You aren't signed in · sign in · register
Add new topic

Recent discussions


Only show discussions in English


RedRob, at 2014-04-17 17:27:29, said:
Hope to have abit of help with 100% verification for this tree. Emailed Duncombe to ask them to confirm but no reply.

Photo 4, a 32 metre Beech had fallen over winter plus a smaller Sycamore and opened up a window to see this tree. Photo 1, the three tall trees in the centre, the one on the right was definitely Oak when I measured it at 34.6 metres last year. I couldn't see the bases of the other two to hit them with the laser. I think that they were Oak, took photos of the ground underneath and Oak and Beech leaves but I amjust not 100% sure as the Oak and Ash bark patterns on trees on this estate are quite if very similar. I stood 48.2 metres below the right branch tip of this tree doing a horizontal measurement. The laser measured 40.8-41.2 metres for the vertical separation between the tree base and tip. I did over 30 measurements to just make sure that I was not getting deflection, mis-readings from any stray closer twigs between the laser and tree base but got measurements in this range consistantly. No leaves on trees and difficult to get a hit on the tallest twig, right one which was the highest, so if anything it may be abit more than 41.2 metres but I will go with 41 metres.

Are these photos good enough to confirm 100% that this is Oak, the twigs were so high up?

The 32 metre fallen Beech in the photo, the tree just above it is the 36.2 metre Ash, the two Beeches just up to it's right, the front one in 40 metres, very lucky that some of these didn't fall. It is very sheltered from the SW wind at the bottom of this escarpment, surprising that this has fallen (and several other Beeches and what looks like a big Sycamore on the escarpment), there must have been a whirlwind or vortex or something?

Jeroen Philippona, at 2014-04-17 22:04:20, said:
Hi Rob,

Better buy a looking glass for identification of high branches. Soon there will be leaves, so identification will be easy. Branch pattern of common oak and ash is very different, so should not be a problem.

A height of 41 m is not amazing for an oak at such a sheltered location, but oak, beech, ash and lime all four can grow to such heights. In Bialowieza there are many pedunculate oaks of 40 to 41 m and some of around 42 m with one over 43 m as heighest measured. This is at a site with rather dry climate and cold winters. There is of cours much less wind in such a far inland location compared to Yorkshire. The very tall sessile oaks in some forests in France are on very favorable sites but perhaps these trees also are genetically of a special quality.


RedRob, at 2014-04-18 16:25:51, said:
Hello Jeroen, I corrected the map co-ordinates on Google and that of the 36 metre Ash near it, the crowns on the two trees do not look the same and this tree looks the same as the definite 34.6 metre Oak in front of it, I am 99% sure it is Oak. Even through the laser rangefinder I was still not 100% sure but the leaves on the floor below were Oak and Beech. Oak, Quercus Robur or Ash, it is a Britain and Ireland champion for height.

RedRob, at 2014-04-19 16:38:41, said:
I have added an up trunk photo of this 41 metre tree, does this help to identify?

common ash (Fraxinus excelsior) '12653' It has flummoxed me, the bark looks Ash as here with this definite tree (click on all four photos to see added up trunk view) but it also looks exactly like the Oaks on the estate.

Jeroen Philippona, at 2014-04-20 13:02:25, edited at 2014-04-20 13:16:05, said:
The bark pattern of the ash is typically for that species. It differs form most oaks in being more regular, less deep furrowed, less rough looking. The bark patter of the supposed 41 m oak indeed looks more like oak than ash to me. Also the branch pattern looks much more like oak. Ash has rather coarse, thick twigs, pedunculate ans sessile oak normaly have finer but more winding / irregular branches.

Something related: recently the American tree expert Bart Bouricius found a new world height record for Quercus: last week he measured an oak high in the mountains of Costa Rica if the species Quercus bumelioides with a height of 60.4 m (198 feet)! The CBH over buttresses is 14.2 m (46'5") but above the buttresses at 4.3 m (14') height the girth is 5.8 m (18'9").

The oak is proparly called "Grandfather Oak".

There is reported an even taller and larger oak in the region he wants to visit soon.

There were already reported oaks of 50 to 60 m from these forests, but now this has been proven by a laser measurement!

So the height of this subtropical oak is over 11 m taller than any oak accurate measured in Europe or the USA, were the records stay below 49 m till now.

There are reported (but not proven) Quercus trees also of 60 m from Asia and of 50 m from Iran.

Here is a link to the report: .

Monumentale bomen · Registreer
Visible for everyone · permalink · nl
Martha, at 2014-04-20 12:15:27, said:
Geachte heer, mevrouw, Uit de provincie Zeeland zijn een paar monumentale bomen opgenomen, waaronder de linde en tamme kastanje in de nabijheid van kasteel Westhove? Als plaatsnaam staat Domburg erbij vermeld, echter dit is Oostkapelle. Evenals de bomen in Berkenbosch. Ik zou u willen vragen of dit gewijzigd kan worden. Bijvoorbaat dank. Met vriendelijke groet, Martha Wedts de Swart, 0118583340.

thetreehunter, at 2014-04-20 10:01:46, said:
Tree Professor Peter Quelch with the great BP nr Homorod
Scholem Alejchem, at 2014-04-20 10:01:50, said:

Stephen Verge
Visible for everyone · permalink · en
RedRob, at 2014-04-17 15:39:05, said:
Hello Stephen, been quite a while, are you still with us? Did you purchase your laser?

Stephen Verge, at 2014-04-20 08:08:45, said:
Hello Rob and all

Yes I am still with you but I have been very busy with family, taken on an allotment and generally very busy with my gardening business, also sheltering after the winter we have just had!! Not good for your laser measuring!

Laser has been put on hold as usual just time is needed, my spare time seems to shrinking rapidly of late!

Are there any major tree losses i.e champions?

I was worried about the big Douglas Fir in North Wales after that bad gale?



Stephen Verge, at 2014-04-20 08:08:53, said:
Hello Rob and all

Yes I am still with you but I have been very busy with family, taken on an allotment and generally very busy with my gardening business, also sheltering after the winter we have just had!! Not good for your laser measuring!

Laser has been put on hold as usual just time is needed, my spare time seems to shrinking rapidly of late!

Are there any major tree losses i.e champions?

I was worried about the big Douglas Fir in North Wales after that bad gale?



Conifers, at 2014-04-18 22:07:06, said:
Thanks for the extra photos! Yes, clearly Thuja plicata. The bark photos also show typical Thuja plicata bark.
Karlheinz, at 2014-04-18 23:25:14, said:
I faced Christoph Michels and the "Kiefernspezi" as representatives of the "Deutsche Dendrologische Gesellschaft e.V." with your determination and asked to comment.



Karlheinz, at 2014-04-20 07:06:56, said:
I have changed the species to Thuja plicata.

Typical whitish pattern on the branches underside, the habitus of the entire tree and the bark point to Thuja plicata. Cones, which would also be suitable for distinction, could not be found yet.

RedRob, at 2014-04-18 16:35:42, said:
Summising it is Beech but never seen a bark pattern like this before on Beech? Is this some sort of variant?

MoritzNagel, at 2014-04-18 19:09:02, said:
Hi Redbob,

that bark pattern is typical for Carpinus betulus, if I'm not mistaken.

TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-04-18 20:24:20, said:
I'd agree with Hornbeam, though the pattern is not really typical unless the tree is smaller than I'd imagined. I've never seen a Beech like that.

Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-04-18 21:22:26, said:
Horbaem is the species. Barkpattern is very beautiful but typical for some hornbaem. I don't know why, or howe iit's formed.


RedRob, at 2014-04-19 16:14:11, said:
Hello Owen, Martin et al. I have posted some more photographs, I took a photo of the leaves beneath the tree and they struck me as being Beech, not toothed like Hornbeam? Perhaps I am wrong here and Hornbeam leaves are more variant then I expected. In the longer range photo, it is the fourth tree trunk from the right, next to the definite 34.6 metre probably 35 metre Oak at the top of the crown. I measured 28 metres to a part that I could see was this undetermined tree but couldn't clearly see the top for twigs so couldn't do a heighting for the actual height. Judging by the Oak next door it must be about 30 metres.

TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-04-19 17:35:57, said:
The second trunk photo has convinced me too that it's a Hornbeam. You're right, Rob, there are no Hornbeam leaves in your photo of dead leaves on the ground - they decay more quickly through the winter months. There are Beech leaves, and also leaves of both species of oak - about twice as many Q. petraea leaves as Q. robur leaves. The Q. petraea leaves have shallower, more regular lobes and there is always a leafstalk 1.5 - 2.5cm long. The Q. robur leaves have irregular lobes with deeper sinuses between them, and the stalk is seldom as much as 1cm long. There are two small lobes which point backwards on either side of the leaf-stalk (auricles); Q. petraea only ever shows very slight auricles. With practice it is possible to differentiate the species in leaf from a distance, but binoculars will help you to begin with. I should like to know which species the tallest oaks here belong to!

Visible for everyone · permalink · en
Rayn, at 2014-04-16 08:05:30, said:
How far is spring in your area and which trees are first?

Snow have now melted, in almost all shaded places too here, and most trees have developed fresh buds and the willows have formed their catkins.

aubreyfennell, at 2014-04-16 17:54:40, said:
Living in Carlow,south-east Ireland at 52'50N and 50 km from the Irish Sea as I do,spring has burst reasonably early

this year. We have just suffered the wettest winter on record with almost 500mm rainfall in Dec to Feb. It usually

is about 170mm for this period.The lowest winter temperature recorded was -2.8c and we had no snow. April has been dry ,sunny and warm and the most common trees such as Quercus,Fagus,Acer pseudoplatanus and Crataegus are almost fully in leaf. Our swallows arrived on the 9th and butterflies such as peacock,red admiral,brimstone,holly blue,small tortoiseshell and green veined white have emerged in the garden but I am still waiting for speckled wood and orange tip. I am still clearing up fallen trees after the most devastating storm[Darwin]in 20 years.On February 12th wind

gusts of 178kms an hour hit the south-west and reached 135kms here in Carlow.Up to 3 million forestry trees were flattened and many of our monumental trees are now gone.

KoutaR, at 2014-04-17 14:21:41, said:
Here in Saxony (Sachsen, Germany), the first tree bud burst was about three weeks ago. Now many species have at least half-grown leaves, exceptions are e.g. Quercus, whose leaves are starting to grow, and Fraxinus, which is always the last one. Spring is early in this years. The winter was very mild, with only a few days snow.

A few years ago I wrote down when each tree species come into leaf but I don't find my notes for now. Anyway, Sambucus nigra is always the first one. Other early species include Aesculus, Carpinus, Betula, Sorbus aucuparia and Crataegus.

Maarten Windemuller, at 2014-04-18 09:02:37, edited at 2014-04-18 19:49:57, said:
> 40 years I follow the beech leaves at 1 of may. When there is sun shining you can catch those thin silver lines at the borders of the leaves because of the sun lighting the hairs at the borders of the young leaves. Not a day earlier, first of may :). This year two weeks earlier, first time.

As most of the plants & trees: this year the siver lines where at least 2 weeks earlier at surroundings of .

Azalea mollis already 2 weeks full orange.

Akebia quinata at de backdoor pergola smells wonderful when you come home late, Rhododendron Cunningham's White next to the letterbox full flowers. Special spring this year.

TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-04-18 20:21:54, said:
In southern England, this has been the earliest spring since I first started noting the times trees come into flower (about thirty years ago): about 15 days ahead of the 'average', though the average for the last decade is probably a week ahead of the average in the 1980s. (And yet the spring of 2013 was one of the latest and coldest.) This has also been the first winter in my home-town of Hastings, on the south coast, when there have been no air-frosts at all. The very wet and windy weather has damaged many trees, but of the 1000 or so nationally-important trees I've revisited so far this year as part of my ongoing updates of the Tree Register records, not one has been lost.

RedRob, at 2014-04-19 16:21:23, said:
Hello Owen, not been so lucky, two of the champion trees that I measured previously have been damaged and lost some growth. One looked as if it had been hit by a falling tree and is now in danger of toppling into the river, undermined by this winter's heavy rain.

Scholem Alejchem, at 2014-04-19 10:49:20, said:
RedRob, at 2014-04-19 16:18:43, said:
Magnificent, only one word needed. The Grove of Titans is a spectacular place. The way that dead foliage gathers and piles up the base and then ferns grow is also quite something.

Rayn, at 2014-04-10 10:53:22, said:
My guess is that some kind of poplar, but I can't say for sure.

Maarten Windemuller, at 2014-04-10 20:31:12, said:
Hei Rayn,

Could it be Grey Alder (Alnus incana)? Maybe you can make some pictures from details like twigs with buds.

Best regards,


Rayn, at 2014-04-10 22:07:46, said:
I'll return later in spring and try to get some closeups, one problem is that the first twigs is at least 10 meters or so up but maybe I can find some cracked twig or fallen leaf by then, thank you for your answer.

Rayn, at 2014-04-19 10:15:03, said:
No leafs yet, but i couldn't see any of the cones or pendants typical for grey alder. I did some research, and they are mentioned before but only as "populus other than tremoloides". I missed one with the girth of 448 cm, which was kind of clumsy. Anyway in Finland it seems kind of common with a Sibirian type called Populus Laurifolia (Laurel-leaf poplar) and a hybrid called Populus Petrowskiana (Petrowskiana poplar) which resembles the ones I found.

We'll see when the leafs come.

Historically it is very strange that a Russian poplar is planted in the early 1800's as Sweden lost Finland to Russia 1809 and the relationships where probably not the best.

Conifers, at 2014-04-18 19:42:36, said:
Do you have a close-up of the foliage (and cones if present), please?
JUAN ALBERT PORCAR, at 2014-04-19 07:27:29, said:

Chamaecyparis funebris (ciprés fúnebre)

TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2013-11-15 17:55:00, said:
The historic heights for this tree seem to show the limitations of both hypsometers and lasers. 33m is optimistic, aiming at branches which are arching slightly towards the observer. 27m is much too low, due to the laser hitting low twigs on the near side (the top of a tree with a crown as rounded as this is completely hidden, even from a distance, in summer. Having measured it several times (with hypsometer) before it leafs out, I'm going to plump for 30.8m - though I can't really claim that degree of accuracy.
Jeroen Philippona, at 2013-11-16 00:43:03, edited at 2013-11-16 00:46:48, said:
Yes, I think with 31 m you are near the true height of this tree. My 33 m measurement in 2007 with Suunto clinometer was not very accurate. Owen, you should add your 30.8 m measurement also in the system with the right date.

When you visit Kew next time you could measure it again with laser. I also think Wim B. did not hit the tallest branches.

Wim Brinkerink, at 2013-11-16 15:02:11, said:
What both of you are saying might well be true. It's not always easy to find the highest one and a mistake is easily made.
krossdal1, at 2014-03-30 10:43:24, said:
great tree
RedRob, at 2014-04-17 16:07:40, said:
Wouldn't an answer for this tree be to email Kew and ask them to meet you with one of those hydraulic extendable things which men stand in to get up to the crowns of trees to prune? It would give you a view over the top of the crown more and down to the base, that said some of the branches look low and could obscure the view of the laser from some windows.
Conifers, at 2014-04-17 19:14:24, said:
That sounds a good idea, offer them £1000 for the costs of using it, and I'm sure they'd do it ;-))
Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-17 19:17:58, said:
One mistake I made before 2014 is that I didn't add my own length to the measurement. So my measurement must at least be heightened with 1.80 meters.
RedRob, at 2014-04-18 16:30:00, said:
I regularly enjoy a walk around the Fountains Abbey estate and the National Trust often have their hydraulic container mounted on the back of a Land Rover out and pruning trees, I imagine that Kew will have something similar. Shouldn't be a difficult job to email them to ask when they might be doing some pruning in that area. If it is to confirm a champion tree they possibly would be quite obliging.
Jeroen Philippona, at 2014-04-18 20:57:31, said:
I am sure that it is not that difficult to measure the height of this tree, you just have to get far enough to see the real top: from the north there is an open view from over 100 m to the tree, the top can be seen easily from there.

