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

Recent discussions

More...

Only show discussions in English
Archive

Archive


Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-11-22 22:48:58, said:
This looks to be a Abies koreana

Greetings, Martin Tijdgat


wwhiteside97, at 2014-11-22 23:39:16, said:
Hello, thanks for this, I wasn't sure as the cones were at the very top of the tree.


Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-11-22 22:43:05, said:
Marc,

Wat een mooie foto, kleur, bastpatroon en een toefje groen; alles klopt.


They set fire on one of the best oaks in Europe!
Visible for everyone · permalink · nl
Jeroen Pater, at 2014-11-19 08:25:38, edited at 2014-11-19 08:32:54, said:
I just got the news today from my friend Krzysztof Borkowski from Poland that Chrobry oak has set on fire:

http://kontakt24.tvn24.pl/dab-chrobry-w-ogniu-milionowe-straty,149851.html

I hope it will survive, but the pictures look very bad.

It is very sad news. The Chrobry oak is one of the most impressive oak trees in Europe. Why are people doing this!?

Regards,

Jeroen


Jeroen Philippona, at 2014-11-19 23:51:47, edited at 2014-11-19 23:52:57, said:
Indeed very sad and incredible that people do this. This is indeed one of the most impressive oaks I have ever visited.

Jeroen Philippona


Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-20 08:13:10, said:
I'm afraid I'm in despair with the human race!

The heat involved is likely to have cooked the sapwood and cambium layer, I am not hopeful it will survive. The Sherwood Oak in Nottinghamshire was also set on fire in the past, but it has survived.


Jeroen Philippona, at 2014-11-20 20:15:47, edited at 2014-11-20 21:58:34, said:
Jeroen Pater and I visited this oak at a day in November 1999. At the same day we also visited the oak Napoleon in Zabor, somewhat more to the north-east, wich had a girth of even 10.45 m and was the biggest circumferenced oak of Poland at that time. It was also hollow and a few years later this oak also was set on fire. It survived, but the burning was repeated after a few years and the oak died.

The biggest girthed tree of the Netherlands, a hollow Sweet Chestnut (see Kastanjedal ) also was set on fire several times, the last time in 2005 and till now has survived.

So I hope Chrobry will stay alive as well.

Jeroen


Rainer Lippert, at 2014-11-20 21:12:06, said:
Hallo,

die Eiche in Hornoldendorf (Außenmauer des Ritterguts) wurde vor zwei Jahren auch in Brand gesetzt. Letztes Jahr hat es noch so ausgesehen, als ob sie es wohl nicht überlebt. In diesem Jahr, als ich dort war, hat sich wieder recht viel grün gezeigt. Und zwar an Ästen, die noch 2013 kahl waren. Sie scheint sich also zu erholen. Vielleicht schafft es ja diese Eiche hier auch so wie die in Hornoldendorf. Hoffen wir also mal.

Viele Grüße,

Rainer


KoutaR, at 2014-11-20 22:57:55, said:
This may be a good reason not to publish record tree locations (though trees like the oak in question cannot be kept secret).

Jeroen Pater, at 2014-11-21 06:29:22, said:
I don't think keeping trees a secret is a good idea. They give Chrobry a value of 4.300000 (I think) zlotty. That is a lot of money. If the Chrobry oak is that expensive, why did they not put smoke and heat detectors inside.

I think a better solution is to some how close the gabs of a hollow tree, so nothing that can burn can get in. It won't work with all hollow trees, but I think it will work with a lot of them. I think is is very hard to burn a tree that has a trunk with no gabs.

Jeroen


Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-21 07:47:16, said:
Hello All

Yes Kouta I agree

Sadly keeping champion trees secret from the public is the only way to protect them from vandalism. But in this case the tree was so well known it was impossible. As I have said before, in the UK there are many rare plants, where location details are kept deliberately vague to ensure protection.

The recent climbing damage to the 66m Douglas fir in Scotland (not deliberate vandalism) I feel is a wake up call not to give exact location details for champion trees and giving the 'wider' general public this information is a risk to them. But recording and uploading them is perfectly acceptable on MT.

I hope those responsible are caught and prosecuted!

Lets hope the tree survives


Jeroen Philippona, at 2014-11-22 00:27:45, said:
Indeed this tree was to famous to hide it from the public. But, the other very big oak in Poland, called Napoleon at Zabor, was not well known, in fact it was a rather secret tree standing at a lonely place to be found only by insiders along a small sand road. It was set on fire very probable by local young boys and I suppose this also was the case with the Chrobry oak, like with the "Kabouterboom", the big Sweet Chestnut in Holland.

So I think most of these hollow old trees are more at risk from local young people than from people from elsewere.

Jeroen


Andrew Weber, at 2014-11-22 13:13:13, edited at 2014-11-22 13:27:23, said:
Moreover, in Poland many big trees, especially oaks, were set on fire, not only the biggest. I have seen in 2014 a few oaks with girth ranging from 6,5 to 8 metres that also suffered an arson and they usually grew in remote places.. So the largest trees should be preserved rather by fence, because cameras could be stolen indeed.. And it is a matter of local government that trees are conserved or 'unwanted', like here, Chrześcijanin (the Christian) Oak in Poland: street.

All in all, I hope that miracle will happen and Chrobry will survive, but it is horrible that someone wants to destroy peaceful monumental trees..

Best regards,

Andrew



RedRob, at 2014-11-21 18:09:18, said:
The 42.5 metre Lime is superb, love the shape. The Chestnut almost looks like it is a weeping one. Any other tall trees here Owen, Sycamore, Sweet Chestnut, anything?

Have you been around here Stephen?


TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-11-21 21:23:18, said:
No. The only old (and tall) trees in the park here are the limes and sweet chestnuts. Common Lime also exceeds 40m nearby at Althorp and Castle Ashby parks - it likes the Jurassic limestone.

Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-22 11:22:24, said:
Hi Rob

No I have not visited here, about 70 miles North of me. Most of the locations I know are from Oxon southwards.

There are also some big Limes near me too.



GregorSamsa, at 2014-11-22 00:42:37, said:
The person is approximately 1.80m tall.

Die Person ist ca. 1,80m groß.

Alberto Cuervo Flores, at 2014-11-22 10:44:53, said:
I think it is "Populus Alba"

stoneleighabbey, at 2014-11-22 09:52:11, said:
Beautiful Oak at Stoneleigh Abbey over 1000 years old

Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-13 08:02:59, said:
Hello Owen

Wow! This one escaped me on MT. I have been here several times and yes quite remarkable that trees of this size can be as big here as in Scotland or Wales, with only 900mm of rain! This tree may surpass the Douglas in Broadwood, Dunster?

Obviously the deeply weathered sandy brown earth soil type derived from the Lower Greensand has been a factor. A pity Southern England was not covered in Greensand as opposed to horrible chalk. There is something magical about this soil which I am interested in finding out about. Here in Oxon, Nuneham Courtenay also on Greensand grows big conifers with only 600mm of rain.

Big Western Hemlock too at Polecat.

I noticed the Sequoia had probably been hit by lightning above the cottage, presume this is the one Alan measured as 170' in his book? An overestimate perhaps?

Kind regards

Stephen


TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-11-15 18:12:28, said:
Greensand is indeed the best soil in south-east England for tree-growth, and so many good tree sites are concentrated on it despite the tiny proportion of the country which it covers. I think the secret is that the grains are coarse enough to allow easy root-penetration but fine enough to be water-retentive. Soils washed down the from the Old Red Sandstone (Welsh Marches etc) and from ancient Scottish sandstone have just the same qualities. So, presumably, do loess soils in the Netherlands where trees can also grow very tall (without the benefits of much side-shelter from high hills as we have in England). Chalk is also much better than heavy clay, which covers so much of lowland England.

I have no idea how tall the Polecat Copse trees will grow. They are in a superbly sheltered spot and the two tallest have continued to produce long leaders through the 14 years I've known them, though they've lost their leaders once or twice and some others in the same line now have rough, bushy tops (but are still growing). Given the right soil, and shelter from dehydrating winds, Douglas don't seem to be troubled by drought or high summer temperatures. I don't know the local conditions for the 65m tree in the Massif Central of France but I would assume that summers there are hotter and drier than in Surrey.

That said, I suspect drought-stress rather than lightning for the loss of the top of the Giant Sequoia opposite Angle Cottage. Lightning would have been more likely to strike the higher tree-tops of the bank to the west. In 1995 we had a very dry summer near my home in Hastings and many of the taller Giant Sequoias died back a few metres (and have now recovered but rounded off).


Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-16 09:46:03, said:
Hello Owen

Thanks. Yes I think the secret with Lower Greensand is the ability for trees to extract soil water much more easily due to the pores and matrix of the soil, coupled with a moderately acid ph and reasonable fertility. On a clay soil water holding capacity is obviously greater, but trees cannot extract it as well as on say Greensand due to the pores and soil matrix unfavorable for tree root growth and penetration. Subsequent capillary action of soil water through the soil is much better on Greensand. As it is a soft sandstone is must have weathered deeply as well. It also probably has no root depth restriction caused by an iron pan, which is frequent on acid sandy soils.

Ulmus and Quercus robur as an opposite example seems to love surface water gleys on clay vales.

It appears to me that Giant Sequoia much prefers sandy soils and the Bagshot Sand near my locality at Crowthorne and also at the Valley Gardens Near Windsor as you know grow big trees, despite only 600mm of rain, some 300mm less than at Polecat. Also Giant Sequoia and Douglas are adapted to grow on sandy well drained soils in their native habitat so it is no surprise.

The tree at Angle Cottage lost many metres due to crown dieback which I think is most likely lightning. Yes I have also seen Giant Sequoia die back due to drought, but I know that when lightning strikes Sequoias it often rarely leaves a scar on the trunk, possibly due to the insulation properties of the bark, however it sometimes does and I have seen trees blown apart in the most extreme examples. I know that Beech rarely leaves a scar and yet oak is badly affected. A difficult question and needs more research.

I know that the Massif Central is the wettest place in France with up to 2000mm, but one has to remember that with higher temperatures the evapotranspiration and summer soil moisture defict would be greater than at Polecat, so perhaps only the available rainfall/soil water there will be only slightly greater?

Windspeed is much less in Surrey than in Somerset, so perhaps they will grow to 60m+ at Polecat.

Regards

Stephen


Conifers, at 2014-11-16 10:00:51, said:
"Giant Sequoia ... and I have seen trees blown apart in the most extreme examples"

Seehttp://www.pinetum.org/lightning.htm for an example!


Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-16 10:08:21, said:
Thanks Conifers

BANG!!! Wow that is an example, I have seen oak trees like this also.


