A technical point: as these trees are seed-grown (self-sown), they are Fagus sylvatica f. tortuosa, and not the cultivar 'Suenteliensis', which to be true to name can only be propagated clonally by grafting.
Martin Tijdgat, am 2014-07-23 22:03:10, geändert am 2014-07-23 22:04:25, hat gesagt:
Thanks for this. You are absolutely right; this is the naturaly occuring forma tortuosa. I had the same type of discussion with Fagus sylvatica 'Asplenifolia'.or 'Laciniata'. This leafform also occurs naturaly and has been grafted under a few different names.
Thanks, that's true, it's not a clone. I changed name. New problem: I cannot get a small "f" before tortuosa. The system automatically generates a capital F. Will ask Tim to change it. But what must we think about the oak, MT nr. 18706? :)
Conifers, am 2014-09-17 21:25:57, geändert am 2014-09-17 21:26:23, hat gesagt:
Thanks! A bit of clarification though, re "I also made it so that cultivars/varieties always get a capital letter (as was the case), but subspecies don't".
The ranks of subspecies, variety and forma are botanical, and governed by the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature; they are always in italics and begin with a lower case letter, and must always show an indication of which rank is being used (the rank NOT in italics!):
Pinus nigra subsp. salzmannii
Pinus sylvestris var. hamata
Fagus sylvatica f. tortuosa
Cultivars, and cultivar groups, are governed by the International Code for Nomenclature of Cultivated Plants; they are not in italics, and begin with a capital; individual cultivars are in single quotes, groups of similar cultivars not in quotes:
Het is mij niet duidelijk wie aan de beschrijving een verhaal over meten op verschillende hoogtes heeft opgeschreven. Mijn ervaringen stroken daarmee. Ik heb nadrukkelijk het centrum van de boom opgezocht, maar daar alleen meten is hachelijk. Het is de kunst om het meetlint strak te houden en steeds te letten op 1.30 meter. Mijn eerste meting kwam uit op 6,57 meter en mijn tweede en derde op 6,56 en 6,49. Ik probeerde met alle macht het lint strak te trekken op de middenpositie. Uiteindelijk lukte me dat (denk ik) en ik kwam op 6,38 meter. Ik had van tevoren wel wat gegevens verzameld en in mijn gegevens stond een hoogte van 6,10 meter. Ik kan die hoogte absoluut niet aan mijn praktijkervaring koppelen.
Jeroen Philippona, am 2014-09-17 20:54:54, geändert am 2014-09-17 20:55:47, hat gesagt:
Het stukje tekst over het meten is van mij. De laatste keer dat ik er aan het meten ben geweest was dit voorjaar samen met Corine van Dun, hoofdredacteur van Bomennieuws. Bomen op hellingen zijn lastig te meten, als je de methode hanteert van het centrum van de boom, waar de boom ooit ontkiemde of werd geplant, kom je bij heel dikke bomen op steile hellingen soms onder het hoogste punt rond de stam uit. Bij bomen op zo'n locatie is het aardig op verschillende hoogtes te meten. Wat je bedoelt met die hoogte van 6,10 m is me niet duidelijk.
De Villa dateert uit 1742, maar hoe weet je dat de lindes ook uit 1742 dateren? Zijn het heel zekere winterlindes, ik zag ze tot nu toe aan voor Hollandse lindes maar heb er niet heel goed op gelet. Leo, Maarten en Simen Brunia waren tijdens de Donateursdag van de Bomenstichting vorige week ook present bij deze bomen, misschien hebben zij er ook op gelet.
Apologies, the measurement should be 20 August 2013, forgot to change from 2014.
Ernie certainly loved these trees so much that he was buried amongst them with his dogs but these have been the single most disappointing trees that I have ever measured. Planted in 1860 and 37 metres in 1957 I was hoping that the measurement was abit out and that they had spurted in growth and there would be 60 metre trees in Yorkshire. Even with the growth rate of 37 metres in 1957 they could have been 56/57 metres. What a disappointment when I got there and measured with the laser.
Wow at least 6 trees over 60m! How long are the leaders of these trees Rob? Any noticeable wind damage from last winter?
I saw these trees in the dark with the car headlights and kick myself for running out of time to see them last year, will have to return soon. Looks like the weather will change next week so may hold off holiday there, until another anticyclone arrives to ensure good weather in Wales.
