North Chagrin Reservation: Cumulative Forest Data

Moderators: edfrank, dbhguru

User avatar
edfrank
Posts: 4217
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 5:46 pm

Re: North Chagrin Reservation: Cumulative Forest Data

Post by edfrank » Mon Aug 15, 2011 5:12 pm

Dan,

Very nice update. This will be an excellent piece for in the next issue of the eNTS Magazine. The video clip is embedded properly in the post, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRayUjTY ... r_embedded however it is not viewable by anyone else as Youtube says "This Video Is Private." If you want it to be viewable you will need to change its settings to a public video. Keep up the great work!!

Ed
"I love science and it pains me to think that so many are terrified of the subject or feel that choosing science means you cannot also choose compassion, or the arts, or be awe by nature. Science is not meant to cure us of mystery, but to reinvent and revigorate it." by Robert M. Sapolsky

User avatar
dantheman9758
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 1:55 pm

Re: North Chagrin Reservation: Cumulative Forest Data

Post by dantheman9758 » Mon Aug 15, 2011 6:39 pm

Ed

It should work now, thanks. Steve Galehouse just gave me a book with an excellent angle on this forest, that counters A. B. Williams categorization of the two forest types. I will be Implementing the excerpt of this the next opportunity I can. I'm just slowly adding data that I come accross.

Dan

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

Re: North Chagrin Reservation: Cumulative Forest Data

Post by Rand » Thu Aug 18, 2011 2:47 pm

Steve Galehouse wrote:Bob, ENTS-

The current Ohio Rucker10 index is 144.15, with all measurements based on the ENTS method. Link to specifics: http://rev215.treesdb.org/Browse/States/33/Details .

All of these measurements have been from the north-eastern part of the state, and I'm sure surveying areas in the south-eastern part of the state would increase the index. There is supposed to be a hemlock at 149' in the Hocking Hills area, but I've not measured it, nor has Rand, I think.
I did actually measure this hemlock. There are several hemlocks between 140-144 around the lower falls. However the taller hemlock (149.8') is downstream from there growing on the lip of a slanted rock ledge, largely buried in duff. The uphill side of the tree is > 3' taller than the downhill side. It looked like the tree sprouted on the edge and sent the roots downhill, so it seemed a little dodgy to use the midslope point as the base for the height measurement. I used the uphill side, so if you wanted to use the midpoint the the height would go over 151' pretty easily.
I think Rand did measure a beech to 135' somewhere in that area, but that record is not reflected by the Rucker10 just posted.
Steve
That's correct. I measured 135.8'

http://www.ents-bbs.org/viewtopic.php?f=111&t=1928

User avatar
dbhguru
Posts: 4499
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 9:34 pm

Re: North Chagrin Reservation: Cumulative Forest Data

Post by dbhguru » Thu Aug 18, 2011 5:06 pm

Rand, Steve,

Ohio rocks. Now, what about Indiana? Any chance that you all can make a foray or two over there?

Bob
Robert T. Leverett
Co-founder, Native Native Tree Society
Co-founder and President
Friends of Mohawk Trail State Forest
Co-founder, National Cadre

User avatar
dantheman9758
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 1:55 pm

Re: North Chagrin Reservation: Cumulative Forest Data

Post by dantheman9758 » Thu Aug 18, 2011 6:32 pm

That puts Ohio RHI to 145.41, I wonder how that stacks up to our other neighbor, PA. Bob, I take it there are no ENTS present in Indiana?

http://www.in.gov/dnr/naturepreserve/4741.htm
If not here's some good leads for sites to check out for any ENTS if no-one has any idea where to start. Old growth doesn't guarantee tall tree's but I bet it doesn't hurt.

http://www.in.gov/dnr/naturepreserve/fi ... -color.pdf
Pine_Hills Footnotes: 480 acre's, sharp 100' elevation changes, white-pines, hemlock, and old age. Lidar would be helpful here because it sounds like a nice site

User avatar
dbhguru
Posts: 4499
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 9:34 pm

Re: North Chagrin Reservation: Cumulative Forest Data

Post by dbhguru » Thu Aug 18, 2011 8:17 pm

Dan,

Some of us have made forays into Indiana. Pioneer Mother is one of those places. But for the most part, the Hoosier State is unexplored territory.

Bob
Robert T. Leverett
Co-founder, Native Native Tree Society
Co-founder and President
Friends of Mohawk Trail State Forest
Co-founder, National Cadre

User avatar
dantheman9758
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 1:55 pm

Re: North Chagrin Reservation: Cumulative Forest Data

Post by dantheman9758 » Sat Aug 20, 2011 9:23 am

ENTS,

With the help of Ed and Steve, I've purchased a rangefinder, clinometer, and a fiberglass tape measure. I also purchased a GPS that can give me the rough lat/longitude of where I'm at. I've got the tape measure, and the remaining tools will arrive next week. I have a calculator, so that about sums up all that I needed correct?

