Dysart Woods spring pictures

Moderators: edfrank, dbhguru

Post Reply
User avatar
Rand
Posts: 1217
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2010 9:25 pm

Dysart Woods spring pictures

Post by Rand » Wed May 11, 2011 8:51 pm

Tom Diggins reported on this site in 2007:

1) Tulip 144.4' x 9'2"
2) Tulip 141.8' x 9'9"
3) Tulip 133.0' x (oops, forgot to go back and check)
4) Tulip 128.8' x 12'0"
5) Tulip 124.9' x 8'10"

6) NRO 128.8' x 9'1"
7) NRO 123.8' x 11'8"
8) NRO of 16'2" CBH, total crown blow out, branches reach 91'

9) White oak 125.2 x 13'6" Nice!
10) White oak 121.0' x 11'6"
11) White oak 114.3'

12) White ash 129.2' x 7'3"
13) White ash 109.9'

14) Beech 114.1' x 8'0"
15) Beech 108.3' x 9'0"

16) Cucumber 119.3' x 7'2"

17) Sugar maple 109.5' x 5'5"

18) Black cherry 111.6' x 5'10"

http://www.nativetreesociety.org/fieldt ... _woods.htm

I got there a little late to make measurements but got some nice pictures of the big white oaks that dominate the canopy:
_MG_5550.jpg
_MG_5558_2.jpg
_MG_5584.jpg
_MG_5594.jpg
_MG_5543.jpg
Also of interest was a test planting of ACF hybrid chestnuts. They're maybe 3 years old. They are still getting established so it's too early to tell how well they are going to do. A handful have made it to the top of their tree shelters:
_MG_5547.jpg
Also of interest was the large Tuliptree that grew here up until the mid nineties, when decay caused by a large lightening scar got the best of it, and the trunk 'unwound' along the spiraling, unhealed scar and snapped in half. Purportedly this tree reached 164' at one time. However, I am skeptical because this tree had a large crown like the oaks and also grew at the top of a ravine, unlike the bottom or midslope like the other 160' class tulips we've found in ohio. Also going against it, is the 144' maximum of the remaining tuliptrees on the site. Much to my surprise, there is still enough deadwood at the site to make a plausible estimate of the tree's former height:
_MG_5575_2.jpg
_MG_5577.jpg
_MG_5580.jpg
Measuring the two downed pieces (15.5yards + ~ 24-26yards) I come up with 120-125' of dead wood (the trunk attached to the crown is largely disintegrated, but there are enough bits to show it's former extent). Now the remaining branches are 2-3" in diameter so we're losing some substantial height there. Maybe 7'-10'? (Any better estimate Will?)

In it's favor, it's by far the most massive tree on the site. I also measured the nearest white oak to 123' (picture #3 above), which is also among the largest and tallest for that species, so there is obviously something favorable about the location. Given this, I'm prepared to be a little generous with the fudging, but I have a hard time believing this tree exceeded 145'.

User avatar
Steve Galehouse
Posts: 700
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 11:50 pm

Re: Dysart Woods spring pictures

Post by Steve Galehouse » Wed May 11, 2011 10:21 pm

Rand-

Nice site and post, but I think all our species measurements at Sand Run, other than the white oak, were taller, which surprises me because I would have expected hilly. unglaciated areas of Ohio to have taller trees. The canopy is quickly closing, so further or re-measurements at local site will have to wait 'til November.

Steve
every plant is native somewhere

User avatar
Rand
Posts: 1217
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2010 9:25 pm

Re: Dysart Woods spring pictures

Post by Rand » Thu May 12, 2011 10:15 am

I didn't do any formal tests, but I get the feeling the soil is fairly thin at the site. i.e I noticed loose rocks on the slopes in places, and the dark humus layer in tip up mounds was not very thick. The valley's are wider and shallower than the sites we visited, the white oak come relatively far down the slopes and the tuliptrees didn't dominate the valley bottoms. The overall impression is just one of a more arid site.

Post Reply

Return to “Ohio”