RedRob, at 2014-11-17 18:22:13, edited at 2014-11-17 18:23:52, said:
Only visited this location once, 2011 and wish that I had had the laser then. Thank you for registering this Owen, it needed to be on here.

http://www.redwoodworld.co.uk/picturepages/haslemere.htm

Is the Sequoiadendron near the cottage, here called 'King Kong' still likely to be 51 metres which you measured, assessed it as a few years ago or will it have added some height? I remember looking at this tree from angles and it would have been difficult to see the top and bottom to measure it. The Coast Redwood in the photo above is one at the top of the hill near the old big house but there is a taller one I am sure, immediately on the hillside above the 51 metre 'King Kong' Seqy. I took photos on an old mobile phone and have not been able to get the photos off it as don't have Bluetooth on my laptop. They would be 1.5MP photos so may not be that great. Anyway, this Coast Redwood looked pretty tall, slim and surely 40 metres plus. There is/was also a conifer plantation just the west of the 59 metre Douglas Fir grove, if I remember Larch and Spruce, Sitka snd Norway, which looked pretty tall.


TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-11-18 19:48:11, said:
Near Angle Cottage at Polecat Copse, the Sequoiadendron that died back around 2005 was the taller but slenderer of a pair. I had measured it at 48m in 2000 but may have underestimated - Alan's 170' c.1990 was presumably a bit too high. The fatter tree beside it (the one in 'Redwood World' has preserved its tip and had grown to 51m by 2011, but I can't guarantee how accurate this was either. I shall return with the laser in due course.

RedRob, at 2014-11-21 18:16:54, said:
I was taken with how red the trunks were of the Douglas at Polecat, Sequoiadendron colour if not even more red, due to the drier air according to Owen.

Are the 44 metre Larches still there at the location in Surrey Owen?


TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-11-21 21:18:42, said:
I think 44m was Alan Mitchell's top height for the larches at Hascombe Hill in the 1980s. I visited in 2000 when I think I made one 43m. I plan to revisit sometime soon.


RedRob, at 2014-11-21 18:20:52, said:
A beauty Rainer, meant the tree but you as well no doubt (laughs) Is this the tallest outside of the USA? With reading the TROBI records can remember alot of champion heights for trees and locations now but not Colorado Blue Spruce? Will have to check. Quite a few of c20 metres in my area.

Rainer Lippert, at 2014-11-21 21:13:08, said:
Hallo RedRob,

ja, ein schöner Baum ist das. Ob das der höchste außerhalb den USA ist, kann ich auch nicht sagen. Aber vielleicht bekommst du es ja heraus.

Viele Grüße,

Rainer


TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-11-21 21:17:20, said:
29m in Hampshire in 2006. This spruce prefers a cool continental climate.


RedRob, at 2014-11-21 18:06:02, edited at 2014-11-21 18:06:35, said:
Comparing this tree to this middle part of the Valley of the Seven Bridges

with a slightly larger girth, this Chestnut does not look 34 metres. Do you have any more recent recordings Owen?


RedRob, at 2014-11-21 18:11:40, edited at 2014-11-21 18:13:33, said:
Forgot to say Owen, someone that I know in Mansfield has a friend who works at the Thoresby Hall hotel and is going to check to see if that Sweet Chestnut is still there. Hope that he photographs it, haven't heard back yet.


ronkrabben, at 2014-11-21 15:22:45, said:
De bomenspecialisten konden het niet laten..

ronkrabben, at 2014-11-21 13:48:25, said:
De laatste loodjes van deze wel zeer oude boom, leeftijd 140 jaar

ronkrabben, at 2014-11-21 13:46:38, said:
Omtrek aan de voet van de stam 7,45 meter, op borsthoogte 5,75 meter

Over deze site
Visible for everyone · permalink · nl
ronkrabben, at 2014-11-21 13:39:30, said:
Woonplaatsen kloppen niet, er staat Groenlo, dit moet Oost Gelre zijn, Groenlo is onderdeel van Oost Gelre net als Lichtenvoorde en de kerkdorpen.

ps, waarom kan ik geen straat invoeren?



Tim, at 2014-11-20 19:22:32, said:
Hallo Marc,

Ik krijg zin om op reis te gaan als ik dit zie :)

Groetjes,

Tim

Marc Meyer, at 2014-11-21 09:12:41, said:
Ja dat kan ik wel begrijpen... The call of the palm trees! ;-)

Another must visit in the future
Visible for everyone · permalink · en
Rayn, at 2014-06-20 11:32:02, edited at 2014-06-20 11:34:26, said:
There is a majestic elm at Övraböke, Halmstad, Sweden, as reported by Lars G Andersson in 2011. He believes it to be a pollarded tree, now abandoned, with an impressive girth of 10,6 metres. Looks multistemmed but still quite a monumental specimen.

I hope to visit this location some day but it's a long trip for me so it's unknown when I get the opportunity. I thought I might share it with you if someone are in the neighbourhood for some reason...

Photo:http://oi61.tinypic.com/11me3jq.jpg

Lars G Anderssons coordinates: https://www.google.se/maps/place/56%C2%B055'03.8%22N+12%C2%B054'13.7%22E/@56.9177737,12.9037396,195m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x0:0x0

Can be found athttp://www.tradportalen.se/Observations.aspx#


Maarten Windemuller, at 2014-06-21 10:35:32, edited at 2014-06-22 13:14:57, said:
Hei Rayn,

Good suggestion, thank you.

Few weeks ago on the way north, we were in Båstad for the "Suntelbuche" (Vresbok) in the Norrvikens trädgård. We passed Halmstad and the area were Övraböke is.

I found three Ulmus > 10 m girth on Trädportalen. One between Rumskilla and Bodnaryd which are both on my list for next week. It looks that the one near Eksjö is on private ground (Google Earth).

Don't know if I succeed in adding more trees om my list now, depends on more than my own intention. Let's see what happens. At least good to know so I can put them on my list anyway for future visits.

Kind regards, Maarten


Rayn, at 2014-06-22 12:40:00, said:
Did you register the Suntelbuche/vresbok here?

Good luck in finding interesting trees on your journeys!

Best regards

Rayn


Maarten Windemuller, at 2014-06-22 13:19:48, edited at 2014-06-22 18:39:17, said:
Hei Rayn,

Not yet, coming soon. 2013 we visited two in Northern Ireland and 2009 one in Germany (MT 13135). Hannover (MT 3409) is on the list. See also Suntelbuche on de.wikipedia site.

Best whishes, Maarten


Maarten Windemuller, at 2014-11-20 23:14:31, edited at 2014-11-20 23:21:21, said:
Rayn,

I see some of the trees you registered are near Gävle. Is it possible you maybe register the apple tree when you come in that area? I read the tree is still standing and 24/7 watched.

There is also facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/radda.appeltradet?fref=ts where I can follow this case and find sometimes links to newsfacts like this one.http://www.arbetarbladet.se/opinion/insandare/lat-det-bli-ett-julappeltrad

Kind regards,

Maarten



ReforestamosMexico1, at 2014-11-20 16:34:03, said:

To Whom It May Concern

I am contacting you since at Reforestamos Mexico we deeply admire your work and commitment to the protection of the environment. Monumental trees is a great source of inspiration for Reforestamos Mexico and we would be extremely pleased if you would accept our offer to collaborate.

Reforestamos Mexico is a Mexican organization completely devoted to the protection of the forests, as natural natural treasure and cornerstone of national development. We believe that the future of our society is intimately linked to the survival of the forests. Particularly, we conceive forests a key promoter of economic growth, not only supplying goods and guaranteeing biodiversity, but also offering great opportunities for local communities and people that live within the forest. This is why we are engaged no only with the protection of woods, but also with the promotion of a new approach to natural resources and sustainable development that can encompass the environmental, social, political and economic dimensions.

We feel that Reforestamos Mexico and Monumental Trees share the same values, interests and missions. In fact, at Reforestamos Mexico we also have a project completely focused on the protection of majestic trees. This program aims at raising awareness on the importance of those trees for our country. Hence, we think that a synergy with you could enhance our actions. For this reason, we propose to mutually advertise our projects through websites and social networks of both Reforestamos Mexico and Monumental Trees, so that our common goal can be better and widely achieved.

I hope this exciting opportunity interests you.

I look forward to hearing your comments.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Best,



Eik in Ouffet groet David
Visible for everyone · permalink · nl
David van Iersel, at 2014-11-19 20:22:50, said:

Han van Meegeren, at 2014-11-19 21:40:22, said:
David

Ik heb het aangepast.

Gr van Han



Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-11-19 16:41:16, said:
Die Eucalyptussen zijn prachtig in Spanje. Jammer dat er fotografisch weinig eer valt te behalen met die vracht aan auto's er omheen.


turtle63, at 2014-11-18 08:40:26, said:
This is from a Postcard of my G.Grandmothers of this tree.

I am guessing it is from early 1905-1911 as this seems to be the time frame for these Postcards.

Looks pretty impressive even then.

I am pleased to see it is still existing after a Google search.

TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-11-18 19:57:54, said:
Thanks for adding this old picture.

I've added a measurement (from Elwes and Henry's book) from this same period and a few other historic measurements from the Tree Register, which show the tree growing away steadily. The growth-rate rather undermines the story that this tree dates right back to Bishop Gunning in the later 17th century, though it is possible that a heat-loving species would actually be adding girth faster today than in the 'little Ice Age'. (The two most recent girth measurements are misleading - I'm sure it's not started to grow that fast!)

turtle63, at 2014-11-18 23:24:52, said:
Thank you for that, I had a look and it looks like it's slowed down growing has it. It has lost some off the top too?

Looking at my Postcard it has lost some big branches off it as well.

I guess it has done well to survive this long, wonder how old it will get.


RedRob, at 2014-11-12 16:49:27, said:
This is a shame, B&I and European champion now ex champion. Did you put a message in Discussion about this Owen, I must have missed it if you did? Perhaps the top fell much more recently and the fallen wood was taken as firewood? A relative lived in Surrey and they had an open fire and used to go out regularly collecting firewood in the local woods, often taking a saw. With the high price of energy and fuel more and more people have been doing this.

RedRob, at 2014-11-12 16:52:29, said:
Busbridge Lakes

This one takes over as the tallest, did you take any photos of it Owen?


TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-11-15 18:14:07, said:
No, I visited Busbridge Lakes in pre-laser, pre-camera days and used a hypsometer made of flint. I must return. I'm moderately confident it is indeed 38 - 39m, if still intact.

RedRob, at 2014-11-17 18:33:44, said:
Hello Owen, looking forward to seeing the tree if it is still there and 38/39 metres. What is the next tallest after that, 36 metres I saw when checking on the Register. The trees in the location at Southwell, Nottinghamshire reported by Richard Goodrich were not 37 metres, 31 metres was the tallest in that location that I recorded with the laser and I could visibly see that it was the tallest. I didn't spot the reported 31 metre Hornbeams at the roadside but they will not be 31 metres if they are as the 31 metre Chestnut stood up higher than the other trees in the group. They could be perhaps 27 or 28 metres if they are there.

TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-11-18 19:43:27, said:
Yes, two 36m trees at Boughton House (Northants) this summer, one of which I added to this site. We can discout the old Humberside records.


Conifers in Devon
Visible for everyone · permalink · en
RedRob, at 2014-11-17 18:27:55, said:
http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/1367161

Owen, 'Warhorse' was shown on BBC1 last night and in the opening sequences on the moors of Dartmoor, in the distance was a reservoir with some what looked like very tall dark conifer outlines in several places on the banks. I have checked and it was filmed at Burrator Reservoir. Have any tall trees been recorded here? The trees in the Geograph link look like Douglas Fir perhaps?


Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-18 08:01:29, said:
Hello Rob

I know that many larch here were infected with Phytophora ramrorum and had to be felled for bio security measures. Douglas though is fairly resistant unless under very heavy pressure from spores.


TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-11-18 19:42:16, said:
I did walk through the woods around the Burrator Reservoir in 2006. There was a Sitka Spruce plantation with trees reaching 40m. I didn't see any notable Douglas Firs. This is on the south-westerly, exposed side of Dartmoor, so I wouldn't expect anything to grow really tall - Sitka is probably the toughest in that situation.


Rainer Lippert, at 2014-11-15 20:58:44, said:
Hallo,

ist das nicht eher "Thuja plicata"?

Viele Grüße,

Rainer

Conifers, at 2014-11-15 21:39:50, said:
Yes, Thuja plicata.
Rainer Lippert, at 2014-11-16 06:52:37, said:
Hallo Conifers,

danke für die Bestätigung. Die Thuja daneben wird dann wohl auch "Thuja plicata" sein?

Viele Grüße,

Rainer

Conifers, at 2014-11-16 13:54:54, said:
Hallo Rainer,

Probably yes, T. occidentalis is almost never a large tree! Could you add a link to the tree you refer to, please ;-)

Rainer Lippert, at 2014-11-16 15:56:04, said:
Hallo Conifers,

hier ist der andere Baum: Western redcedar (Thuja plicata) '19892'

Viele Grüße,

Rainer

Conifers, at 2014-11-16 16:38:59, said:
Danke! Yes, Thuja plicata is correct.
Rainer Lippert, at 2014-11-16 16:45:02, said:
Danke auch für die Bestätigung. Dann handelt es sich bei beiden Bäumen um Thuja plicata. Und mal wieder ein falsch angebrachtes Schild ;-)

Viele Grüße,

Rainer

RedRob, at 2014-11-17 18:11:33, said:
Some very impressive trees at this location Rainer, one to visit for sure if anyone is ever this way.
Rainer Lippert, at 2014-11-17 18:30:23, said:
Hallo RedRob,

ja, da stehen einige interessante Bäume. Aktuell stehen dort von 6 Baumarten der jeweils höchste von Deutschland.

Viele Grüße,

Rainer


RedRob, at 2014-11-17 18:08:21, edited at 2014-11-17 18:09:59, said:
Hello Jeroen, is this the Netherland's tallest tree now and likely to remain so or are there some possible challengers? From the distance photo the Douglas looks as if it has a really wide spread on the crown.


Scharlaken eik in de tuin van Villa
Visible for everyone · permalink · nl
Leo Goudzwaard, at 2014-11-13 11:35:45, said:
wow, this oak tree has been grafted twice!, and I have never seen this before.

Has anyone noticed this before on large trees?

The old Quercus coccinea trees in the Netherlands are usually grafted once and quite high on the stam, on Q. rubra or Q. palustris.

Double grafting has been common practice with fruit trees as apple, pear and Cydonia.

In Dutch the method is called "tussenstam"-method.

Great finding and good picture, Nardo!


TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-11-15 18:17:48, said:
I've only seen double-grafting of Pyrus salicifolia 'Pendula' and on what in Britain were sold as 'Sheraton' cherries. (Roots Prunus avium, trunk P. serrula, crown P. serrulata cv. They don't live long.) In SE England many older Quercus coccinea are also grafted on Q. rubra and I had assumed they were 'Splendens', a clone distributed by the Knap Hill Nursery in Surrey. They have bigger axillary tufts under the leaf vein-joints, almost like Q. palustris. I don't know whether the Knap Hill Nursery also distributed to the near Continent or if there was a similar clone sold there as grafts.

Conifers, at 2014-11-16 13:57:46, said:
I'm not sure it is double-grafted, it may just be a coincidence with the bark pattern on the burrs. The adjacent scarlet oak (Quercus coccinea) '19854' is clearly not double-grafted.

Conifers, at 2014-11-16 16:44:39, said:
I just looked at the tree on Google Street View, which shows it well from the other side. Only one graft line!


Jeroen Philippona, at 2014-11-16 09:34:09, said:
Hallo OKAnnette,

Leuk dat je een foto en gegevens van de Major Oak op deze website zet! Deze boom staat echter al enige jaren op een andere locatie op de website, nl hier: http://www.monumentaltrees.com/nl/gbr/engeland/nottinghamshire/968_sherwoodforest/ .

Het zou het beste zijn om je foto's en evt. andere gegevens op die pagina toe te voegen en de nieuwe pagina te verwijderen.

De omschrijving van een locatie is in Engeland vaak wat lastig, vandaar waarschijnlijk dat je de oudere pagina van de eik niet had gezien.

Vriendelijke groeten,

Jeroen Philippona



Rainer Lippert, at 2014-11-16 09:33:58, said:
Hallo,

ein toller Baum.

Handelt es sich hier um die gleiche Eiche: http://www.monumentaltrees.com/de/gbr/england/northamptonshire/10111_sherwoodforest/19894/

Viele Grüße,

Rainer



OKAnnette, at 2014-11-15 23:38:06, said:
Foto niet van mij maar van Phil Lockwood.

Zie artikelhttp://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-30052751

Enhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_Oak.

Indrukwekkend mooi. Daar wordt je stil van.....


Rainer Lippert, at 2014-11-15 19:00:30, said:
Schöne Stimmung.

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-11-14 17:41:14, said:
Hallo Leo en/of Jeroen.

Ik ben vandaag opnieuw langs geweest ij deze machtige platanen. Dat heb ik wel vaker gedaan, maar ik vond het steeds niet de moeite waard om ze te meten. Toen ik me realiseerde dat de laatste meting uit 2009 stamt, dacht ik dat ik deze bomen de eerste de beste keer dat ik in Amsterdam zou zijn, moest opmeten. Vandaag heb ik dat gedaan. Tot mijn spijt zijn de resultaten weer niet corresponderend met jullie eerdere metingen. De boom met de lage zijtak London plane (Platanus × hispanica) '1874'is volgens mijn metingen dunner dan de ander London plane (Platanus × hispanica) '1876'. Ik wil graag de juiste maten opvoeren. Kan het zijn dat jij/jullie destijds de metingen hebben verwisseld?


Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-11-14 19:43:41, said:
Aanvulling,

Ik heb een aantal oude foto's uit 2012 verwijderd. Ik denk dat het beeld daardoor helderder wordt met de nieuwe geüp

loade foto's.


Jeroen Philippona, at 2014-11-14 20:05:01, edited at 2014-11-14 20:12:05, said:
Hoi Wim,

In juni 2006 waren Leo en ik met hoofdstedelijk bomenconsulent Hans Kaljee bij de bomen en hebben ze gemeten, zie de foto met mij. Die meting staat echter niet op MT. De meting uit 2009 is van Leo, ik was daar niet bij. Als jij nu een andere boom als dikste meet, kan het zijn dat Leo foto en meting heeft verwisseld maar ik maak vaker vreemde groeispurts mee bij bomen die moeilijk zijn te verklaren.

Heb je overigens je eigen foto's verwijderd?

Jeroen


Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-11-14 20:11:40, said:
Hallo Jeroen,

Uiteraard heb ik alleen mijn eigen foto's verwijderd. Dank voor je opmerking over de groeispurt.

Wim


Leo Goudzwaard, at 2014-11-15 12:56:04, said:
hallo Wim, ze zijn allebei gegroeid maar de een meer dan de ander, dat kan best hoor, bovendien zijn beide metingen niet op exact dezelfde plaats uitgevoerd, omdat er geen stippen op de stam staan.

Goed dat je ze gemeten hebt, dit levert op termijn veel groeigegevens van monumentale bomen op.

Leo



Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-11-15 08:23:31, said:
What a tree!!

themoudie, at 2014-11-10 22:06:26, said:
Aye RedRob,

If the tree in question is the 'hairy' one left of centre, then from the image I am guessing that it is most likely a Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis) that has developed a vigorous mass of epicormic shoots. Whether this is due to an increase in side light striking the trunk since thinning operations or a genetic malfunction I cannot discern from the image. I also can't discern the cones from the image. Is it possible to obtain close up images of the bark, needles, shoots and cones, as this would ease diagnosis?

Regards, themoudie

RedRob, at 2014-11-11 18:00:33, edited at 2014-11-11 18:03:38, said:
Hello Moudie, welcome to the forum (haven't noticed your name previously) Hope that you don't mind my asking, are you in Scotland or living in Scotland?

A previous discussion about this it was thought that it was another Douglas Fir, it is the tree clothed to the ground just to left of centre. There is a large grove of c50 metre Sitka Spruce about 200 metres to the left of this photo. I was so busy looking at the emergent tree two to the right of this tree which the laser measured as c55 metres, I should have noted what this tree was? At first with the dense narrow habit thought that it might be a Picea Abies that I had missed, if so it would be 49/50 metres as the tree 4 tips to it's right, Douglas Fir was 49.8 metres. If you click in the photo and then when the little magnifying glass comes up click again you can enlarge the photo.

themoudie, at 2014-11-12 01:23:16, said:
Aye RedRob,

Thank you for your welcome, and yes to both of your questions about Scotland. I have used the magnifying facility, but it produces a very pixelated image for me that doesn't aid diagnosis. I was thinking that it might be Serbian spruce (Picea omorika), but the apical growth rate I wouldn't have expected to keep pace with Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis) or Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii). Hence my request for some detail, if poss.

Good health.

My regards, themoudie

RedRob, at 2014-11-12 17:34:09, said:
Hello Moudie

Are you involved with forestry or arboriculture? Are you in the Highlands or low lands? Whatever, you must live in striking distance of some magnificent trees of all descriptions.

I have added what photos I have of this tree at Dalby, I was so busy with the Douglas that I didn't go up to it. It was only when I later looked at the photos that it stuck out with it's very narrow habit with foliage to the base and quite heavy crop of cones whilst the surrounding Douglas appear to have none or very few. I should also have noted what the small blue conifer was, the track next to these trees is/was one of the best viewing areas for the old Lombard RAC Rally when it was held here years ago now.

themoudie, at 2014-11-14 21:39:13, said:
Aye RedRob,

Yes to both and Southern Highland boundary fault! ;¬) Aye, there are plenty to cuddle.

