Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2013 5:30 pm
by Will Blozan
KoutaR wrote:According to the East Max List, the Boogerman Pine was 207 ft, only 0.8 m taller than the Sgerm Spruce. Is 207 ft correct? According to the same list 207 ft was measured with tape and clinometer. Is that correct? What is the reliability of the measurement?

I hope Michael will tell about the climbing technique himself.



Yes 207' is correct- I think Larry meant feet, not meters. Bob Leverett and I did a very careful cross-triangulation on the tree with ground spotters for top measurements as projected to the ground. I think the numbers are solid but certainly could be in error but not by much. The tree deserved no less than the best attempt at accuracy.

In the photo below taken by Michael Davie in 2002 (taken from an adjacent hemlock) I am at a fork that originates at ~140' (42.7 m). The leader to left was the formerly tallest stem and the large break is visible (stem ends). The current high top is on the formerly shorter leader (right) and is a reiterated branch that now stands 188.9' (57.6 m) tall.


Will at fork in Boogerman Pine 2002