Will be at Europe's largest forestry show on Sat in the Midlands so may look at impulse lasers and the new model out and may or may not be tempted! Trouble is that would I have the time to use it? 10 years ago definitely would.
Hello Stephen, just run out of time with fiddling with the maps.
Six trees of 60 metres, the lot I bet are 60 metres if you could find windows in to measure them, the whole stand of probably nearing a hundred trees.
RedRob, am 2014-09-17 17:00:58, geändert am 2014-09-17 17:26:35, hat gesagt:
Stephen, your visit on Saturday, I wouldn't be tempted would be my advice. Look, ascertain what you want but don't buy or else you will be robbed blind. Try sourcing the same instrument in Holland or the continent, you will get the same thing much cheaper, ridiculously cheaper. I got the Forestry Pro that I bought for half the price that they were being advertised over here. I couldn't have justified £500 odd quid for the laser but I am happy now with what I paid, I think that I have measured enough trees to justify it. Don't think that I could have ever have justified the price of one of the Impulse lasers, not for the number of trees that I have found and measured and am now likely to find in the future. I think you would have to be travelling the world measuring or a forestry professional or professional tree measurer to justify the Impulse. Judging by Karlheinz's and Kouta's recent measuring of the 59 metre Norway Spruce, the margin of error is not too bad for the Nikon Forestry Pro. We don't know if Kouta and Karlheinz chose precisely the same spot on the trunk to measure to so this is another error margin also Kouta may actually have had the correct spot and Karlheinz may have just been a tad high, we don't know but some of this probably accounts for the small difference.
Hello Owen, this is/was the tree at the top of the stand where the path turns to the left, straight in front of you with Ivy on the trunk. I could only get 52 metres for this tree but I couldn't see the top at any point with a view of the base. Assessing from further down where I managed to see the tip, I think I will have missed about twenty feet off, every tree that I have measured in this stand is/was 60 metres so I will assign 60 metres for this one. It certainly was not 14 0r 15 metres taller then 52 metres.
I think the tree in the lower photograph is one I got 60m for - on the left of the footpath after you've gone round the bend and continued climbing. The one I made 61m was about 50m below this, a few metres away from the bend in the path (o the SW side) and with a lot of ivy. Maybe it has been removed since.
A very impressive stand of trees for that part of the country! It may be that the North Sea moderates the climate somewhat here? Although to a lesser degree than say the New Forest on the channel coast? Any Sitka there?
There is a Douglas just north of Henley, Oxon (close to me) which is almost as tall planted 1917 and still growing (on chalk!) Possibly tallest tree in Oxon if not Bucks and Berks.
I agree with Stephen, abit of a surprise but an impressive one. The Grand Fir is very impressive. I do abit of plane spotting and have been to RAF Lakenheath several times and the soil there is like dust-sandy,dry. As said to someone, amazing that the conifers in Thetford Forest can survive in the soil. I imagine it will be very dry at the moment as it has been very dry in Eastern England for the last few weeks.
Ik heb de betreffende boom gemeten op 16-9-2014. Wat mij betreft is meten op 1.30 niet reëel of mogelijk. Op circa 1.10 meter loopt een tak uit, waardoor je volgens mij op 1.10 meter moet blijven. Ik heb op die plek 5,27 meter gemeten. Ik vind de sprong naar mijn voorgangers erg groot(die nb op 130 cm hebben gemeten!), maar...ik kan niet anders dan dit maar opvoeren.
RedRob, am 2014-09-16 17:20:26, geändert am 2014-09-16 17:27:49, hat gesagt:
When I press on 'Show on Map' the Google Map is close with individual trees visible. Press to change the location the map has panned out and I cannot get it to zoom in, I have to just stick a red bubble. Conifers, would you be able to put this directly in front of the 65 metre tree.
Difficult measuring conditions on the slope in the upper part of the Waterloo Grove, difficult on many or most of the trees to see base and apex tip together. I did manage to measure three trees cleanly through gaps and this was the tallest. The others were also 60 metres. I didn't explore enough further up last year on my visit and thought that there may be a taller tree in the higher part of the stand but I think they will be all around this height in the higher and slightly more exposed part of the stand. The tree looks like just a trunk but the sun was shafting through the trees and I was photographing towards it.
Need abit of help with this one, more photos available if required. The trunk pattern didn't seem smooth enough for Abies Grandis, the foliage not flat enough and the shape not quite right for conventional Grandis that I have seen? What is this tree?
