I will upload a clearer picture of both cone and shoot but the bottom side of the shoot is very noticeably white (which made me think it wasn't Norway spruce).... will upload a picture of the underside.
Could be any of several - Pinus armandii, P. ayacahuite, P. monticola, P. strobiformis, P. stylesii, P. veitchii, P. wallichiana, or a hybrid (white pines are notorious for hybridising!). Needs a cone for determination. A close macro of a more vigorous young shoot (to see if glabrous or pubescent) would also help.
The hybrid is of course intermediate between the parents. Leaf length / width ratio (A. koreana has shorter, broader needles, A. veitchii longer, slenderer needles), and the degree of white below (A. koreana more vivid white often covering the full width of the underside, A. veitchii less vivid white and usually in two bands with the green midrib showing easily) are the best features to look for.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
Andrew Weber, à 2014-11-22 13:13:13, édité à 2014-11-22 13:27:23, a dit:
Moreover, in Poland many big trees, especially oaks, were set on fire, not only the biggest. I have seen in 2014 a few oaks with girth ranging from 6,5 to 8 metres that also suffered an arson and they usually grew in remote places.. So the largest trees should be preserved rather by fence, because cameras could be stolen indeed.. And it is a matter of local government that trees are conserved or 'unwanted', like here, Chrześcijanin (the Christian) Oak in Poland: street.
All in all, I hope that miracle will happen and Chrobry will survive, but it is horrible that someone wants to destroy peaceful monumental trees..
Wow! This one escaped me on MT. I have been here several times and yes quite remarkable that trees of this size can be as big here as in Scotland or Wales, with only 900mm of rain! This tree may surpass the Douglas in Broadwood, Dunster?
Obviously the deeply weathered sandy brown earth soil type derived from the Lower Greensand has been a factor. A pity Southern England was not covered in Greensand as opposed to horrible chalk. There is something magical about this soil which I am interested in finding out about. Here in Oxon, Nuneham Courtenay also on Greensand grows big conifers with only 600mm of rain.
Big Western Hemlock too at Polecat.
I noticed the Sequoia had probably been hit by lightning above the cottage, presume this is the one Alan measured as 170' in his book? An overestimate perhaps?
Greensand is indeed the best soil in south-east England for tree-growth, and so many good tree sites are concentrated on it despite the tiny proportion of the country which it covers. I think the secret is that the grains are coarse enough to allow easy root-penetration but fine enough to be water-retentive. Soils washed down the from the Old Red Sandstone (Welsh Marches etc) and from ancient Scottish sandstone have just the same qualities. So, presumably, do loess soils in the Netherlands where trees can also grow very tall (without the benefits of much side-shelter from high hills as we have in England). Chalk is also much better than heavy clay, which covers so much of lowland England.
I have no idea how tall the Polecat Copse trees will grow. They are in a superbly sheltered spot and the two tallest have continued to produce long leaders through the 14 years I've known them, though they've lost their leaders once or twice and some others in the same line now have rough, bushy tops (but are still growing). Given the right soil, and shelter from dehydrating winds, Douglas don't seem to be troubled by drought or high summer temperatures. I don't know the local conditions for the 65m tree in the Massif Central of France but I would assume that summers there are hotter and drier than in Surrey.
That said, I suspect drought-stress rather than lightning for the loss of the top of the Giant Sequoia opposite Angle Cottage. Lightning would have been more likely to strike the higher tree-tops of the bank to the west. In 1995 we had a very dry summer near my home in Hastings and many of the taller Giant Sequoias died back a few metres (and have now recovered but rounded off).
Thanks. Yes I think the secret with Lower Greensand is the ability for trees to extract soil water much more easily due to the pores and matrix of the soil, coupled with a moderately acid ph and reasonable fertility. On a clay soil water holding capacity is obviously greater, but trees cannot extract it as well as on say Greensand due to the pores and soil matrix unfavorable for tree root growth and penetration. Subsequent capillary action of soil water through the soil is much better on Greensand. As it is a soft sandstone is must have weathered deeply as well. It also probably has no root depth restriction caused by an iron pan, which is frequent on acid sandy soils.
Ulmus and Quercus robur as an opposite example seems to love surface water gleys on clay vales.
It appears to me that Giant Sequoia much prefers sandy soils and the Bagshot Sand near my locality at Crowthorne and also at the Valley Gardens Near Windsor as you know grow big trees, despite only 600mm of rain, some 300mm less than at Polecat. Also Giant Sequoia and Douglas are adapted to grow on sandy well drained soils in their native habitat so it is no surprise.
The tree at Angle Cottage lost many metres due to crown dieback which I think is most likely lightning. Yes I have also seen Giant Sequoia die back due to drought, but I know that when lightning strikes Sequoias it often rarely leaves a scar on the trunk, possibly due to the insulation properties of the bark, however it sometimes does and I have seen trees blown apart in the most extreme examples. I know that Beech rarely leaves a scar and yet oak is badly affected. A difficult question and needs more research.
I know that the Massif Central is the wettest place in France with up to 2000mm, but one has to remember that with higher temperatures the evapotranspiration and summer soil moisture defict would be greater than at Polecat, so perhaps only the available rainfall/soil water there will be only slightly greater?
Windspeed is much less in Surrey than in Somerset, so perhaps they will grow to 60m+ at Polecat.
Is the Sequoiadendron near the cottage, here called 'King Kong' still likely to be 51 metres which you measured, assessed it as a few years ago or will it have added some height? I remember looking at this tree from angles and it would have been difficult to see the top and bottom to measure it. The Coast Redwood in the photo above is one at the top of the hill near the old big house but there is a taller one I am sure, immediately on the hillside above the 51 metre 'King Kong' Seqy. I took photos on an old mobile phone and have not been able to get the photos off it as don't have Bluetooth on my laptop. They would be 1.5MP photos so may not be that great. Anyway, this Coast Redwood looked pretty tall, slim and surely 40 metres plus. There is/was also a conifer plantation just the west of the 59 metre Douglas Fir grove, if I remember Larch and Spruce, Sitka snd Norway, which looked pretty tall.
Near Angle Cottage at Polecat Copse, the Sequoiadendron that died back around 2005 was the taller but slenderer of a pair. I had measured it at 48m in 2000 but may have underestimated - Alan's 170' c.1990 was presumably a bit too high. The fatter tree beside it (the one in 'Redwood World' has preserved its tip and had grown to 51m by 2011, but I can't guarantee how accurate this was either. I shall return with the laser in due course.
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.
with a slightly larger girth, this Chestnut does not look 34 metres. Do you have any more recent recordings Owen?
RedRob, à 2014-11-21 18:11:40, édité à 2014-11-21 18:13:33, a dit:
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.
Rayn, à 2014-06-20 11:32:02, édité à 2014-06-20 11:34:26, a dit:
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...
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'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!)
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.
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.
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?
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.
RedRob, à 2014-11-17 18:08:21, édité à 2014-11-17 18:09:59, a dit:
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.
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.
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.
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 platane (Platanus × hispanica) '1874'is volgens mijn metingen dunner dan de ander platane (Platanus × hispanica) '1876'. Ik wil graag de juiste maten opvoeren. Kan het zijn dat jij/jullie destijds de metingen hebben verwisseld?
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.
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?
RedRob, à 2014-11-11 18:00:33, édité à 2014-11-11 18:03:38, a dit:
Hello Moudie, welcome to the forum (haven't noticed your name previously) Hope that you don't mind my asking, are you in Scotland or living in Scotland?
A previous discussion about this it was thought that it was another Douglas Fir, it is the tree clothed to the ground just to left of centre. There is a large grove of c50 metre Sitka Spruce about 200 metres to the left of this photo. I was so busy looking at the emergent tree two to the right of this tree which the laser measured as c55 metres, I should have noted what this tree was? At first with the dense narrow habit thought that it might be a Picea Abies that I had missed, if so it would be 49/50 metres as the tree 4 tips to it's right, Douglas Fir was 49.8 metres. If you click in the photo and then when the little magnifying glass comes up click again you can enlarge the photo.
Thank you for your welcome, and yes to both of your questions about Scotland. I have used the magnifying facility, but it produces a very pixelated image for me that doesn't aid diagnosis. I was thinking that it might be Serbian spruce (Picea omorika), but the apical growth rate I wouldn't have expected to keep pace with Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis) or Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii). Hence my request for some detail, if poss.
Are you involved with forestry or arboriculture? Are you in the Highlands or low lands? Whatever, you must live in striking distance of some magnificent trees of all descriptions.
I have added what photos I have of this tree at Dalby, I was so busy with the Douglas that I didn't go up to it. It was only when I later looked at the photos that it stuck out with it's very narrow habit with foliage to the base and quite heavy crop of cones whilst the surrounding Douglas appear to have none or very few. I should also have noted what the small blue conifer was, the track next to these trees is/was one of the best viewing areas for the old Lombard RAC Rally when it was held here years ago now.
Yes to both and Southern Highland boundary fault! ;¬) Aye, there are plenty to cuddle.
Thank you for posting the additional images of the trees in the vicinity of your first image. I can see why you are remarking upon the fully clothed tree and the shorter vigorous growing one with the blue green foliage. I suspect shelter, available nutrients and moisture along with the adjacency of the large trees are all contributing to it's form. It may even be the prodgeny of one of those older trees.
If I am fortunate to be in the vicinity of these trees I shall try to give them a look.
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.
