staan.
Goed dat je ze gemeten hebt, dit levert op termijn veel groeigegevens van monumentale bomen op.
If the tree in question is the 'hairy' one left of centre, then from the image I am guessing that it is most likely a Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis) that has developed a vigorous mass of epicormic shoots. Whether this is due to an increase in side light striking the trunk since thinning operations or a genetic malfunction I cannot discern from the image. I also can't discern the cones from the image. Is it possible to obtain close up images of the bark, needles, shoots and cones, as this would ease diagnosis?
Hello Moudie, welcome to the forum (haven't noticed your name previously) Hope that you don't mind my asking, are you in Scotland or living in Scotland?
A previous discussion about this it was thought that it was another Douglas Fir, it is the tree clothed to the ground just to left of centre. There is a large grove of c50 metre Sitka Spruce about 200 metres to the left of this photo. I was so busy looking at the emergent tree two to the right of this tree which the laser measured as c55 metres, I should have noted what this tree was? At first with the dense narrow habit thought that it might be a Picea Abies that I had missed, if so it would be 49/50 metres as the tree 4 tips to it's right, Douglas Fir was 49.8 metres. If you click in the photo and then when the little magnifying glass comes up click again you can enlarge the photo.
Thank you for your welcome, and yes to both of your questions about Scotland. I have used the magnifying facility, but it produces a very pixelated image for me that doesn't aid diagnosis. I was thinking that it might be Serbian spruce (Picea omorika), but the apical growth rate I wouldn't have expected to keep pace with Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis) or Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii). Hence my request for some detail, if poss.
My regards, themoudie
Are you involved with forestry or arboriculture? Are you in the Highlands or low lands? Whatever, you must live in striking distance of some magnificent trees of all descriptions.
I have added what photos I have of this tree at Dalby, I was so busy with the Douglas that I didn't go up to it. It was only when I later looked at the photos that it stuck out with it's very narrow habit with foliage to the base and quite heavy crop of cones whilst the surrounding Douglas appear to have none or very few. I should also have noted what the small blue conifer was, the track next to these trees is/was one of the best viewing areas for the old Lombard RAC Rally when it was held here years ago now.
Yes to both and Southern Highland boundary fault! ;¬) Aye, there are plenty to cuddle.
Thank you for posting the additional images of the trees in the vicinity of your first image. I can see why you are remarking upon the fully clothed tree and the shorter vigorous growing one with the blue green foliage. I suspect shelter, available nutrients and moisture along with the adjacency of the large trees are all contributing to it's form. It may even be the prodgeny of one of those older trees.
If I am fortunate to be in the vicinity of these trees I shall try to give them a look.
Not far from me.
Do you know about the tree next to the River Hamble at Hambleden in Bucks. It may be bigger than this. It appears H. Chestnut loves chalk stream's in valleys.
The Hambleden tree was 7.22m @ 0.5m x an estimated 25m in height measured by me in January 2000.
Yes, that could be even bigger by now. The record hadn't got through to the Tree Register. Is it in Hambleden village (ie the big house opposite the churchyard?
The tree is in a private garden about 50m south west across the road from Hambleden Church, in the village centre. With its roots in the Hamble Brook.
The trunk is very rectangular in shape due to the 3 massive limbs dividing at about 3m up. Horse Chestnut grows quite quickly here and may date back to only 1800-1830 as the Georgian house/gardens date back to roughly then. I had the opportunity to measure it when I worked on the tree back in 2000.
Tree trunk is not easily seen from the road as it is hidden from view by a fence. I only live 5 miles from it so will take picture and upload to MT when I have time.
"The trunk is very rectangular in shape due to the 3 massive limbs dividing at about 3m up
Given that the massive low branches influence the shape of the trunk at measuring height, shouldn't it be tagged as 'multistemmed'? I'd certainly think so.
Hello Stephen, looking forward to seeing photos of all your trees eventually. Are there any really tall Horse Chestnuts in your area, perhaps challenging Arundel's 39 metre tree?