Conifers, at 2014-04-18 19:40:09, said:
Foliage characters identify readily as Thuja plicata

Tim, at 2014-04-18 08:35:30, said:
Incredible Rainer, that you keep finding such great trees and manage to get nice sunny spring photos of them.

Keep up the good work,


Rainer Lippert, at 2014-04-18 15:58:11, said:
Hallo Tim,

danke für das Lob. Ich will mich auch weiterhin bemühen ;-)

Viele Grüße,


Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-03-21 21:14:10, said:
Wie wil mij vertellen wat ze vinden van de monumentaliteit van deze boom ?Ik ben zeer nieuwsgierig? Geen sparende antwoorden svp. Zeg gewoon wat je vindt. Al vind je het helemaal niks, maakt mij niet uit.
Conifers, at 2014-03-21 23:09:07, said:
Hi Wim - it looks to be a good specimen for its species (if I am right with it being Malus sylvestris!), above average but not exceptional in size or location; if rating it, I guess I would give it around 3.75 or 4 on MT's rating system.
Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-03-22 07:08:28, said:
Hai Wim and Conifers,

Malus sylvestris checks out with it's overal treeform, bark, flower and leaf. It is a beautiful old tree and belongs in MT as I see it.

Greetings, Martin

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-03-22 10:11:07, said:
Thank you fot your opinion There is also somebody who speaks in numbers. Probably a bit shy person
Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-03-22 12:44:04, said:

Ik geef foto's een waardering als fotokwaliteit en de mate waarin de boom mijn bewondering, verwondering of andere emotie oproept. Dat is meer bepalend dan de maten (geen Miss World verkiezing).

Veel plezier trouwens volgende week met de fotocursus van Hans Clausing in de Leidse Hortus.


Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-03-22 12:50:59, said:
Hi Martin,

Dat is ook mijn lijn. Daarnaast Geef ik niet stelselmatig allerlei foto's die ik lager waardeer dan 3 een cijfer. Dat is zo flauw en irritant. Maar ja, kennelijk heeft de betreffende figuur daar veel behoefte aan want hij doet het vaak. Hier ook weer. Ik snap niet waarom je één van deze foto's een 2,5 moet geven. Het is niet zo dat ik me daardoor gekwetst voel. Eigenlijk interesseert het me niet zo veel. Ik vind het plaatje wel mooi, zo van die frisse voorjaarsbloesem, maar dat hoeft niemand met me eens te zijn. Ik vind het alleen raadselachtig en ik begrijp graag alles. (Ik was nou eenmaal een controlfreak in mijn werkzame leven)


TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-03-30 17:21:09, said:
From your photo, Wim, I'm fairly confident this is Malus hupehensis, a species from China and Japan introduced (to Britain) around 1901. It is one of the largest-growing Malus, as well as one of the most beautiful.
Leo Goudzwaard, at 2014-03-30 18:05:50, said:
Hello Owen,Wim and others

M. hupehensis could be right, or M. baccata. Both species have pure white flowers. They differ in fruits, but from the image of the flowering tree it is difficult to say. M. baccata is more common than M. hupehensis in the Netherlands. Flowers of M. sylvestris are not white, so it is certainly not M. sylvestris. I agree in changing the species in M. hupehensis.

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-03-30 19:02:23, edited at 2014-03-30 19:23:51, said:
Thank you all for the intrest. With your comment in mind I will try to give additional information.I'm not at all surprised if this is a special tree. I talked to some people in the neighbourhoud, they keep being attracted to it's beauty. Besides The Clingendael estate is a very special place. During centuries is was habitated by people that made a difference in history. Up till now it is habitated by a scientific elaborate institute that studies international relations.

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-05 19:03:43, said:
Hi all,

Today I visited this tree again and was very much surprised that it didn't show any flowers. Apparently it blooms only one time in two years?. Does this add information for you? Ik will upload some new pictures of the leaves and bark. Furthermore I saw a smaller similar tree next to it and another apparently the same some hundred metres furtheron.

TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-04-06 16:32:58, said:
In England they bloom each year, but they are not the earliest to bloom (still in bud now). I find it difficult to tell M.hupehensis with confidence from M. baccata (or M. mandshurica which is the commonly grown form), but this tree's wide-spreading irregular habit and bark cracking into big scales with orange and pink tints are characteristic of M. hupehensis.
Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-18 15:36:56, said:
Hi all,

Today I again visited the Malus Hupehensis (t 16999) and to my pleasure I saw it is full of buds. Next week I will visit it again accompanied by Martin Tijdgat. For now I upload a picture of the bus.

Furthermore, apparently there was someone in the Hague who really liked these trees, I found another example in the West of the Hague on the Hyacinthweg. I will post it later on.

Libanoneik in Merwesteinpark
Visible for everyone · permalink · nl
Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-18 15:32:07, said:
Hallo Leo,

Zoals je hebt kunnen zien, heb ik de informatie over de bomen in het Merwesteinpark Dordrecht een beetje gesystematiseerd en toegankelijker gemaakt. Nou kom ik 2 metingen van jou tegen die ik niet kan plaatsen. 1. Je hebt een Libanoneik opgevoerd die er volgens de gegevens van de Stichting Merwestein park en mijn waarnemingen niet is. En 2 je hebt een meting voor een plataan toegevoegd. Kun je nog achterhalen voor welke dat is?


Wim Brinkerink

Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-04-18 12:01:02, said:
Wim; wauw wat een foto van deze prachtige klimboom. Martin
Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-18 14:50:50, said:
Dank je, Martin.

Even ter info, Maarten Windemuller wees me op het negatieve effekt van de bestrating rondom. Ik heb deze zorg aan de beheerder doorgegeven. Kan geen kwaad. De beheerder geeft ook aan dat de boom zeer geliefd is als klimboom, maar dat hij volgens hem nog heel gezonds is.


Bess, at 2013-12-03 21:27:17, said:
Heerlijke haagbeuk!
Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-04-18 06:44:56, said:
Hai Bess,

Als ik deze foto zie dan is dit, net als de boom waar ook discussie over is in het park Merwestein in Dordrecht, een eikbladige haagbeuk Carpinus betulus 'Quercifolia'.

Heb je wellicht foto's van verschillende bomen bij deze boom gezet, want ik zie ook een foto van een kaarsrechte populierenstam?

Groet, Martin

Bess, at 2014-04-18 10:26:46, said:
De haagbeuk is de scheve stam op de achtergrond. Populier is de boom die hier in deze foto niet in beeld is. En op de voorgrond van deze foto zie je blaadjes van meidoorn.

De populier links van het kapelletje en rond de kapel een gemengde haag, waarvan de haagbeuken zijn uitgegroeid. Aan de grilligheid van de haagbeuk te zien, gewone Carpinus betulus.

:-) het wordt inderdaad verwarrend zo. Maar de plek is bijzonder door zijn geheel. De populier 'vodjesboom' wordt zelf niet echt gebruikt voor 'vodjes' wel de haag rond de kapel. En omdat ik zelf een Carpinus liefhebber ben trokken die natuurlijk ook mijn aandacht!

Bess, at 2014-04-18 10:27:08, said:
De haagbeuk is de scheve stam op de achtergrond. Populier is de boom die hier in deze foto niet in beeld is. En op de voorgrond van deze foto zie je blaadjes van meidoorn.

De populier links van het kapelletje en rond de kapel een gemengde haag, waarvan de haagbeuken zijn uitgegroeid. Aan de grilligheid van de haagbeuk te zien, gewone Carpinus betulus.

:-) het wordt inderdaad verwarrend zo. Maar de plek is bijzonder door zijn geheel. De populier 'vodjesboom' wordt zelf niet echt gebruikt voor 'vodjes' wel de haag rond de kapel. En omdat ik zelf een Carpinus liefhebber ben trokken die natuurlijk ook mijn aandacht!

Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-04-18 11:56:29, said:
Hai Bess,

De machtige gespierde grillige haagbeuk hoort ook tot mijn favorieten!

Na deze uitleg snap ik het pas echt. Kan je je verhaal voor deze bijzondere combinatie van vodjesboom (populier), kapelletje, ring meidoorns en haagbeuken waar de 'vodjes' in worden gehangen daar op aanpassen? Heb je misschien een foto van de hele combinatie met de complete zwarte populier?

Scholem Alejchem, at 2014-04-17 09:41:23, said:
Ich will ja nicht ätzen, aber der letzte bebilderte Absatz hier

wäre sicher hilfreich.

lg Scholem

Karlheinz, at 2014-04-18 05:57:26, said:
Hallo Scholem,

bei einem vielstämmigen Baum, wo die Verzweigungen schon unterhalb von 1,30 m liegen, mache ich grundsätzlich eine Taillenmessung. Die beschreibt den Stamm besser als eine sture 1,30-m-Messung. Da MT kein Datenfeld zur Kennzeichnung als Taillenmessung hat, muß die Angabe der von 1,30 m abweichenden Messhöhe (hier 10 cm) genügen.

Scholem Alejchem, at 2014-04-18 08:47:36, said:
Hallo Karlheinz

Das ist ziemlich einfach, wenn man zuerst eine Messung an der geringsten gemeinsamnen Stelle macht und die Höhe angibt und dann eine auf 1,30m Höhe beim dicksten Stamm.

So wie viele andere auch ist zB. diese Flügelnuss Caucasian wingnut (Pterocarya fraxinifolia) '12254'

das beste Beispiel dafür.

lg Scholem

Karlheinz, at 2014-04-18 11:51:58, said:
Hallo Scholem,

bei deiner Flügelnuss sieht es so aus, als kommen sechs Einzelbäume aus dem Erdreich heraus (eine Verbindung darf im Erdreich vermutet werden), da bietet sich keine Taillenmessung an. In meinem Fall sind es zwei einzeln stehende Bäume und den größeren der beiden habe ich gemessen, aber da bot sich eben die Taillenmessung auf 10 cm Höhe an, weil die Verzweigungen direkt über der Erdoberfläche beginnen. Die "Taillenmessung" ist die Messung an der engsten Stelle unterhalb der Verzweigungen und ich halte sie für aussagekräftiger als die Messung eines einzelnen Stämmlings. Ob das hier bei diesem Gebilde in exakt 1,30 m überhaupt sinnvoll möglich ist, will ich gern prüfen, wenn ich noch mal hin komme.

viele Grüße


Facebookgruppe Monumentale Bäume
Visible for everyone · permalink · de
Scholem Alejchem, at 2014-04-18 10:54:53, edited at 2014-04-18 10:58:22, said:
Liebe Leute

Ich habe eine Facebookgruppe namens Monumentale Bäume eröffnet, wo sich Baumliebhaber treffen und austauschen können. Ich habe in der letzten Zeit auf FB immer wieder "geteiltes" erhalten, das ich gerne diskutieren und herzeigen möchte, aber durch die Copyright-Bestimmungen nicht im MT-Forum konnte.

Ich werde die MT-Homepage angeben als weiterführende Information, wenn es recht ist.

liebe Grüße


Maarten Windemuller, at 2014-04-18 08:47:36, said:
Pavement around the tree: beginning of end. Pity

Leo Goudzwaard, at 2014-04-15 15:39:18, said:
hallo Wim, dit is Fagus sylvatica 'Aspleniifolia', mooie boom, Leo

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-16 15:29:16, said:
Hi Leo,.

Dank voor de correctie. Jammer dat zelfs info van een park waarvan de grondlegger J.R. Hoey Smith is, zijn bomen niet correct benoemd. Ik had de naam uit hun eigen informatiebronnen. Ik zal het veranderen.



Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-17 08:18:47, edited at 2014-04-17 08:32:38, said:
Hallo Leo,

De beheerder namens gemeente en stichting blijft erbij dat het een Carpinus betulus Quercifolia is. Nico Duyndam (de beheerder) geeft aan " Wim ik moet je toch teleurstellen boom nr 48 is echt een Carpinus betulus Quercifolia een Fagus sylvatica Asplenifolia draagt sowieso geen 2 verschillende bladvormen. Dit even ter kennisgeving. Groeten


Nou ben ik niet teleurgesteld dat het toch een Carpinus Betulus Quercifolia is, maar wel in onzekerheid wat ik zal doen.



Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-17 09:14:45, said:

Ik heb nogmaals contact gehad met Nico Duyndam. Zodra de boom in blad staat stuurt hij een foto. Naar zijn mening is dat het meest overtuigend.



Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-04-17 17:38:50, said:
Wim en Leo,

De F.s. 'Aspleniifolia' heeft wel degelijk 2 verschillende bladvormen. Kijk maar naar mijn foto's van de varenbeuk in Woodstock Gardens. Ik heb er met Gert Fortgens van Arboretum Trompenburg ook over gehad, maar er is een hele zwerm van in de natuur gevonden beuken met afwijkende bladvormen; met ingesneden tot lijnvormige bladeren. Deze gevonden vormen kregen bij naamgeving allerlei verschillende namen.

Maar ga er graag eens kijken want Carpinus betulus 'Quercifolia' als volwassen boom heb ik nog niet gezien.

Groet, Marrtin

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-17 19:23:25, said:
IK heb zojuist 17-4-2014 21.22 uur een foto van het blad bij de boom geplaatst.

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-17 20:15:00, edited at 2014-04-17 20:16:20, said:
Han van Meegeren heeft een zelfde soort boom opgevoerd in Breda. [ t 9593]

Hij geeft aan dat de boom grotendeels beukenbladeren heeft en aan de uiteinden eikenbladeren.

common hornbeam (Carpinus betulus) '9593'

Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-04-17 22:36:00, said:
Wim, Han, Leo,

De boom ziet er voor mij wel degelijk uit als Carpinus betulus 'Quercifolia', gezien de detailfoto. De varenbeuk heeft meestal insnijdingen die scherper zijn en naar de top van het blad steeds dieper insnijden tot bladeren die vrijwel geheel lijnvormig zijn. Die laatste bladvorm heb ik nooit bij jonge C.b. 'Quercifolia' gezien.

Groet, Martin

Sessile oak in Knole Park, Sevenoaks
Visible for everyone · permalink · en
Jeroen Philippona, at 2014-04-03 20:06:36, said:
Hi Owen,

Nice you confirmed it to be 41 m! I visited Knole with Tim Bekaert in April 2007 and was a bit frustrated I did not know where this tree stood so that I did not find it.

Did you remeasure the girth also?

Regards, Jeroen

Tim B, at 2014-04-04 06:58:54, said:
Yes indeed, I remember very well. I looked on the map where the tree stands, and reconstructed our walk in 2007: luckily for us now, Jeroen, we did not walk very close to the tree and missed it.

Kind regards,


TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-04-06 16:37:10, said:
I've now heard that the tree was climbed by Waldo Etherington last year at 38.7m, which is much closer to my hypsometer estimates, so this time the laser height is probably not accurate. I could only record 41m from one direction - the rest of the time I was getting around 39m but felt I was only hitting near shoots on the side of the crown. It is a difficult tree to record because of the broad, even dome, and I doubt if Waldo's team got to the very highest shoots.

RedRob, at 2014-04-17 15:56:41, said:
This is a superb tree, is there any visible wind shear on it Owen, was the higher reading looking at the tree from the north east side? With a big crown like this, it must be a real decision for a climber to decide which is the tallest shoot sticking up, how would they have decided which one to choose?

RedRob, at 2014-04-17 15:56:57, said:
This is a superb tree, is there any visible wind shear on it Owen, was the higher reading looking at the tree from the north east side? With a big crown like this, it must be a real decision for a climber to decide which is the tallest shoot sticking up, how would they have decided which one to choose?