Hello Stephen, looking forward to seeing photos of all your trees eventually. Are there any really tall Horse Chestnuts in your area, perhaps challenging Arundel's 39 metre tree?
I must ask about one lot of trees, the suspense is killing me (laughs) Did you manage to get to the Elan Valley Douglas Firs, how tall? I have done photo measurements on Google Maps using the telephone box as a reference (being a complete nerd and even googling various telephone boxes to ascertain dimensions, heights), c40 metres is what I got but there is obvious distortion and fore-shortening on Google Maps cameras, for example the Waterloo Grove looks nothing from the road.
The tree has a very oval, almost elliptical trunk shape, but has a clear stem of 3m before dividing into 3 massive limbs. The quoted girth measurement @0.5m was the 'narrowest point' of the trunk and measuring any higher up the trunk, one would encounter buttressing and reaction wood. This would vastly inflate any girth measurement.
No need to measure anymore phone boxes! The Douglas in question I estimate was about 50m, nice trees of 90 years old, but nothing exceptional.
Some Horse Chestnuts could be 33-35m, in this chalk river valley where conditions appear optimum. However the leaf miner and bleeding canker is sadly having an effect on their health and future growth. Has the leaf miner reached you up in Yorkshire yet?
Having trouble with uploading pictures to my PC off my phone but hopefully You will see them soon!
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.
I hadn't looked but hadn't realised that you had added this one Owen, I tried to take a distance photo of it but not very successfully as it is rather hemmed in.
Just added my photo for this one, not the small tree nearest the camera but the bi tree behind. Quite difficult to ascertain where or which was the tallest shoot but recorded just below 34 metres with the laser for what I could hit. The ground surrounding it seems to be well paddled and bare so not sure how this will affect the tree in the long run.
Hello Stephen, the Douglas at Elan certainly worth recording as current tallest recordest trees in mid/central Wales, Owen's 50 metre Grand Fir at Cefn Park near Cardiff being the tallest in South Wales.
Hello Stephen, the Douglas at Elan certainly worth recording as current tallest recordest trees in mid/central Wales, Owen's 50 metre Grand Fir at Cefn Park near Cardiff being the tallest in South Wales.
Hello Stephen, the Douglas at Elan certainly worth recording as current tallest recordest trees in mid/central Wales, Owen's 50 metre Grand Fir at Cefn Park near Cardiff being the tallest in South Wales.
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'. ;¬)
RedRob, à 2014-11-11 18:32:28, édité à 2014-11-11 18:34:21, a dit:
The site webpage link on the Elm conversation mentioned that Deodars could be 250 feet in their native habitat, surely there be some taller specimans than this somewhere in Europe, Germany, France (Sisley?) Would love to see some 50 metre specimans in Europe, likely?
I have just forgotten to update this tree, I measured it again in September (2014) and I could visibly see that the top was flatter, certainly when compared to my photos from 2013. I am pretty certain that it has lost it's top most branch, must have been in the severe winds of last winter as I couldn't get this height for it. Will look in my notes and update with new height which I just cannot recall exactly offhand.
I doubt if there are Deodars over 40 m in Europe, there seem to be no very old plantations of them.
In 1981 I have been in one of the locations with tall Deodar Cedars in the Indian Himalayas, in Manali. Probably those were taller than 40 m, but from my remembrance (I did not have any height measurement instrument at that time) I doubt if they were a lot above 50 m. Alas till now nobody seems to have measured them with reliable methods. Kouta and I once mailed that it would be nice to go there and to other locations in the Himalayas, but till now we did not make real plans.
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.
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.
Also in 'The Trees of Great Britain and Ireland' you'll find mention of a Wych Elm near Field in Staffordshire which was felled in 1636 and carefully measured as 120' tall and 16' thick at the kerf. I think we can safely say that elms were our biggest native trees.
Those elms must have been great trees! I remember coming the first time in England and Wales in 1970 when I was 15, seeing everywere dead elms in the countryside. This has been a great loss for the British landscape.
Stephen and Owen: the Magdalen College Elm contained 2787 cubic feet of timber. You calculate this as 98 cubic metre. When a foot is 30.48 cm / 0.3048 metre than a cubic foot is 0,0283168466 cubic metre. Then 2787 cubic feet is 78,92 cubic metre. It could be that only good timber was calculated, not the smaller branches and the bark. The tree in total had perhaps more volume.
As you know Robert van Pelt calculated the large Sessile Oak of Croft Castle as having a total volume of 3800 cubic feet / 107.6 cubic metre and Majesty the Fredville Oak as 3300 cubic feet / 93.45 cubic metre, but these will both be the total volume of the tree including bark, all branches and (especially for Majesty) including the hollow trunk. So this is not existing volume of timber but the volume of the tree as a whole.
Probably measured in this way the Magdalen College Elm also would have had a volume of over 3000 or more cubic feet.
Would be nice to have a guy like Robert van Pelt to estimate volumes of some more British and European trees.
Yes you are right, I entered in the conversion factor wrongly.
It could be that the old method of measurement was used, the Hoppus foot. There is 0.03605m3 to the Hoppus foot. This is still used in the UK for measuring hardwoods, sadly and not metric.
Yes a tragedy, the loss of Ulmus procera. I remember being in my pram at 2 years, sadly watching big elms being felled in 1975 in my village and ever since been addicted to trees!
Another tree not native to the UK and yet somehow some people accept these trees in the landscape and not other species such as conifers which I find rather stupid!
There are some old pictures of elms being felled which surely were as big as the biggest plane trees of today.
In September I visited the Croft Castle Sessile Oak. I remember standing beneath this tree in 1984.
I did an extensive study into the trees health/age. Sadly the National Trust has expanded the car park since 1984 allowing car parking in close proximity to the tree's root zone, which puts the tree's health at risk due to soil compaction. I have spent most of my career trying to educate people about this kind of thing, but sadly some people are ignorant.
The tree is generally in good health at present but it has extensive internal decay in the heartwood and is structurally compromised, thus at some future date perhaps in 50 years time it may fall. Nearly all oaks of this age (300 years) I have seen, have decay and have witnessed them snapping off at the base. Perhaps the only way to prevent this would be to reduce the upper crown, but this would be sad and perhaps letting nature take its course would be best, as surely we have to accept the tree has done wonderfully.
Presume B.V. Pelt just measured the trunk and main branches. If upper crown included it could perhaps amass more than 120m3? This would amount to 128 tonnes as there are 0.94m3 to the metric tonne for Oak which is fresh and green. But of course impossible to measure weight accurately if the tree has decay.
I will upload pictures and report for MT in due course.
Has anyone in Europe tried to estimate volume using Laser Technology's Criterion RD 1000 dendrometer? Perhaps some of the UK's conifers could be measured to estimate volume this way. Although climbing and measuring diameter at certain heights would be more accurate?
2 years old, that takes some beating Stephen! 2 years old in 1975, I was curious as to how old you were and this as given it away. Not my long list twin then. Don't think that I can remember as far back as that, remember how my interested first sparked, all the kids in my Primary school class were given an Oak sapling to look after. It was my second year in Primary so 1975 coincidently again. I cannot remember what happened to my little Oak? Hope that it was planted somewhere and is growing strong now. My interest was further engaged when my late Dad and myself began searching for a grove of very tall trees that he had seen but which he could not remember the location of. We drove right to within a few hundred metres of them from both directions but couldn't find them and turned back. Took us many outings and we finally dropped down over the edge of the ravine and found the redwoods at Hebden Wood. The trees were very, very tall to a little kid.
I seem to remember discussing this with someone before and realising that Elwes and Henry were using Hoppus feet whenever they wrote 'feet of timber'. I believe that Bob van Pelt will have recorded even the minor branches of the Croft Castle oak with some precision, as that is what he does when surveying the giant American trees. But our big, young conifers are easier to measure as they only have light branches so far.
If Elm disease had not happened perhaps my interest in trees would have never occurred! That day in December 1975 obviously had left an imprint on my brain! One of my earliest memories was 100ft elms being felled across the main road into the pub car park whole, falling with an almighty bang (no health and safety then) There were 200 of them lining the road! The whole of the Vale of Oxford was full of them and a guy who I worked for said he spent years constantly felling dead Elms.
There was an interest in genetic engineering Ulmus procera inserting a gene to make it resistant, but there are 'anti's' that do not like this, so project halted! Trouble is there are about 2 clones of Ulmus procera so when the disease struck there was no resistance. Whereas Ulmus hollandica 'vegeta' (Huntingdon Elm) does have some resistance.
The bookmark for the online book shows some interesting trees of the past, nice beech etc.
The Huntingdon Elm at Silk wood Westonburt has now sadly died.
Measuring the upper crown must be a very complicated task for an oak. Has the Tree Register considered measuring girths at different heights to determine volume for some of the big conifers like the Grand Fir at Strone or Murthly etc. when doing tape drops?
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.
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.
I think I will frame the above picture of that beautiful Elm and hang it on my wall! I am going to invent a time machine and return to 1960 with a good camera and 50 Kodak slide films!
Yes there are some survivors, very rare in The Chilterns. There was a Ulmus glabra of 26m x 1.3m which survived at least 3 phases of the dreaded DED. and finally died in 1993, I reported this to Alan Mitchell. Now there is the largest Ulmus glabra probably in the Chilterns about 25m tall with two trunks 60cm diameter still with no disease and strangely in the same valley an Ulmus procera 15m tall x 40cm which has somehow survived 2 bouts of disease and recovered! I do not know why? Just very lucky isolated trees?