User avatar
dantheman9758
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 1:55 pm

Re: North Chagrin Reservation: Cumulative Forest Data

Post by dantheman9758 » Sun Sep 04, 2011 9:03 pm

ENTS,

I just wanted to chime in with an update:

I now have all the tools I necessary to obtain ENTS accurate field measurements! I'm practicing the laser/clinometer/sine method, and I'm in the process of collecting all of the important GPS points for leaf-drop before I forget where everything is. I don't have time to organize all of the new data I've collected but here is some highlights from today:
  • *Chestnut stumps: 14' 8" and an 11' 8" @ 2.5' (where they were cut). That makes Chestnut the second "largest" species from the original forest. And they were numerous, the stumps are everywhere. Damn. I would have loved some real measurements.

    *There are no less than 5 Blackgum over 3' diameter, and 100' tall.

    *The trail-side Red Oak still comes in at 18' 3" but the very similar looking interior big Red Oak is now accurately measured to 18' 2". So there's two 18'ers!

    *There is now a Hemlock that I measured to 136', that lidar indicated was 136.38'. I also found another spectacular Blackgum that I measured to 127.5' x 10' 1" that Lidar indicated was closer to 123', I will keep my eye on this tree after leaf-drop.
I don't have all good news though, the CMP research application is daunting to say the least. I've put a good 6 hours into it on my downtime at work and I feel that I'm making little progress. Here's what their process entails:

http://www.clemetparks.com/Naturalresou ... ements.pdf

http://www.clemetparks.com/Naturalresou ... permit.asp

In the simplest terms all I would like to do is "legally" be allowed to collect the data so that I can plug it into the ENTS database and it looks like I've got to jump through hoops to make that happen. They'll be looking for either an interim or final report. I don't know if I'm interpreting their requirements correctly but if they expect full blown research than I honestly don't feel that I'm qualified to put together any sort of "analysis" of this data. All I desire to do is collect the data, and the most I can do is:
  • *Map the extended boundaries of old-growth within the park. (with the help of gps, google earth, lidar etc)

    *Measure/Map superlative specimens within the park. (height/dbh/cs and perhaps age via coring)
That permit application is making a mountain out of a mole mound... I can post what I had started this coming Tuesday when I return to the office. Any suggestions or tips that could help move this along faster would be much appreciated!

Dan
Last edited by dantheman9758 on Mon Sep 05, 2011 8:24 am, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: North Chagrin Reservation: Cumulative Forest Data

Post by Steve Galehouse » Sun Sep 04, 2011 10:28 pm

Dan-

I'm glad you got out again to North Chagrin. I wouldn't be too intimidated by the possibility of "tree police", since simply photographing the woods is a form of data collecting, and no physical samples are being collected. I think the Metroparks is just trying to cover their ass as far as liability is concerned.

I think we should meet up at the Tinker's Creek Gorge in Bedford Reservation sometime this Fall; I would still like to show you around Sand Run as well. I'll be at our cabin in Ontario through 9/17, will contact on return.

Steve
every plant is native somewhere

User avatar
dantheman9758
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 1:55 pm

Re: North Chagrin Reservation: Cumulative Forest Data

Post by dantheman9758 » Sat Sep 10, 2011 10:52 pm

Another great hike today,

*11' 6"x111' Blackgum - new girth maximum. daayummm!

*Another pair of giant red oak "twins", this close proximity pair was 17' 8"x123.3' (sine height measured from an adjacent ravine) and 17' 5"x118.5' (quick and dirty from the base of the tree).

*Grove of yellow birch that must be measured after leafdrop! 5'5" girth on one specimen, I took a quick height of the easiest one on flat ground @ 3' 7"x87.4'. There were two specimens deep in the ravine stretching for sunlight that I'm looking forward to measuring.

*A very weathered looking Red Maple at the crest of a slope. It had a strong, tall, and straight trunk, but the crown shape and total height looked worse for wear. Also some unusually smooth and weathered looking bark. Old age maybe? 11' 7"x100.2' - new girth maximum

*A nice pair of basswood in a ravine, I cannot estimate heights but I know one of them will be larger than 10' circumference. I had to leave them behind for now. I took GPS coords and hope to return either tomorrow or next weekend for a preliminary height and the girth from the larger specimen. I Haven't found any basswood of these proportions in my prior trips so both of these trees will contribute to the RHI and RGI.
*(EDIT: returned to basswood site, the larger one was 112.5' and 8'10" circumference)

Post Reply

Return to “Ohio”