The bark looks OK to me for Abies grandis, it gets like this on mature trees. What foliage was it you looked at, if it was windblown upper crown foliage, then that's normal for the needles to be more assurgent.
Hello Conifers, the tree had lower branches sweeping down and I photographed the foliage close up which I have posted if you look at all the photos. Not seen any really big, old Grand Firs as close up as this so not seen the ribbed bark like this before. The terminal foliage on the shoot ends around the buds also seemed abit more rounded than other Grand Firs that I have seen but maybe this is with age as well, I suppose it is what you have seen yourself which you compare to.
Thanks! What the foliage does fit in that case is the interior subspecies Abies grandis subsp. idahoensis (from east of the Cascades crest); this has somewhat assurgent foliage throughout the crown, not just at the top of the tree. The only problem with this is that it is a smaller, slower-growing tree than coastal subsp. grandis, a 50 metre specimen would have to be ancient.
Abies grandis subsp. idahoensis grades into Abies concolor in the south of its area, including (in the southwest of its area) into Abies concolor subsp. lowiana, which is also a large, fairly vigorous tree (though not as vigorous as subsp. grandis). But it does perhaps offer a potential source location in the southern Cascades in Oregon.
It might be worth contacting the FC to see if they have planting records for the plot. A lot of the older plantings of Abies grandis in Britain are of the interior subspecies (being smaller, it was much cheaper to collect the seed!), before foresters discovered how much slower and poorer its growth was compared to coastal origins.
Hello Conifers, I had never heard of Idahoensis, learn something new every day. From reading the description it does describe these trees, the foliage just didn't seem flat enough for conventional Grand Fir (quote 'stongly flattened' from one site) and it seemed to taper around the buds and recurve more than the usual Grandis (you can see it in the photos) which I have seen myself albeit I won't have seen as many examples as people like Kouta, yourself, Owen etc. Any comments from anyone else, Owen, Kouta, Jeroen, Karlheinz?
Just uploaded a further foliage photo of this tree taken up tree. As said, still might be wrongs but it just didn't look fully right for Abies Grandis, the rounded tapering recurving needles around the terminal buds.
Hello Stephen, welcome back, missed reading your posts. This does look like Idahoensis, this one wasn't even the tallest, that was 53 metres for the other one that I put on here the other day. Vyrnwy, cloud and mist was hanging over the lake and it may be fairly mild comparative here, would this mean that Idahoensis would possibly have more potential for growth here than east of the Cascades which I imagine is certainly colder in winter and drier?
Most of Grand Fir in the UK before the 1960's came from just east of the crest of the Cascades, little came from the actual Pacific Coast so most of the oldest and tallest are probably of inferior growth rate, but likely to grow faster in UK. I was not aware this has been regarded a sub species, is this recent?
I may go on holiday later this month to find some more giants, have you been on holiday there too?
Hello Stephen, are you going on holiday to the Pacific Northwest or to look for trees in this country? I was in North Wales and Powys last week but there are areas in central Wales that could have some tall trees if you want some ideas? The Elan Valley area, Alan Mitchell recorded 50 metre Douglas Firs there way back in 1979 I think it was. I have located some myself which I had hoped to visit but never made it down as far.
Hope to go back to North Wales if the weather holds out later this month. Find some big trees and maybe pan for some gold if there is time!
Perhaps try to look at the Elan Valley on the way but its quite far from North Wales.
How is the tall Douglas in the Conwy Valley doing? I left too late one evening and only saw them in darkness with the headlights on!
RedRob, am 2014-09-11 16:30:25, geändert am 2014-09-11 16:31:54, hat gesagt:
Hello Stephen, will be reporting on the Betws trees from this year's visit when I get around to it over the next few days.
Before I visited North Wales this year I spent a considerable time scouring the valleys of North Wales on Google Maps looking for dark shadows and long shadows from the satellite and then looking on Street View. Really don't think that there are any more really tall stands in the Snowdonia area, Coed Y Brenin, Conwy Valley, Vyrnwy, Aber Hirnant seem to be the places. I drove all over last week scanning various valleys in the Berwyns and up around Betws and didn't come across anything taller or anywhere near. I have been to the forests around Corris on a previous visit and the trees there are not exceptional. An area where there could be tall and unknown trees is central Wales, Elan Valley and further down, Twyi Forest and the forests near Llandridod Wells. Owen sent me the records but I cannot find them in my emails so I have just asked him again, Alan Mitchell recorded big Douglas Firs back in 1979 and if they have kept growing at a reasonable rate they could be pretty big now.