Thank you for posting the additional images of the trees in the vicinity of your first image. I can see why you are remarking upon the fully clothed tree and the shorter vigorous growing one with the blue green foliage. I suspect shelter, available nutrients and moisture along with the adjacency of the large trees are all contributing to it's form. It may even be the prodgeny of one of those older trees.

If I am fortunate to be in the vicinity of these trees I shall try to give them a look.

Regards, themoudie


Jeroen Philippona, at 2014-11-13 23:07:00, said:
Hallo Waldfotograf,

Dierer Eiche war schon lange auf diese Website: http://www.monumentaltrees.com/de/deu/mecklenburgvorpommern/mecklenburgstrelitz/5023_kirche/

Ich versuche die beide anmeldungen zusammen zu bringen.

Grüße,

Jeroen Philippona



Jeroen Philippona, at 2014-11-13 23:06:49, edited at 2014-11-13 23:07:37, said:
Hallo Waldfotograf,

Dieser Eiche war schon lange auf diese Website: Kirche

Ich versuche die beide anmeldungen zusammen zu bringen.

Grüße,

Jeroe Philippona



Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-13 08:14:16, said:
Rob

Dreaded health and safety gone mad I expect. If a danger why not fence it off from the public and let nature take its course!

Stephen



MrGreen, at 2014-11-06 20:57:08, said:
Awesome!
Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-09 12:09:38, said:
Hi Owen

Not far from me.

Do you know about the tree next to the River Hamble at Hambleden in Bucks. It may be bigger than this. It appears H. Chestnut loves chalk stream's in valleys.

The Hambleden tree was 7.22m @ 0.5m x an estimated 25m in height measured by me in January 2000.

Regards

Stephen

TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-11-09 21:21:01, said:
Yes, that could be even bigger by now. The record hadn't got through to the Tree Register. Is it in Hambleden village (ie the big house opposite the churchyard?
Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-10 08:01:38, said:
Owen

The tree is in a private garden about 50m south west across the road from Hambleden Church, in the village centre. With its roots in the Hamble Brook.

The trunk is very rectangular in shape due to the 3 massive limbs dividing at about 3m up. Horse Chestnut grows quite quickly here and may date back to only 1800-1830 as the Georgian house/gardens date back to roughly then. I had the opportunity to measure it when I worked on the tree back in 2000.

Tree trunk is not easily seen from the road as it is hidden from view by a fence. I only live 5 miles from it so will take picture and upload to MT when I have time.

Regards

Stephen

Conifers, at 2014-11-10 15:56:16, said:
"The trunk is very rectangular in shape due to the 3 massive limbs dividing at about 3m up"

Given that the massive low branches influence the shape of the trunk at measuring height, shouldn't it be tagged as 'multistemmed'? I'd certainly think so.

RedRob, at 2014-11-11 18:11:34, said:
Hello Stephen, looking forward to seeing photos of all your trees eventually. Are there any really tall Horse Chestnuts in your area, perhaps challenging Arundel's 39 metre tree?

I must ask about one lot of trees, the suspense is killing me (laughs) Did you manage to get to the Elan Valley Douglas Firs, how tall? I have done photo measurements on Google Maps using the telephone box as a reference (being a complete nerd and even googling various telephone boxes to ascertain dimensions, heights), c40 metres is what I got but there is obvious distortion and fore-shortening on Google Maps cameras, for example the Waterloo Grove looks nothing from the road.

Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-12 08:03:24, said:
Hello Conifers

The tree has a very oval, almost elliptical trunk shape, but has a clear stem of 3m before dividing into 3 massive limbs. The quoted girth measurement @0.5m was the 'narrowest point' of the trunk and measuring any higher up the trunk, one would encounter buttressing and reaction wood. This would vastly inflate any girth measurement.

Kind Regards

Stephen

Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-12 08:11:42, said:
Hello Rob

No need to measure anymore phone boxes! The Douglas in question I estimate was about 50m, nice trees of 90 years old, but nothing exceptional.

Some Horse Chestnuts could be 33-35m, in this chalk river valley where conditions appear optimum. However the leaf miner and bleeding canker is sadly having an effect on their health and future growth. Has the leaf miner reached you up in Yorkshire yet?

Having trouble with uploading pictures to my PC off my phone but hopefully You will see them soon!

Cheers

Conifers, at 2014-11-12 08:31:19, said:
Hi Stephen - Thanks!

Yes, Cameraria ohridella has even been up here in Northumbs for 3 years now, and is starting to get common. No doubt its natural predators will catch up with it soon; it doesn't seem to be a big problem. The bleeding canker is likely a worse problem, though so far at least, it is rare up here.

Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-12 08:48:07, said:
Interesting conifers

Many Thanks

RedRob, at 2014-11-12 16:59:52, said:
below Anne Boleyn's seat in the water gardens of the Skell V

This was or must have been a superb speciman originally, got the chop a year or so ago. Cannot remember what the diagnosis was for it, Conifers?

RedRob, at 2014-11-12 17:03:22, edited at 2014-11-12 17:20:37, said:
Forge Valley, East Ayton

I hadn't looked but hadn't realised that you had added this one Owen, I tried to take a distance photo of it but not very successfully as it is rather hemmed in.

Just added my photo for this one, not the small tree nearest the camera but the bi tree behind. Quite difficult to ascertain where or which was the tallest shoot but recorded just below 34 metres with the laser for what I could hit. The ground surrounding it seems to be well paddled and bare so not sure how this will affect the tree in the long run.

RedRob, at 2014-11-12 17:09:26, said:
Hello Stephen, the Douglas at Elan certainly worth recording as current tallest recordest trees in mid/central Wales, Owen's 50 metre Grand Fir at Cefn Park near Cardiff being the tallest in South Wales.
RedRob, at 2014-11-12 17:12:19, said:
Hello Stephen, the Douglas at Elan certainly worth recording as current tallest recordest trees in mid/central Wales, Owen's 50 metre Grand Fir at Cefn Park near Cardiff being the tallest in South Wales.
RedRob, at 2014-11-12 17:14:30, said:
Hello Stephen, the Douglas at Elan certainly worth recording as current tallest recordest trees in mid/central Wales, Owen's 50 metre Grand Fir at Cefn Park near Cardiff being the tallest in South Wales.
RedRob, at 2014-11-12 17:15:42, said:
Using Internet Explorer the site sticking tonight, just swapped to Mozilla and now not having the problem.
Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-13 08:11:46, said:
Rob

Now I wished I had measured it. There must be taller trees in central Wales southwards?


Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-13 08:09:30, said:
Nice tree Rob

Amazing reaction wood where the tree forks to keep it all together.



themoudie, at 2014-11-10 22:24:16, said:
Aye Bess,

Might I suggest that this tree is a Bigleaf Linden, Broadleaf Lime, Large-leaf Lime, Large-leaved Linden (Tilia platyphyllos)? An alternative might be the Common Lime or Kaiser Linden (Tilia × europaea), but I think that the leaves on your 'Unknown' tree appear larger than those of the hybrid and the Small leaved lime (Tilia cordata). I like the image, promoting tree 'cuddling'. ;¬)

My regards, themoudie

Conifers, at 2014-11-10 23:53:30, said:
Common Lime for me.
Leo Goudzwaard, at 2014-11-11 08:28:51, said:
T. x europaea; the leaves are large probably due to regrowth after pruning one or more years ago
Martin Tijdgat, at 2014-11-11 14:14:32, said:
Hai Bess en collega's,

Ook ik herken eerder een Tilia x europaea in dan een Tilia platyphyllos.

Met vriendelijke groet,

Martin Tijdgat

themoudie, at 2014-11-12 01:13:30, said:
Morning All,

Local knowledge goes for (Tilia × europaea), so be it. ;¬)

Good health.

My regards, themoudie

Bess, at 2014-11-12 22:01:09, said:
Thanks all of you for the Lime-knowledge!

and yess… I do have tree cuddling friends! :-)


RedRob, at 2014-11-11 18:32:28, edited at 2014-11-11 18:34:21, said:
The site webpage link on the Elm conversation mentioned that Deodars could be 250 feet in their native habitat, surely there be some taller specimans than this somewhere in Europe, Germany, France (Sisley?) Would love to see some 50 metre specimans in Europe, likely?

I have just forgotten to update this tree, I measured it again in September (2014) and I could visibly see that the top was flatter, certainly when compared to my photos from 2013. I am pretty certain that it has lost it's top most branch, must have been in the severe winds of last winter as I couldn't get this height for it. Will look in my notes and update with new height which I just cannot recall exactly offhand.


Jeroen Philippona, at 2014-11-11 22:03:56, said:
I doubt if there are Deodars over 40 m in Europe, there seem to be no very old plantations of them.

In 1981 I have been in one of the locations with tall Deodar Cedars in the Indian Himalayas, in Manali. Probably those were taller than 40 m, but from my remembrance (I did not have any height measurement instrument at that time) I doubt if they were a lot above 50 m. Alas till now nobody seems to have measured them with reliable methods. Kouta and I once mailed that it would be nice to go there and to other locations in the Himalayas, but till now we did not make real plans.

Jeroen


RedRob, at 2014-11-12 17:43:07, said:
Hello Jeroen, lets hope that there are some giant specimans hidden somewhere and yet to be found? Perhaps Sisley has the best chance of finding some in hidden gullies somewhere in central France.

I have updated the measurement for this one, now 37.8-38 metres MT standard, 37.6 to the high side Tree Register standard. Will have to check if this is now still the tallest in B&I?



RedwoodMike, at 2014-11-12 11:03:52, said:
Nice! This tree is called "El Viejo Del Norte".


Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-09-29 15:48:19, said:
Very nice picture
Frank Gyssling, at 2014-11-06 17:50:38, said:
Sehr schöne Aufnahme. Ich hätte die linke Seite noch etwas beschnitten (Luftkabel).Damit würde auch die Sonne aus dem Zentrum rücken.

viele Grüße Frank

derWaldfotograf, at 2014-11-12 10:16:12, said:
Hallo Frank, Hallo Wim,

Danke für eure positiven Kommentare.

Eigentlich gehört der Baum auf die rechte Seite des Bildes.

Das war aber leider vom Standort aus nicht machbar. Darum meine Entscheidung das Bild so wie gesehen zu gestalten.

Ich wollte unbedingt den ganzen Baum in seiner Schönheit zeigen.

Ps. Antworten kann ich leider nur auf Deutsch.