Also a half hectare wood full of elms about 25m x 60cm unable to determine the species, but clearly very resistant to disease, Possibly a Ulmus carpinifolia clone or perhaps a rare Plot elm. There are just so many types.
Interesting about Elms in Holland I know they had an extensive breeding program. I am sure that Elm disease could be stopped by advances in breeding/genetics but there is no political will or money to do the research?
So the historic Elm at Oxford could have amounted to 100m3! The hybrid arose in Hinchinbrook Park in Huntingdon in 1760, so after 151 years the tree accumulated 100m3, which I find hard to believe. I know the rich alluvial floodplain soil around Oxford is fertile, but growth rate would surely be comparable with Abies grandis, Sequoia, Sequoiadendron! Perhaps the tree had everything it needed, as well as hybrid vigour. What do you think?
Perhaps volume measurement is another project for European trees although technically challenging. Certainly big conifers with little taper would be the easiest and would be interesting to see which ones were really the biggest, as we know measuring just height and diameter is possibly a inferior method of identifying the biggest.
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.
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?
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.
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.
Problem is, I don't think either method is giving a reliable estimate. The 11 m pole is some distance (about 25 m) beyond the tree, and down slope, so looks a lot less high by comparison. Also the bend in the access road where one can measure its photo-width is beyond the tree too, which inflates the comparative height of the tree. Measuring on google earth, the photo was taken from the adjacent main road 30 metres from the tree, with the bend in the access road 50 metres away, 20 m beyond the tree. And finally, as is usual with broad-crowned trees, the highest visible shoot is not the real top but a branch closer to the observer and so appears higher. It will need a laser device to get a real measurement. But my prediction would be in the 15-18 metres range, perhaps 20 m at most.
Yep, should have had a look on the Google map and have and Conifers is right, the tower is some distance beyond the tree from the position from where the photo is taken. Bringing it forward, the height is probably around 20 metres. Needs lasering to confirm if anyone is near this area?
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.
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.
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!
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.
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?'
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.
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.
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.
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!
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?
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.
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: orme lisse (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?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
here is my English translation:
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: <orme lisse (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.
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.
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.
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.
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, à 2014-11-05 18:21:31, édité à 2014-11-06 17:45:40, a dit:
Yep, not dreaming, two along the River Foss across from 20 Huntingdon Road, difficult to assess the height, only ducks for real context.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
'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, à 2014-11-05 17:22:42, édité à 2014-11-05 17:23:39, a dit:
'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 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." 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?
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.
'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.
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.
I don't suppose that anyone esle caught this but Tony Robinson visited this location in his TV series 'Walking through History: Victoria and Albert's Highland Fling' aired last Saturday, 1st November Channel 4 8pm. He walked from Dunkeld up to Balmoral and ended up at Loch Muick. Some very tall trees were visible near Blair Atholl House, Diana's Grove? I also noticed a very tall grove of conifers along the river at Kilikrankie Bridge. Any idea what these are Owen and how tall?
Lucky Tony. I've walked some of that, at least, myself. Diana's Grove itself isn't really visible from the main thoroughfares up the valley, though the landscape there is dotted with giant conifers. Steven (Verge) sent the Tree Register a record of a 56m Douglas at Killiecrankie about ten years ago so it could well be 60m by now. I didn't spot it when I walked up the gorge in 2007 but may have been on the wrong bank. (Tony's walk would also have passed the 62m Grand Fir at Kinnaird below Pitlochry which is also very visible from the railway, though not measured before 2007.)
Goede morgen , heb tijdens mijn Modder Bike ( MB ) tochten een schietwilg opgemeten en ja 5.50 m omtrek hoogte ongeveer 15 m op het grondgebied Tienen op 200m van de autobaan .Een tweede in Waals Brabant in de gemeente Cocrou fusiegemeente Grez-Doiceau en heb dus op 1.5m hoogte een omtrek van 5.55m gemeten . Beide bomen zijn meerstammige bomen .De derde schietwilg staat op grondgebied Vertrijk in een onopvallend natuurgebied en meet 4.40 m en ik schat ongeveer 17 m hoogte . Zal weldra , dank zei een gps de juiste coördinaten kunnen doorgeven . Heb ook enkele uitzonderlijke populieren op het oog , u hoort nog van mij . Depré Yves 0499 10 65 56
This is a superb location, why aren't the Forestry Commission using Coast Redwood if they are bombproof and can grow like this? I have also read that Coasties can tolerate very waterlogged soils, is this correct generally? Sequoia would have done much better in my local Redwood location, Hebden Wood, as the valley is waterlogged in the middle where the Sequoiadendrons are growing but some don't look too well, defoliating.
Yes, Sequoia is an excellent timber tree, but not one with much of a market. (Most softwood timber produced in Britain just goes for pulp, and Sequoia can't compete with Sitka, at present at least, in cold upland sites.) Taymouth Castle, deep in the Highlands, is actually right near the limit at which Sequoia can withstand the winter cold when young, though clearly ideal for it as it matures. Has anyone ever thought of coppicing Sequoia to produce high-quality bark mulch?
Yes It is surprising how well Sequoia grows in the Highlands. The Taymouth trees must have survived a frost of -20 in its life there? Yes frost damage to young trees of less than 5 years can be a problem, but this is often related to the seed provenance. I have grown many redwoods and planted them at 3 years without any problems here in frosty Oxon. The hardiest provenances are from the northern part of the range in Del Norte County.
Sequoia requires a mean minimum January temperature of more than 2 Celsius, which surely is not achieved in inland Highland Scotland. It maybe that these trees are especially hardy?
This tree has always had great potential but industry requires many thousands of m3 to create a market, (much to my disgust with no diversity.)
Redwood will only grow well at low sheltered elevations with fertile brown earths, there is now an interest in this species caused by the present diseases affecting Larch etc.
Growth is best achievable in the west and south west and climate change will make it more productive there but not in lowland S. England, as climate change predictions indicate drier warmer summers which would stress the trees.
The timber can be valuable, but as in California with second growth timber, it can be of low density, therefore stand management can reduce this.
Yes bark surely would be useful byproduct and trees regenerate without being planted through coppicing!
Only low grade small logs of Sitka go for pulp/chipwood. Larger diameter material is sent for sawmilling where it is stress graded by machine to be used for construction timber. The value of timber is soaring at present so profitable.
"Sequoia requires a mean minimum January temperature of more than 2 Celsius, which surely is not achieved in inland Highland Scotland. It maybe that these trees are especially hardy?"
Means don't matter; what does is extremes. I'd suspect that central Scotland has warmer exteme minima compared to its mean because of its proximity to the sea, and also, perhaps even more important, it doesn't have the really damaging effects of cold dry air that kills Sequoia in more continental climates. Severe cold in Scotland is still accompanied by high relative humidity, and that reduces desiccation damage.
Coast Redwood must be pretty tough as this tree for example grows in a location only a few miles from one of the coldest spots in Northern England, Topcliffe, -18c recorded in Dec 2010. This tree suffered little damage, very little browning as I have visited it every year for years. This location will also be pretty dry relative although the tree may benefit from the lake, having roots intruding that way, in summer dry periods.
Hello Owen, I see what you mean about bark mulch because of Redwood having a fairly thick bark, at least on older trees. Would you mean using the wood, heartwood, also as a bark, munching it up? It is a shame, doesn't get diseases, high growth rate, wood that doesn't rot, regenerates so no need to replant, it does seem like the perfect forestry tree in maybe highland valleys. Just for interest, would sucker shoots from felled stumps be as vulnerable to cold and frost as young seed grown trees. The sucker growth is amazingly vigorous, a felled tree in the Valley Gardens in Harrogate has thrown up vigorous shoots which survived the very cold winters of a few years ago.
I would say with a high degree of confidence that the trees would be exposed to -8 every year and at least -10 to -15 every 10 years here. It is in a valley next to water and therefore likely in a frost hollow. A local temperature record would perhaps not represent the meteorological conditions here in the stand as min temperature would vary considerably locally.
I remember visiting these trees back in 2002 and to give an idea how cold central Highland Scotland gets, there was not a single Eucalypt anywhere! which perhaps gives an idea how cold it gets on rare occasions i.e. -20.
On the Continent freezing winds with low humidity and frozen soil conditions can badly dessicate the trees, basically suffering from drought as the trees cannot extract water from the soil when it is frozen, hence they turn brown.
Only the Cairngorm area of Scotland the (coldest region in the UK) comes anywhere near the conditions on the continent and even then it is not as cold in Scotland.
Nice trees, but they have a very high percentage of bark which inflates their girth somewhat and a rather brashy coarse crown, but that is with my forestry hat on tight!
Hello Stephen, is this the Aber Hirnant house valley that you were referring to on the other thread? I wasn't sure if there was public access up the road and didn't go up it. On assessment from various positions the Douglas Firs looked very similar in size.
I think you may have missed the biggest here? It is a public dead end road. Trees are bigger than lower down the valley at the picnic site! Possibly 53-55m? Next time!
RedRob, à 2014-11-03 17:11:42, édité à 2014-11-03 17:12:11, a dit:
In a way, this probably illustrates why accurate locative descriptions should be provided for trees as re-finding the same trees is difficult without. I did see the trees up the valley and viewed them from the opposite hillside and they looked pretty even with the trees that I did measure near the house, had to estimate where the base was and may have been 55 metres. I don't think any here are challenging the Betws Douglas.