The estate at Llanwrthwl was called Glanrhos SN973641 Owen has informed me again.
https://maps.google.co.uk/ put Glanrhos estate into search. I have been up and down the lane and there is a group of tall conifers which look like Douglas Firs but they don't look super tall and are in an open, exposed position. Not sure if these will be the trees which Alan Mitchell recorded or not?
http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/2526900 This group in the Elan Valley is a group that I came across whilst searching, on Google Maps they do look pretty tall but there looks to be abit of distortion in the camera which may be fore-shortening them in height when viewed from the bridge. They are in the bottom of the valley so should be pretty sheltered. Stephen, if you do make it anywhere down this way in passing this group would be worth stopping at. I haver just been riding up and down roads in Tywi Forest and the A44 between Llanwrtyd and Abergwesyn and over towards Aberystwyth and had longer range views and the conifers look ordinary.
Elan valley looks interesting, it may be a bit far out to travel to North Wales, but I could do a detour.
Dyfi valley was an interesting place for big plantation grown conifers. Sadly as usual The FC felled the best stand of Hemlock about 10 years ago. With good soils and shelter the forest is very productive here.
It will be interesting to see how Dothistroma needle blight is progressing there in North Wales it was partly defoliating conifers and causing them to lose vigour.
Hope to make it back there if the weather remains good.
Hello Stephen, I really don't like to hear the talk about needle drop, especially connected with some more trees that I have yet to post on.
I have been up the Dyfi Valley on Google Maps and there is large scale felling viewable. If you put 'Pantperthog' into Google Maps and travel about a quarter of a mile north on the A487, there is a line of tall trees that I think may be Douglas Fir. Look big but not massive but abit hard to truly judge on Google Maps as I have seen distortion on some views. These are the tallest that I can find in this area, beautiful countryside though, wonderful smooth roads (as they all appear to be down there compared to the potholed lot we have up in Yorkshire) sweeping through deep, wooded valleys. Visited King Arthur's labyrinth at Corris in 2006 and it was great countryside.
If you want a nice little B&B Stephen, I can recommend one near the north end of Lake Bala, a little gem with great food and incredibly reasonable. It provided a great, central base for my visit.
In a spot of bovver and need abit of help. Whilst looking up at the 60 metre Douglas Fir at Vyrnwy (next to ex 64 metre champ) I fired the laser off across the ravine to the group od spruces on the other side and this was the tallest. Came to a decision but just want to double check? Can it be identified from the blowing the photo up to see foliage and bark pattern?
Hello Stephen, the Welsh weather changed in a very short time and it was tippling down by the time that I took this photo but I think the Douglas Firs that you were referring to have been caught in this photo in the background. I stood up the hill on the road and looked back over to assess and the trees down near the road definitely physically looked the tallest when viewed from the horizontal up the road. The land rises up the valley and the trees near the road looked level with the higher trees, I suspect that they will be 51/52 metres, the tallest tree that I measured on the road definitely the tallest of it's line, dfinitely 54 metres but could be 55 metres.
Beautiful tree, how come some of the Norways remain narrow in shape and clothed with branches way down and yet others are very open and lose their lower branches? There are both types up in Yorkshire, they look quite different at times? Do they vary according to what area they originated from?
I believe that the main reason, why this tree has foliage almost along the whole lenght, is that its one side gets plenty of light (the tree is standing at a creek). But branching patterns of Norway spruce also vary genetically, also within a single stand.
I am not sure but I think I saw boring traces in the trunk. It is definitely much older than 200 y. Spruce cannot attain almost 5 m girth in 200 years in Germany. The UK's climate is apparently not the best for Norways spruce. Possibly too ocean. Fungal pathogens may be one factor, indeed. "Conifers" knows more about this, I once has a short e-mail discussion with him.
Hello Stephen, the tallest tree that I found in Aber Hirnant is the one on the left in the distant photo, 54.2 metres although the base was difficult to see and I had to estimate the location so it could be near 55 metres. Is this the tree that you found, near the group of houses with the Sequoiadendron in the garden?
Glad you found them. Could be my tree but was further up the hill when I recorded 55m. Probably some of the oldest Douglas in Wales, some close to 1.8m in diameter. I reckon planting was around 1860-1870? tried to count the whorls but too difficult. Some of these trees could have in excess of 40m3 each!