Winter storm damage.
Visible for everyone · permalink · en
RedRob, at 2014-04-15 17:17:30, said:
How has everyone faired with damage from the winter storms? Quite alot of my own to report, alot of damage, fallen and shattered trees up here.

Jeroen Philippona, at 2014-04-15 21:21:32, said:
In the NW of the Netherlands there was a lot of storm damage in November and December, in Amsterdam a lot of trees in the old city fell over. In the region where I live in the east there was little storm damage this winter. The winter here was a lot dryer and with less wind compared to most of the UK. January to March were very warm and dry.


Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-04-16 00:57:40, said:
RedRob and Jeroen,

From the 10.000 trees I take care off in my area (Wijdemeren next to Hilversum) there were 45 storm victims after october 28 2013. 10 birch in one street, 7 young Liquidambar, 5 young Pterocarya stenoptera, and only a few 60 year old trees as oak, Groeneveld-iep, aspen, London plane, willow and lime.

We have already replanted 19 trees like 4 Ostrya carpinifolia, Ulmus 'Frontier', 3-stemmed Parrotia persica, Ginkgo biloba 'Saratoga', Acer platanoides 'Eurostar' Acer rubrum 'Karpick', Ulmus 'Dodoens'. I have to find room for 11 other trees to keep in line with our 60% replant in the local tree policy paper.


RedRob, at 2014-04-17 15:51:19, said:
When you watch the BBC weather forecasts, a great deal of the time with the depressions you can see the tight isobars over us even down to the channel and then open isobars sometimes none over France, Germany, even the low countries as you say, amazing what a few miles difference makes southern England over to the continent.

RedRob, at 2014-04-15 17:12:27, said:
Hello all, this bear has just woken up from hibernation.

The recent and ongoing photo voting saga, these photos will trounce any ever posted on here (winks)

Seriously, the biggest tragedy since I have been tree hunting and measuring. Forestry is not sentimental I know but walking around this site up the devastated land up the hill, this must have been the or one of the largest and most mature stands of Abies Procera anywhere judging by all the stumps. I could see big shadows on Google Maps, these stragglers that are left were probably not the tallest, I suspect a 40 meterer here. The tallest left is the slightly leaning tree immediately above the lady on the horse, 33.8 metres consistantly but had to aim just below the tip to get a hit with the laser. Anyone have any opinions as to why seemingly isolated trees like this are left standing? Are they likely to be left standing? If not then the trees here are likely to have gone already. If only I had visited a month earlier.

Sisley, at 2014-04-15 18:45:41, said:
Storms are always a problem for trees and plantations in especially for a monospecific plot of the same age, exposed to wind corridor.

It's a shock at the time, but we are forced to go ahead and then nature abhors a vacuum, so in years other species grow on the ground.

This is my main fear for some old specimens open field I spotted but what can you do front from the elements.

Conifers, at 2014-04-15 19:34:45, said:
The other option is that they left some standing to act as seed trees to regenerate the site naturally - Noble Fir is quite good at producing natural regeneration in Britain.

RedRob, at 2014-04-17 15:43:53, said:
Hello Conifers, funny that you should say that, I was struck by how many self seeded Nobles there were on bits of the slope where the caterpillar machine hadn't been, all really small ones no bigger than about 6 inches, none of any higher height? Whether taller ones had been destroyed but I couldn't find any evidence if they had? When I visited Cragside, there were seedling Douglas Firs and Hemlocks around many tree bases but no Noble Fir seedlings around the big Nobles, the seedlings here are Greenhow are the first that I have ever seen. Perhaps if they are leaving the remaining trees for self seeding, this Yorkshire County champion Noble will survive unless exposure leads to it being dropped.

RedRob, at 2014-04-17 15:45:48, said:
What are the old specimans you fear for Sisley? Does that big near 58 metre Sequoiadendron have reasonable shelter, do you think that there may be more Seqys of this height waiting for you to find?

Aubrey Fennell
Visible for everyone · permalink · en
RedRob, at 2014-04-17 15:38:02, said:
Hello Aubrey, just read your post on the 'Spring' thread that sounds wild to say the least, if I remember correctly I think we had 87mph at Bingley as the maximum here. Driving around I have seen shattered trees all over the place, it will be a case of re-checking trees to see if there has been any damage. I hope for instance that the big Sweet Chestnuts at Fountains haven't fallen. Which of your monumental trees have gone, any of real significance for height? The 40 metre Ash hasn't gone for instance has it? How are you getting on with the Nikon Forestry Pro laser?

Frank Gyssling, at 2014-04-16 18:16:02, said:
Mein "Abwerter" ist wieder pünktlich zur Stelle ;-). Wie immer, leider ohne Kommentar.
Rainer Lippert, at 2014-04-16 18:25:52, said:
Hallo Frank,

es ist nicht "dein" Abwerter ;-) Meine Bilder erhalten auch zu genüge so niedrige Bewertungen.

Viele Grüße,


Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-16 17:39:59, said:
Hallo Leo.

Er is geen Libanoneik in het Merwesteinpark. Is dit misschien de moseik?

Groet Wim

Zeltins, at 2014-04-14 16:10:28, said:
Still alive after the 2005th January storms.
RedRob, at 2014-04-15 17:25:08, said:
Quite a few trees like this up here in Yorkshire after this winter.

Foto's door 013hanvanmeegeren
Visible for everyone · permalink · nl
OKAnnette, at 2014-04-15 11:20:34, said:
Hoi Han, weet jij wanneer de Pawlowna Tormentosa in Maastricht bloeit? Vanuit Friesland wel een te grote gok om op de bonnefooi te gaan. Annette

Overlegpagina van Nardo
Visible for everyone · permalink · nl
OKAnnette, at 2014-04-15 11:17:50, said:
Dag Nardo, weet jij wanneer de Pawlonia Tormentosa in Eindhoven bloeit? Ik zou het graag willen zien, maar een reisje vanuit Friesland is een te grote 'gok' om op de bonnen. Fooi te gaan. Alvast bedankt Annette

Rainer Lippert, at 2014-04-14 21:10:06, said:
Hallo Karlheinz,

reinrassige Schwarz-Pappeln werden nie von Misteln befallen, demnach ist deine Einschätzung absolut richtig.

Viele Grüße,


Treefriend007, at 2014-04-13 20:22:07, said:
This cedar (Atlas/Libanon) seems to be in good shape.

Please communicate details on arboristic diagnosis.

luisindepels, at 2014-04-14 16:14:20, said:
it was demage at the other site.I don't have arboristic diagnosis. but if I can find it or can't take hand of it I will post it...

papagan1950, at 2014-04-14 09:59:40, said:
Komen aan deze beuk ook beukennootjes ik heb nu 8 tamme kastanje 5 walnoten en 2 beukennootbome
Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-14 13:49:30, said:
Ik weet het niet. Lijkt me wel.
papagan1950, at 2014-04-14 13:55:00, said:
ik nu wel 8 tamme kastanje 5 walnoten en 2 beukennootjes bomen allemaal zaailingen hoe verder behandel

KoutaR, at 2014-04-10 17:41:26, said:
There are plenty of fallen trees in the satellite image northwest of this tree. What are those fallen trees?

Incredible downy birch!

TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-04-13 18:37:48, said:
I seem to remember a plantation of forestry poplars in this area. Parham Park is an ancient deer-park (not open to the public) and a Site of Special Scientific Interest, and the poplars could have been felled to restore the area where they had been planted, as well as to sell the timber.


luisindepels, at 2014-04-11 18:22:28, said:
photo form the plant in the year 1957

Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-04-11 17:37:54, said:

Dank voor de foto's. Ga de boom morgen beter determineren, want het is geen Magnolia maar eerder een Sierkers, wellicht Prunus avium 'Plena'.

Groet, Martin

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-11 16:06:24, said:
Hi Martin,

Ik was vandaag in Rotterdam en onderweg naar huis zag ik een prachtige boom tegenover de oude ingang van de diergaarde. Ik stond perpleks over de boom. Na enig zoekwerk met daarbij de afweging is het een prunus of een malus kwam ik de conclusie Prunus cerasifera.??? Nou ben ik geen expert, maar goed ik leer. Toen ik hem wilde opvoeren kwam ik deze boom van jou tegen. Hij stond er al met een andere naam. Nou laten we maar kijken. Ik voer de maten op en voeg foto's toe. Prachtboom!

Rayn, at 2014-04-10 22:15:31, said:
That is one impressive rowan.

Rayn, at 2014-04-10 10:55:48, said:
My guess is an European larch, or could it be some other kind?

Maarten Windemuller, at 2014-04-10 21:16:26, edited at 2014-04-10 21:24:25, said:
Larix sibirica is common on the same geographic level in Finland and adjacent part of Russia. On the other side on there are some L. d. registered (in 2006) form which one on about the same place as 'your' L.d is pointed on the map. So keep it for L.d.

Rayn, at 2014-04-10 21:57:44, said:
Thank you, there was two larches of similar girth size on the property and that other registration you found would be one of them. Thank you for your help.

Rayn, at 2014-04-10 22:02:19, said:
I must have measured the smallest one, or too high up because the older one is 3.20 if I'm reading that site correctly, compared to my measurement 3.10 and I guess it have not shrunk in the recent years.

Scholem Alejchem, at 2014-04-09 09:29:34, said:
Na servas!!

Wie groß und alt werden die eigentlich in ihrer angestammten Heimat?

Rainer Lippert, at 2014-04-10 17:37:12, said:
Hallo Scholem,

also viel dicker werden die in Amerika auch nicht. Der Rekordhalter hat einen Umfang von etwas über 8 m. Zum Alter kann ich da leider nichts sagen.

Viele Grüße,


Scholem Alejchem, at 2013-11-02 17:02:35, said:
Uhu da schaut eine alte Hex heraus....
Tim B, at 2013-11-03 13:24:36, said:
Actually it's me on that picture. It's my girl friend that took the picture. This is in fact not a single tree, but two individual trees fused at the base. The fire scar is located at the fuse.

Kind regards,


Pacortiz, at 2014-01-24 01:41:03, said:
Excelentes seres vivos. Quiero visitarlos. A donde tengo que ir?
Tim B, at 2014-01-24 20:56:53, said:
Hola Pacortiz,

si hace clic en la imagen se puede ver la ubicación donde el árbol crece.

Saludos cordiales,


celtedu13, at 2014-04-09 10:22:39, said:
Impressionnant ;)

celtedu13, at 2014-04-09 10:19:03, said:
Faut être sous cet arbre pour se rendre compte de l'envergure qu'il a

celtedu13, at 2014-04-09 10:15:24, said:
je connais bien ce Platane j'habite pas très loin je le trouve extraordinaire ;)

williBremen, at 2013-02-22 09:22:09, said:
Scholem Alejchem, at 2013-02-22 09:36:58, said: Sie, und erst die Bäume!
celtedu13, at 2014-04-09 10:09:22, said:
magnifique :)

Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-04-07 23:19:42, said:
Can it be that we have some clumps off a few planes planted together in one place? Martin

Rainer Lippert, at 2014-04-08 05:31:26, said:
Hallo Martin,

ich verstehe dich leider nicht so richtig. Es dürfte sich jeweils um ein Baum handeln, der jedoch Mehrkernig ist. Die Trennung der einzelnen Äste geschieht in über 2 m Höhe.

Viele Grüße,


KoutaR, at 2014-04-08 11:19:13, said:
Hallo Rainer,

Er meint, dass es sich um einem "Büschelbaum" handeln könnte: mehrere Jungpflanzen in einem Bündel gepflanz, um schnell "einen" grossen Baum zu schaffen.

Leo Goudzwaard, at 2014-04-08 12:46:07, said:
Yes, these are Buschelbaume, planted and tied together or planted at short distance.

Many of them are at MT, see for instance:

European beech (Fagus sylvatica) '3913'

This is a rare example of an interwined tree.

In many old parks from 18 and 19th century you can find them, f.i. Muskauer Park (a very nice place to visit):

cheers, Leo

Rainer Lippert, at 2014-04-08 15:59:39, said:

ihr meint also, es würde sich nicht um einen Baum handeln? Ich habe über diese Platanen inzwischen auch schon mit dem Deutschen Baumarchiv und mit Michel Brunner von proarbore gesprochen. Die meinen auch wie ich, dass es sich um Mehrkernigkeit, aber definitiv um ein Individuum handeln würde. Wenn die Aufteilung der Äste nicht so hoch wäre, würde ich auch eher zu Mehrstämmigkeit tendieren, aber so eigentlich nicht.

Viele Grüße,


Leo Goudzwaard, at 2014-04-08 18:46:13, said:
The stems of the trees have been tied together after planting, so that it looks like one individual tree. And the landscape architects in the late 18th and 19th century succeeded, as most of the people, even many tree specialists, do not recognise it. See also this Platanus, the largest one in the Netherlands is a bundle of trees: kasteel Laag Keppel

cheers, Leo

Rayn, at 2014-04-08 19:01:24, said:
That is interesting. Is there more species that succesfully merge together like that?

Rainer Lippert, at 2014-04-08 20:02:11, said:
Hallo Leo,

interessante Diskussion. In Deutschland wurden im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert oftmals drei Buchen im Büschel zusammengepflanzt. Tiere haben dann meistens die äußeren Triebe abgefressen, so dass der mittlere Leittrieb eine höhere Überlebenschance hatte. Aber manchmal haben auch alle drei Triebe überlebt. Beispiele dazu sieht man im Urwald Sababurg oder beim Kloster Frauenroth:

European beech (Fagus sylvatica) '9626'

European beech (Fagus sylvatica) '9556'

Bei beiden Fällen handelt es sich um Büschelpflanzungen, die heute eine Drillingsform haben. Man sieht da auch heute noch deutlich die einzelnen Stämme.

Bei den Platanen hier sieht es aber meine ich anders aus. Die Stämmlinge sind da bis in über 2 m Höhe miteinander verwachsen. Ich denke da eher an Kernwüchse. Zumindest müsste man in Monumentaltrees die Art wie bei den Platanen hier und in deinem Fall anders Klassifizieren, als bei den beiden Buchen in meinen Beispielen. Nur ist das leider in Monumentaltrees nicht möglich. Ich habe das vor einiger schonmal hier angesprochen, aber ohne Erfolg.

Viele Grüße,


Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-04-08 21:13:54, said:
These forms with 2,3,5 or even 7 trees put together as one tree is seen with different trees, like Fagus, Betula, Carpinus, Quercus, Tilia and Platanus. I even have a question with a Castanea sativa in Loosdrecht that has 7 limbs. Some garden historians tell this is a clump off 7 trees.

Nowadays this type of cultivating trees becomes more popular again. This year I planted 1 clump with 3 stems of Parrotia persica in Kortenhoef. Tree nurseries offer a wide range off different clumped trees.

Leo Goudzwaard, at 2014-04-09 04:55:11, said:
Hello Martin,

tree nurseries offer multistemmed trees, but that is almost ever one (coppiced) tree with more stems, not different trees. The best way is to buy 3, 5, or 7 trees, plant them together and tie them up. All tree species can be used. There are even examples of different species, e.g. a Fagus and a Populus xcanescens together.

I have planted this year a bundle of smal Juglans trees and Platanus trees in Oostereng Arboretum.

To my opinion the Castanea you mentioned is a coppiced tree, een gekopte boom, ook daarvan zijn nog een paar voorbeelden in NL.


Scholem Alejchem, at 2014-04-07 18:43:54, said:
Schöne Riesen

Ich habe am letzten WE ebenfalls einen extrem verwilderten Schlosspark entdeckt, in dem ebensolche Platanen auszumachen sind.

lg Scholem

Rainer Lippert, at 2014-04-07 19:43:15, said:
Hallo Scholem,

ja, schöne Riesen trifft es genau. Immerhin handelt es sich jetzt um die dickste Platane in Deutschland. Hast du die Platanen schon registriert, die du da gefunden hast?