Yes they would not challenge the trees at the Waterloo Grove, but they are much larger by volume some I reckon 1.6-1.8m in diameter and 50-55m tall. Some of the largest and oldest Douglas in North Wales.
Check out my discussion about the Huntingdon Elm at Oxford, a real beauty long ago. UK largest broadleaf tree of the past. Never seen a photograph before!
Yes they would not challenge the trees at the Waterloo Grove, but they are much larger by volume some I reckon 1.6-1.8m in diameter and 50-55m tall. Some of the largest and oldest Douglas in North Wales.
Check out my discussion about the Huntingdon Elm at Oxford, a real beauty long ago. UK largest broadleaf tree of the past. Never seen a photograph before!
Thanks for these records! I uploaded a couple of trees from the Gosford Castle pinetum last year when I was adding the UK and Ireland record-holders to Monumental Trees, but, as you've probably gathered, I don't know this site personally. (The records we have at the Tree Register include Irish National Grid grid-references but I don't have the means to convert them into latitude/longitude.) So any corrections or updates will be most welcome!
Aubrey Fennell, who recorde the trees at Gosford in 2000 and in 2010, is a member of this site, but hasn't had time to add his own records in person. But he may pick up this message.
There are some other champions as well, some Irish ones anyway. I know the area well as I live just inside the main gates. I have added a Bhutan Pine which I think might be an Irish champion, there is also a Noble Fir and an Italian Cypress.
Hello Owen, I made contact with the head gardener at Belvoir a couple of months ago as thought that I may be heading down that way workwise and could call in but it didn't happen so didn't make it. If you are planning a visit, I will forward the email on to you as the visiting hours are quite tight.
Thanks Tim. I'll consider correcting all the errors of this kind which I can find for the UK, when I have more time! You may remember that 'City of London' and 'Greater London' appear as two counties, and that some sites such as Kew Gardens are duplicated under both 'counties' - this could do with rationalising.
Stephen, I hope that you will decide to register your trees, I don't think that I am the only one who would love to see some photographs? Those Red Cedars at Coed Y Brenin, 47 metres B&I champ so they must be some trees. If you don't want to disclose location, stick them in a building or in the sea or wherever, just hope that you will share at least a few photos with your measured heights.
Yes I will post them but at the moment I'm trying unsuccessfully to upload them to my PC,I was given a camera phone and the software for the computer and phone is not working. I could scan some prints but this will take time. The phone pics will be of rather low resolution though.
The Red Cedars at Coed y Brenin are about 40-42m but only planted in 1931. They could make 55m in another 30 years! I measured them back in 2003 at 34-36m, so growing well but were slightly defoliated by the leaf fungal disease Keithia, caused by the wet summer of 2012. There are several hectares of these trees planted in small stands throughout the forest, a very underrated tree which should be planted more. Trouble is industry wants 500 000m3 before they are interested in it!
I visited the Croft Castle Oak, near Kington. The most massive oak in UK. I will write a report on this as soon as I can upload the pics.
Just looking for the Lydney Beech I have realised that I have made a mistake with this tree, must have hit the wrong digit when registering. 41 metres was the reading with the laser, David Alderman had recorded 40 metres in 2005 with one of his readings, clinometer suggested 43 metres.
RedRob, à 2014-10-24 16:30:17, édité à 2014-10-26 17:10:39, a dit:
Only two Common Laburnums registered! I wish I had realised this as have seen quite a few good sized Laburnums, probably around 10 metres, but didn't record them as have been meaning to visit Wakefield Castle to measure and confirm the B&I champion height there, 12 metres if I remember correctly? They are lovely trees when in flower. Will have to now try and remember where I have noticed some of the Laburnums.
Hi Rob - you'd need to check identities carefully. 'Common' Laburnum is actually far from common in cultivation now, and rarely exceeds 6 metres or so tall. Larger ones are almost all Alpine Laburnum L. alpinum, or (most frequently of all now) the hybrid between the two, Voss's Laburnum L. × watereri 'Vossii'. Distinguishing them is fairly tricky; I suspect the ones in these photos here are Voss's, but can't confirm it without close-up pics.
Intriguing that you stumbled upon this tree. Don't know how you see it, but in the 60's and 70's the babyboomers in Holland, judged this species as a thoroughly "burgerlijk" plant/tree. A lot of people (probably outside the world of agriculturalists, naturalist and dendrologists) defied this trees.
I used to be one of them. By now, I am a bit independent and judge everything without prejudice. And true, Laburnums can be very nice. That's what a lot of people in Asia think.
Rob, you probably know the very big thriving Laburnum in the Valley Gardens in Harrogate (near the north edge of the main park). This is L. alpinum. (There is one much bigger but collapsing one in Ireland, which I've not seen.) Generally L. alpinum grows better the further north you go and I've recorded 14m trees in Scotland. There should be a 15m one somewhere. (12m tree in the park at Wakefield was anagyroides and exceptional in its way, though it's moot whether we should really award champions for height for trees that grow no taller than this.)
Some great photos on this page, the Corsican Pine shelterbelt is visible in the top left photo. The weeping Sequoiadendron, I walked right past it but it didn't strike me as being any different. Should have measured it with the laser but didn't.
der Baum lebt noch, wie du richtig erkannt hast. Die Wappeneiche befindet sich zwar in einen sehr schlechten Zustand, der eine Ast ist aber noch grün. Bei meinem letzten Besuch 2008 war da noch mehr grün. Später hatte ich dann im Internet gelesen, dass die Eiche inzwischen abgestorben sei. Und wie ich den Baum dann in MT eingetragen habe, habe ich ihn entsprechend markiert. Ich war deswegen vor ein paar Woche auch überrascht, wie ich den grünen Ast gesehen habe. Habe es aber versäumt, hier entsprechend abzuändern, was ich jetzt nachgeholt habe. Also Danke für den Hinweis.
Mir fehlt leider halt immer etwas die Zeit, um da noch Beiträge dazu zu schreiben. Ich nehme mir das immer wieder vor, aber leider wird es dann nichts. Wie jetzt aktuell habe ich wohl noch so um die 50 Bäume, die ich in MT eintragen möchte, die ich die letzten Wochen aufgesucht habe. Und das eintragen und bebildern hat bei mir zuerst Priorität. Aber bis ich die 50 Bäume eingetragen habe, sind schon wieder neue dazugekommen. Es ist einfach ein Teufelskreis ;-)
Yes, it is the same tree. Easiest solution here would be to delete Wim's photo from '13346', upload it for '15304' and then delete the tree '13346'. I could do this, but then I think the photo would appear with a hyperlink to me instead?
I wonder if these are hybrids (Larix x marschlinsii) again? They would be much the tallest so far. It would depend whether they are Victorian plantings from the original landscaping of the reservoir, like the tallest Douglas Firs and, presumably, the 40m larch which is among them, or Forestry Commission plantings from 1920 onwards. I wouldn't like to say from their outlines against the sky here. The tall Grand Firs in this view are post-1920, I would guess? Did you take more pictures of the larches?
Photo 1 at top, a good view of the plantation, probably eventually likely to be felled?
I have just had a look on Google Maps and you can get a pretty good view up to them from the road. This also illustrates the difficulty of measuring the interior trees, dense vegetation. I measured one of the clear view trees at the bottom of the plantation roadside.
Hello again Owen, I have just added another photo for this tree. I toook them as just Larix Decidua and didn't take any close up photos. The tree I measured is on the left of the photo with the car in the lay-by, you can see the tip. You can look on Google Maps from the same position (where the car is) and the trunk is clear but the Google Maps camera blurs the tips as it is a steep view straight up. They look fairly young trees, comparative, not Victorian although I am far from being an expert I discover seemingly more very day.
Did you have a look at the trees below the dam at Vrnwy Stephen? On my visit I wasn't alone so just didn't get down to see these but pointed the laser at them from the dam. Probably towards the limit of the laser's range but recorded a consistant c40 metres for the Noble Fir (?) on the right of the photo. Could not see the bases of the Douglas Firs but look as though they may be mid 50 metres possibly to the late. The red trees, Copper Beeches, must be very close to the 34.2 metre record, couldn't see any bases but 34 metres came back from an estimation, looking down on them so will have hit foliage higher then the base.
Drat, I went so far down the west shore of Vyrnwy and then double backed over the dam, stopped at the ex 64 metre Douglas grove and then went over the top and down in to Aber Hirnant and so did miss the 55 metre Douglas you mention. The drive over the top to Aber Hirnant is superb for anyone reading and visiting this area. The day I drove over, I was in amongst a convoy of TVR cars which must have been having a club run out or something, what a drive for them.
Visit them next time! Yes nice Noble Fir. It is considered only a minor species and has not really been trialled properly in plantations. Big trees are all in collections but best place for big Nobles are at Benmore and Blair Atholl. If they don't cone up at the top (causes breakage but grow new leaders) they could reach 60m+ as they are exposure resistant.
Drive up the other way from Vrnwy up to 'Hell Fire' pass at over 530m a real gem of a ride!
Another beauty Abies concolor 'Lowiana' massive trees in Scotland but only in collections again 60m one day.
Off to Windsor Great Park today to look at a massive Sessile oak one of S. England's finest. Will report back.
Hello Conifers, thanks for placing this one on the map, I have just tweeked him to the correct location.
I wish that I had visited this group of trees, I wouldn't have known how to get down to them but on Google Maps the road down is clear although there is no sign posting at the entrance. I could have driven right down in the car and walked around these in not too much time.