Hello Kathryn, generally Coast Redwoods are my favourite tree, love their size, majesty and indeterminable will to live when damaged or felled, branches becoming new trunks if one falls and is laid on it's side. Individually, my favourite tree on this site is this one Sitka-Fichte (Picea sitchensis) '9351'
such a maligned tree but what a magnificent speciman and what magnificent trees Sitkas can make.
Jeroen said that this Larch was just up form the path (is that correct Jeroen, did I remember correctly) I think likely that this is the same tree, measured 43.6 metres but to a point on the trunk above the Bracken, estimate about 0.5 of a metre to the point, this tree is 44 metres or just a fraction over. Didn't look incredibly healthy, quite sparse.
45.8 metres was the reading that I got for this tree from close to the position in the photo and further around to the left from the road. Vegetation around the base so aimed just abit up from it but this tree has not put much growth on since 2010.
Great to see the Redwoods in Big Basin and Henry Cowell being featured, a great many photos exist for the trees in Humboldt and the north (MD Vaden's site) but few for down here. It would be interesting to see some Redwoods from the southern most groves in Big Sur, what is the tallest recorded down there?
Owen, if you are anywhere about, (a plaque near this tree says it is 39 metres and the tallest in Britain) I moved across the shoots at the top and the highest reading that I could get was 37.6 metres for this one with this laser.
The smooth bark is right for some balsamifera clones ('TT32' is very smooth but has a different habit, I think 'TT37' is similar in bark). The premature autumn colour is due to a fungal infection which the balsam poplars and the wild Black Poplar get, but not the Black Poplar's common hybrids.
Hello Tim, I am having consistant problems on the site registering trees and moving about in general, the following message keeps coming up at the bottom of the page:
Monumentaltrees.com is not responding Recover Webpage
Is this problem at your end or mine? I downloaded Windows Internet Explorer 9 a couple of weeks ago after unistalling it a year or so ago and going back to IE 8 after having locking problems which I never experienced on IE 8. Is the problem above likely to be mine with IE 9 or with the site?
in der Literatur wird diese Eiche als "Dicke Eiche" bezeichnet. Die "Bouquet-Eiche" wird dort die zweitdickste, mit knapp 9 m Umfang angeben. Bei der zweitstärksten Eiche gehen zudem die Äste Bouquetförmig ab.
Abit more help needed with an ident? Couldn't get any closer than this but clearly a Poplar but leaves turning very early? The bark pattern is visible if you zoom in? Thought that they may be Aspen but not seen enough Aspen to be positive?
Hello Kouta, thank you for the short article, very interesting. A graceful tree in shape, this one with branches down to near the ground. Surprising that the Cragside Nordmann is nearly as tall, 49 metres. Perhaps eventually some specimans in Wales or Western Scotland could be the tallest, there was a 2005 42 metre speciman at Bodnant Gardens where I was last week but I wasn't able to measure as the area had been fenced off with no publice permitted. We need some tree measurers from the Caucasus area on here to find trees to measure.
I think the UK has at least greater potential for tall Nordmann firs than the Borjomi Reserve, because of milder and moister climate. The westernmost part of the Georgian Greater Caucasus may have taller trees than the Borjomi Reserve, but the real giants are likely still further west, in Abkhasia and the Russian part.
I agree that it would be the best to get information from local forest researchers. I tried to contact one but did not get answer (not surprising).
KoutaR, am 2014-09-10 15:52:21, geändert am 2014-09-10 15:54:41, hat gesagt:
As most members likely know, great heights up to 85 m have been claimed for Nordmann fir (Abies nordmanniana). These super-tall firs have been reported mostly from the Russian western Caucasus and Abkhazia. I discussed Nordmann fir heights with Prof. Peter A. Schmidt, a renowned Caucasus expert. He said giant firs can be found in the western Greater Caucasus, particularly in the Russian part and in Abkhazia and he has not seen any giants in Georgia (excluding Abkhazia, which is not in Georgian control anymore). According to him, the Georgian floras and other sources give the max. height of the species as 50 m. Thus, I did not expect to find any super-tall trees in Borjomi Reserve, and the fact that the tallest tree I found was only 50.2 m http://www.monumentaltrees.com/en/geo/samtskhe-javakheti/borjomi/9778_borjomistrictnaturereserve/) is no argument against the possibility that the claimed super-tall trees exist.