I must ask about one lot of trees, the suspense is killing me (laughs) Did you manage to get to the Elan Valley Douglas Firs, how tall? I have done photo measurements on Google Maps using the telephone box as a reference (being a complete nerd and even googling various telephone boxes to ascertain dimensions, heights), c40 metres is what I got but there is obvious distortion and fore-shortening on Google Maps cameras, for example the Waterloo Grove looks nothing from the road.
The tree has a very oval, almost elliptical trunk shape, but has a clear stem of 3m before dividing into 3 massive limbs. The quoted girth measurement @0.5m was the 'narrowest point' of the trunk and measuring any higher up the trunk, one would encounter buttressing and reaction wood. This would vastly inflate any girth measurement.
No need to measure anymore phone boxes! The Douglas in question I estimate was about 50m, nice trees of 90 years old, but nothing exceptional.
Some Horse Chestnuts could be 33-35m, in this chalk river valley where conditions appear optimum. However the leaf miner and bleeding canker is sadly having an effect on their health and future growth. Has the leaf miner reached you up in Yorkshire yet?
Having trouble with uploading pictures to my PC off my phone but hopefully You will see them soon!
Hi Stephen - Thanks!
Yes, Cameraria ohridella has even been up here in Northumbs for 3 years now, and is starting to get common. No doubt its natural predators will catch up with it soon; it doesn't seem to be a big problem. The bleeding canker is likely a worse problem, though so far at least, it is rare up here.
below Anne Boleyn's seat in the water gardens of the Skell V
This was or must have been a superb speciman originally, got the chop a year or so ago. Cannot remember what the diagnosis was for it, Conifers?
Forge Valley, East Ayton
I hadn't looked but hadn't realised that you had added this one Owen, I tried to take a distance photo of it but not very successfully as it is rather hemmed in.
Just added my photo for this one, not the small tree nearest the camera but the bi tree behind. Quite difficult to ascertain where or which was the tallest shoot but recorded just below 34 metres with the laser for what I could hit. The ground surrounding it seems to be well paddled and bare so not sure how this will affect the tree in the long run.
Hello Stephen, the Douglas at Elan certainly worth recording as current tallest recordest trees in mid/central Wales, Owen's 50 metre Grand Fir at Cefn Park near Cardiff being the tallest in South Wales.
Hello Stephen, the Douglas at Elan certainly worth recording as current tallest recordest trees in mid/central Wales, Owen's 50 metre Grand Fir at Cefn Park near Cardiff being the tallest in South Wales.
Hello Stephen, the Douglas at Elan certainly worth recording as current tallest recordest trees in mid/central Wales, Owen's 50 metre Grand Fir at Cefn Park near Cardiff being the tallest in South Wales.
Using Internet Explorer the site sticking tonight, just swapped to Mozilla and now not having the problem.
Now I wished I had measured it. There must be taller trees in central Wales southwards?
The site webpage link on the Elm conversation mentioned that Deodars could be 250 feet in their native habitat, surely there be some taller specimans than this somewhere in Europe, Germany, France (Sisley?) Would love to see some 50 metre specimans in Europe, likely?
I have just forgotten to update this tree, I measured it again in September (2014) and I could visibly see that the top was flatter, certainly when compared to my photos from 2013. I am pretty certain that it has lost it's top most branch, must have been in the severe winds of last winter as I couldn't get this height for it. Will look in my notes and update with new height which I just cannot recall exactly offhand.
I doubt if there are Deodars over 40 m in Europe, there seem to be no very old plantations of them.
In 1981 I have been in one of the locations with tall Deodar Cedars in the Indian Himalayas, in Manali. Probably those were taller than 40 m, but from my remembrance (I did not have any height measurement instrument at that time) I doubt if they were a lot above 50 m. Alas till now nobody seems to have measured them with reliable methods. Kouta and I once mailed that it would be nice to go there and to other locations in the Himalayas, but till now we did not make real plans.