Gruß

Burkhard


Conifers, at 2014-11-09 09:35:52, said:
Any information on why it died? Too much building in the root zone would be my guess.
Rainer Lippert, at 2014-11-09 09:47:03, said:
Hallo Conifers,

in der Mammutbaumcommunity http://mbreg.de/forum/index.php/topic,3329.msg66958.html#msg66958) haben wir auch schon über diesen Baum gesprochen. Anhand von Satellitenaufnahmen entstanden da in den letzten Jahren mehrere bauliche Veränderungen. Auf Bildern von 2009 sind Gebäude noch nicht zu sehen, die aktuell dort sind.

Viele Grüße,

Rainer

Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-09 12:00:06, said:
Hi

Possibly lightning or more likely Armilaria mellea or Heterobasidion annosum or good old Homo sapiens?

Rainer Lippert, at 2014-11-10 21:24:54, said:
Hallo Stephen,

also ich denke es hat mit den baulichen Veränderungen im Umfeld zu tun. Also mal wieder der Mensch daran schuld.

Viele Grüße,

Rainer

Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-12 08:15:31, said:
Hallo Rainer

Sorry I do not speak German! Can you translate so I can reply?

Stephen

Conifers, at 2014-11-12 08:26:40, said:
Hi Stephen,

Google translator says:

"So I think it has to do with the structural changes in the environment. So once again the man to blame"

Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-12 08:44:03, said:
Thanks for that Conifers

Giant Elms in the UK. The Magdalen College Huntingdon Elm at Oxford
Visible for everyone · permalink · en
Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-03 14:53:50, said:
Hi All

I thought this might be of interest while browsing through a very interesting book published online about UK trees early on in the 20th century.

I came across a photograph (I had known about this tree before) of perhaps one of the largest broadleaved trees ever recorded in the UK. It was measured on the ground 142feet x 28feet round in 1911.

I'm interested in giant Elms, especially Ulmus procera (was tallest UK tree before Pacific Coast conifers and Abies alba overtook them.

Scroll through the pages and look under elm.

Pictures of big elms are so scarce now and only if I was 40 years older and had the hindsight to photograph them before they all perished apart from a few! What have we lost?

Cheers

Stephen

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/39946/39946-h/39946-h.htm


Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-04 08:32:06, said:
Hello All

The Huntingdon Elm was measured by the well known UK tree expert of his time Elwes, contained 2787 cubic feet of timber which is 98 cubic metres, so well over 100 tonnes. This may not include the upper crown though, so perhaps 120m3 in total. The tree must have been severely decayed though.

Has anyone else seen this old photograph before?


TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-11-04 18:50:40, said:
Also in 'The Trees of Great Britain and Ireland' you'll find mention of a Wych Elm near Field in Staffordshire which was felled in 1636 and carefully measured as 120' tall and 16' thick at the kerf. I think we can safely say that elms were our biggest native trees.

Jeroen Philippona, at 2014-11-04 21:23:58, edited at 2014-11-05 19:59:55, said:
Those elms must have been great trees! I remember coming the first time in England and Wales in 1970 when I was 15, seeing everywere dead elms in the countryside. This has been a great loss for the British landscape.

Stephen and Owen: the Magdalen College Elm contained 2787 cubic feet of timber. You calculate this as 98 cubic metre. When a foot is 30.48 cm / 0.3048 metre than a cubic foot is 0,0283168466 cubic metre. Then 2787 cubic feet is 78,92 cubic metre. It could be that only good timber was calculated, not the smaller branches and the bark. The tree in total had perhaps more volume.

As you know Robert van Pelt calculated the large Sessile Oak of Croft Castle as having a total volume of 3800 cubic feet / 107.6 cubic metre and Majesty the Fredville Oak as 3300 cubic feet / 93.45 cubic metre, but these will both be the total volume of the tree including bark, all branches and (especially for Majesty) including the hollow trunk. So this is not existing volume of timber but the volume of the tree as a whole.

Probably measured in this way the Magdalen College Elm also would have had a volume of over 3000 or more cubic feet.

Would be nice to have a guy like Robert van Pelt to estimate volumes of some more British and European trees.

Jeroen


Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-05 07:39:04, said:
Hello Owen

Yes I totally agree. Although tree sizes may have been over estimated back then.

There appears to be very few photographs of big elms on the internet, which is sad. If only I was alive before 1970 with a camera!


Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-05 08:31:28, said:
Hi Jeroen

Yes you are right, I entered in the conversion factor wrongly.

It could be that the old method of measurement was used, the Hoppus foot. There is 0.03605m3 to the Hoppus foot. This is still used in the UK for measuring hardwoods, sadly and not metric.

Yes a tragedy, the loss of Ulmus procera. I remember being in my pram at 2 years, sadly watching big elms being felled in 1975 in my village and ever since been addicted to trees!

Another tree not native to the UK and yet somehow some people accept these trees in the landscape and not other species such as conifers which I find rather stupid!

There are some old pictures of elms being felled which surely were as big as the biggest plane trees of today.

In September I visited the Croft Castle Sessile Oak. I remember standing beneath this tree in 1984.

I did an extensive study into the trees health/age. Sadly the National Trust has expanded the car park since 1984 allowing car parking in close proximity to the tree's root zone, which puts the tree's health at risk due to soil compaction. I have spent most of my career trying to educate people about this kind of thing, but sadly some people are ignorant.

The tree is generally in good health at present but it has extensive internal decay in the heartwood and is structurally compromised, thus at some future date perhaps in 50 years time it may fall. Nearly all oaks of this age (300 years) I have seen, have decay and have witnessed them snapping off at the base. Perhaps the only way to prevent this would be to reduce the upper crown, but this would be sad and perhaps letting nature take its course would be best, as surely we have to accept the tree has done wonderfully.

Presume B.V. Pelt just measured the trunk and main branches. If upper crown included it could perhaps amass more than 120m3? This would amount to 128 tonnes as there are 0.94m3 to the metric tonne for Oak which is fresh and green. But of course impossible to measure weight accurately if the tree has decay.

I will upload pictures and report for MT in due course.

Cheers

Stephen


Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-05 08:39:50, said:
Hi Jeroen

Has anyone in Europe tried to estimate volume using Laser Technology's Criterion RD 1000 dendrometer? Perhaps some of the UK's conifers could be measured to estimate volume this way. Although climbing and measuring diameter at certain heights would be more accurate?


RedRob, at 2014-11-05 17:38:43, said:
2 years old, that takes some beating Stephen! 2 years old in 1975, I was curious as to how old you were and this as given it away. Not my long list twin then. Don't think that I can remember as far back as that, remember how my interested first sparked, all the kids in my Primary school class were given an Oak sapling to look after. It was my second year in Primary so 1975 coincidently again. I cannot remember what happened to my little Oak? Hope that it was planted somewhere and is growing strong now. My interest was further engaged when my late Dad and myself began searching for a grove of very tall trees that he had seen but which he could not remember the location of. We drove right to within a few hundred metres of them from both directions but couldn't find them and turned back. Took us many outings and we finally dropped down over the edge of the ravine and found the redwoods at Hebden Wood. The trees were very, very tall to a little kid.

TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-11-05 19:52:02, said:
I seem to remember discussing this with someone before and realising that Elwes and Henry were using Hoppus feet whenever they wrote 'feet of timber'. I believe that Bob van Pelt will have recorded even the minor branches of the Croft Castle oak with some precision, as that is what he does when surveying the giant American trees. But our big, young conifers are easier to measure as they only have light branches so far.

Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-06 08:14:00, said:
Morning Rob and Owen

You too Rob have a nice childhood story to tell.

If Elm disease had not happened perhaps my interest in trees would have never occurred! That day in December 1975 obviously had left an imprint on my brain! One of my earliest memories was 100ft elms being felled across the main road into the pub car park whole, falling with an almighty bang (no health and safety then) There were 200 of them lining the road! The whole of the Vale of Oxford was full of them and a guy who I worked for said he spent years constantly felling dead Elms.

There was an interest in genetic engineering Ulmus procera inserting a gene to make it resistant, but there are 'anti's' that do not like this, so project halted! Trouble is there are about 2 clones of Ulmus procera so when the disease struck there was no resistance. Whereas Ulmus hollandica 'vegeta' (Huntingdon Elm) does have some resistance.

The bookmark for the online book shows some interesting trees of the past, nice beech etc.

Owen

The Huntingdon Elm at Silk wood Westonburt has now sadly died.


Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-06 08:19:41, said:
Hi Owen

Measuring the upper crown must be a very complicated task for an oak. Has the Tree Register considered measuring girths at different heights to determine volume for some of the big conifers like the Grand Fir at Strone or Murthly etc. when doing tape drops?


Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-06 08:23:32, said:
Interesting site and pictures of Elms still alive in Kent

http://www.resistantelms.co.uk/galleries/kecp-gallery/

Stephen


Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-06 08:46:29, said:
This is what we have lost, so sad wish I had been there. What a beauty! R.I.P. Ulmus procera

http://www.resistantelms.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/15964948-Tall-Somerset-elm-quotation-5-Forster.jpg

Best picture on the net I have seen.

Stephen


RedRob, at 2014-11-06 17:18:15, said:
Hello Stephen, are there any large Elms of any type left in your territory? Up here there are very few although quite alot of shrubby specimans forming parts of hedges. The tallest that I have recorded is a 27.8-28 metre speciman at Ribston Hall. Cannot remember if I have added this to MT or not, will have to a check? I don't like adding just any tree as it wastes webspace for Tim but this one is worth adding probably because it is a County Champion for Yorkshire.

Jeroen Philippona, at 2014-11-06 20:59:50, edited at 2014-11-06 21:09:50, said:
Hi Stephen, Owen and Rob,

There is some hope that there will be still elms in the UK as well as other parts of Europe in future. In Amsterdam there is a very good program for preservation of elms, of wich there are around 70.000 in the city. Among these are still some beautiful old trees of Ulmus x hollandica 'Belgica', but as far as I know there are no large U. procera in Amsterdam. Of U. hollandica 'Vegeta'(Huntingdon Elm) there are medium large trees but not as old as of 'Belgica'.

By the way: 2787 Hoppus Feet = 100,47 cubic metre, a lot more than with modern feet.

Stephen, I don't know anybody measuring volume in the way you ask. In the USA there are several persons who do, like Robert Leverett, Robert van Pelt, Steve Sillett and Michael Taylor.

Beside giant conifers in the Pacific Northwest they have measured the volume of a huge Live Oak (Quercus virginiana) as nearly 5000 cubic feet = 140 cubic metres and of a tall big Tulip Tree of 4200 cubic feet, by measuring nearly all branches by climbing and taping.

Best regards, Jeroen


Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-07 08:18:50, said:
Hi All

I think I will frame the above picture of that beautiful Elm and hang it on my wall! I am going to invent a time machine and return to 1960 with a good camera and 50 Kodak slide films!

