Rocky River floodplain forest additions

Moderators: edfrank, dbhguru

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

Rocky River floodplain forest additions

Post by Steve Galehouse » Wed Nov 02, 2011 6:39 pm

NTS-

This afternoon I went to an area I first measured in March of 2010. I went there "blind", without taking my earlier records or notes. I'm happy to say nearly all the trees I found a year-and-a-half ago are still the tallest of their species at the site, and that most have grown appreciably, either in height or girth or both. A couple of surprise finds, trees not noticed or measured earlier, were a blackgum at 126' x 9' 2'', located on a slope adjacent to the floodplain shelf, displaying tremendously fissured bark---
Click on image to see its original size

and also a Freeman maple at 130.7' x 7' 6''. Freeman maple is a naturally occurring hybrid of red and silver maples, with foliage intermediate compared with the parents, but typically with a tall straight bole, which this tree certainly has---
Click on image to see its original size
Click on image to see its original size
This would be the only Ohio maple over 130' in height that I am aware of. The revised RH5 for the site is now 130.86, the RH10 is 124.48.

Details here: http://alpha.treesdb.org/Browse/Sites/923/Details

Steve
every plant is native somewhere

User avatar
dbhguru
Posts: 4498
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 9:34 pm

Re: Rocky River floodplain forest additions

Post by dbhguru » Wed Nov 02, 2011 7:29 pm

Steve,

That black gum is off the charts. New England black gums don't even come remotely close to 126 feet. A few approach the girth figure, but even that is larger than I've seen up here. Ohio continues to strut its stuff.

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
Will Blozan
Posts: 1153
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:13 pm

Re: Rocky River floodplain forest additions

Post by Will Blozan » Wed Nov 02, 2011 7:39 pm

Steve,

Damn dude! You are kickin' some ash and maple up there! Nice freemanii- you beat my 128.1' tree in Swan Creek Preserve (although it has likely grown to 130.8 by now ;)

Will

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

Re: Rocky River floodplain forest additions

Post by Steve Galehouse » Wed Nov 02, 2011 9:43 pm

Bob, Will--


And just think, these trees are in Cleveland. Tall and big trees are everywhere, all you have to do is look for them.

Steve
every plant is native somewhere

User avatar
dbhguru
Posts: 4498
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 9:34 pm

Re: Rocky River floodplain forest additions

Post by dbhguru » Thu Nov 03, 2011 7:59 am

Steve, Will,

I recall a number of years ago a well-intentioned soul in the State Legislature introducing a bill to give trees that reach 3 feet in diameter special status. Trees that large and larger are common throughout Northampton and Florence. They are reasonably common throughout the Massachusetts urban areas other than in obvious places like downtown districts, shopping malls, and relatively recent housing developments.

Once in the countryside, the story becomes mixed. Most private woodlands in southern New England are pretty scruffy (worse in northern New England), except for the conservation lands of environmental organizations (in Mass, Mass Audubon and TTOR). Most state-owned woodlands have areas that feature scatterings of larger trees, and a few special places like Robinson SP, Mount Tom and Mount Greylock State Reservations, Mohawk Trail and Monroe State Forest have them in abundance. Wetland corridors in southern New England usually have large trees in the species of cottonwoods and silver maples. All told, we have plenty of places to search for large and/or tall trees, even though as a percentage of the total number of pole-sized trees, the big ones could be considered rare.

A fun, if not labor intensive, project for ENTS might be to develop statistics on the distribution of large trees. We could do it by accumulating lots and lots of samples taken on a catch as catch an basis. The strategy would be to identify a site that can be measured for area, determine the area, and then tabulate trees meeting a diameter threshold. It would be a long term project, but the results might prove interesting and give us some good talking points. On the other hand, maybe this coffee I'm drinking is too strong.

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

Post Reply

Return to “Ohio”