Hello Jeroen, lets hope that there are some giant specimans hidden somewhere and yet to be found? Perhaps Sisley has the best chance of finding some in hidden gullies somewhere in central France.
I have updated the measurement for this one, now 37.8-38 metres MT standard, 37.6 to the high side Tree Register standard. Will have to check if this is now still the tallest in B&I?
Giant Elms in the UK. The Magdalen College Huntingdon Elm at Oxford
I thought this might be of interest while browsing through a very interesting book published online about UK trees early on in the 20th century.
I came across a photograph (I had known about this tree before) of perhaps one of the largest broadleaved trees ever recorded in the UK. It was measured on the ground 142feet x 28feet round in 1911.
I'm interested in giant Elms, especially Ulmus procera (was tallest UK tree before Pacific Coast conifers and Abies alba overtook them.
Scroll through the pages and look under elm.
Pictures of big elms are so scarce now and only if I was 40 years older and had the hindsight to photograph them before they all perished apart from a few! What have we lost?
The Huntingdon Elm was measured by the well known UK tree expert of his time Elwes, contained 2787 cubic feet of timber which is 98 cubic metres, so well over 100 tonnes. This may not include the upper crown though, so perhaps 120m3 in total. The tree must have been severely decayed though.
Has anyone else seen this old photograph before?
Also in 'The Trees of Great Britain and Ireland' you'll find mention of a Wych Elm near Field in Staffordshire which was felled in 1636 and carefully measured as 120' tall and 16' thick at the kerf. I think we can safely say that elms were our biggest native trees.
Those elms must have been great trees! I remember coming the first time in England and Wales in 1970 when I was 15, seeing everywere dead elms in the countryside. This has been a great loss for the British landscape.
Stephen and Owen: the Magdalen College Elm contained 2787 cubic feet of timber. You calculate this as 98 cubic metre. When a foot is 30.48 cm / 0.3048 metre than a cubic foot is 0,0283168466 cubic metre. Then 2787 cubic feet is 78,92 cubic metre. It could be that only good timber was calculated, not the smaller branches and the bark. The tree in total had perhaps more volume.
As you know Robert van Pelt calculated the large Sessile Oak of Croft Castle as having a total volume of 3800 cubic feet / 107.6 cubic metre and Majesty the Fredville Oak as 3300 cubic feet / 93.45 cubic metre, but these will both be the total volume of the tree including bark, all branches and (especially for Majesty) including the hollow trunk. So this is not existing volume of timber but the volume of the tree as a whole.
Probably measured in this way the Magdalen College Elm also would have had a volume of over 3000 or more cubic feet.
Would be nice to have a guy like Robert van Pelt to estimate volumes of some more British and European trees.
Yes I totally agree. Although tree sizes may have been over estimated back then.
There appears to be very few photographs of big elms on the internet, which is sad. If only I was alive before 1970 with a camera!
Yes you are right, I entered in the conversion factor wrongly.
It could be that the old method of measurement was used, the Hoppus foot. There is 0.03605m3 to the Hoppus foot. This is still used in the UK for measuring hardwoods, sadly and not metric.
Yes a tragedy, the loss of Ulmus procera. I remember being in my pram at 2 years, sadly watching big elms being felled in 1975 in my village and ever since been addicted to trees!
Another tree not native to the UK and yet somehow some people accept these trees in the landscape and not other species such as conifers which I find rather stupid!
There are some old pictures of elms being felled which surely were as big as the biggest plane trees of today.
In September I visited the Croft Castle Sessile Oak. I remember standing beneath this tree in 1984.
I did an extensive study into the trees health/age. Sadly the National Trust has expanded the car park since 1984 allowing car parking in close proximity to the tree's root zone, which puts the tree's health at risk due to soil compaction. I have spent most of my career trying to educate people about this kind of thing, but sadly some people are ignorant.