Viele Grüße,


Scholem Alejchem, at 2014-04-07 20:19:17, said:
Nein der Park ist eingezäunt und extrem dicht bewachsen. Ich muss erst die "richtige" Person finden, die Einlass gewährt.

lg Scholem

Rainer Lippert, at 2014-04-08 15:55:09, said:
Das kenne ich leider auch zu genüge, dass Bäume auf Privatgrund stehen. Vielleicht bekommst du ja irgendwann Zugang. In meiner Region steht eine Platane auf Privatgrund mit geschätzten 7,5 m Umfang. Man sieht es von außen nicht so gut. Der Schlossbesitzer lässt mich aber nicht zum Baum, leider.

Viele Grüße,


Scholem Alejchem, at 2014-04-08 19:09:04, said:
Manchmal kann man Schloss- und Parkbesitzer damit zum Nachdenken bringen, daß eine Erwähnung bei MT die wirtschaftliche Nutzung erleichtert, besonders da man EU-Förderungen lukrieren könnte. Dazu muß man aber erst zum richtigen Ansprechpartner gelangen, denn das sind Verwalter zumeist nicht und die meisten Schlösser in Ö sind ja nicht bewohnt.

lg Scholem

Rainer Lippert, at 2014-04-08 20:07:22, said:
In meinem Fall habe ich an der Schlosstür persönlich mit dem Schlossherren gesprochen. Er möchte es aber nicht, dass der Baum bekannt wird. Ein anderer Fall ist wiederum die dickste Schwarznuss Europas:

Eastern black walnut (Juglans nigra) '17056'

Dort war ich vor ein paar Wochen. Der Baum steht auch auf Privatgrund. Ich konnte aber mit dem Schlossbesitzer im Vorfeld per Mail einen Termin ausmachen. Und vor Ort hat der Freiherr von Gayling mir dann ganz Stolz sein Schloss, sein Park und vor allem die Schwarznuss gezeigt. Es geht also auch manchmal anders ;-)

Viele Grüße,


Beuk op de Burcht in Leiden
Visible for everyone · permalink · nl
Jeroen Philippona, at 2014-04-06 20:16:29, edited at 2014-04-08 19:44:49, said:
Hoi Wim,

Kun je de leeftijd van deze beuk onderbouwen? Volgens jouw melding de oudste beuk in Nederland die op MT is vermeld en ouder dan de oudste beuk die we in het boek Bijzondere bomen in Nederland hebben gemeld, die uit Haastrecht van 1694.

Dat het park in 1651 is aangelegd zegt weinig over het plantjaar van de beuk, wellicht heb je meer specifieke informatie.

Zo ook is de leeftijd van ± 314 jaar van de beuk van Oegstgeest bepaald niet zeker. Van de beuk in Haastrecht zijn er in ieder geval documenten betreffende de aanplant ter gelegenheid van de geboorte van een kind van de toenmalige eigenaar, zie het artikel in Bijzondere Bomen.

Frank Moens meldt in dat boek voor de beuk in Oegstgeest 1860 - 1870 als plantperiode, ook dat onderbouwt hij niet, maar het vermoeden van de eigenaar van 300 jaar moet op meer gebaseerd zijn om het als feit te accepteren.

Groeten, Jeroen

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-07 07:34:18, said:
Hallo Jeroen,

Ik zal uitzoeken op grond waarvan ik die leeftijd heb toegevoegd. .

Tussendoor een vraag. Normaal krijg vragen ook via mijn mail door. Deze vraag kwam ik toevallig tegen omdat ik op de hoofdpagina langs de nieuwe posts scrolde en jouw vraag tegenkwam. Snap jij het, weet je er iets meer van?.

NB. De eerste keer ( 5 minuten geleden) dat ik deze vraag probeerde te beantwoorden kreeg ik de melding dat er geen verbinding met gemaakt kon worden. Nou gebeurt dit laatste wel vaker, maar in dit geval waard om bij stil te staan, terwijl ook mijn tekst verdwenen was.



Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-07 09:19:47, said:
Hallo Jeroen,

Ik heb me gebaseerd op het feit dat de Burcht in 1150 is aangelegd en dat het stadsbestuur hem heeft aangekocht en er in 1651 een stadspark van heeft gemaakt. Gezien de plek van de boom en het feit dat deze zo hoog boven het maaiveld stond, vond ik het niet onlogisch dat de boom er al vanaf het begin heeft gestaan. De vertakking van de wortels lijkt daar ook op te duiden. Jij vindt dat dus niet aannemelijk?



Conifers, at 2014-04-07 11:30:56, edited at 2014-04-07 12:04:23, said:
I agree with Jeroen, this tree is not so old. First, Fagus sylvatica is not a long-lived tree; specimens over 250 years old are very exceptional (and usually only found at high altitude where growth is slower), and even trees >200 years are rare. Second, the cultivar 'Atropunicea' was only described in 1770; there are no records of any purple-leaf Fagus sylvatica cultivars until 1680 (when one was reported at Buchs, Zurich, Switzerland).

It should be possible to find historical evidence for planting dates, or old illustrations with useful information. In a quick look, I found this 1742 drawing showing newly planted trees where this tree is now, but whether it is one of these is not certain (if it is, it would be the middle right tree in the set of nine). However, I suspect even ~1740 is too old for this tree; my guess for its planting date would be around 1800. Can anyone estimate a date for this undated drawing, where the tree is not present?

Edit: I asked someone with experience of historical clothing fashions; he dated the undated drawing as later 18th century, 1750-1800, and definitely later than the 1742 drawing. So the young trees in the 1742 drawing had been removed and replaced with a parterre garden, and cannot include the beech in question.

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-07 15:43:27, said:
Hi Conifers,


I started to try and find an answer to your question about the age of the drawing. It's not that simple. I think I'll go to the archives this week. And thanks for your research.



KoutaR, at 2014-04-08 10:28:33, said:
Fagus sylvatica is not a long-lived tree; specimens over 250 years old are very exceptional (and usually only found at high altitude where growth is slower), and even trees >200 years are rare.

Hi Conifers,

I guess you slightly under-estimate the longevity of beech. At least in Central Europe, it regularly reaches 300 years in the few remaining old-growth forest remnants, also at low elevations. Or maybe you mean that specimens over 250 years are very exceptional because there is so little old forest left?


Conifers, at 2014-04-08 18:15:41, said:
Hi Kouta,

Thanks for the extra details! Although I had not known about these older trees in natural forest conditions, it does not surprise me, as they will spend a long period growing slowly in the understorey before reaching maturity (same applies to e.g. Abies, which I did know about). That won't apply in the present case of a planted tree, of course.

Rayn, at 2014-04-08 18:57:58, said:
I know of one beech in that grew naturally to over 400 years:

Girth was only 232 cm.

"In 2001 an extraordinary old (Fagus Sylvatica) was found in a beech forest at the Mårås nature reserve. The tree died in 2002. A sample from about 50 cm off the ground contained 397 annual rings. Normally the beech in that area needs between three and ten years to reach that height. The tree was therefore at least 400 years and is the oldest dated individual so far in Northern Europe. Slow growth during most of it's life is like to have contributed to it's high age by keeping it's dimensions down. The tree showed no signs of having been pollarded"

There is one heavily trimmed beech in Epping Forest in England mentioned in that pdf that is said to be between 500 to 1000 years, is that tree on this site?

Leo Goudzwaard, at 2014-04-06 10:43:20, said:
This tree is not 9014 years old, but dead wood remains from roots and cones in the soil appeared to be 9550 years old according to radio carbon dating. The age of the tree itself is not known, there has been no tree ring data research as far as I know. The press release was not correct, only dead wood remains are 9550 years old.

Could you please put the right information at MT? For the list of oldest trees in the world, see:

cheers, Leo

Rayn, at 2014-04-06 15:27:33, edited at 2014-04-06 15:31:15, said:
This is an interesting discussion. An old oak where the centre is rotten and only the younger outer parts of the tree remains, is it as old as the living wood or should the dead parts count?

I don't know the answer and is not in any position to say what belongs on this site or not, I'm merely posting a tree that some sources claim to be 9550 years old. Not that very trunk that is visible, as I wrote it appeared in krummholz formation for thousand of years and have taken a more treelike appearance lately.

The reason it says 9014 years is that when you come to this ages the site wont let you be more specific than 8000, 9000 or 10000 BC.

Rayn, at 2014-04-06 23:31:43, edited at 2014-04-06 23:37:16, said:
I reread my answer and thought to myself that I do not wish to start arguments as I am clearly the newbie here. Do not know whether this discussion disappears when I remove the registered tree but I'll do that anyway.

Conifers, at 2014-04-07 08:57:41, said:
While I agree that the evidence for its age is not good (in the absence of DNA matching, how can they prove the 9550 year radiocarbon-dated wood is from the same individual as the living tree?), it is still scientifically and dendrologically a far more interesting and significant tree than many others on this site. It is also a tree that (from the publicity about it) people might expect to find included here. So, please bring Old Tjikko back!

Maarten Windemuller, at 2014-04-08 07:21:26, said:
Agreer with Conifers: please bring Old Tjikko back on MT.

Rayn, at 2014-04-08 09:15:55, said:
Ok, I added it again. No picture this time as I got no photo myself and just read the disclaimer...

My wife and I have talked about getting back to Fulufjället again some day as we have a cabin in the family nearby and then I promise to take photos. Last time we where there we just took some photos of the waterfall as my interest in trees is a quite recent thing.

Conifers, at 2014-04-08 18:10:16, said:
Thanks! I can add a photo from Wiki Commons, as they are creative-commons licensed for use by people other than the photographer.

Conifers, at 2014-04-08 18:32:32, said:
Photo added - Tim, could you change the Photographer attribution from 'Conifers', to Karl Brodowsky, please (I can't work out how to do it!)

Rayn, at 2014-04-07 15:14:14, edited at 2014-04-07 16:25:11, said:
Could this be a betula pendula, silver birch instead?

Betula pendula is known for masurgrowth, when the stem deforms and give a decorative wood for furnitures etc. Don't know the english word, but here is a swedish wikipage about it with some pics:

Betula pubescens does not often have this deformation growth.

Also the branches on the close up picture looks very hanging and the leafs is quite triangular, just as Betula pendula.

Betula pubescens on the other have not as hanging branches and rounder leafs.

Could be something else than masur growth with this tree though, also maybe need more closeup to say something about leafs and cross pollination between the two is not rare either.

TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-04-07 18:57:12, said:
From the bark I would be fairly confident this is Betula pubescens. The bark of pure B. pendula breaks into thick corky plates near the base. In Britain, most big birches are B. pubescens and are often as fluted as this one.

Rayn, at 2014-04-07 21:49:56, said:
Yes you and the original poster is surely correct, the bark is indeed quite smooth and clear white.

Interesting news to me though that bigger pubescen is more common in Britain, in central Sweden its the opposite actually.

And also pendula is more common on dry normal soils, where pubescens grows on wet soils close to mires and tarns and on the mountains in the north it forms forests as dwarfgrown at the border of the treeline above spruce and pine.

Rayn, at 2014-04-07 21:50:36, said:
Yes you and the original poster is surely correct, the bark is indeed quite smooth and clear white.

Interesting news to me though that bigger pubescen is more common in Britain, in central Sweden its the opposite actually.

And also pendula is more common on dry normal soils, where pubescens grows on wet soils close to mires and tarns and on the mountains in the north it forms forests as dwarfgrown at the border of the treeline above spruce and pine.

KoutaR, at 2014-04-08 11:06:20, said:
I have observed this birch nearly all my life. Rayn, you are not the first person who suggest it is B. pendula. However, the characteristics showing it's B. pubescens include:

  • Young twigs are pubescent, though only sparsely.

  • Twigs are without warts, which are typical for B. pendula.

  • Bark at the base don't break into plates (as Owen noted above).

  • The tree comes into leaf at the same time with B. pubescens trees nearby.

You are right that the leaves are quite triangular. This is true for B. pubescens in that region generally, where the two birches are sometimes rather difficult to tell apart, particularly in forest where the bases are often dark and rough in the both species.

Hybridization between B. pendula and B. pubescens is thought to be a rare event as they have differing chromosome numbers B. pendula being diploid and B. pubescens tetraploid, but I don't know if this has really been studied.

In Finland, B. pendula gets taller and thicker, but B. pubescens sometimes makes this like mutations. Note that if you exclude the "buttresses" the tree is much thinner.

The birch making "masur growth" (I don't know the English word either) is B. pendula var. carelica, a rare variety native to southern Finland, Russian Karelia and the Baltic countries. I don't know if there are other similar varieties.



Rayn, at 2014-04-08 15:17:53, said:
Yes if it's pubescent and without warts that definitely settles it.

I know that carelica has the highest rate of masurgrowth but pendula can occasionally have it too. Not at all as often, that's for sure.

Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-04-07 23:02:27, said:
Wim, Nardo and others,

We have to see the fruits to make a real determination . In Wijdemeren I have 2 very old (estimated planted around 1850) cultivated prunes; Prunus (domestica) Myrobalaan-A. It has tasty golfball-size and -shaped fruits with a orange skin dotted with small red spots. To get the right name I found an old fruittreegrower via nursery G. Snel in Huizen. I still have to put pictures of these fruits with the trees in MT.

It looks a lot like another old semi-cultivated prune called "kroosje". I do not know how these fruit taste.

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-03-13 19:28:56, said:
Ter aanvulling. De eigenaar vertelde me dat ze er jaarlijks heerlijke zoeter pruimen van krijgt. Dus Prunus, maar welke?

Nardo Kaandorp, at 2014-03-13 20:50:07, said:
Ik denk aan een Kerspruim, maar dan een groenbladige. Prunus cerasifera. Toevallig heb ik deze boomsoort kortgeleden toegevoegd. Exact dezelfde omtrek als de roodbladige boom in Nuenen, hoe groot is die kans! Ze bloeien heel vroeg.

Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-03-14 06:23:25, said:

Ben in Wijdemeren net bezig met een sierfruitcontrole en inderdaad staat de Prunus cerasus nu vol in bloei, naast de sleedoorn (Prunus spinosa) en een hybride als Prunus 'Accolade'. Prunus spinosa bloeit spierwit en heeft op vrijwel alle takken een paar takdoorns als einde van de kortloten en heeft ronde zure knikkers, de sleepruimpjes. Prunus 'Accolade' bloeit roze, net als veel andere nu bloeiende Prunus-hybriden.

Ik ben het met Nardo eens dat het hier een Prunus cerasus betreft.

Groet Martin

Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-03-14 06:28:03, said:
Sorry tikfoutje op de vroege morgen niet cerasus (zure kers) maar Prunus cerasifera (kerspruim)!! Martin

Conifers, at 2014-03-14 16:23:01, said:
I agree with Prunus cerasifera, the crown shape also fits.

TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-04-06 17:54:56, said:
This tree interests me because the bark is very different from the Prunus cerasifera that grows in Britain (the crown is also broader and fuller and the blossom more profuse). If I had to give it a name I would plump for Prunus x dasycarpa (Black Apricot), but this is a rare tree in Britain and I have only studied a few, in big collections.

Nardo Kaandorp, at 2014-04-07 19:41:50, said:
Hello Owen,

You could well be right. Wim mentioned that the owner of the tree has tasty & sweet fruits from this tree. I think we need more details on the leeves and fruits to be sure.

Rgds, Nardo

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-07 19:53:19, said:
I'll post everything I have on the tree. Cannot do anything more. Hope it will clear out.


Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-07 20:08:22, said:
Cannot deliver any addition.

papagan1950, at 2014-04-05 09:36:43, said:
erg mooie boom erg groot vindt ik mooi
Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-05 16:44:35, said:
Helemaal mee eens. Dit is zeker voor Zuid-Holland een bijzondere boom, want er zijn niet zoveel oude tamme kastanjes.
papagan1950, at 2014-04-05 16:56:48, said:
Ik heb vorig jaar oktober 2013 tamme kastanje gevonden aan de oranjesluisweg gem

Westland heb er wat in de grond gestop op het balkon nu zijn er 5 op gekomen Thom

papagan1950, at 2014-04-05 16:58:53, said:
Daar staat ook een tamme kastanje boom gewoon bij mensen in de tuin
Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-05 18:19:09, said:
Let wel, die tamme kastanjes kunnen groot worden. Maar als de ruimte er voor is, kun je later de tamme kastanjes poffen. Als je ooit met je ouders of wie dan ook in Brussel bent, moet je maar een gepofte kastanjes aan een kraampje bestellen. Vooral s' winters. Erg lekker. Een specialiteit daar.
papagan1950, at 2014-04-05 19:35:35, said:
Ik heb gezien op het voormalig landgoed Marlot heb je ook een heel oude tamme kastanje staan omtrek 4,12m hoogte 22,40
papagan1950, at 2014-04-07 16:31:09, said:
Ik heb gezien dat erbij mij 8 tamme kastanje zijn opgekomen. en 4 walnoten en beukennoot Thom moet je warm houd?

Leo Goudzwaard, at 2014-04-03 19:03:54, said:
dit is een Prunus serrulata, een prachtige enkelbloemige cultivar, maar ik weet niet welke, Leo

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-03 19:47:09, said:
Hi Leo Ik heb hem gewoon gewijzigd. Nadere specificatie kan kater nog. Maar ik vond het ook een fantastische boom.

TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-04-06 16:41:34, said:
Prunus x yedoensis

Rayn, at 2014-04-06 08:50:10, edited at 2014-04-06 08:54:28, said:
Mooie structuur op de boomstam
Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-06 09:55:17, said:
Ik zal een foto zoeken waarin dat nog beter tot zijn recht komt. Ik vind het ook een fraaie boom.
Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-06 12:20:38, said:

Ik heb zojuist een foto geplaatst waarin de structuur ook nog eens maximaal door de zon wordt belicht.


Wim Brinkerink

Rayn, at 2014-04-06 15:17:34, said:
Thank you! Indeed a beautiful tree.

Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-04-06 08:27:45, said:

Deze appel blijft me nog even bezig houden. Kunnen we er eens langs? Als het M. Hupehensis is dan komen er binnenkort paarsroze bloemknoppen in. De bloemen openen lichtroze om snel naar wit te verbloemen. In jouw foto's zie ik dat beeld niet. Eind april zou hij volop in bloei moeten komen in dit vroege jaar. Veel appels laten een roze bloemknop zien, dus een echt witte bloemknop kan determineren helpen.

Groet, Martin

Ps: zag dat je ook in het Citadelpark in Gent was. Wat een mooie collectie aan bijzondere bomen in een platanenbos is dat.

Leo Goudzwaard, at 2014-04-06 10:08:45, said:
hallo Wim en Martin, beide soorten M. hupehensis en M. baccata lijken erg op elkaar en zijn ook nog variabel. Beide hebben bloemen die voor het openen lichtroze tot paarsroze zijn, en daarna wit. Vruchten zijn rood tot geel. Volgens Dendrologie van de Lage Landen zit het verschil in het aantal stijlen: 2 bij M. hupehensis en 3 bij M. baccata, en de kelkbladen: even lang of korter dan de bloembodem bij M. hupehensis en meestal langer dan de bloembodem bij M. baccata. groet, Leo

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-06 12:31:18, said:
Hallo Martin,

Lijkt me prima om samen te gaan kijken. Maar vooralsnog zag ik geen enkel tegen van bloei. !Maar wellicht zie jij al meer zonder bloei. Je weet dat ik niet meer werk, dus ik kan vrij vaak. Als je me wat datavoorstellen doen kunnen we iets vastzetten. We kunnen dan eventueel nog wat andere plekken bekijken. Ik maak een klein voorbehoud voor één van de komende vrijdagen. Overigens ben ik nog nooit in het Citadelpark in Gent geweest. Ik zag wel dat Wim Peters onze Belgische vriend daar is geweest evenals Tim.


Wim Brinkerink

En Leo,

Dank voor de extra info. het zou mij echter zeer verbazen als deze bomen dit voorjaar nog in bloei komen.

Frank Gyssling, at 2014-04-03 09:21:51, said:
Hier hat sich wieder mein "Abwerter" gemeldet.

Das ist ein historisch bedeutsamer Baum an historischer Stääte, gepflanzt anlässlich der Vereinigung Deutschlands! (siehe Kommentar zum Herbst-Foto).

Frank Gyssling, at 2014-04-03 09:33:06, said:
Ich bin gespannt ob sich der Erstbewerter einmal meldet und seine Note kommentiert.
Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-03 12:04:05, edited at 2014-04-03 12:47:20, said:
Hi Frank, This time I agree with the rating, allthough I myself will not rate it. My preference is nice and beautiful trees of some monumentality.For me the picture is the most important and not the height of a tree or whatever record might be broken.

I like your picture but I think the composition could be better. In my opinion the tree should be dominant and to be seen completely. This composition gives too much weight to the bridge as if that is the object of intrest. I like the idea of the bridge in the background, but it should be less dominant. So I wouldnt rate above 3 and than I do not rate it, Unless it has an average score of above 4,25.

Wim Brinkerink

Frank Gyssling, at 2014-04-03 15:01:02, said:
Tank you for your friendly opinion.

best wishes frank

Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-04-03 23:47:12, said:
Hai Frank,

I did rate this picture first. My comment is almost the same as Wim wrote as a comment. I think the tree should be more dominant in this picture and more complete to rate it higher than I did. I do rate a lot of pictures in MT in this way. I also try to rate the photo's for their technical skils

Greetings, Martin Tijdgat

KoutaR, at 2014-04-04 12:20:08, said:
Hello Frank,

Die Komposition ist super, wie in deinen Fotos immer, aber da MT eine Baumseite ist, könnte der Baum wirklich ein Bisschen mehr Gewicht haben.

Frank Gyssling, at 2014-04-04 17:09:21, said:
Ja, da hast du prizipiell recht. Aber ich wollte der weltbekannten Glienicker Brücke, welche als Pflanzort hier bewust anlässlich des Falls des "Eisernen Vorhangs" gewählt wurde etwas Raum geben. Das können naturgemäß wir Deutsche besonders gut verstehen. Ich bin direkt an dieser furchbaren Grenze aufgewachsen. Insbesondere dieser Baum hat für uns einen hohen symbolischen Wert und ich hoffe sehr, er wird reletiv alt und mahnt uns immer Diktaturen ernergisch zu begegnen.

Vergleichbar wäre ev. dieser noch so junge Baum mit den vielen "Kaiser- od. Königs-Eichen bzw. -Linden die wir nicht nur in Deutschland kennen.

viele Grüße Frank

Conifers, at 2014-04-04 21:44:53, said:
What I find odd with this tree is the choice of species, a very short-lived one, to commemorate such a momentous event of history. Sadly, the tree will likely be dead while there are still people alive who remember the event. I saw it was a gift from Japan, maybe a long-lived species like Sugi (Cryptomeria japonica) or Keaki (Zelkova serrata) would have been a better choice?

The photo composition (unless truly dreadful!) doesn't matter to me in giving a rating, this is after all a site about monumental trees, not monumental photographs. It is a nice pic for balance of subjects (though a bit over-saturated*), but what matters to me in rating is the monumentality of the tree itself.

* (something I've noticed with many of Frank's photos, perhaps the camera settings need adjusting slightly so as to reflect actual colours better?)

KoutaR, at 2014-04-05 11:18:46, said:
About the saturations: I think it's only that tastes differ. What someone regards as over-saturated, is a stunning photo to another. And what is natural for the first person, is boring to the second.
Frank Gyssling, at 2014-04-05 13:01:06, said:

I wish a little more tolerance of conifers to other opininons and a correspeonding rating. He always finds something to criticize. He should better more owne trees present of MT.

Greetings Frank

Jeroen Philippona, at 2014-04-05 23:40:51, edited at 2014-04-06 12:19:20, said:
It seems that several of the frequent users of this website still have completely different opinions about what is important at the website, what are beautiful or important trees and what are beautiful or good photographs.

The same discussions can be seen many times again but there seems to be little understanding of each other.

I like to repeat that Tim Bekaert did start the photo-rating system to rate the quality of the photos, just to get a good order in the photos of one tree so that the heighest rated photos would be on top and seen first.

Alas mr. Conifers has never understood this and still likes to give ratings of the monumentality of the trees themselves, wich never was the meaning of the system. The monumentality, importance or beauty of a tree is rather subjective and I don't like to make ratings of them. Everybody can have his own preference and it is clear that those differ a lot among the users.

Concerning the photograph by Frank of the Sargentkerselaar at Glienicker Brücke: to my opinion it is a very beautiful photo of an important subject. Indeed also a photo of the whole tree would be nice.


Jeroen Philippona

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-05 20:16:13, said:
23 mei 2013

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-05 20:15:45, said:
5 april 2014

Rayn, at 2014-04-03 06:48:36, said:
Alternative name is also Rumskullaeken.

Age is estimated to be between 750 and 950 years by Bertil Lindquist, professor in botanics and silviculture. This was in the 1930's or 1940's though, so now it would be between 800 and 1000 years if his estaminations where correct.

Some info on Bertil Lindquist (in swedish but google translate maybe does the trick)

Some more info about the tree unfortunately only in swedish from Länsstyrelsen i Kalmars län, the County Board of Kalmar, the region which it grows.

Maarten Windemuller, at 2014-04-04 14:13:49, edited at 2014-04-04 14:15:13, said:
Hei Rayn

Welcome at MT.

Thank you for the links and extra information. I hope to visit the tree this year again.

You know last year some SAF members did good work at the oak and replaced the iron belt. Foto's of the job I found at facebook, in SAF group.

Kind regards,


Rayn, at 2014-04-04 15:58:44, said:
Thank you, I was not aware of that, will check that out!

Best regards


Rayn, at 2014-04-04 23:02:19, said:
Yes here is the new look without that steel band:

KoutaR, at 2014-04-04 12:31:57, said:
Hi Sisley,

New height record for Prunus avium - great!

You write: "The height is between 25 and 32 m." Do you mean that the cherry trees in the stand are 25-32m in average?

Bess, at 2014-04-04 11:42:19, said:
Nice… if you compare with the recent picture the tree hasost took almost all off the place till the wall. :-)

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-03 20:24:43, said:
Fantastic tree and fantastic picture. Thank you.

Leo Goudzwaard, at 2014-04-03 18:51:18, said:
hoi Han, dit is een Prunus serrulata, Japanse kers, Leo

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-04-03 12:51:29, said:
Nice picture, won't rate it though, because it is only a nice picture and I see no monumentality.
Bess, at 2014-04-03 13:12:46, said:
Is the complete row Pyrus p.? and from the same age as the one measured?
Frank Gyssling, at 2014-04-03 14:27:57, said:
No, that's merely a field avenue by the nice atmosphere in the evening.

Eschen-Ahorn (Acer negundo) im Nationalpark Donauauen
Visible for everyone · permalink · de
Scholem Alejchem, at 2014-04-01 16:43:08, said:
Liebe Leute

Die Nationalparkverwaltung hat begonnen alle Eschen-Ahorn (Acer negundo) zu beseitigen. Neben anderen "Fremden" wie den Götterbaum, werden diese soweit geschädigt, bis sie eingehen, würde man sie schneiden dann könnten sie nachwachsen.

Auf die Frage, wozu das gut sein soll, denn die gesamte Vegetation ist nach der letzten Eiszeit "eingewandert" haben die Sonderbaren wie immer keine Antwort.

lg Scholem

KoutaR, at 2014-04-02 09:57:57, said:
Die Einheimischen sind nicht einzeln von ausserhalb des Ökosystems eingewandert, sondern zusammen mit ihren Konkurrenten, Feinden, Parasiten usw. aus den Rückzugsgebieten im Süden zurückgekehrt. Die Nordamerikanischen Arten kommen dagegen völlig von draussen. Z.B. die Robinie hat hier seinen Erzfeind "locust borer" nicht und kann die Einheimischen in bestimmten Habitaten verdrängen. Die Fremdarten sind weltweit die zweitgrösste Gefahr für die Biodiversität.

Scholem Alejchem, at 2014-04-02 10:30:55, said:
Das mag zwar richtig sein, aber danach müßte man alle Platanenmischlinge oder Pappelmischlinge, welche auf Kreuzungen mit amerikanischen Arten beruhen ebenfalls aus dem Weg räumen.

Und dann sind die Donauauen vollkommen leer, während an den Grenzen dazu, alles weiterhin fest angebaut wird.

Man müsste großräumig in allen Ländern Europas gleichzeitig alles in den Zustand vor 1492 bringen.

lg Scholem

KoutaR, at 2014-04-02 11:56:57, said:
Die Platanen sind kein Gefahr für die Einheimischen. Wie oft siehst du Platanensämlinge? Aber die Kanadische Pappel ist natürlich teilweise schuldig für die Vernichtung der europäischen Schwarzpappel. Das mit der Fremdarten ist kein einfaches Thema. Nationalparks sind generell gemeint für den Schutz der einheimischen Flora und Fauna. Aber wenn dort nur Fremdarten wachsen, könnte man fragen, warum sind die Donauauen ein Nationalpark.



Scholem Alejchem, at 2014-04-02 17:25:42, said:
Das frag ich mich auch, denn

Die Via-Donau kann alles entlang der Schiffahrtsrinne machen (Umbauten, Strassen, Dämme)

Die Waldbesitzer haben uneingeschränktes Nutzungsrecht (Kahlschlag, auch von Baumriesen)

Die Bauern bauen noch immer auf ihren Feldern an und zumeist NICHT BIO

Die Jagd ist noch immer erlaubt (Es werden sogar Jadgschneisen geschlagen)

Die Fischerei ist auch erlaubt

und vor allem

ALLE Genannten haben Zufahrtsrechte mit Auto oder Arbeits-Maschinen sowie Durchfahrtsrechte für Motorboote in den Seitenarmen.

Auch Fischer- und Jägerhütten sind zu hunderten gestattet und werden von der Verbänden auch erneuert.

Verbote sind nur für Besucher, um alle "Kontrolleure" auszuschliessen.

lg Scholem

KoutaR, at 2014-04-02 18:22:40, said:
Leider ist die mitteleuroäpäischen Nationalparkrealität teilweise so wie du beschrieben hast. Das finde ich besonders komisch, dass man nur auf den markierten Wanderwegen betreten darf, aber Bäume darf man fällen!

Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-04-02 23:01:37, said:
Dear people,

I can't understand these type of discussions. Every day we eat products from all over the world, starting with potatoes, mais, rice, etc., etc. If birds and other animals manage with or without human help to expand all over the world it's okay.

But when it is a tree it is a problem. Historic pollen let us know Magnolias and others did grow here before the ice-age. Why can't they return? Why can we use mais and other South-American plants but can't use Nothofagus or Auraucaria???

Greetings, Martin

KoutaR, at 2014-04-03 08:58:01, said:
I don't think people see it's more okay if alien animals cause ecological problems. In New Zealand, a few alien species (cats, rats etc.) has destroyed the unique native fauna almost completely. In Australia, fox, camel, cane toad, rabbit, pig etc. have caused ecological disasters, as well. European polecat has been replaced by American mink in large areas. You find examples easily. I don't think people think these changes are okay.

European magnolias cannot return because they have been extinct already millions of years. The American species are not the same ones. Our ecosystems have developed without those species. However, Nothofagus, Araucaria and Magnolia are no danger for European species. As with plane trees, how often do you see natural seedlings of these genera.