Rob:-

Yes there are some survivors, very rare in The Chilterns. There was a Ulmus glabra of 26m x 1.3m which survived at least 3 phases of the dreaded DED. and finally died in 1993, I reported this to Alan Mitchell. Now there is the largest Ulmus glabra probably in the Chilterns about 25m tall with two trunks 60cm diameter still with no disease and strangely in the same valley an Ulmus procera 15m tall x 40cm which has somehow survived 2 bouts of disease and recovered! I do not know why? Just very lucky isolated trees?

Also a half hectare wood full of elms about 25m x 60cm unable to determine the species, but clearly very resistant to disease, Possibly a Ulmus carpinifolia clone or perhaps a rare Plot elm. There are just so many types.

Jeroen:-

Interesting about Elms in Holland I know they had an extensive breeding program. I am sure that Elm disease could be stopped by advances in breeding/genetics but there is no political will or money to do the research?

So the historic Elm at Oxford could have amounted to 100m3! The hybrid arose in Hinchinbrook Park in Huntingdon in 1760, so after 151 years the tree accumulated 100m3, which I find hard to believe. I know the rich alluvial floodplain soil around Oxford is fertile, but growth rate would surely be comparable with Abies grandis, Sequoia, Sequoiadendron! Perhaps the tree had everything it needed, as well as hybrid vigour. What do you think?

Cheers

Stephen


Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-07 08:25:50, said:
Hi Jeroen

Perhaps volume measurement is another project for European trees although technically challenging. Certainly big conifers with little taper would be the easiest and would be interesting to see which ones were really the biggest, as we know measuring just height and diameter is possibly a inferior method of identifying the biggest.


TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-11-07 18:17:46, said:
Elwes and Henry were confident that the Magdalene College elm was much older than the 1760 selection of the 'Huntingdon' clone and represented an independent wild hybrid.

Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-09 11:54:28, said:
Hello Owen

Thanks for that, that makes sense of my query. I wonder if this clone is now extinct? Certainly a massive tree I would estimate it would take at least 250 years to amass 80-100m3 of wood. It was certainly in a very advanced state of decay, judging by the 1911 photograph.

Perhaps Black Italian Poplar could have approached these sizes, as I have seen some enormous trees in old photographs which had been sadly felled.

Regards

Stephen


Jeroen Philippona, at 2014-11-10 21:58:41, said:
Hi Stephen, Owen and Rob,

There are still breeding programs in the Netherlands for resistant elms, but indeed there is little money to do more research. Still there is a professional nursereyman in Holland breeding many resistant clones and in Amsterdam there is a good preservation / protection program for elms. Leo knows more about it, he is the co-author of a book on Elms in the Low Counties wich was published in 2009 (alas only in Dutch language). The other co-authors are Hans Heybroek, who did most off the research on breeding resistant elms and Hans Kaljee, who is the tree-consultant of the City of Amsterdam and among the most influential tree-people of the Netherlands.

About the Magdalene College elm: if it was much older than the first breeding of the Huntingdon clone (wich is given in the above book as 1746), was it sure it was a Huntingdon elm or just a hybrid of an unknown clone?

The biggest girthed hybrid elm in Holland is also of an unknown clone, see: Dutch elm (Ulmus × hollandica) '1929'

Tallest U. x hollandica in Holland are: Dutch elm (Ulmus × hollandica) '3450' and Oudemanhuispoort .

Considering measuring big conifers: Tim Bekaert describes a method here:http://www.monumentaltrees.com/en/content/measuringvolume/

About the largest European trees: you probably know we estimated the Ivenack Oak as having 140 cubic metre total wood volume and the Trsteno Oriental Plane as 150 - 175 cubic metre.

Some Giant Sequoias will have surpassed 100 m3 and in the near future will be the largest trees of Europe.

What will be the total volume of the big Abies alba in Ardkinglas as well as the largest Cedrus libanii and Sweet Chestnuts I don't know, but probably also around or above 100 cubes.

Regards, Jeroen


RedRob, at 2014-11-11 17:51:48, said:
Hello Jeroen, very fine Elms.

Stephen Verge, at 2014-11-12 08:39:46, said:
Hi Jeroen

Very interesting about the Elms in Holland. There was an attempt to genetically engineer Ulmus procera so it would hopefully be resistant and was undertaken at Abertay University in Scotland.

Ulmus procera proved to be an ideal subject for this as it does not produce seed and is sterile, so there was no chance of it breeding with other Elms with its changed genetics. However there are anti's in this country who did not like the idea of genetically modified trees (sadly a lot of ignorance here in my opinion), so sadly the project did to proceed to the next phase of testing the resistance in the field. However I believe it could still be done if there is the will!

A French Study has shown that none of the Common Elms in Europe have total resistance to the disease, although some are more resistant than others, Huntingdon Elm being one of them.

A recent statistical analysis of the spread of Elm disease has shown nothing could be done to stop it after the import of 'Rock Elm' logs from Canada in the late 1960's, into the ports of the UK, once it was established in the countryside.

Yes Giant Sequoia will be the biggest conifer, but London Plane will surely be largest broadleaf. The trees at Ely, Cambridgeshire and Lydney Park could be 80-100m3 perhaps as big as the tree at Croft Castle?

Also I am worried that climate change is going to seriously retard tree growth in South and Eastern England due to a predicted drop in summer rainfall during the growing season, in the next 100 years. However Northwest UK should become more productive for tree growth unless there is another disease.

Cheers

Stephen



RedRob, at 2014-11-05 17:41:59, said:
Wow, this is some tree! Scholem, is it possible to officially record the height with a laser? Do you have any more photos, some with some human figures or something for context?

Conifers, at 2014-11-05 19:24:33, said:
Hmmm . . . that tree doesn't look anything like 33 m to me; at a guess, you can knock at least 10 m (and probably 15 m) off from that. The narrow single-lane driveway beside it gives a fair estimate of scale.

RedRob, at 2014-11-06 17:54:30, said:
Hello Conifers, is the lane a particularly narrow one, it is single track yes but how wide? Using the photo technique, the road is 1cm to the tree 13cm.

8 foot road gives a tree 104 feet tall, 31.7 metres

7 foot 91 feet tall 27.7 metres

6 foot 78 feet tall 23.7 metres

I think a narrow track lane for vehicles which this is from the whiter marks where the tyres run will be 6 feet at least.


Frank, at 2014-11-06 18:23:54, said:
Scholem noted in the German description that the power pole next to the tree is 11 metres high. I would give the tree 27-30 metres as well. It has a wide crown, which makes it look less high.

Conifers, at 2014-11-06 20:53:24, said:
Problem is, I don't think either method is giving a reliable estimate. The 11 m pole is some distance (about 25 m) beyond the tree, and down slope, so looks a lot less high by comparison. Also the bend in the access road where one can measure its photo-width is beyond the tree too, which inflates the comparative height of the tree. Measuring on google earth, the photo was taken from the adjacent main road 30 metres from the tree, with the bend in the access road 50 metres away, 20 m beyond the tree. And finally, as is usual with broad-crowned trees, the highest visible shoot is not the real top but a branch closer to the observer and so appears higher. It will need a laser device to get a real measurement. But my prediction would be in the 15-18 metres range, perhaps 20 m at most.

RedRob, at 2014-11-11 18:21:42, said:
Yep, should have had a look on the Google map and have and Conifers is right, the tower is some distance beyond the tree from the position from where the photo is taken. Bringing it forward, the height is probably around 20 metres. Needs lasering to confirm if anyone is near this area?


spsp, at 2014-11-11 17:16:06, said:
http://kgk-deinze.be/pdf_files/contactblad_pdf/contactblad_1994_6.pdf

TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-11-09 21:19:16, said:
Pinus wallichiana?
Conifers, at 2014-11-09 23:31:36, said:
Doesn't look like it to me, and I'd be doubtful if P. wallichiana is fully hardy in Salzburg. I'd like to see a close-up of the cones and foliage. My suspicions would be for Pinus × schwerinii, though can't rule out P. monticola, or other cultivated origin hybrids.
Jeroen Philippona, at 2014-11-10 22:13:08, said:
I didn't look very carefully but indeed it doesn't look much like P. strobus.

I don't have good photos of the tree, the cones or foliage.

Alas a bit too far to make them now.


English Main page not working
Visible for everyone · permalink · en
Conifers, at 2014-11-04 09:25:57, said:
The English main pagehttp://www.monumentaltrees.com/en/ is giving me an error message:

Warning: mysql_connect(): User monumentaltrees already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/database.php on line 72 User monumentaltrees already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections

The rest of the site seems to be working OK, though.


Han van Meegeren, at 2014-11-04 11:48:46, said:
Conifers

That's not specific the problem with the englisch mainpage. Sometimes the Dutch one has the same errors. I think the server is sometimes overloaded. Perhaps Tim has an answer for this problem.

Greetings HAn


Conifers, at 2014-11-04 12:12:43, said:
Thanks!

Conifers, at 2014-11-06 09:37:08, said:
Still happening, I have had to bookmark one of the sub-pages like 'Discussion' to enter MT. This is OK for me as I know how to do this, but it will stop new visitors from finding out about the site, which is sad. Also the low number of recent additions suggests some established members are not being able to post at the moment. Hope it can be solved soon!

Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-11-06 17:05:58, said:
I'va had serious problems in signing in. And indeed I have scarcely been able to upload or even see what's happening. Furthermore I have met a problem in uploading. At the moment it prevents me from being all too active. I have bought a new computer. Its operating system is windows 8.1. This OS rotates the taken pictures in the vertical form if they are taken that way. The problem is that the photo's consequently appear horizontal....

I have asked Packard Bell for a solution. (Microsoft won't discuss this problem because I have a OEM version). Packard Bell says that this is a known problem in Windows 8 and they cannot do anything. I have the same problem with the database of "De Bomenstichting" .

Will be continued. I have asked a problem manager of a computer magazine for a solution.

Will be continued.


RedRob, at 2014-11-06 17:21:28, said:
Funny, I am the archetypal 'problem user' on MT but not experiencing any of these problems. What I did find was using Mozilla Firefox is much better than Internet Explorer 9 which kept coming up with the message 'Monumentaltrees.com is not responding' 'Recover webpage?'

Han van Meegeren, at 2014-11-06 17:32:54, said:
I've just send a mail to Tim about these problems.

Greets, Han


Wim Brinkerink, at 2014-11-06 18:31:28, said:
I have tried IE 11, Google chrome and Mozilla Firefox. The problems occured with all three browsers. But now the problems seem to be finished. ?

Tim, at 2014-11-07 08:24:20, said:
Hi,

I'm aware of these problems but I'm still thinking about decent solution.

The cause is that at certain moments there are a lot of Chinese visitors (likely all of them automated robots) from Chinese search engines like Baidu etc. These hammer the site each one creating a connection to the database and making some queries (e.g. to show the recent changes list) making my database overloaded.