The tree is generally in good health at present but it has extensive internal decay in the heartwood and is structurally compromised, thus at some future date perhaps in 50 years time it may fall. Nearly all oaks of this age (300 years) I have seen, have decay and have witnessed them snapping off at the base. Perhaps the only way to prevent this would be to reduce the upper crown, but this would be sad and perhaps letting nature take its course would be best, as surely we have to accept the tree has done wonderfully.
Presume B.V. Pelt just measured the trunk and main branches. If upper crown included it could perhaps amass more than 120m3? This would amount to 128 tonnes as there are 0.94m3 to the metric tonne for Oak which is fresh and green. But of course impossible to measure weight accurately if the tree has decay.
I will upload pictures and report for MT in due course.
Has anyone in Europe tried to estimate volume using Laser Technology's Criterion RD 1000 dendrometer? Perhaps some of the UK's conifers could be measured to estimate volume this way. Although climbing and measuring diameter at certain heights would be more accurate?
2 years old, that takes some beating Stephen! 2 years old in 1975, I was curious as to how old you were and this as given it away. Not my long list twin then. Don't think that I can remember as far back as that, remember how my interested first sparked, all the kids in my Primary school class were given an Oak sapling to look after. It was my second year in Primary so 1975 coincidently again. I cannot remember what happened to my little Oak? Hope that it was planted somewhere and is growing strong now. My interest was further engaged when my late Dad and myself began searching for a grove of very tall trees that he had seen but which he could not remember the location of. We drove right to within a few hundred metres of them from both directions but couldn't find them and turned back. Took us many outings and we finally dropped down over the edge of the ravine and found the redwoods at Hebden Wood. The trees were very, very tall to a little kid.
I seem to remember discussing this with someone before and realising that Elwes and Henry were using Hoppus feet whenever they wrote 'feet of timber'. I believe that Bob van Pelt will have recorded even the minor branches of the Croft Castle oak with some precision, as that is what he does when surveying the giant American trees. But our big, young conifers are easier to measure as they only have light branches so far.
Morning Rob and Owen
You too Rob have a nice childhood story to tell.
If Elm disease had not happened perhaps my interest in trees would have never occurred! That day in December 1975 obviously had left an imprint on my brain! One of my earliest memories was 100ft elms being felled across the main road into the pub car park whole, falling with an almighty bang (no health and safety then) There were 200 of them lining the road! The whole of the Vale of Oxford was full of them and a guy who I worked for said he spent years constantly felling dead Elms.
There was an interest in genetic engineering Ulmus procera inserting a gene to make it resistant, but there are 'anti's' that do not like this, so project halted! Trouble is there are about 2 clones of Ulmus procera so when the disease struck there was no resistance. Whereas Ulmus hollandica 'vegeta' (Huntingdon Elm) does have some resistance.
The bookmark for the online book shows some interesting trees of the past, nice beech etc.
The Huntingdon Elm at Silk wood Westonburt has now sadly died.
Measuring the upper crown must be a very complicated task for an oak. Has the Tree Register considered measuring girths at different heights to determine volume for some of the big conifers like the Grand Fir at Strone or Murthly etc. when doing tape drops?
Interesting site and pictures of Elms still alive in Kent
This is what we have lost, so sad wish I had been there. What a beauty! R.I.P. Ulmus procera
Best picture on the net I have seen.
Hello Stephen, are there any large Elms of any type left in your territory? Up here there are very few although quite alot of shrubby specimans forming parts of hedges. The tallest that I have recorded is a 27.8-28 metre speciman at Ribston Hall. Cannot remember if I have added this to MT or not, will have to a check? I don't like adding just any tree as it wastes webspace for Tim but this one is worth adding probably because it is a County Champion for Yorkshire.