Interesting what you say as it seems that Noble have been tried in plantations. I spotted a large swathe of blue on Google Maps, went to check and was frankly devastated as much as the trees when I found this. The whole plantation of Abies Procera was in the process of being or had just been felled. The tallest examples of this species in Yorkshire were certainly here, probably some 40 metres, 34 metres is the tallest remaining (County champion) that I measured (above the lady and horse) I was taken at what nice spire shapes they had retained as every single speciman that I have looked at either has a broken top or a squat, flat headed top. This plantation had retained spires probably because they were growing in a dense plantation.
Hello Stephen, I drobe over the 'Hell Fire' pass a few years ago (2011) but drove along the north east shore. I have just had a look on Google Maps and think that I can see your 55 metre Douglas Firs at the north west point of the lake, just over the bridge from the turn to go over the pass mentioned above. They are not visible from where I turned.
So sad about the Noble Fir. Commercially the timber is not that valuable, could have left them alone. Lets hope that this 'natives only' virus does not spread like Ebola! Not another new planting of scrub please!
Nobles can break at the top due to the weight of cones in autumn gales, but very resistant to exposure to wind generally.
die Ulme wurde schon mehrmals wissenschaftlich untersucht. Angeblich soll es die einzige Bergulme Europas sein, die resistent gegen den Ulmensplintkäfer ist. Es wurden schon Klone davon gezogen, die ebenfalls resitent sind. Hier mal ein paar Artikel über die Ulme:
Off to Wales next week to see your trees near Waterloo Bridge plus some new ones. Will try to take a look at the Elan Valley Douglas on the way, where exactly are they?
Have you contacted the F.C. (now Natural Resources Wales) about these trees as I think they need a guarantee of protection. Especially it seems very likely they are the tallest Douglas Fir in the Northern Hemisphere outside the Pacific Coast of North America. I am sure they would be very interested. Although some ways better to keep the public quiet about them as having thousands of people trampling around them can be detrimental to their health due to root/ soil compaction, as the F.C often makes a trail to the trees. But letting the forest manager know is I think a good idea. What do you think?
Owen reported the Waterloo Grove trees to the Forestry Commission last year if I remember correctly. You are right about people tramping around them would cause damage although that said the land in front of them is full of bracken, brambles and hidden gullies. Have a good time, look forward to hearing about your experiences. Take some photos and report your trees whatever or wherever they are.
Got back on Sat. 12 days in North Wales. 1326 miles driven! Loads to talk about some good some bad with discoveries expect posts and much talk in the coming weeks. Waterloo Grove is amazing!
RedRob, à 2014-10-23 15:46:25, édité à 2014-10-23 16:03:55, a dit:
Hello Stephen, have you been to North New South Wales, 1,300 miles is some going! Looking forward to hearing about what you found and hopefully some trees registered with photographs?
How long did you spend at the Waterloo Grove, it is the sort of place that you don't want to leave in a way as the trees tower. Did you measure it yourself? Don't be afraid of submitting readings, your readings for the Aber Hirnant trees were practically identical with what the Forestry Pro recorded when I pointed it. I think anyone or everyone will accept your measurements.
1326 miles is including the journey there and back, but drove about 850 miles around Snowdonia! Very easy to do as its such a big area and driving 100 miles a day from my B+B was very easy and with no potholes!
Spent several mornings at Waterloo Grove. Crashing about the undergrowth! One thing which is apparent is that you don't get any sense of scale of the trees. Your 36m Scots Pine looks very small in comparison. I did not measure any, crashing about the brambles and ferns could have taken days with a tape for a baseline.
It looks as though they have been thinned about 15 years ago judging by the stumps, which they have responded to. The quality of the trees is superb and you may have noticed a massive cone crop at the top. This was a once a decade opportunity to collect seed which I did in abundance! There must have been a drought year in 2013 as trees often produce a heavy seed crop during times of stress. This has taken a lot of energy for growth out of the trees and put it into seed production. Consequently the leaders have been much shorter this year also possibly due to a dry early summer.
The Douglas seed now collected from Washington is absolutely crap with coarse poorly formed trees. The Waterloo Grove is most likely to have originated from the Washington Coast or Cascade foothills according to my FC seed import records, possibly from near Vancouver as well. The high quality is due to the loggers felling the best trees with good genes and subsequently collecting the seed for export to the UK as a byproduct. Sorry my forestry hat is on now!
I would say average height of the stand is over 55m with many dominants at or over 60m. The growth rate is as good or better than anywhere in their native range. Very sheltered could reach 75m! If left alone!
Saw the trees at Miner's bridge and across the road at Artists Wood. Even better quality here with perfect cylindrical stems with nice thin bark (some of the best I have ever seen.) These were planted in 1927. I am convinced that you may have missed the tallest at the bottom of the slope where I am sure there are at least 6 trees at or approaching 60m. Also a Grand fir 60m? They are at the bottom of the slope and I think Owen got 60m for one in his book?
Thats the good news now the bad:-
I'm afraid Dothistroma or otherwise known as red band needle blight is attacking Douglas now and the trees at Miners Bridge are suffering with 30-40% needle loss caused by the fungus prematurely removing the older needles.
I will write a report on this for MT as this I'm afraid will have an impact on these trees in Europe, something which I find very depressing!
Hello Stephen, keep putting your forestry hat on as very interesting for a lay man like myself.
I just don't know how I missed the biggest trees here as I wandered round and round up and down the trails above the Miners Bridge and drove right along the road at the top and stopped and measured numerous trees?
I crossed the Miners Bridge and turned immediately left along the east bank of the Afon Lugwy and followed the track north for more than 300 metres, quote:
'Douglas Fir 60 metres 297 cm 300 metres north of Miners Bridge, at bottom of bank of 1921 trees'
I definitely went further along than 300 metres, the views that I could get the to the tips the trees were not 60 metres with the Forestry Pro but early 50 metres? They are difficult to measure I accept and I was hoping to beat the previous day 65 metres at the Waterloo Grove but I was disappointed as none came near. I probably could live with a speciman or two or perhaps late 50 metres but I don't think that they are any taller. I did see several broken stumps (photo in link) which I wondered if could be Owen's tree as it was about 300m north of the Miners Bridge just up from the bottom of the stand. My lay man's eye is abit different to your professional eye, the Afon Lugwy trees did/do not look as luxuriant as the Waterloo Grove (see clean 53 metre in link above), the crowns were narrower which I thought may be because the location is more exposed to the west and north west winds howling down the valley.
I agree about the Artists Wood trees, finer specimans than the Lugwy trees, for me anyway.
I didn't particularly notice the heavy cone crop but interesting to know why this occurs. Agree about the ferns and brambles around the big trees at Waterloo, there are also hidden gullies which you cannot see. I ended up in one up to my chest last year when attempting to get to the base of the 65 metre tree to girth, the gully was completely hidden, the ground looked no different to that which I had traversed. At least this will add a degree of protection for these trees. I did notice when measuring the 67 metre tree that the crown looked sparser then the 65 and 64 metre tree just in front of it which are still luxuriant. The leading shoot was also short, funny that you should make that point as this is something that I definitely did notice as it was more stumpy then the neighbouring trees and abit easier to get a hit on. I muts update the other tree, readings of 65.6-65.8 metres for him this year and still a good leading shoot. You are right about the Scots Pines, look like comparative dwarfs, as said measured numerous trees now at Waterloo and every one is 60 metres, one being early 50 metres to the part that I could hit but 60 metres I estimate to the top.
The 53m tree you measured at the Western end of the grove is at the opposite end where the tall trees I saw. The trees I viewed were definitely taller than 53m. Feel I am a good judge of height now and my trees I am sure 55-60+. The soil is better here also. I have some pics to upload but of low resolution, soon I promise.
You may be right and may have measured them? Feel that this stand is not too exposed and low elevation is the key to shelter, but yes potentially exposed to the south west, but there was no damage from last winters storms, but at sheltered Coed y Brenin there was damage exposed to the south west.
Ha! I think I fell in the same hole! There were a lot of rotten logs hidden in the undergrowth! Such are the hazards of measuring trees!
The thinning crown I'm afraid is Dothistroma. 10 years ago I thought Douglas was bombproof, but now not so sure. I did think it could live at least 300 years here and maybe 500 in the colder regions of Scotland. But now we have to factor in climate change and diseases.
Do you have a big garden? You could grow your own Waterloo Grove as I have plenty of seed!
There are so many diseases now mostly brought in by man and his incompetent greed. Now oak trees are under threat in Southern UK by Oak Processionary Moth. Brought in from the continent on a few trees. Now in Greater London and slowly spreading outwards. It could have been stopped but incompetence and politics have stopped this. Apparently helicopter spraying is not popular in London as a few Blue Tits were killed by the safe insecticide. Now their entire habitat is under threat and sacrificing a few birds I think is a price worth paying!
Stephen, of the miles that you drove around Snowdonia, did you travel up the A4085 north from Beddgelert? A mile or so north on the west side of the road in the plantations are some conifers standing proud above the rest, one looks abit like Grand Fir? Did you assess the height if so? Never wennt this far up. Further north, Llyn Cwellyn looks a place with great potential, mountain shelter but the stands don't look 60 metres, 35-40 metres at most I would estimate from the buildings.