The climate change can change things. One possibility is that the vegetation zones don't shift neatly northwards but the resulting "natural" communities are colonies of alien species with very low biodiversity.

arbremonumental, at 2014-04-02 19:12:51, said:
Cést magnifique!!
oldoak, at 2014-04-02 19:36:21, said:
agree on that

Rayn, at 2014-04-02 06:57:16, said:

oprus, at 2014-04-01 16:00:11, said:
How old is this tree?
Conifers, at 2014-04-01 16:58:01, said:
According to Alan Mitchell (1972, Conifers in the British Isles), it was planted in 1861.

Previous measurements: 30 m tall, 3.45 m girth, in 1931; and 40 m tall, 4.50 m girth in 1970.

Letzte Änderungen
Visible for everyone · permalink · de
baumklettermax, at 2014-03-30 11:55:27, said:
Gibt es hier Baumfreunde aus Österreich?

Ich bin Baumkletterer und möchte meine Hilfe für Baumhöhenmessungen anbieten.

Als Austauch dafür prächtige Bäume kennen zu lernen und besteigen zu dürfen.

LG aus Steyr/OÖ,


Scholem Alejchem, at 2014-03-31 10:46:49, said:
Hallo Max

Der simi ist aus OÖ, mrgreen und acerus sind so wie ich aus Wien.

Baumkletterer sind immer gut, um die Daumen-mal-pi-Messungen zu bestätigen oder widerlegen.

Es gibt auch einen unbekannten "ungesicherten" Baumkletterer in Wien.

lg Scholem

baumklettermax, at 2014-03-31 14:24:53, said:

Und trefft ihr euch manchmal bzw. macht gemeinsame Baum-Besuche?

Bin auch öfters in Wien.

Falls ihr einen Mail Verteiler zu diesem Zwecke habt würde ich mich sehr freuen darin aufgenommen zu werden,meine Email Adresse ist:



Scholem Alejchem, at 2014-03-31 16:10:08, said:
Begegnungen sind eher zufällig, wir sind aber auch alterstechnisch sehr weit auseinander.....

Aber wenn Du die Leute anschreibst, wer weiss....

Rating van foto's
Visible for everyone · permalink · nl
Tim B, at 2011-12-21 17:39:42, edited at 2011-12-21 17:49:54, said:

gezien misverstanden hieromtrent, wat uitleg.

De rating van een foto is een getal tussen 0 en 5. Deze wordt gebruikt om de volgorde van de foto's te bepalen op een bepaalde pagina (deze met de hoogste rating komen bovenaan te staan) en dient enkel bij wijze van sortering. De datum van upload, of grootte, of eender welk criterium is ook mogelijk, maar een soort gemiddelde gebruikersrating lijkt me het meest voor de hand liggend: zo komen doorgaans de beste foto's bovenaan te staan.

De rating is een gemiddelde van alle stemmen.

Stel dat persoon A 3/5 geeft als rating, een volgende persoon B geeft 4/5 als rating, dan zal de totale rating veranderen naar 3.5 op 5 (het gemiddelde).

Stemt vervolgens een persoon C nog eens 4 op 5, dan wordt het gemiddelde 3.67/5 (daar het gemiddelde van 3 + 4 + 4 = 3.67).

Stemmen doe je door met de muis te zweven boven de 5 sterretjes en te klikken op het aantal sterretjes dat je wenst te geven. Als je traag heen en weer beweegt met de muis boven de sterretjes, zie je de rode achtergrond meebewegen. Stemmen doe je door ergens op de sterretjes te klikken. Klik je ergens helemaal links op het linkersterretje, dan geef je 0/5 - klik je ergens rechts op het rechtersterretje geeft je 5/5 als rating. Je kan je stem steeds wijzigen door elders te klikken zolang je niet op de knop "Stem" hebt geklikt. Daarmee stuur je jouw stem door.

Als je op "Stem" klikt, zonder eerst een rating in te geven, geef je dezelfde rating door als deze die al beschikbaar was (zo er al op de foto gestemd is). Stel dat een foto een rating heeft van 2/5 en je klikt direct op "Stem" zonder zelf eerst een keuze te aken, dan geef je ook als rating "2/5" door. Dit zal ik wellicht aanpassen: de knop "Stem" verbergen zolang je nog geen keuze gemaakt hebt.

Iedereen kan stemmen, al kan je per sessie slechts 1 maal op een foto stemmen. Een volgende keer kan je wel opnieuw stemmen (eigenlijk zou dat niet mogen, maar dit was meer implementeerwerk op het moment dat ik de code schreef en er waren toen - en zijn nog steeds - belangrijker katjes te geselen).

Ratings zijn uiteraard niet bedoeld om een appreciatie over een bepaalde gebruiker kenbaar te maken. Zo geef ik zonnige, scherpe duidelijke foto's vaak een rating van 4 à 4.5 / 5 en regenachtige donkere foto's iets minder, omdat op die manier bezoekers eerst de beste foto's te zien krijgen.

Veel gebruikers baseren hun eerste indruk namelijk op het eerste wat op hun scherm te zien is.

Hopelijk verklaart dit één en ander.



Han van Meegeren, at 2011-12-21 20:22:39, said:
Dank voor de uitleg Tim

Het lijkt me duidelijk zo.

Groet van Han

Conifers, at 2011-12-22 10:51:59, said:
One suggestion I would make - rating should only be available to registered MT members. If it is available to everyone, it is too easy for vandals to give nil votes to photos as a joke, and this will inevitably disproportionally affect the best photos with the highest ratings as they are the most visible.

Tim B, at 2012-01-08 19:49:35, edited at 2012-01-08 20:12:23, said:
From today on voting for images is allowed for registered users only.

Kind regards,


Han van Meegeren, at 2012-01-08 21:46:22, said:
Dag Tim

Prima actie. Ik kreeg zojuist toen ik aan het uploaden was wel iets vreemds. Ik kreeg onderaan de pagina over het scherm een brede balk. Het leek wel of ik met de functies in die balk van alles kon aanpassen op de site. En toen ik net jouw bericht las over de verandering van het stemmen, dacht ik, heb je ons niet te veel permissie gegeven? Ik heb helaas geen schermafdruk gemaakt. Misschien vergis ik mij, maar ik heb dit nooit eerder gezien. Ik herinner mij een knop waarop CSS stond. Dat is toch de software waarmee deze site gemaakt is, of niet?

Groet van Han

Bess, at 2014-03-31 13:27:01, said:
Blijkbaar is er veel gevoeligheid over 'weinig' sterren geven… . één of twee sterren geven blijkt ook 'not done'? Ik zie de sterren als 'waardering'. Tenslotte is een foto van één ster beter dan een zonder sterren, want ze komt 'hoger' te staan? voor mij staat 2,5 sterren geven dus eerder gelijk aan iemand 75% geven… en niet een 'voldoende'… . Bij deze verontschuldig mij alvast als ik iemands eer gekrenkt hebt, maar moest ik de foto niet waarderen zou ik ze dus ook geen sterren geven… .

Conifers, at 2014-03-30 21:56:32, said:
Do you have a close-up of the foliage, please? From the crown shape, it looks more like Chamaecyparis lawsoniana.
Berimux, at 2014-03-31 04:15:04, said:
Closeup posted - unfortunately I am not an expert......
Conifers, at 2014-03-31 08:06:06, said:
Thanks! Yes, definitely Chamaecyparis lawsoniana.
Berimux, at 2014-03-31 08:34:44, said:
OK - will change this tree to Chamaecyparis lawsoniana !!

Christopher, at 2014-03-31 08:13:57, said:
Großer Herzbergteich

krossdal1, at 2014-03-30 10:23:46, said:
what a beauty. would like to get my hands on some of it's seeds.

I like try out new trees and varieties here in Iceland, just need more seeds

Conifers, at 2014-03-30 12:26:39, said:
Unfortunately, it is a single specimen, so with no pollen source for cross-pollination, it does not produce viable seeds.
krossdal1, at 2014-03-30 21:52:05, said:
so micropropagation is the only way. do you know if it has been tried?
Conifers, at 2014-03-31 08:09:01, said:
That should work, though I don't have the equipment to do it myself.

Another option would be to contact RBG Edinburgh to see if they might have any wild-origin seed available for exchange.

Jeroen Philippona, at 2014-03-30 21:19:58, said:
Hallo Henk,

Deze beuk is dezelfde als nr 1894, die Leo Goudzwaard eerder op MT zette. Het beste kun je jouw foto's toevoegen aan zijn pagina.

Groeten, Jeroen

rzelger, at 2014-03-30 20:56:53, said:
this tree is 15 feet in circumference and hundred and 20 feet in height do not know when it was planet do not know the ages of tree

Karlheinz, at 2014-03-30 18:56:58, said:
Info-Tafel: BHU 5,15m; Höhe 46 m

Bess, at 2014-03-28 17:57:55, said:
2 sterren… Mooie foto, maar uiteraard treurig nieuws!

Prachtig hoe grillig van vorm hij onderaan is.

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-03-30 13:27:30, said:
Hij is al een tijd geleden gekapt. Ik heb hem laten staan. Ik vind hem ook erg mooi.

Conifers, at 2014-03-29 17:17:13, said:
Taxodium distichum
luisindepels, at 2014-03-29 19:31:37, said:

Bess, at 2014-03-28 16:50:58, said:
Die iepenkevers hebben het wel heel bont gemaakt :-p.

Sorry, flauw mopje… .

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-03-28 17:36:47, said:
Geeft niet. Ik vroeg me destijds af waarom dit er zo was. Ik denk eerlijk gezegd eerder aan vandalisme dan aan de iepenspintkever.
Bess, at 2014-03-28 17:39:00, said:
ja, iets op 4 wielen of op rupsbanden… waarschijnlijk bestuurd door iets met 4 poten :-p

MoritzNagel, at 2014-03-28 11:45:47, said:
I think this is probably Populus tremula or alba?
Conifers, at 2014-03-28 17:02:59, said:
Yes, agree, or perhaps most likely the hybrid between them Populus × canescens
Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-03-28 17:04:16, said:
Okay, than I will delete. Trees of that kind and that measures are not interesting enough to post here. Thank you. I misjudged it.

Scholem Alejchem, at 2014-03-28 11:07:26, said:
Der Hofstetter Burlkönig!

Scholem Alejchem, at 2014-02-14 17:58:15, said:
Schönes Trumm!
simi, at 2014-02-14 18:30:21, said:
Ich war selber überrascht. Ich hab den Baum beim Vorbeifahren gesehen, hab noch einmal umgedreht und bin dann zu den Häusern gegangen. Da sieht man erst die wirkliche Dimension. Es stehen dort noch einige starke Linden und Ahornbäume herum. Ich möchte im Frühling nochmal hin und die restlichen Bäume dokumentieren.
Scholem Alejchem, at 2014-02-14 19:33:55, said:
Mir ist es so ähnlich beim Gschaider Sattel gegangen, wo gleich links und rechts der Strasse zwei ganz Große stehen. Kennst Du die "Lindenstrasse" bei Übelbach? Dort sollen mehrere 8-10 metrige und eine mit 15 Meter Umfang stehen. Ich hab sie aber 2013 vergeblich gesucht, bzw. mein Auto ist für die steilen Forstwege nicht gebaut.
mrgreen, at 2014-02-14 19:53:55, edited at 2014-02-14 19:54:32, said:
Die Linde mit 15m ist ziemlich schwer zu erreichen. Mit Navi sollte es aber gehen - nimmst mich mit falls du mal wieder runter fährst?^^

Steht übrigens nicht direkt in Übelbach sondern in Neuhof Nr. 8, sogar auf Google Earth erkennbar, wenn man das im Netz kursierende Foto gesehen hat kann man nachvollziehen von wo es gemacht wurde.

Scholem Alejchem, at 2014-02-15 11:15:40, said:
Das Problem ist nicht, dorthin zu finden, sondern der Weg. Zu steil, zuwenig flach (Bodenplattenaufsitzer) zu gatschig, etc. sowie die exakte Lage, denn einmal falsch abgebogen, kommt man irgendwo hin. Und zu Fuß sollte man jung und trainiert sein....oder einen Traktor besitzen!
mrgreen, at 2014-02-15 17:59:01, said:
Okay das wusste ich nicht haha
Scholem Alejchem, at 2014-03-26 16:33:20, said:
Ich bin nach Ostern in der Gegend um Liezen herum
mrgreen, at 2014-03-26 20:18:09, said:
Da hab ich leider Matura :/
simi, at 2014-03-26 21:03:54, said:
Hallo Scholem! Wenn du in der Nähe von Liezen bist, ist es nicht weit zur Linde am Buchloer Sattel. Vielleicht hat die zu diesem Zeitpunkt schon ausgetrieben. Es ist heuer ohnehin alles ein wenig früher dran. Wir sind über Ostern auf der Burg Lockenhaus. Da will ich nochmal hin zu den dicken Kastanien bei Leibing. BTW: es gibt auch direkt in Admont ein paar interessante Linden:äler_im_Bezirk_Liezen
simi, at 2014-03-26 21:06:31, said:
BTW: ich werde nach Ostern einmal zu den Linden in Übelbach fahren.
Scholem Alejchem, at 2014-03-27 11:13:43, said:
Werd ich mir sicher anschauen, so wie viele andere auch und viel Spass bei der großen Auffindung. Hoffentlich haben wir da keinen Wintereinbruch, sonst ist alles Makulatur.

robur73, at 2014-03-26 21:43:28, said:
Beautifull tree

Klauhar, at 2014-03-24 22:48:52, said:
Beim Namen der Stadt habe ich mich vertippt. Richtig ist Tewkesbury. Vielleicht kann das ja einer der Administratoren noch ändern.

Tim, at 2014-03-26 10:56:42, said:

Kind regards,


Conifers, at 2014-03-26 01:47:40, said:
An impressive tree given the location!

Conifers, at 2014-03-25 14:20:45, said:
Metasequoia (Dawn Redwood)
suzieross, at 2014-03-25 14:22:47, said:
Is that the species? How do you know?
Conifers, at 2014-03-25 18:01:15, said:
Metasequoia is deciduous, Sequoiadendron is evergreen.

New country Costa Rica
Visible for everyone · permalink · nl
Tim, at 2014-03-25 16:52:57, said:

it should now also be possible to register trees in Costa Rica.

Kind regards,


oprus, at 2014-03-23 21:01:10, said:
Trunk size average 2.5 feet, This is Zone 3a, usually I'v read they only grow in zone 6+?
Conifers, at 2014-03-24 23:31:55, said:
Zone 3 is correct; this is close to the NW edge of the species' native range.

oprus, at 2014-03-23 21:04:00, said:
This is Zone 3a
Conifers, at 2014-03-23 23:40:16, said:
Nice to see what are almost certainly the first genuine Thuja occidentalis photos on Monumental Trees! (the other photos all look to be Thuja plicata misidentified ;-)

oprus, at 2014-03-23 21:11:57, said:
Might be also "Thuja occidentalis"

Picture book England
Visible for everyone · permalink · nl
Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-03-22 17:35:09, said:
Hi, recently I had printed two picturebooks. The pictures are not always very sharp on the computer, but it is a nice presentation for the admirer. For me it is practice for the Photobooks I want to make and publish. These practices make the insight sharper on what I sould and should not do. For anyone who wants to enjoy the first link it is here. The prints are better than seen on your computer. (Criticism and appreciation is welcome) Suggestions for working together are also welcome.

I wasn’t able to upload my second worldwide book, but I wil try it again.

Enjoy these.


Fotoboek engeland
Visible for everyone · permalink · nl
Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-03-22 17:32:40, said:
Hi.. Ik heb recent een tweetal fotoboeken laten afdrukken. De plaatsjes zijn op de computer niet allemaal even scherp, maar het is wel een leuke reportage voor de liefhebber. Voor mij zijn het oefeningen voor de fotoboeken die ik wil gaan maken. Ze maken het inzicht scherper wat ik straks wel en niet moet doen. Wie wil meegenieten hier zijn de links. De afdrukken zijn overigens veel beter dan op computer is te zien. (Overigens is kritiek en waardering welkom) Maar ook eventuële coproducties.