I could simply block these, but this would prevent the site from popping up in Baidu search results (and the Baidu robots don't show this behaviour all the time), but that might be a solution for now. Other bots like the one from Google behave more nicely, spreading their requests in time. A better solution would be to make the querying lighter, by e.g. also caching the recent changes list so not every user has to build up this list independently.

The non availability is always a temporary issue that can happen at any moment (for Conifers by coincidence at the main page), usually when there are a lot of users active at the same time.

Maybe I'll block Chinese users for the moment, and work on a decent solution later. Currently my time for the site is consumed by work on the cultivar/variety editing possibilities.

Kind regards,

Tim


Conifers, at 2014-11-08 16:31:29, said:
Thanks for checking, Tim!

While it would be very nice to get some trees from China, it hasn't happened yet. So I'd agree with blocking their robots (if feasible!), even if it does mean fewer potential 'real' Chinese visitors to the site.


Rainer Lippert, at 2014-11-10 21:34:22, said:
Hallo,

ich habe seit gestern Mittag keinen Zugriff mehr auf MT. Jetzt geht es auch nicht. Ich erhalte immer die oben genannte Fehlermeldung. Das ganze allerdings nur bei Firefox. Erst jetzt bin ich auf die Idee gekommen, mal den IE zu verwenden. Da geht MT, konnte so auch diese Diskussion finden.

Viele Grüße,

Rainer



Veldiep in Gartrop, Hünxe
Visible for everyone · permalink · nl
Leo Goudzwaard, at 2014-11-04 09:39:14, said:
hello Karlheinz, this great tree is an Ulmus laevis, cheers, Leo

Karlheinz, at 2014-11-04 18:52:35, said:
Hi Leo, you could be right, the trunk with the many water veins looks like Ulmus laevis. But the leaves are different. I could compare directly with those of the 200 meters away Ulmus laevis '19794'. The leaves are thicker and solid, smoother the upper side, and the lower leaf surface shows the typical pattern of profiled Ulmus minor (it looks likehttp://www.baumkunde.de/Ulmus_minor/Blatt2/). But surely with the identification of the species I'm not. It would be good if you or someone else could check the tree on site!

regards

Karlheinz


Karlheinz, at 2014-11-06 20:55:01, said:
Leo,

please check out my additional photos of the leaves. I took a few home with me. The lower leaf surface shows a profiled or cracked pattern and I see silky hair tufts in the vein angles, focusing on the central vein. This is something I've only seen at Ulmus minor, is this also possible with Ulmus laevis?

Karlheinz


Karlheinz, at 2014-11-07 02:04:08, said:
refer to:http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulmen "Bestimmungstabelle für Ulmen"

Leo Goudzwaard, at 2014-11-07 09:24:08, edited at 2014-11-07 09:26:59, said:
hello Karlheinz,

your added leaf pictures show U. minor, but the leaves at your tree pictures are typical U. laevis.

I have added a photo showing an enlarged part of one of your tree pictures combined with a part of your collected-leaves pictures.

These cannot be from the same tree, because at the left side there are U. leaves trees and on the right side U. minor leaves.

U. laevis has much wider leaves with long curved teeth at the edges

U. minor has narrower leaves with short teeth

If this was a test, I hope I have passed, cheers, Leo


Karlheinz, at 2014-11-07 10:18:43, said:
I want to go there again and photograph leaves tomorrow. Is there still something else I should particularly look out for?

KoutaR, at 2014-11-07 11:17:27, said:
Most importantly, the leaves from fast growing sprouts or coppice shoots are unusable for identification - they readily result in missidentification. The best leaves are the subdistal ones (next below from the leaves at the shoot tip) from the short shoots (Kurztriebe) in the crown, including the lowest branches of the crown. Never leaves from the shoots at the tree base.

Leo Goudzwaard, at 2014-11-07 15:18:33, said:
you are right Kouta, but even from leaves from the treebase or epicormic shoots, I will be able to distinguish U. laevis (which is my favorite tree) from other U. species.

KoutaR, at 2014-11-07 15:29:01, said:
Ok. I believe that YOU can do it.

Karlheinz, at 2014-11-10 15:55:44, said:
Leo,

einen Scherz habe ich mir nicht erlaubt und Verwechslungen oder falsche Zuordnung der Blatt-Fotos schließe ich aus. Auch ohne die Fotos erinnere ich mich daran, dass ich unter dem Baum neben den normalen Blättern zahlreiche dieser Feldulmen-ähnlichen Blätter gefunden habe. Sie hatten Nervengabelungen auch in der oberen Blatthälfte. Ich kannte dieses Unterscheidungsmerkmal und habe vor Ort sehr bewußt darauf geachtet.

Gestern war ich wieder in Gartrop, ich hatte aber leider keinen Zutritt zum Schlosspark. Über die Sprechanlage zur Hotelrezeption erhielt ich immer nur den Hinweis auf "Privatbesitz", zu weiteren Auskünften war man nicht bereit.

Ich kenne eine weitere Ulme, die als Flatterulme bekannt ist und wo ich zu Beginn der Laubfallzeit vor etwa einer Woche auch solche Feldulmen-ähnlichen Blätter fand: European white elm (Ulmus laevis) '19851' . Auch dort war ich gestern und habe Fotos gemacht. Die obere Kronenhälfte ist inzwischen völlig blattleer und unten rieselten die Blätter. Zu meinem Erstaunen konnte ich im dichten Laub unter dem Baum keine Blätter mit Nerven-Gabelungen in der oberen Blatthälfte mehr entdecken, nur noch normale Flatterulmenblätter.

Beide Bäume weisen ein übereinstimmendes Merkmal auf:

Durch baumpflegerische Eingriffe in der Vergangenheit wurde die Krone eingekürzt und an den Schnittstellen haben sich Büschel von Neuaustrieben entwickelt, welche nun die Kronenperipherie prägen.

Ich schliesse daraus:

Diese für Flatterulmen untypischen Blätter bilden sich an den Neuaustrieben oben in der Krone. Zu Beginn der Laubfallzeit sind das die ersten Blätter, die der Baum abwirft und die man dann unten auflesen kann. Später, wenn die große Masse der Blätter fällt, sieht man nur noch normal geformte Blätter.

Nach meiner Einschätzung ist das eine Flatterulme, ich habe das entsprechend geändert.

Was haltet ihr von dieser Theorie?

Grüße

Karlheinz

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

here is my English translation:

Leo,

a joke I'm not allowed and confusion or incorrect assignment of the leaf photos I exclude. Even without the photos I remember that I found under the tree in addition to normal leaves many of these field elm-like leaves. They had nerve forks in the upper half. I knew this distinctive feature and on site I have paid attention very consciously to it.

Yesterday I was back in Gartrop, but I had no access to the park. Over the intercom to the hotel reception I always received the reference to "private property", for other information they were not willing.

I know another elm, which is known as white elm and where I also found such field elm-like leaves at the beginning of leaf fall time, about a week ago: <European white elm (Ulmus laevis) '19851' . Even there I was yesterday and took pictures. The upper half of the crown is now completely empty from leaves and also below the leaves trickled strongly. To my amazement, in the dense foliage on the ground under the tree I could no longer find leaves with nerve forks in the upper half, only normal elm leaves.

Both trees have a matching feature:

By arboriculture interventions in the past, the crowns of both trees was shortened and the stumps have developed tufts of new sproutings, which now shape the crown periphery.

I conclude:

This for Ulmus laevis untypical leaves are formed at the sproutings in top of the shortened crown. At the beginning of leaf fall time these are the first leaves that the tree throws off and you can pick up from the ground. Later, when the large mass of leaves fall, you will find only normal shaped leaves.

In my estimation, this is a white elm, I have changed accordingly.

What do you think about this theory?

regards

Karlheinz



Jeroen Philippona, at 2014-11-09 08:45:40, said:
Hi Rainer,

Interesting oak. Do you know if it has beeen a forest grown oak in the past and if it is known what height it had with the original crown?

Best regards, Jeroen


Rainer Lippert, at 2014-11-09 09:02:12, said:
Hallo Jeroen,

ja, eine besondere Eiche ist das. Die Eiche ist laut Literatur geschützt im Wald aufgewachsen. Fröhlich gibt in "Wege zu alten Bäumen" aus dem Jahre 1992 eine Höhe von 25 m an. Im Jahre 2000 wurde die Krone bei Pflegemaßnahmen stark eingestutzt. 2011 wurde die Krone dann nochmals eingekürzt.

Viele Grüße,

Rainer



Ericc, at 2014-11-08 00:15:30, said:
This beautiful Sequoia is to be removed by the City of Fife for a developer funded road widening project.

Bert Veerman, at 2014-11-07 18:40:19, edited at 2014-11-07 18:40:52, said:
Dit bomen groepje heb ik inderdaad de plant leeftijd van geschat , het stond er al toen ik als kind zijnde bij mijn vader achterop de fiets mee ging en ik ben nu 68 jaar

JJVR, at 2014-11-06 19:55:11, said:
Schitterend loof in alle kleuren.

JJVR, at 2014-11-06 19:48:20, said:
Schitterende herfstkleuren.

Helaas van straat af aan (Vanderlandelaan) niet goed te zien.


RedRob, at 2014-11-03 17:53:41, said:
Visit Bramham occasionally professionally and noticed a number of Weeping Willows growing. Visited today and measured several of them all of very similar height. Have a an idea of which type these are but will let the expert eyes confirm. From the Register, this looks like the tallest recorded 'Weeping Willow' in Yorkshire.

TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-11-03 18:05:16, said:
The common Golden Weeping Willow, 'Chrysocoma', which is near its northern limit in Yorkshire. There are a few quite big ones in York itself, but I think only the girths have been recorded.

Leo Goudzwaard, at 2014-11-04 09:41:58, said:
It's name is Salix x sepulcralis 'Chrysocoma'

RedRob, at 2014-11-05 17:29:37, said:
Hello Leo, Owen, Con, from looking at photos thought that it would be Sepulcralis of some sort, Thanks.

Owen, trying to think of where big Weeping Willows could be in York? Visit York regularly, think (?) I may have seen some unsubconsiously on the side of the River Foss at Foss Island although may be seeing them there in my mind? There are some big Willows down at New Earswick which I have passed many times and must take the laser at some time when I pass. White and Crack Willows I think they are.


RedRob, at 2014-11-05 18:21:31, edited at 2014-11-06 17:45:40, said:
Yep, not dreaming, two along the River Foss across from 20 Huntingdon Road, difficult to assess the height, only ducks for real context.

TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-11-05 19:43:12, said:
The big Weeping Willow in York was an Ancient Tree Hunt record from 2009 - S side of Acomb Road, Holgate (W of New Lane), if it was placed correctly on the map; SE58235140. I've just realised that the 127cm trunk diameter recorded is exactly 4m girth so 99% likely to be an estimate (and 50% likely to be a hopelessly bad one...) though the lady recorded it as a precise measurement. So worth a visit if you're out that way! I may even have walked past it as I visited West Bank Park in that part of the city (which has an especially good Metasequoia) but I can't remember a very big willow.

RedRob, at 2014-11-06 17:44:52, said:
Hello Owen, yet again, know the West Bank Park well, have looked after dogs at York and walked them through thisn park may times but again pre-treeing. The Metasequoia is near the gate on Acomb Road, have seen it on passing in the car and have been meaning to have the laser with me when I pass at some point. I will look for the Weeping Willow next time that I am there and will measure the two on the River Foss at Huntingdon Road as well.


Historic trees in GB
Visible for everyone · permalink · en
RedRob, at 2013-11-12 17:48:06, said:
http://archive.org/stream/cu31924053948943/cu31924053948943_djvu.txt

Owen, reading information on this site, (844 down left margin) Castanea Sativa, very large specimans (86 feet to first branch) reported at Godinton, Kent circa 1908, do any of these still survive? 113 foot speciman at Dynevor Castle, does this still survive? I notice that the Mackershaw, Studley Royal Castanea is mentioned here (after number 850) 112 feet, 34.1 metres c1908, now 34.4 metres, has hardly grown at all if any any.

160 foot Castanea reported from Madeira (844), whether that ever existed, anyone else have any old info relating to this?

873, mention of 146 foot Fraxinus Excelsior at Cobham ,Kent, any still there Owen and if so, how tall?

Really interesting to read about the conifers further up the page and writers enthusing about 90 feet Grand Firs, Douglas Firs as tallest recorded. Owen, any places mentioned that you haven't visited? 827, Douglas Firs mentioned at Eggesford, Devon, about 40 years old in 1865 and 100 feet tall (properly 93 feet), 128 feet in 1908, any of these still there Owen?


TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2013-11-12 20:24:01, said:
Your text is from 'The Trees of Great Britain and Ireland' by Henry Elwes and Augustine Henry (1906-13), which was the definitive text on specimen trees of its day and is still an important source and point-of-departure for the Tree Register and for websites like this one. The Chestnut Tell at Godinton Park does still exist, though some of the best trees were blown down in the 1987 storm. The survivors are about 34m tall. I've been to Dinefwr, but did not find anything notably tall.

In 1910 most of the American conifers were still youngsters in Britain, so it wasn't evident to Elwes and Henry that the examples in the south (which had grown faster in the warmer climate) would begin to fail before very long, while those that were plodding along in the Scottish Highlands would continue to thrive - indefinitely as yet.


TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2013-11-12 20:27:44, said:
The tall ashes at Cobham have all gone - in common with several others Elwes and Henry recorded as taller than any known in England today.

The Douglas Fir at Eggesford is still there, and still the biggest. It's the only American conifer I know that has reigned supreme since the 1860s at least. I shall add it to Monumental Trees in due course.

I do think the chestnuts in 'Mackershaw Trough' are the same ones you've recorded at Studley Royal, and it's interesting how they have maintained their height over more than a century. Matching current records like this to trees measured a hundred years ago is fascinating, and Alan Mitchell and I have certainly tried to relocated all of Elwes and Henry's records.

Owen


RedRob, at 2014-11-03 16:53:33, said:
Good when you can search discussions for yourself, I posted this and found it again relatively easily. Haven't typed in the address but one of these old sites did have old photographs of GB trees, might be this one.

RedRob, at 2014-11-03 17:00:09, said:
No, that isn't it, I posted a site link somewhere with old photographs of trees including Elms, must be further back than I thought.

Hope that the Register and Owen won't mind, will delete the record below when it has been viewed.

42678

Ulmus glabra

Castle Howard (Yorkshire)

41.00 131 412 1996 O Malton

Yorkshire

England

County Champion: Historic Height

Comments

Felled c.1998 according to John Simmons. Ex-champion for height.

Would have loved to have seen this and to have measured him. Quite recent as well. Not sure where abouts on the estate of Castle Howard this was and if any Elms have survived in the same area?


TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-11-03 18:10:25, said:
No, no big elms left around Castle Howard. Without seeing old photographs I can't visualise where the 41m trees may have been - there's nothing that tall left in the park.

RedRob, at 2014-11-05 16:57:17, said:
Ah ah

http://freepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~wakefield/history/39946-h/39946-h.htm#Page_49

Went back through my emails and found the webpage with the photos (also a photo of the Magdalene Elm albeit fallen) Have put it on here to make it easier for anyone to re-find.

Owen, have you been to Blair Drummond in Perthshire in Scotland, has David and Chic? Reading on this page again, some big Sycamores there once.


RedRob, at 2014-11-05 17:13:20, said:
'There are many hawthorns of greater height in other districts, notably one at Lenchford, in Worcestershire, whereof the dimensions in 1875 were recorded in the Gardeners' Chronicle as 60 feet high and 9 feet in girth'.

Big Hawthorns, taller then anything today if accurate.

The Queen Beech at Ashridge was a beauty.

Interesting webpage, some of the old latin/botanic names are interesting.


RedRob, at 2014-11-05 17:22:42, edited at 2014-11-05 17:23:39, said:
'The finest chestnut I have seen anywhere is in the woodland of Thoresby Park, near Nottingham, being within the bounds of the ancient Sherwood Forest. In 1904 it was 110 feet high, with a straight bole quite clear of branches for 70 feet. Its cubic contents in timber were estimated at 300 feet. Loudon measured this tree in 1837 and found it to be 70 feet high, with a girth of only 11 feet at 1 foot from the ground. Its girth at that height is now over 17 feet. It is impossible to imagine a more perfect specimen of the species than this beautiful tree. It was planted about the year 1730, and is, therefore, now, say, 180 years old'.

40 feet growth in 64 years for Sweet Chestnut, is this likely?

'Perhaps the most striking display of the true English elm to be found anywhere is the magnificent quadruple avenue known as the Long Walk, at Windsor. Many of these are 120 feet high and 15 feet in girth. The avenue leads from the Castle gates to the statue in the park, a distance of two miles and three-quarters. Taller individual elms may be seen elsewhere, as in the grounds of King's College, Cambridge (130 feet), Boreham House, in Essex (132 feet), and Northampton Court, Gloucestershire (150 feet by 20 feet in girth). The last-named tree, by the way, may no longer be seen, for it was blown down in 1895, but there can be no doubt about its dimensions, which were accurately ascertained as it lay on the ground. It was probably the champion of that[54] particular species in England; but it was inferior in bulk to the great elm which stood in the grounds of Magdalen College, Oxford, until it was blown down in April, 1911, pronounced by Mr. Elwes to be "the largest elm I have ever seen and the largest tree of any kind in Great Britain."[10] Mr. Elwes carefully measured the fallen giant, finding it to be 142 feet high, 27 feet in girth, and containing 2787 cubic feet of timber. He and Dr. Henry pronounce it to have belonged to the variety or sub-species classed as the smooth-leaved Huntingdon or Chichester elm (U. vegeta, Lindley), although in this case no suckers had been produced, which the Huntingdon elm usually sends up in profusion'

150 foot Elm at Northampton Court, Gloucestershire, Owen, any tall trees left in this location?


TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-11-05 19:58:33, said:
To answer your last three messages, Rob:

Yes, I visited Blair Drummond in 2009 - a magnificent site but with nothing above 50m. I think I put the biggest Sequoiadendron on MT.

18m should be possible for hawthorn, though I've not managed to measure anything above 15m.

Interesting record of the Chestnut at Thoresby as I've mentally written off 'The Dukeries' as a region where the soils are too poor to grow really big trees. It could even still be there! Whenever you read 'Loudon measured' this is actually short for 'Loudon published a record which had been sent to him' - when he was compiling Arboretum et Fruticetum Britannicum he posted hundreds of questionnaires to estates up and down the country and the Head Gardener of Forester filled these in as best as he was able. So, for this chestnut, 110' by E&H should be fairly accurate, but it will have been more than 70' in the 1830s as a mature broadleaf just wouldn't put on a growth-spurt like that.


TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2014-11-05 20:02:11, said:
'Northampton Court' should read 'Forthampton Court' - I think the text of Elwes and Henry you're looking at was digitalised by a print-recognition programme so beware of mistakes like this. Elms reached these huge heights in places where only Hybrid Black Poplars, Common LImes and London Planes are likely to be able to do so today, so sites that were formally graced by towering trees often nowadays only grow quite low ones.

RedRob, at 2014-11-06 17:35:06, said:
Hello Owen, a few years ago there was a diversion on the A614 and it sent me through Thoresby Park, it is a nice estate and quite evocative because of Robin Hood. This was before I started 'treeing' and I didn't really look for champion trees but if you are planning to visit Belvoir, I would definitely say that this is worth visiting as it is not that far away. The Thoresby Hall Hotel I think is open to the public but alot of the area seems to be private, where the Sequoiadendron avenue is near Perlethorpe, it said 'private drive' and I went no further. Nottinghamshire seems to be under-represented on the Register, that 37 metre Horse Chestnut near Southwell isn't, not in the location stated, I think Richard Goodrick over-estimated. Clumber Park is probably worth re-visiting with your eye rather than mine. I once pulled in at Wollaton Hall several years ago and it had some fine trees.

I thought that growth rate for the Sweet Chestnut seemed abit high, judging by the Mackershaw trees the tree may have at least have kept it's height if it hasn't lost it's top, 110 feet 33.5 metres, it is not far off B&I champion height and could be taller? I have some Nottinghamshire Robin Hood acquaintances, I will ask them again if they know of any hidden locations.



Recherche de cultivars du sequoiadendron
Visible for everyone · permalink · fr
Delbar, at 2014-11-03 17:16:20, said:
Je recherche désespérément le cultivar Hazel Smith et bultinck yellow du sequoiadendron.

Mes recherches sur internet ont été vaines.

Je sais que le site ne permet pas de donner des noms de pépinière.

Cependant j'aimerais savoir si je dois arrêter mes recherches où si Cela est malgré tout

possible ?

Est-il envisageable de faire venir ces arbres des Usa ?

Merci pour votre aide.

J'ai déjà une dizaine de sequoias dans ma propriété dont plusieurs d'une dizaine de mètres.


Frank, at 2014-11-05 18:27:26, said:
Sorry, but my French is extremely rusty. I would recommend to ask for these two cultivars here:

http://www.sierteeltkwekerijkools.nl/en/

If they are unavailable there, Nelis should know where to look else.


Delbar, at 2014-11-06 07:22:22, said:
Merci beaucoup pour cette information.

J'entre en contact avec lui.

Très cordialement.



More...
 

Main page · Top of page · Share/Bookmark

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