"A friend of mine climbed the tallest tree in Scotland, at Reelig Glen Wood last weekend to measure it by tape drop. TO HIS HORROR HE FOUND THAT SOMEONE HAD CLIMBED IT USING SPURS!!! There were deep wounds ALL THE WAY from the lowest branches to a few metres from the top. There were also very bad rope burns on some branches from natural-crotched dDRT descents.
I have reported this to the Forestry Commission and also the Tree Register of the British Isles, who are investigating it.
The tree was climbed a month ago by a film unit and a presenter for the BBC. The program was aired on national TV 2 weeks ago. Is it possible that someone saw the program and decided to 'have a go at climbing it?
We need to come together to condemn such total disregard for any healthy tree, let alone a national champion!
I think this is appalling and always feared that this would happen. I feel it is a very difficult balancing act to:-
Educate and show the trees to the general public, without causing damage and also revealing such tree's exact location is perhaps not a good idea except between us tree fans/owner. I think by doing this the risk that a vandal or a so called recreational tree climber damaging it through perhaps just ignorance or just not caring is reduced significantly.
I wonder if the UK Tree Register has considered listing the trees but keeping the location deliberately vague to the public.
Owen what do you think?
I do not think it is a good idea to tell the media!
With these giants often growing in very fragile environments should we not take the policy as the same as the tallest Coast Redwoods in California? Perhaps treating them like rare protected orchids and not revealing their exact location, like say a rare military orchid.
A classic example is the Giant Sequoia just off Rhinefield Drive in the New Forest 51m tall. I have been visiting this tree for over 20 years and at first the Forestry Commission just put up a vague post some distance away which attracted little attention from the public. But now a large sign has been put up some years ago and now attracts many people to the tree.
The result is now significant soil compaction around the base, touching and picking of bark and even someones ashes had been deposited at the base! I estimate several thousand people are trampling around its root zone, which I'm sure you know is generally the most vulnerable part of the tree, with fine feeder roots only 20-30cm below the surface. I fear the tree is now showing early signs of stress. (Sequoia's are shallow rooted.)
I hope to contact the F.C. and recommend that they fence off around its root zone to prevent further damage, I am a qualified arborist/forester by the way. It would be nice if they paid for a full decompaction by compressed air to aerate the root zone.
I have a number of champion conifers which may be some of the tallest in Europe which as far as I know remain unknown except to myself, which I hope to reveal to you, but I would appreciate that they are just admired by us on this site and the UK Tree Register but not revealing exactly where they are to the media and general public to protect them.
As to the damage, I would say that it is just confined to a small area of the thin bark at the tree top and the cambium layer and as long as this is not repeated should only have a minor impact, with transpiration and subsequent growth unaffected.
Sorry for the rant but this has been a worry for me for sometime.
My feeling is that the benefits to trees in general by interesting the public in remarkable and champion specimens outweighs the risk that the most famous trees may be damaged by climbing or soil compaction. People as a whole are less and less aware of the natural world around them and the threats which it faces, and trees, being big and spectacular, are a good way of getting them (and especially their children) more emotionally involved.
We sometimes have to disguise tree locations at the request of owners who are touchy about their privacy, but 95% of trees on the Tree Register do have precise location details. To re-record the trees in 20 or 50 years time, the recorder needs to know what and where it is, and the extra paraphernalia involved in keeping the locations disguised makes me worry that sometimes this may become difficult. A tree record kept in somebody's head or on the back of an envelope is of no use at all after 50 years!
The 50m Giant Sequoia at Nymans has a boardwalk for the 10m of path that traverses its root-run, which seems a good idea.
I don't think the BBC news item that showed the Reelig Glen Douglas being climbed clearly showed at any point which of the many similar trees there the tallest actually was. I suspect they were deliberately keeping its identity unclear, as copy-cat climbs are a health-and-safety nightmare even if they don't damage the tree. The tree called Dughal Mor (on OS maps) and which has or had a plaque claiming it as Britain's tallest tree is about 30m from the new candidate and would have been the obvious tree for people to have climbed. When I visited in 2013 and identified the new tree as taller, this wasn't evident at all from the few viewpoints on the ground - hence I don't have a good photo with this one as the centre of attention.
It is always a difficult balancing act to educate the public and at the same time, preventing damage either accidental or worse, deliberate.
My personal feeling is that there are enough sacrificial trees in arboretums and collections now to educate the public and the next generations of tall trees which are often in fragile environments should be protected.
Trouble is when the word gets out, that there is a new tall tree, it does attract public attention, especially when its in state forests which inevitably leads to a trail to the tree and over the years much potential damage can be done by soil compaction. I always advised the FC of their trees but to keep quiet about them where possible. I notify them just to let them know and hope they will be retained for their scientific value.
I would of course let the Tree Register know where they are, but often in big stands of many hectares with hundreds of trees pin pointing the tree exactly even with GPS can be impossible.
For us dendrologists I think studying these trees is great, but I think letting the general public know 'exactly' where they are is a potential risk to them. One can always say a new tree has been discovered and dimensions given, though but location kept is deliberately vague from the public.
Good arguments presented here speak for not to reveal the Champion Tree by single photo or exact coordinates. On the other hand we want to raise interest of people in forest and nature, which is supported by focusing on distinctive superlatives. MT also heats up the search for the champion with the ability to sort by tree heights and by the "European tree height records list". The competition of the regions according to the motto: "Who has the highest tree" is opened. Who has measured a tree and now claimes the title of champion for this tree, must allow for review, anything else would be unfair. The incentive for me to go to Scotland to see and remeasure the tallest tree is little, if not previously is clear that I can find and identify the particular tree on site. Who does not want the tree to become famous, may not register it on MT. He must not boast of having found it. He must keep the secret for himself and approve that others will discover and publish the tree.
Thanks for your comments. I have no problem posting the tallest trees on this site or the UK Tree Register. However giving precise location details to the UK public and media can be a potential risk to them, mainly too many people can visit and cause damage mainly accidental, caused by soil compaction. As you can see here someone has climbed the tree using bad techniques which have caused damage, we need to prevent this from happening where ever possible.
The location for some of the tallest Coast Redwoods in California are kept secret and only a few know where exactly they are.
There are many trees in the UK where people can visit tall trees now in private grounds or in state forests and be educated which I strongly recommend, but some of the tallest are in very fragile locations and having potentially thousands of people visiting them I feel would damage their health.
I hope to purchase a trupulse 200x soon as I am entirely scientific and dislike inaccuracy.
Half of my registered trees are probably incorrect on the map because of a problem that I had with the said map (if people go looking for some of them they will end up in the Irish Sea for some of them) Would it be advisable to change the location for the Waterloo Grove trees for one? On my visit in September there was hardly a soul to be seen other than passing cars which use the road. I wanted some pedestrians to get some good photos in context but the only person who went past was a jogger who was away before I could get the camera in to position.
It has been suggested that it was probably the person who roped up for the presenter who caused this spur damage so does all this need to be put in perspective? Is this just a one off either inadvertant or through lack of knowledge rather than amateurs? Did amateurs attempt to climb the Vyrnwy tree, the Hermitage tree, Dughall Mor or the Stronardron tree causing spur damage when claims were made and reported for them being the tallest? These trees are also in public areas as well aren't they rather then being in closed collections like Ardkinglas?
Stephen, I hope that you decide to tell all about all your finds as they sound fascinating. If you don't want to disclose on here, could I request being included in any emails that you submit of your finds to the Register. I am suspecting that Coed Y Brenin will be one of the places that you have been in your 1,326 miles, it would be nice to see some of the trees at this location.
Have no problem posting the trees to MT or Tree Register, but keeping the location vague to the 'general public' I think is the best way to keep them safe. Sadly what man creates often destroys! As I have said before there are enough tall trees to educate the public now around the UK.
With Giant Sequoia, bark is either punched or picked off and sadly the FC is ignorant by allowing a path to the trees and then soil compaction results. Trees are not adapted to having hundreds if not thousands of people trampling around their root zone.
Coed Y Brenin:-
Sadly Rob, Dothistroma is having a big impact on these trees. There is a whole valley of 1928 50-60m Douglas with some of the trees have lost 50% of their foliage. 3 years ago these trees were growing 0.5m a year (perfect health) and in 2013 0.2m and now 0.1m due to defoliation. Trying not to get too upset as some trees appear completely resistant but it is a real worry. There are so many diseases entering that most of the UK forest stock is at risk from something.
This stand was on course to become the tallest stand of trees in Europe, but now I am not too sure? Lets hope it is a passing phase and they will become resistant!
The planted 1931 Grand Fir here could be as tall as 63m (tangent) measured it very carefully last year, very likely fastest growing tree anywhere in the world north of 52 degrees! It appears Dothistroma is affecting Grand Fir as well.
Coast Redwood is bomb proof and this tree I feel will have a great future in the warming U.K. climate in the west.
Are some of these diseases coming over in wood and plants imported in from mainland Europe like Ash Die Back? According to experts, Britain imports vast amounts of young trees and seedlings from Europe with which it is suspected Ash Die Back may have come in with. Why do we have to do this, I know the answer-economic, cheaper- but why can't all this business be given to British growers! I know the answer to this, EU need I say more, but all the growers and business it could provide over here also helping to cut down on imported diseases.
Forgot to say, Stephen, hope that you register and post some photos of the Coed Y Brenin trees (how tall now is the 50 metre Sitka Spruce?) Stick the locations in the Irish Sea, drown anyone trying to find them to damage them (laughs)
(Probably shouldn't have made that joke given the modern PC ridden world)
Yes would be nice to see forests of Redwoods. But now forestry has changed.