Hi Stephen, Owen and Rob,
There is some hope that there will be still elms in the UK as well as other parts of Europe in future. In Amsterdam there is a very good program for preservation of elms, of wich there are around 70.000 in the city. Among these are still some beautiful old trees of Ulmus x hollandica 'Belgica', but as far as I know there are no large U. procera in Amsterdam. Of U. hollandica 'Vegeta'(Huntingdon Elm) there are medium large trees but not as old as of 'Belgica'.
By the way: 2787 Hoppus Feet = 100,47 cubic metre, a lot more than with modern feet.
Stephen, I don't know anybody measuring volume in the way you ask. In the USA there are several persons who do, like Robert Leverett, Robert van Pelt, Steve Sillett and Michael Taylor.
Beside giant conifers in the Pacific Northwest they have measured the volume of a huge Live Oak (Quercus virginiana) as nearly 5000 cubic feet = 140 cubic metres and of a tall big Tulip Tree of 4200 cubic feet, by measuring nearly all branches by climbing and taping.
Best regards, Jeroen
I think I will frame the above picture of that beautiful Elm and hang it on my wall! I am going to invent a time machine and return to 1960 with a good camera and 50 Kodak slide films!
Yes there are some survivors, very rare in The Chilterns. There was a Ulmus glabra of 26m x 1.3m which survived at least 3 phases of the dreaded DED. and finally died in 1993, I reported this to Alan Mitchell. Now there is the largest Ulmus glabra probably in the Chilterns about 25m tall with two trunks 60cm diameter still with no disease and strangely in the same valley an Ulmus procera 15m tall x 40cm which has somehow survived 2 bouts of disease and recovered! I do not know why? Just very lucky isolated trees?
Also a half hectare wood full of elms about 25m x 60cm unable to determine the species, but clearly very resistant to disease, Possibly a Ulmus carpinifolia clone or perhaps a rare Plot elm. There are just so many types.
Interesting about Elms in Holland I know they had an extensive breeding program. I am sure that Elm disease could be stopped by advances in breeding/genetics but there is no political will or money to do the research?
So the historic Elm at Oxford could have amounted to 100m3! The hybrid arose in Hinchinbrook Park in Huntingdon in 1760, so after 151 years the tree accumulated 100m3, which I find hard to believe. I know the rich alluvial floodplain soil around Oxford is fertile, but growth rate would surely be comparable with Abies grandis, Sequoia, Sequoiadendron! Perhaps the tree had everything it needed, as well as hybrid vigour. What do you think?
Perhaps volume measurement is another project for European trees although technically challenging. Certainly big conifers with little taper would be the easiest and would be interesting to see which ones were really the biggest, as we know measuring just height and diameter is possibly a inferior method of identifying the biggest.
Elwes and Henry were confident that the Magdalene College elm was much older than the 1760 selection of the 'Huntingdon' clone and represented an independent wild hybrid.
Thanks for that, that makes sense of my query. I wonder if this clone is now extinct? Certainly a massive tree I would estimate it would take at least 250 years to amass 80-100m3 of wood. It was certainly in a very advanced state of decay, judging by the 1911 photograph.
Perhaps Black Italian Poplar could have approached these sizes, as I have seen some enormous trees in old photographs which had been sadly felled.
Hi Stephen, Owen and Rob,
There are still breeding programs in the Netherlands for resistant elms, but indeed there is little money to do more research. Still there is a professional nursereyman in Holland breeding many resistant clones and in Amsterdam there is a good preservation / protection program for elms. Leo knows more about it, he is the co-author of a book on Elms in the Low Counties wich was published in 2009 (alas only in Dutch language). The other co-authors are Hans Heybroek, who did most off the research on breeding resistant elms and Hans Kaljee, who is the tree-consultant of the City of Amsterdam and among the most influential tree-people of the Netherlands.
About the Magdalene College elm: if it was much older than the first breeding of the Huntingdon clone (wich is given in the above book as 1746), was it sure it was a Huntingdon elm or just a hybrid of an unknown clone?