Helaas kreeg ik mijn 2e fotoboek niet geüpload. Ik probeer het opnieuw.

Geniet van deze.

Groet Wim Brinkerink

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-03-22 15:24:15, said:
maart 2014

Monzon, at 2014-03-22 13:05:04, said:
Qué es esto de "Almez latonero"???? La especie es Celtis australis. "Almez" o "latonero" es el nombre común en español.
JUAN ALBERT PORCAR, at 2014-03-22 14:29:59, said:
Gracias por la aclaración,ya está corregido

Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-03-22 11:52:27, said:
What a beautiful specimen and also a terrific photo with al those curved lines, shades and leafs! This Castanea makes my day. Thanks a lot.


Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-03-22 07:24:33, said:
Hallo Bicri,

Kan het zijn dat dit een groep van ongeveer 7-9 haagbeuken zijn, die in een cirkelvorm zijn aangeplant??

Duidelijk is dat deze haagbeuken meermalen zijn afgezet, maar dat deze snoeitechniek die eigenlijk elke 9 tot 12 jaar moet worden herhaald al een jaar of 30 niet is uitgevoerd.

Vanwege dit zware achterstallige onderhoud kunnen zware armen gaan uitbreken. Dat zou jammer zijn voor deze unieke boomgroep. Laat er eens goede European Tree Technicians naar kijken zou ik je willen aanraden.

Groet, Martin

Conifers, at 2014-03-19 22:38:09, said:
Probably Tsuga canadensis. Can you get a close-up of the foliage, and cones if present, please?
Monzon, at 2014-03-21 11:42:28, said:
Tsuga canadensis is extremely rar in Spain. Perhaps a Cedrus?,-0.08463,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m5!1e2!3m3!1s90034371!2e1!3e10

Conifers, at 2014-03-21 22:58:08, said:
Hi Monzon - I found a close-up of the same tree on Panoramio, and you are right, it is Cedrus deodara, and not Tsuga.

Question to conifers
Visible for everyone · permalink · fr
bicri, at 2014-03-21 18:51:25, edited at 2014-03-21 19:54:50, said:
j'ai la réponse c'est un charme en effet de 100 ans mesurant 9.20 m de circonférence pour 12 m de hauteur.

bicri, at 2014-03-21 10:36:10, said:
plusieurs troncs issus d'une seule source....beau spécimen ,
Bess, at 2014-03-21 16:49:48, said:
tres chouette! Mas pas tres 'saule'? Carpinus?
bicri, at 2014-03-21 18:33:03, edited at 2014-03-21 19:55:28, said:
charme centenaire

Angel oak saved
Visible for everyone · permalink · en
Maarten Windemuller, at 2014-03-21 09:58:41, edited at 2014-03-22 21:11:11, said:
Southern live oak '14619' in the park of the Angel Oak, Johns Island: Angel Oak

The tree should be felled for 'development" of the area.

Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-03-21 05:47:53, said:

Ziet er uit als een Malus. Welke soort weet ik niet.

Groet, Martin

Frank Gyssling, at 2014-03-20 09:07:05, said:
Es sieht ein bischen aus als wenn die Platane dem Haus stark ausweichen mußte, welches bestimmt auch nicht unwahr ist. ;-) viele Grüße Frank
Rainer Lippert, at 2014-03-20 17:55:52, said:
Hallo Frank,

ja, die Platane steht etwas dicht am Haus. Das Gegenstück auf der anderen Seite aber auch: London plane (Platanus × hispanica) '15527'

Viele Grüße,


Conifers, at 2014-03-20 15:10:22, said:
Almost certainly Malus sylvestris, but a seedling of Malus pumila (or hybrid between the two) is a slight possibility.

Joel Skok, at 2012-11-26 23:02:03, said:
Tremendous lighting, very stately, orderly trees. What kind of trees are they? Planes? Dantleys? Beautiful picture, 5/5
Nardo Kaandorp, at 2012-11-27 19:01:14, said:
Hi Joel,

Thanks for the compliments. These trees are Fagus Sylvatica. I was lucky with this shot, because there were snow storms that day.

Frank Gyssling, at 2014-03-20 09:32:46, said:
That's a wounderful old avenue of fagus sylvestris

Visible for everyone · permalink · fr
bicri, at 2014-03-19 20:20:33, edited at 2014-03-19 20:21:17, said:
this oak measuring 4.90m to 1.50m, 200 years? pedunculate oak (Quercus robur) '14488'

Conifers, at 2014-03-19 22:33:11, said:
Seems reasonable, could be older, could be younger, I'd say your ±50 is about right too. Probably impossible to get better detail without a wood core.

Conifers, at 2014-03-17 20:51:35, said:
Leyland Cypress Cupressus × leylandii (hybrid C. nootkatensis × C. × macrocarpa)
Nardo Kaandorp, at 2014-03-19 20:28:09, said:
Hi Conifers,

Yeap you are right, it's not Cupressus nootkatensis. I will change it. Thanks!

Matthias Schaefer, at 2014-03-19 18:47:37, said:
am 19.03.2014 aufgenommen

Frank Gyssling, at 2014-03-13 12:06:43, said:
Was hat wohl den Bewerter zu dieser Note veranlasst?

Es wäre interessant für mich, wenn er sich mal melden würde.

KoutaR, at 2014-03-14 08:17:15, said:
Ein schönes Foto!

Einige Mitglieder bewerten Bäume anstatt von Fotos. Es sieht so aus, dass um eine hohe Bewertung zu kriegen, muss der Baum

  • sehr gross sein

  • im Urwald wachsen

  • ein Nadelbaum sein

  • sich am Bessten in den USA befinden.

Leo Goudzwaard, at 2014-03-14 10:10:53, said:
looks like an Acer rubrum to me, considering inflorescence and bark features
Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-03-14 11:56:26, said:
Hi Frank,

I have the same experience. There is a very negative person (or more?) giving a lot of unnecassary negative ratings. If I see a tree that I don't like, I withhold rating, unless it has too high a score. Kouta is right in his analyses. I have earlier tried to open a discussion on this topic, I stopped doing that. I now accept to live with a system in which not the nicest photo's/trees have the highest score. It's a pity, because a more logical rating system could attract much more people and views.

Conifers, at 2014-03-14 16:19:09, said:
Hi Leo - looks reasonably OK for Acer saccharinum to me on branch shape, but agree the flowers on the second photo do hint at A. rubrum. It may prove to be the hybrid between the two (Acer × freemanii). A close-up photo of leaves in the summer should help.
Rainer Lippert, at 2014-03-14 16:53:32, said:

also ich erlebe das auch immer wieder. Aber eigentlich müssten es mehrere Personen sein. Kürzlich habe ich dieses Bild hochgeladen:

Es ist wohl qualitativ nicht das beste, aber so schlecht wie die Bewertungen es machen, sehe ich es jetzt auch wieder nicht. Nach vier Bewertungen hat es genau 2,0.

Viele Grüße,


Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-03-14 17:34:34, said:
Hi Rainwer, I agree on that. It's a nice picture of a nice "tree". An off course it has some peculiarities, but that's also what it makes interesting., I will give it a 5 to upgrade it. I hope we will not end in a situation where contrasting views with extreme ratings sety thye norm, ?? That's what's happening in the middle east.
Rainer Lippert, at 2014-03-14 17:49:55, said:
Hallo Wim,

danke für die Bewertung. Ja, der Baum ist jetzt nicht besonders dick, aber aufgrund des Standortes und der Schutzplanke am Stamm aber schon etwas besonderes. Kouta trifft es wohl mit seiner Äußerung ziemlich genau.

Viele Grüße,


Frank Gyssling, at 2014-03-14 18:46:20, said:
Hallo Alle,

vielen Dank für die aufschlussreichen Kommentare. Ich dachte immer hier werden die Fotos bewertet und nicht vorrangig die Bäume, ev. nach den Kriterien die KautaR vermutet. Bäume ohne Fotos kann man ja hier nicht bewerten, trotz ggf. beeindruckender Maße. Es wäre gut wenn der/die Bewerter auch machmal die Courage hätten ihre Noten ehrlich zu kommentieren. Dann könnte ich das vieleicht verstehen!

Seltsam - nun ist das Foto des Silberahorn in Klein Briesen sogar gelöscht worden (wie geht denn das?). Ich werde es nochmals hochladen.

Bei vielen meiner letzten Fotos bin ich öfter schon wenige Minuten nach dem Upload durch den annonymen "Abwerter" meist nicht über eine 3,5 hinaus gekommen. Vielleicht grollt auch Jemand mit mir - warum nur?

Ich werde mich trotzdem nicht von meinem Vorsatz gute Fotos zu machen abbringen lassen.

Was solls, vieleicht siegt ja das Gesetzt der großen Zahl.

Beste Grüße aus Potsdam


Rainer Lippert, at 2014-03-14 18:57:02, said:
Hallo Frank,

nein, dass ist bestimmt kein Groll gegen dich. Eine Zeit lang habe ich da bei meinen Bildern mal darauf geachtet. Wenn ich jetzt sage ich mal 20 Bilder hochgeladen habe und eines davon hat eine Note von über 4 bekommen, wusste ich genau, dass dieses Bild am nächsten Tag zwei Bewertungen hat, wobei der Durchschnitt dann bei unter 3 lag. Derjenige welcher hat sich also gezielt die bereits bewerteten Bilder vorgenommen, um diese tief zu bewerten. In die andere, positive Richtung, beobachte ich das eher sehr selten.

Zumindest ist das wiederholte positive bewerten eigener Bilder nicht mehr möglich, so wie früher. Da gab es ja Bilder, die eine Vielzahl von hohen Bewertungen hatten. Es gab da wohl solche Benutzer, die wiederholt eine hohe Bewertung auf das eigene Bild vergeben haben, um so besser dazustehen. Aber das hat Tim vor einiger Zeit unterbunden.

Viele Grüße,


Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-03-14 19:15:51, edited at 2014-03-14 19:17:01, said:
Hi German friends I am so glad that finally other rational people start the discussion again that I have lost long time ago. i think that it is important to do Judge on images. And I think you have to make a mix of quality of the picture and importance of the tree. Some people here are able to manipulate the scores and give extreme low ratings to important pictures/trees. I have some extreme examples. I really value Conifers....But...he disqualifies every fagus sylvatica purpurea or pendula pendula. Nevertheless that doesn't clear the problem of a very negative person who is active the last few weeks.
Frank Gyssling, at 2014-03-14 19:21:22, said:
Hallo Rainer,

nach meiner Beobachtung waren es bei meinen Fotos alles Erstbewertungen!

Kann denn auch ein Fremder ohne Editorenrechte meine Fotos löschen oder war das ein technischer Fehler?

viele Grüße Frank

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-03-14 20:17:48, said:
Hi Frank.

Ein Fremder kan deine Fotos nicht löschen. Er kann sie nur sehr slecht bewerten..

Some of our members do so. and the initiators of the register, Bekaert and Philiponna do not really care about that corrupting effect.

I have tried to change their opinion for quite some time, but they don't care. They think rating is not important. They even don't want to gard the monumentality of the trees on this site.

So I stopped trying and enjoy what is. What "can be" is far out of reach for now.


Rainer Lippert, at 2014-03-14 20:49:40, said:
Hallo Frank,

Wim hat recht. Eine andere Person kann deine Bilder eigentlich nicht löschen, sondern eben nur schlecht bewerten. Also bei mir kommen auch bei der Erstbewertung schlechte Noten vor. Das stimmt. Es müssen aber mehrere Personen sein. Hier zwei Bilder von einem Baum von vor ein paar Wochen, mit einem Durchschnitt von 2, bei 2 Bewertungen:

Also die Beweggründe für manche Bewertungen erschließen sich mir auch nicht immer.

Viele Grüße,


Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-03-14 21:13:50, said:
cannot find 29287.

I'll tell you a story. alltough I value conifers, I am sure he is responsible. He thinks that cutting a tree is mistreating. Human interference with natural growth is in his opinion "not done" I don't know how he manages it, but I think he has a lot of people to vote and work for him. And some Austrians do the same !!!

Rainer Lippert, at 2014-03-14 21:30:20, said:
Hallo Wim,

also das Bild 29287 ist noch da. Was passiert, wenn du bei meiner vorherigen Post auf das Bild klickst?

Ich schätze Conifers auch sehr. Aber was du sagst, habe ich an anderer Stelle auch schon gehört. Aber ob er deswegen niedrig bewertet, weiß ich nicht.

Viele Grüße,


KoutaR, at 2014-03-14 21:47:25, said:
Everybody has right to have his own criterions. I rate photos only rarely but as I do the preconditions for a top rating are that 1) the photo should be estetically fine and 2) the tree should be interesting somehow.

So, in my opinion, it is not possible to forbid members to give poor ratings or order them to rate in a certain way. However, I have said this already, it should not be possible to give multiple ratings; this is what easily makes the list of the best rated photos monotonous as a very limited subset of members give repeatly top ratings to their favourite photos/trees. The list was extremely monotonous before Tim limited the multiple ratings to once per 50 days or so. Now the situation is already much better.

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-03-14 22:03:47, said:
I have the same position as KoutaR. Nevertheless once and a while I get so irritated about idiotic ratings that I handle the complete list and value extreme or counterveiling. And I also do it under an alias if necessary. That's quite easy, if you want to. I don't want it but some members press me to do so. I welcome the moment that we have a trustworthy classification of nice and valuable trees.
Jeroen Philippona, at 2014-03-15 23:51:07, said:
Although I don't like to go ito this discussion again, because my name is called and Wim thinks he should write about my opinion (as well as Tim's) I will give a short reaction.

It is a pity when there are people who try to manipulate this site by the system of valuating photos.

The photo of Frank Gyssling is a nice photo of an interesting tree, so I don't understand why somebody will give it a very low rating.

But the valuing of the photo is not corrupting its worth, it can still be viewed by everybody.

As Tim has written several times, he created this valuating system to give a ranking order of the photos of a tree on a page, so that the heighest ranked photo is placed on top of the page and the other photos of the same tree in order of this ranking.

For Tim this is just the reason for the ranking, not a ranking between all photos on the websie or of the photos of different persons.

Indeed some persons seem to use the ranking system to give a ranking between different trees, but that was not meant to be done with the system.

Because of all the quarreling and the persons giving extreme ratings I would prefer to have no ranking system at all and myself I did not give ratings for months for any photo.

Wim, I don't know what you mean by "They even don't want to gard the monumentality of the trees on this site".

I don't know, Wim, how you want to guard the monumentality of trees with the website Monumental Trees, but of course good photos can help people to see the beauty and value of trees.

For preservation (protection) of monumental trees we are busy with the Dutch "Bomenstichting" (Tree Foundation) to upgrade the "Landelijk Register Monumentale Bomen" (National Register of Monumental Trees).

There is already a new website but it is still in a testing phase with a group of people envolved with this, several of who also are active at MT.

This is in contact with owners and local communities. The Bomenstichting tries to convince the local governments to create a better system of protection.

International protection of Monumental Trees is something wich could be organised at a European level and what is discussed by several groups like the Ancient Tree Forum, the European Champion Tree Forum, etc.


Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-03-16 10:58:04, said:
Hi Jeroen,

What I mean by not-garding the monumentality is that contributors can post very young trees or very average trees on the site. A time ago even people started registering whole streets with very average or low-worthy (in a monumental sense) trees. I will not try to locate all the not-monumental or interesting trees, you must have seen them come bye the last few months. In my opinion there should be some minumum standards to gard the quality of this register. I think that in the end a minimun girth or age or quality should be asked. In my view exceptions could be accepted, but there has to be a thorough reason. (For instance part of a collection, arboretum, or rarity)

Despite this critical observations I enjoy the register. But I think it is neccessary to once and while have a critical examination of where it is heading.