At Coed Y Brenin its all about restoring 'ancient broadleaved woodland' and throughout the UK. This is significant as where redwood would grow on low altitude sheltered fertile sites, mature conifer is being felled to replaced with scrub! This makes my blood BOIL! I am fed up with these 'native only tree fascists'. Don't get me wrong, I like broadleaves and I am environmentally conscious, but this country spent the last 95 years building up a strategic reserve of timber and now squandered! If the political world changed then the UK would be vulnerable to a gross shortage of timber.
The Douglas at Coed y Brenin are safe I hope! but the upper slopes are being felled for broadleaves, mainly rubbish like weedy birch and oak bonsai. This also removes shelter to the tall trees, as tall trees above the Douglas increase topography and therefore shelters the Douglas.
They have been ring barking the naturally growing Western Hemlock to prevent their spread, as they can be slightly invasive, but the stupid thing is they are removing the very tree that is immune to Dothistroma!
They felled a large area of Sitka at over 400-500m so they could grow broadleaves. The planted broadleaves failed and guess what grew back SITKA!
Things will change I hope, so don't despair you may see redwood forests they do grow very fast!
Amazing Red Cedars at Coed y Brenin planted 1931 and already over 40m! Will be champs soon!
There maybe Sitka 48m here but not any taller I think. My 50m tree has died back but this maybe due to Honey Fungus damaging the roots. There is something strange about the climate of Wales that prevents Sitka growing to giants like in Scotland. The rainfall is sufficient, but it maybe the temperature is too high, as it likes to be very cool. I have been puzzled by this. Sitka grows well in Cumbria.
I think that I have found a long lost twin brother, falling down the same holes, the views expressed above, we must have been separated at birth!
I agree totally with your views on the purists, zealots I call them. There is a valley near to where I live, the Nidd Gorge valley which contains some nice conifers, 40 metre Sitka, Douglas, 31 metre Norway Spruce, 30 metre Larch, from the photos now on here a group of Bhutan Pines possibly(?) but they all have red marks on the trunk, many have already been felled at the request of the Bilton Conservation group. It makes my blood boil as these trees add diversity and interest but these lot zealously want the woods to be pure. Up here in Yorkshire there are vast areas of barren land, moorland and field where natural woods could be planted without felling any conifers which many people love. The moorlands and fields are referred to as Yorkshire's natural beauty but they are no such thing, man cleared this land, it is all man made.
The west Wales Sitka thing, the winter at this location, Dalby is going to be colder (and not as wet) but the summer temperatures are going to be signifcicantly higher and again less wet (local weather foreccasts, Vale of Pickering of which Staindale is a side valley and will be a sheltered south facing one as well), is nearly always the sunniest and warmest part of this area) and yet Sitkas are seemingly thriving and superb specimans?
Yes conservation groups with their open toed sandals and butterfly nets skipping through the long grass!! Perhaps you could try to educate them, I am always doing this! They are blind! Rub off the red marks on the best of them!
I see no difference in a tree coming to this country either naturally or having been introduced by man. Sweet Chestnut and sycamore long naturalised are we gong to fell them all? Perhaps Beech North of S. England? With that awful totally biased Coun*** Fi** program pulling up Hemlock. When was the last time there was anything about forestry other than planting Squirrel fodder! I'm afraid there is so much propaganda and B*** SH** in this world!
Yes Yorkshire Moorland a barren biological desert created by man caused by sheep grazing, plenty of room for Conifers and Broadleaves, but as usual they like to think this is natural. It is not!
Fed up with the Lake District and their anti conifer mentality, all thanks to Wainright and his romantic thoughts of man made open desert moorland!They think that open mountainside is 'normal'. They soon complain about windfarms but want cheap green energy!
A totally independent report on planted coniferous forest showed that it was not detrimental to wildlife and birdlife.
Yes strange about Sitka, perhaps because Sitka is planted only at high altitude and therefore would never grow to large size due to soil conditions. If planted on fertile low altitude sites would grow to giants but species selected often Douglas and Larch here.
Interesting Yorkshire Sitka, Have been to Hammsterley Forest further North and been to Dalby long ago.
Stephen, did you take a look at this stand of Larch when you visited? This must be the largest stand of Larch by wood volume of any in the UK possibly? I could only get a view of bases and tips of a few trees at the bottom but I can clearly see on my photographs that I have almost certainly or have certainly not measured the tallest in this stand. There are emergents further up with their tips clear of the rest by metres and even accounting for slope I estimate that they will be 43 perhaps even as much as 45 metres. This stand is also growing on the southern slope of the lake facing north east so it has mountain shelter, certainly much more than the 64 metre Douglas Fir stand will have at the other side of the lake. What sort of growth rate can we expect for Larch trees in a tight stand like this and in this location? How long before some of these trees might be challenging the 48 metre tree at Reelig Glen?
Probably Betula pubescens, rather than B. pendula - the commoner of the two native 'Silver Birches' in the UK. Leaves of B. pendula are more triangular, the finer branches hang down, and the bark is usually crisply divided into smooth pure white bits and very rugged black bits (not visible in this case because of the moss).
Thank you, I hadn't worked out the differences. There are a lot of ancient birches and other tree species on Gray hill ... Mixed in with as many Neolithic and Bronze Age stone workings, enclosures, circles banks, cairns and walls
Hello demercleden, welcome. Are you a South Wales resident or from somewhere near this area? If so it would be great to have someone in that area with an interest in trees, there must be some tall trees down this way. Would you have the time or inclination to photograph a few if nothing else? There is a 43 metre Beech at Lydney Park not far from these trees and big Douglas Firs in the Forest of Dean. There also look to be some fair sized conifers in the Vale of Neath. I for one would love to see some photographs of the trees in Longleat Forest, specifically the 54 metre Coast Redwood (where it is?)
I currently live in Caldicot (near Chepstow) S. Wales.
Until 6 months ago used to live near Lydney, Forest of Dean,.. so lots of trees yes .. took them a little bit for granted.
May be able to photograph some for you ...
Have been to Longleat (Center Parks) where there is a stand of Redwoods.
My main 'tree-focus' is Gray hill because the usage of that hill has note changed much for past ... 5000 years ? Actually I am primiraly ivestigating the 'stones' and Neolithic/Bronze age stuff.
It seems you like the great 'heights' of trees? There are plent like that in the forest of dean (FoD) as they were grown mainly for shipbuilding purposes 2-4 hundred years ago ..
I will keep an eye out for you .. but easier to use a separate email address ... (or can I post pictures here, unattached to actually registered trees ?.. I have quite a few good ones already!)
RedRob, à 2014-10-24 16:21:19, édité à 2014-10-24 16:23:01, a dit:
Hello John, thank you for the offer of photographing some of the trees, very much appreciated. Forest of Dean and Longleat are two places that I would love to visit. I have also been searching on Google Maps for trees in the South Wales valleys and am amazed at what nice country it is down there now. You always envisage a pretty bleak area with all the pits and slag heaps but the scars have now greened over with forests and it looks lovely (cannot think of another word that describes it), green forested hills and great drives, definitely another area that I would love to visit before the bucket is kicked.
These are the Redwoods which you will have found at Centre Parcs as I ended up at them myself on a visit a few years ago. It is the location of the Britain and Ireland and European height champion Coast Redwood (also registered on page on link)which seems to be more elusive to find than Lord Lucan.
Yes that is a huge tree at Lydney Park. (Haven't seen it myself yet).
I walked over the back of Gray hill down to Wentwood this evening and found three MASSIVE beeches casually holding up a field fence there. Maybe not challenging the Lydney Park tree but not far off ... And three of them, just unassumingly sitting in the edge of the wood.
I shall go back tomorrow to measure and register them .... But there are so many great trees in the area that I am spoilt for choice to record them ... Such as another downy birch In a field of horses that would undoubtedly be a near-champion, if it's trunk remains 'single' for high enough....
I saw this tree way back in the early nineties, it was flat topped. Yes very luxuriant and healthy. Judging by the fresh fissures in the bark I would say it is still growing rapidly in girth. The trunk also has very little taper and I would not be surprised if it contained 60m3 of wood. It may reach 55-60m eventually but may take another 30 years?
A species which has not reached its full potential in the UK and with climate change, could well excel in the west. It is virtually bombproof with only man/wind/lightning the real hazard. With Giant sequoia Honey fungus and other decay fungi can attack these trees but not Coast Redwood.
Stephen, were the footpaths open on the south west bank of the river through the Dell? I really wanted to have a go at measuring the Corsican Pines which were planted as a shelterbelt and which Owen recorded as 43 metres in 2005 but the whole area was fenced off with 'no admittance' the day that I visited. I could see them but couldn't get any view of any bases? Don't know what was going on that day? I could also see the Nordmann Fir but not the base? 45 metres is the B&I record for Corsican Pine and these had probably or possibly overtaken that? Did you photograph them or attempt a measurement?
The 'no admittance' signs are just for the general public - if you ask at reception, they'll (usually) give you permission to go over them once they know why you're there if it's a special reason like measuring trees. At least that's how it used to be. All they'd likely ask of you is to give them a copy of the measurements afterward.
Hello Conifers, you may be right. The paths up the hillside were blocked off with pink ribbon which I thought unusual and that something may have happened further up, perhaps unsafe paths or a landslide?