The biggest girthed hybrid elm in Holland is also of an unknown clone, see: Holländische Ulme (Ulmus × hollandica) '1929'
Tallest U. x hollandica in Holland are: Holländische Ulme (Ulmus × hollandica) '3450' and Oudemanhuispoort .
Considering measuring big conifers: Tim Bekaert describes a method here:http://www.monumentaltrees.com/en/content/measuringvolume/
About the largest European trees: you probably know we estimated the Ivenack Oak as having 140 cubic metre total wood volume and the Trsteno Oriental Plane as 150 - 175 cubic metre.
Some Giant Sequoias will have surpassed 100 m3 and in the near future will be the largest trees of Europe.
What will be the total volume of the big Abies alba in Ardkinglas as well as the largest Cedrus libanii and Sweet Chestnuts I don't know, but probably also around or above 100 cubes.
Hello Jeroen, very fine Elms.
Very interesting about the Elms in Holland. There was an attempt to genetically engineer Ulmus procera so it would hopefully be resistant and was undertaken at Abertay University in Scotland.
Ulmus procera proved to be an ideal subject for this as it does not produce seed and is sterile, so there was no chance of it breeding with other Elms with its changed genetics. However there are anti's in this country who did not like the idea of genetically modified trees (sadly a lot of ignorance here in my opinion), so sadly the project did to proceed to the next phase of testing the resistance in the field. However I believe it could still be done if there is the will!
A French Study has shown that none of the Common Elms in Europe have total resistance to the disease, although some are more resistant than others, Huntingdon Elm being one of them.
A recent statistical analysis of the spread of Elm disease has shown nothing could be done to stop it after the import of 'Rock Elm' logs from Canada in the late 1960's, into the ports of the UK, once it was established in the countryside.
Yes Giant Sequoia will be the biggest conifer, but London Plane will surely be largest broadleaf. The trees at Ely, Cambridgeshire and Lydney Park could be 80-100m3 perhaps as big as the tree at Croft Castle?
Also I am worried that climate change is going to seriously retard tree growth in South and Eastern England due to a predicted drop in summer rainfall during the growing season, in the next 100 years. However Northwest UK should become more productive for tree growth unless there is another disease.
Wow, this is some tree! Scholem, is it possible to officially record the height with a laser? Do you have any more photos, some with some human figures or something for context?
Hmmm . . . that tree doesn't look anything like 33 m to me; at a guess, you can knock at least 10 m (and probably 15 m) off from that. The narrow single-lane driveway beside it gives a fair estimate of scale.
Hello Conifers, is the lane a particularly narrow one, it is single track yes but how wide? Using the photo technique, the road is 1cm to the tree 13cm.
8 foot road gives a tree 104 feet tall, 31.7 metres
7 foot 91 feet tall 27.7 metres
6 foot 78 feet tall 23.7 metres
I think a narrow track lane for vehicles which this is from the whiter marks where the tyres run will be 6 feet at least.
Scholem noted in the German description that the power pole next to the tree is 11 metres high. I would give the tree 27-30 metres as well. It has a wide crown, which makes it look less high.
Problem is, I don't think either method is giving a reliable estimate. The 11 m pole is some distance (about 25 m) beyond the tree, and down slope, so looks a lot less high by comparison. Also the bend in the access road where one can measure its photo-width is beyond the tree too, which inflates the comparative height of the tree. Measuring on google earth, the photo was taken from the adjacent main road 30 metres from the tree, with the bend in the access road 50 metres away, 20 m beyond the tree. And finally, as is usual with broad-crowned trees, the highest visible shoot is not the real top but a branch closer to the observer and so appears higher. It will need a laser device to get a real measurement. But my prediction would be in the 15-18 metres range, perhaps 20 m at most.
Yep, should have had a look on the Google map and have and Conifers is right, the tower is some distance beyond the tree from the position from where the photo is taken. Bringing it forward, the height is probably around 20 metres. Needs lasering to confirm if anyone is near this area?