While in the park, it became clear to me why there are no super-tall firs: the vegetation clearly shows that the climate is way too continental and dry for optimal tree growth. The southern slopes are covered with low forests of such drought-resistant taxa as Quercus petraea ssp. iberica, oriental hornbeam (Carpinus orientalis) and Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris). The northern slopes are moister but Scots pine is still very common, along with Caucasian spruce (Picea orientalis) and common hornbeam (Carpinus betulus); the forest floor is fairly open. Along the Georgian Black Sea coast there is a mild and moist “rainforest” strip but the fir does not grow there. As a conclusion, it remains a mystery whether Nordmann fir can really reach 70 or even over 80 m.
I hope so, because the white poplar 18923 is also a very great tree! But there are some other candidates with similar (even greather) size in Poland, so we will have interesting competition in future :).
[Ja też mam taką nadzieję, bo kandydatka na następczynię rzeczywiście niczego sobie! Ale podobnych kondydatek jest więcej, więc zapowiada się ciekawa rywalizacja :).]
Looking through your site [rpdp] I discovered interesting thing that 'my' poplar which I desribed in previous post, from Zalesie, may be the largest with crown that grows very highly - more than 10metres, maybe even 15, depending upon estimations.
That is why it should be found in new album of famous Krzysztof Borkowski's book, hopefully He will know about this great tree.. And I really recommend you to visit this place (obviously in future, maybe for a few years) because probably it is worth visiting. And I could feel like an adventurer discovering this poplar, but it is very important to desribe this tree as a natural monument, I will strive for this. Best regards and thanks for your work for dendrology! :)
Thank you very much for your kind words about my RPDP website; see alsohttp://mojedrzewa.pl. As to your huge poplar from Zalesie - please attach it's photo (here or/and on RPDP website) if you have one. I am very interested how it looks like :).
Saturday, 6th September I will visit this poplar and then I will make a few more photos which could be on your site and you will see mentioned greatness of this tree. I can't wait for laser rangefinder, only if it hadn't been so expensive.. And I am really happy that I can see at least photos of Napoleon Oak or Lesznowska Topola (it's a pity that not Thick Fir from Babia Góra :). You don't know about trees which fell at the PRL time? I'm think that through 40years a few interesting Giants could end their lives, but only prof. Pacyniak was so keen on the trees to register them , it appears to me unbelieveable..
Superb tree, tallest in Europe (is it the tallest in the world measured?) Great to have laser measured trees, a 30 metre Juglans Regia was reported at Glen Lyon about a decade ago but turns out to be 20 metres laser measured, another in Suffolk was 27 metres but is 24.8 metres. This one is the tallest and accurate. Always have a soft spot for Juglans Regia since a holiday in Corfu in 1977 when I was nine and there was this beautiful tree right outside the balcony which I was fascinated with because of the aroma it gave off in the heat.
According Prof. Dr. Hans Pretzsch (in Enzyklopädie der Laubbäume), the species reaches 35 m in forest. Such heights sound extreme to us because walnut is not(?) planted in forest stands in our countries. This is the tallest laser-measured specimen so far I know, but I have no doubt that taller ones exist. Remember that the natural area extends over the Himalayas to Japan!
A 30-metre tree shrank to 20 m after a laser-measurement - quite extreme! I have encountered 40m -> 30m.
KoutaR, am 2014-09-07 20:39:14, geändert am 2014-09-07 20:40:13, hat gesagt:
Velvet maple (Acer velutinum) has been claimed to reach heights up to 50 m in northern Iran. The tallest maple I found in Lagodekhi Protected Areas, Georgia, was only 39.7 m (Samt-Ahorn (Acer velutinum) '19217').
However, the easiness of finding almost 40-metre maples and the fact that I found all the trees without any local help suggest that the species may reach well over 40 m even in this park. Moreover, the growing conditions are better in northern Iran, the winters being milder and the growing seasons longer. Compared with sycamore maple (A. pseudoplatanus), velvet maple generally seems to develop a beech-like straight trunk, which suggests a greater height potential than that of sycamore maple. Thus, my findings in eastern Georgia are no argument against the possibility that the species could reach 50 m. Ten years ago, I had the opportunity to visit some forests in northern Iran and I saw larger velvet maples there, though I cannot estimate their heights (some of my earlier estimates have proved to be totally wrong since I started to measure with a laser). I believe velvet maple is the tallest maple species of western Eurasia, but whether it really reaches 50 m remains a mystery. 50 m would be taller than the tallest bigleaf maple (A. macrophyllum) in California, which is 48.1 m ( http://www.mdvaden.com/maple_tallest.shtml).