Jeroen Philippona, at 2014-03-16 13:55:00, said:
Okay, Wim, I understand what you mean and I agree MT should not be used to post very young trees. As you know MT is a follow up website of a general website about Sequoia(-dendron). Tim used that also to give information about planting and nursing of these species. Still several contributors of MT see it in the first place as a website about Redwood and Giant Sequoia.

Tim also does not like people posting young and not-monumental trees on the website. But it is difficult to guard the site against that. For example, there are very old trees wich are rather small and also there are quite big trees wich are still young, for example Poplars and Eucalyptus.

Some contributors like Martin T. post rather young trees because these are the oldest ands largest trees in his neighbourhood.

When selecting trees wich I like to see at MT I select on girth and height from the new posts or form the older databases of countries, regions or of species, so I rarely see these young or small trees wich have been posted, for me they are hidden from the beginning behind the more interesting trees. Another selection criterium for me is the person who posts a tree.

While I am interested in the trees and the photos for me serve as information about the trees, I never look for the selection starting with photos.

But perhaps for you the selection is by photos.


Frank Gyssling, at 2014-03-18 18:26:43, said:
Foto-Bewertungen und Kriterien für Bäume in MT

Nach mühevoller Übersetzung von Conifers Beitrag (nl - 2014/03/17) Guarding quality (mit fremder Hilfe) ist mir nun Einiges klar geworden.

Conifers bewertet nicht die Fotos sondern die Bäume nach seinen eigenen Kriterien. Dieses teilen eventuell noch weitere, hoffentlich wenige Baumfreunde. Das ist doch offensichtlich ein großes Missverständnis. Das Votum steht doch in MT unmittelbar bei den Fotos und hat damit Bezug auf diese – oder?

Auch seine Kriterien halte ich nicht für sinnvoll! Wenn ich Conifers richtig verstanden habe, sollten nach seiner Meinung nur Bäume die im Weltmaßstab sehr alt, sehr hoch und in vollkommen naturbelassenen Urwäldern stehen in MT aufgenommen werden. Wie wir das Alter ggf. in Korrelation mit dem Umfanges ermitteln sollen wird nicht klar. Regionale Bedeutsamkeit und Vielfalt (seltene Exemplare) spiele auch keine Rolle bei seinen Betrachtungen.

Damit müssten wir sicher über 90% unsere Beiträge löschen und uns alle auf Reisen zu den letzten Urwäldern dieser Welt begeben. Bäume in der Kulturlandschaft Europas finden nicht seine Würdigung. Auch Parkbäume würden damit nicht zu seinen Auswahlkriterien passen. Desgleichen findet er Unterarten schrecklich und verächtlicht obwohl doch viele davon auf natürlichem Wege entstanden sind. Ich glaube nicht dass dieses die Intentionen der aktiven MT-Initiatoren sind.

Sehr bemerkenswert finde Conifers eigenen Beiträge in MT: 25 Fotos, 8 Standorte mit 19 Bäumen und 7.650 Wortbeiträge. Unter seinen Bäumen findet man zum Beispiel zwei Schwarz-Pappeln mit Umfängen von 1,7 m und 2,45 m. Solche gibt es hier in Brandenburg viele die ich nicht in MT einstellen würde.

Hier ist für mich offensichtlich hier kein Akteur, sondern lediglich ein kritischer Beobachter unterwegs. Etwas mehr Toleranz würde ich mir wünschen.

Insgesamt war die Disskussion schon wichtig und solle uns voran bringen.

Vielleicht wäre es auch für uns alle hilfreich wenn wir die Grenzen für die Aufnahme von Bäumen etwas besser umschreiben könnten (es sollte m. E. kein Dogma sein). Auch möchte ich zur Entlastung des Servers eine Beschränkung die Datengröße für die einzelnen Fotos z.B. auf eine maximale Seitenlänge von 1200 Pixel vorschlagen.

Viele Grüße aus Brandenburg


Conifers, at 2014-03-19 01:18:00, said:
Hi Frank - I suspect you are misunderstanding me there? The argument is over photo ratings, not inclusion in MT. I am not saying these trees should be excluded from MT, it is just about the ratings for the photos of them. I think it is right to give a pollarded tree in poor condition a lower rating on its photos, whereas Wim wants (I think - forgive me if I am wrong!) to give them higher ratings than spectacular, large, old trees.
Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-03-19 09:18:23, said:
Off course I don't want to give a pollarded tree a higher vote. I would like to treat each others preferences respectful. That means that you only give (extreme) low ratings if you think a tree is overestimated and it should be downgraded on monumental list.

Furthermore I think one should rate with a mix of the value of the tree and the quality of the picture. The original rating of Frank's Saccharinum in Klein Briesen is not respectful. The vote is even misplaced. Wat is one's aim if you rate it at 2,5? If there was an average score of that tree of say 5, I can understand that you try to degrade it a bit. But 2,5 is out of proportion and not a a very rational doing. And lately I have experienced this mechanism quite often. It seems lik some members work together to frustrate others or aim to hustle the lists.

Do I want to give pollarded trees a higher rating? Nonsens. My preference is high rating to a nice picture of a monumental tree, especially if it stands for a valuable tree. But I have seen that some think pollarded trees at principal low-worthy trees and the same goes for brown beeches. I have seen and placed (confirmed by respected members) very nice pictures of monumental brown beeches and pollarded trees, who were down-ranked with more than 1 votes under the 2 or even under 1.

And off course pictures are just one aspect of the list and not the most important. I approach the register from more perspectives. Sometimes I start with country or region, Sometimes from species,sometimes from thickest, largest or oldest.

But I do think that in the end the attraction of the register for bigger communities lies in pictures of monumental trees of good quality. And I think that especially pictures will enlarge the number of people (not being professional) who will share our passion for trees.

Visible for everyone · permalink · fr
bicri, at 2014-03-18 18:08:44, said:
pedunculate oak (Quercus robur) '12930' the age of the pedunculate oak was given me about 300 years, this estimate seems you correct ? thank you

TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-03-18 19:02:39, said:
From the photos (and based on my experience of growth-rates around Britain) I would guess a little over 200 years. The ivy (Hedera helix) and elder (Sambucus nigra) imply a fertile soil and good growing conditions. It is also possible that the dense ivy has slightly exaggerated the measured girth of the trunk.

To guess more accurately, from the rate the tree is growing, wait 50 years then measure it again!

bicri, at 2014-03-18 19:06:15, edited at 2014-03-18 19:08:47, said:
yes i came this afternoon , 4,80 mèters more just , i come back in 50 years i having 104 years in 2064 a young man

Giant sequoia
Visible for everyone · permalink · fr
bicri, at 2014-03-18 11:30:07, said:
Giant Sequoia, you know what happened on the specimen washington, struck by lightning and reduced to 31 m, which was alive in 2005, but since I do toruve no news and no recencemment this tree thank you

Conifers, at 2014-03-18 13:35:52, said:
Still alive in 2012: report

bicri, at 2014-03-18 18:02:32, edited at 2014-03-18 19:03:03, said:
Thank you very much, conifers, great news, I am reassured.there photographs?

elisa45at, at 2014-03-15 18:58:32, edited at 2014-03-15 19:00:53, said:
Der Baum 16510 steht teilweise auf meinem Privatgründstück. Ich finde es irgendwie eigenartig, dass dieser Baum am 10. Februar fotogfiert wird und ich wenig später eine Aufforderung von der Straßenmeisterei erhalte, dass der Baum möglicherweise umgeschnitten gehört. Da könnte man fast meinen, es will jemand den Baum kaufen. Schreckt die menschliche Gier vor nichts mehr zurück. In China werden solche Bäume geschützt, da man denkt, es wohnten die Ahnen darin. Das Holz dieses Baumes ist ziemlich viel wert. Ironie: Ich soll das Umschneiden dieses Naturdenkmals bezahlen!!!

Kann man nur hoffen, dass die Geschäftemacher die Seelen der gefällten Bäume bis in ihre Träume verfolgen.Ich bin empört! Danke auf alle Fälle für die tollen Fotos.

Scholem Alejchem, at 2014-03-16 12:52:16, said:
Was hat die Strassenmeisterei dort verloren, ich denke, der steht auf NP-Gebiet.
elisa45at, at 2014-03-16 13:07:09, said:
Hallo Alejchem,

leider ist das nicht so. Es wird behauptet, der Baum gehört zu zwei Drittel mir, das restliche Drittel der Straße, also dem Land Niederösterreich.

Ich danke dir jedenfalls recht herzlich für das Foto und hoffe, der Baum ist noch zu retten.

Mir wäre am leibsten, dass der Parkplatz gesperrt wird und der Wanderweg 7, bis Klarheit geschaffen ist, was mit dem Baum weiter passiert. Wenn ihr Zeit habt kommt morgen 17.3. um 11 Uhr zum Baum, da gibt es eine Besprechung mit Straßenmeisterei und Oberförster. Ihr könnt das alles gerne hier mit Fotos dokumentieren. Der Baum soll gestutz werden, da gehören aus meiner Sicht ein Landschaftsplaner und Baumdoktor her, nicht ein Straßenmeister. Da der Baum zwei Drittel mir gehört, verbiete ich einfach ihn umzuschneiden, basta, und vor allem ihn irgendwie zurecht zu stutzen. Danke, dass du dich gleich gemeldet hast.

Scholem Alejchem, at 2014-03-16 14:33:23, said:
Ich hab leider derzeit kaum Zeit, aber ein Tipp,.alle Anwesenden fotografieren, damit sich keiner rausreden kann, falls Schwachsinn Methode wird.
elisa45at, at 2014-03-16 15:45:14, said:
Ich versuche jetzt die Republik wegen Verstoß gegen das Naturschutzgesetz § 5 zu klagen. Der Baum war als Naturdenkmal geschützt und er wurde plötzlich von heute auf morgen zum Nicht-Naturdenkmal erklärt. Ich farge mich, wei das bei einem solchen Baum geht.

Damit zeigt die republik, dass sie vom Aussterben bedrohte Arten nicht schützt, da sie sie nicht pflegt, wie es notwendig wäre.

Dafür bekommt sie ja von der Eu Fördergeld.

Scholem Alejchem, at 2014-03-16 20:12:01, said:
Ich schätze Mal, daß da die gleichen Brucker Hansln verantwortlich sind, wie beim Aukönig und bei den Leitha-Auen-Abholzungen. Von der Größe her schätz ich Mal, daß er so 120-150 Jahre alt sein wird und eine der letzten gesunden Schwarzpappeln. Wozu also das ganze dienen soll, nur weil ein paar Deppen hinten gezündelt haben, fällt so ein Baum nicht wirklich um.
elisa45at, at 2014-03-18 07:39:44, said:
Laut Aussagen der Straßenmeisterei stellt der Baum ein Gefahr dar.

Ich bin mir da nicht so sicher. Hast du Erfahrungswerte mit alten Bäumen? Was sagst du zu dem Fall? Du hast den Baum ja gesehen.

Er ist unten am Stamm schon ziemkich düeftig, aber schließlich wird ein Baum ja auch von Wurzeln gehalten und oben ist er ziemlich grün.

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-03-17 22:53:34, edited at 2014-03-17 22:59:24, said:
How can anybody who is sane of mind can value this picture at 2,5??? in a scale of 5, within 1 hour when a picture is posted, there must be sometihing wrong in your mind. 2,5 in a scale 5 for this picture. Sorry for your miserable wof living. I am not really affected by your ignorance.

Sleep well and realise that you're stupid.

Bess, at 2014-03-04 23:20:50, said:
it's really horrible their solution to protect the tree… but because of that, in fact very funny… :-)

I had to look twice… 'is this real?'

Rainer Lippert, at 2014-03-05 17:44:22, said:
Hallo Bess,

ja, ist schon etwas ungewöhnlich. Der Baum steht aber auch direkt an einer stark befahrenen Bundesstraße. Selbst zum Bildmachen musste ich eine Autolücke abwarten.

Viele Grüße,


Bess, at 2014-03-17 12:04:30, said:
And thanks a lot for posting this tree! I think he is still very monumental. 'bad' examples for trying to protect trees are nice on this website as well!!

Tree of the year - award ceremony Brussels
Visible for everyone · permalink · nl
Bess, at 2014-03-17 11:59:58, said:
Dear Tree lovers,

is anyone coming to Brussels this Wednesday evening? click 'award ceremony'

for inscriptions:

I would love to discuss in real life about the ongoing topics… .

All the best


Guarding quality
Visible for everyone · permalink · nl
Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-03-16 18:51:31, edited at 2014-03-17 09:24:40, said:
Following the discussion about quality of rating started by Frank Gyssling and Rainer Lippert and supported by me, I suggest to have a quality team that guards valuation and posting trees. I think that in the end this will be necessary and that moment is now. We have to take care that sincere people make contributions and get frustrated by ridiculous hobbyists, who have a very negative impact. The most obvious example in this is that the red beech is systematically bashed and degraded. The same for pollarded trees. Some of us see pollarding as misbehaviour.

I am prepared to invest a lot of time in this subject. So Tim,Jeroen and Leo.... Are you willing to do something about this??

Conifers, at 2014-03-16 21:23:10, said:
If such a group were to be set up, I'd be willing to assist. But I'm very far from sure that this is the right thing to do; of the various forums I visit, the best are those where policing is done with a light touch. Heavily policed forums go downhill and lose members who get fed up with having everything they say moderated or deleted.

Additionally, while I can see that people posting recently-planted trees can be seen as cluttering up the site, it does also - in the longer term - mean that those trees have a record of their growth right from the start until they eventually become monumental. For many of our current monumental trees, a lack of any information on their history is very regrettable, and their planting / germination dates are no more than vague guesswork. Perhaps there could be a separate placement on the forum for young trees, but there would always be difficulty over where the boundary is put with borderline cases.

Also the comment about Beech cultivars and pollards, I don't think that is a good idea; yes it is true I have given low votes to some, but I am far from alone in doing so - I have seen several get very low votes without me voting on them. To many, they are the antithesis of monumentality and what a high-quality tree is. Anyone with any training in ecology or botany sees cultivars as anathema, the mass-produced IKEA flat-pack of trees with monotonous sameness damaging biodiversity, as opposed to the individually unique "chippendales" of natural seedling-grown trees with real character. And pollards - well, Bess's comment says it all: "it's really horrible their solution to protect the tree" and "I had to look twice… 'is this real?'". A tree as disfigured and mistreated as this, really can't be considered monumental (except perhaps as a monument to human stupidity!).

With most of the comments on the Silver Maple photo being in German I'd not attempted to follow the discussion there, nor wanted to post rather off-topic comments not about that tree. But looking again, Kouta's comments that monumental trees are (a) large and (b) natural ('urwald') are of course correct in that is what makes a tree monumental; to that I'd also add trees of great age. But I'd disagree on (c) that they are conifers (other than that yes, conifers are strongly represented among the World's largest and oldest species) or (d) be in the USA (other than that it is true that the USA has been better tham most countries in protecting its monumental trees). MT has plenty of high quality monumental trees with high ratings which are not USA and not conifers. Yes, there is some bias toward Sequoiadendron gigantuem, but that is hardly surprising given (a) it is after all the world's largest tree species, and (b) MT starting out as a recording forum for this species. After Sequoiadendron, MT's highest-scoring photos are from Japan and New Zealand, again no surprise given the spectacularly monumental nature of the trees concerned. I wish Europe had something to match them, but it doesn't; all of Europe's most spectacular trees were destroyed centuries, if not millenia, ago.

KoutaR, at 2014-03-17 07:49:55, said:
"Kouta's comments that monumental trees are..."

To be clear, that was not my opinion what makes a tree monumental, but an (slightly exaggerated) analyse what kind of photos get highest ratings.



Main page · Top of page · Share/Bookmark

© · disclaimer · also available in · Castellano · Deutsch · Français · Nederlands · translate?