Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 10:58 am
by edfrank
Kouta,

The basal buttresses extend up higher on some trees than others. It is my impression, perhaps Will or Jess will comment, that the data for the hemlocks is generally above this basal buttressing. So a similar value should be used for your tree. The 480 cm values seemed the best choice of your data points. The numbers used for the western trees may be suspect because I a unsure where the measures were taken with respect to this basal buttressing. They were simply pulled from Bob Van Pelts book of Forest Giants.

This is the data we have. It was not collected for the purpose of these calculations and is therefore not ideal. The numbers are for the most part pretty consistent and I would expect much more variation if some included much more of the basal buttressing than others. I know from around here that the basal buttresses do not extend very far up the hemlock trunks, so I think the numbers generated are reasonable. Will talks about the processes used for measuring these big hemlocks http://www.nativetreesociety.org/tsuga/ ... tocols.htm

Ed