I've just added some historic measurements for this tree. It's growing remarkably steadily! (Tim, one feature that could be added is a calculation of annual growth-rate between the planting date and the first measurement for trees with known planting dates?)
Rob, the Corsican Pine was very difficult to measure tangent-fashion, as they generally are, and it could have been more than 43m. But probably also hard to see the highest shoots with laser. As it's part of the official 'shelterbelt' it may not have added more height. Much of the garden was also shut to the public on my visit in 2005 - is this a permanent condition? I know that recently Bodnant has been undergoing 'restoration' at the urging of various influentual landscape gardeners. This is a word that always fills me with dread as it generally means cutting down the existing 100-year-old trees and planting new ones to 'recreate the spirit in which the garden was originally conceived' or words to that effect. At least they've spared this one.
Hello Owen, perhaps we need a petition from someone, the Tree Register members perhaps amongts others to protect these older trees, it would be tragic if any of the tall conifers and others were felled just for the sake of it, they are irreplaceable.
This Coastie doesn't grow very fast does it, I measured 51 metres for it MT standard reading (centre of base on slope), Tree Register standard it will be about 50.4 metres I estimate, the girth probably now 6 metres perhaps taking into account Stephen's comments. It looks glaucousy as you described so will it be some sort of variant and hence have a lower growth rate?
Areas are being developed and should be open next spring, apparently they take parties of people round on certain days. I did not see any felling, but I was saddened to see the big Western Hemlock had been felled.
The Corsican I did not see, but it appears the dreaded Dothistroma which Corsican is very susceptible has just started to infect trees.
Coast Redwood is superb. Still growing rapidly judging by the new fresh fissures in the bark at the base. Difficult tree to measure due to the stream! Possibly within the top 5 for size in the Northern Hemisphere outside California?
meinst du eine weitere Höhenmessung, von einem anderen Standpunkt aus? Das geht unter "Neuer Messung hinzufügen" nicht. Zumindest nicht, wenn beide Messungen vom gleichen Jahr stammen. Du kannst aber unter "Bearbeiten Sie die Daten von diesem Baum" einen Kommentar abgeben. Wie in diesem Fall den Hinweis mit einer weiteren Messung.
jetzt verstehe ich dich erst. Ich dachte, du hättest bereits einen weiteren Messwert, und du weißt nicht, wie du den hier in die Datenbank eintragen sollst. Du möchtest aber vor Ort eine weitere, genauere Messung durchführen. Ok, also ich wohne etwa 120 km weg, ist also ohne weiteres für mich machbar. Welches Messinstrument hast du denn? Eingetragen hast du die Tangentenmethode, also eine reine Winkelmessung zur Spitze. Wenn der Baum schräg steht, ist das Fehlerbehaftet. Auch, wenn das Gelände geneigt ist, ist es damit Problematisch. Ich hätte ein Nikon-Entfernungsmesser. Damit kann ich eine Winkel- und Entfernungsmessung zur Spitze und zur Basis machen, was genauer ist, als eine reine Winkelmessung zur Spitze. Also ich hätte durchaus Interesse an eine Messung mit dir zusammen vor Ort. Bei mir geht es aber nur an Wochenenden.
Da wird auch die Entfernung zusätzlich zu den Winkeln gemessen, um einen Schrägstand des Baumes auszugleichen. Ist auch einfacher zu messen, da kein Bandmaß benötigt wird.
An diesem Wochenende kann ich auch nicht. Das darauffolgende Wochenende muss ich am Samstag arbeiten, am Sonntag, den 26. Oktober könnte es bei mir gehen. Wie viel Zeit wird der Baum in Anspruch nehmen? Ich meine, wie weit muss man vom Auto aus zum Baum laufen?
Prima, den 26. Oktober merke ich mir vor. Es sind ca 25 Min Fußweg vom Parkplatz bis zur Fichte. Stiefel sind nötig, weil der Jüchnitzbach durchquert werden muß, grobes unwegsames Gelände auf den letzten 60 Metern!
Ok, bleiben wir beim 26. Oktober. Trockenen Fußes kommt man da nicht hin? Ist das ein breiter Bach, oder kommt man da auch über Steine irgendwie auf die andere Seite? Treffpunkt ist dann beim Parkplatz vom Schullandheim Geraberg? Also hier: https://maps.google.de/maps?q=50.701853,10.817295&num=1&t=h&z=18
Forestry Commission plantations of Douglas Fir at Gwydyr, Conwy and Coed a Brenin are now hot on the heels of these older trees and David Alderman predicts the champion could change several times over the next few years, unless and other specimens such as the Lake Vyrnwy Giant could be found in a deep gorge somewhere breaking the 65m barrier.
Owen, reading back I came across this page. Conwy, which plantation at Conwy is this referring to? On Google Maps there are no plantations up around Conwy? Does this mean along the Vale of Conwy? I drove along the west escarpment of the Conwy valley (really all Gwyrdr Forest) and stopped and pointed the laser at quite a few but they were not on the scale of the Afon Lugwy and Waterloo trees.
I saw this tree and definitely Abies grandis. Possibly from the Cascades or just east of the crest. Foliage there typically has upturned foliage at the end of branch tips, where as trees from the Pacific coast have needles which lie flat on the shoot.
This is an interesting point, as we have English (country) names for trees on this site in the English language version rather than American ones, which would be more logical for trees with an American distribution. In this case 'Weymouth' commemorates Captain George Weymouth who first brought the tree to England in the early 17th century but has no relevance to American users of this site. I shan't offer to change the names to the American ones myself as I don't know all of them!
I'd favour using native names (i.e., use Eastern White Pine for Pinus strobus), provided they are botanically accurate (thus use e.g. Lawson's Cypress for Chamaecyparis lawsoniana, and not call it a cedar Cedrus as many in the USA regrettably misidentify it).
geertaa, à 2014-10-23 08:45:47, édité à 2014-10-23 08:51:57, a dit:
Ik heb een heel aantal jaren geleden een aantal mammoetbomen gezaaid en gekweekt. Velen zijn tijdens een strenge winter overleden. Gelukkig zijn er een paar die het hebben overleefd. Eentje is op het moment zeer hard aan het groeien in de volle grond (net toegevoegd aan jullie archief), de ander staat in kuip en is zo'n 2 meter hoog nu. Weet iemand hier of er partijen zijn die in deze boom geïnteresseerd zou zijn?
I don't know if you're aware of the site www.ancient-tree-hunt.org.uk, which is designed to allow people to record details of veteran trees (ie trees which are important for their associated wildlife and intrinsic age) around the UK. I've just transferred your pollard sallow to this site (http://www.ancient-tree-hunt.org.uk/recording/tree?tree=96d3cccd-659a-41fe-b3fe-1b6aca7f5852), as it's clearly ancient from your pictures and one of the most significant in Wales. (You'll see the record appearing under my user-name on that site. The details of where I transferred the record from are in the notes.) I hope I've got the location right. If you want to upload your photos (or other tree records) to the Ancient Tree Hunt site, this is quite easy, though the site doesn't have much professional support these days. It's working OK today anyway!
I think this tree is Salix caprea (possibly the hybrid Salix x reichartii), rather than Alder Buckthorn. The leaves should be wrinkly above and very finely grey-woolly underneath - very smooth and quite shiny green in Frangula alnus. I'd love to see an Alder Buckthorn with a single trunk more than 30cm thick, but I doubt I ever will! 3.6m girth is also near the maximum size for Salix caprea, though it tends to grow bigger in relatively harsh upland climates like this.
Thank you again (I apologise for my inexperience) but have to start somewhere .. Yes I can see that you are right as I have checked the leaf against picture in Wikipoedia .. Can I change the classification?
Conifers, à 2014-10-21 21:39:59, édité à 2014-10-21 21:41:00, a dit:
Thanks, I can do that. Probably won't be near any records but it is a splendid and notable tree nevertheless. I shall take a measurement of the largest trunk,(and for reference a measurement of the trunk below where the three join, and the height of this above the ground).
Is dit een 'gewone' gele treurwilg Salix x sepulcralis 'Chrysocoma'? Die de afgelopen weken hel-gele twijgen had. Of is het de veel zeldzamer groene treurwilg Salix babylonica, die altijd groene twijgen heeft?
Ik heb hem pas ontdekt op een nieuwe wandelroute, dus kan helaas noch bevestigen noch ontkennen. Ik gok dat het de gewone treurwilg is. Maar dat is nergens op gebaseerd....Ik kan alleen de volgende lente afwachten. Of kan ik het nog ergens anders aan zien? En ook veel dank voor je boeken tip.
Deze treurwilg stond er op MT (zonder foto) met een omtrek van 4,12m. Ik herkende hem gelijk vanwege de uitgebroken top. Als je op de kaart kijkt zie je het ook. Kun jij deze boom verwijderen en je foto toevoegen aan de boom die er al op stond. Thanks!
Overigens de dikke populier aan de overkant is toch echt een populier hoor en geen berk. De stam en bladeren laten geen twijfel.
Hallo Narno, jammer genoeg weet ik niet waar de treurwilg mt staat die je bedoelde. Ook de reden waardoor ik dit zo lang uitstel...Ik heb net gezocht...maar zonder resultaat. Wil graag alles in orde maken. Kun je me helpen?vast bedankt karin
Mountain silverbells. This is often still called Halesia carolina (which is properly now called H. tetraptera), but it is a distinctly different species. H. tetraptera is a shrub, while this is a medium-size tree.