I'm not sure if this one is really a N. dombeyi.The leave corresponds, the bark doesn't. I think I have to change it to a Nothofagus sp. Unless some one can identify it better.
De boom heeft in een najaarsstorm van 2016 een grote tak verloren, daaropvolgend, om opnieuw schade te voorkomen, want dit was al de tweede keer, is hij december 2016 gekandelaberd. Op hoop van zegen. Zie foto.
Ben er geweest. Erg mooie plek voor die boom. Perfecte locatie voor een horror film… Heb ook foto’s, maar wil niet de graven van mensen op de site zetten.
Cannot understand how this tree of about 44 years old can have a girth like this. One of these days I will approach the owners and ask them if I can measure the tree.
Il faudrait fondre en un seul arbre, le Néflier du Japon ou Bibacier, les deux orthographes Eriobotrya japonica (qui est le nom correct) et "Erobotrya" japonica, qui est incorrect.
Thanks for spotting this! I've renamed all the specimens to the correct name, and blanked the incorrect name (as "Zz zz"); I think only Tim (website owner) can delete the incorrect name fully.
good morning, I would like to remove the name from my page Rossocanarino, with my name Valentina Nicastro, from my profile it won't let me do it Greetings Valentina Nicastro
Hi Wim - for those of us unable to read Dutch, can you help out with a bit of translation, please? I'd normally put the text into google translate, but that doesn't work with photos :-)
Thanks!
Wim Brinkerink, at 2024-04-24 10:40:58, edited at 2024-04-24 11:58:06, said:
First part; Goodbye to a 100 year old Cedar.
Our hundred years old Cedar is reaching it's final phase. Storm Eunice caused a lot of breaking branches in 2022 in the, until then, beautiful tree. Rotting wounds made the tree unsafe . Therefore we decided in 2024 to cut down the crown. The stem can now slowly rot away and be food for insects and soil life.
Second part:
Tree with history.
The Cedar planted in 1928 got damaged earlier in 1961. In those days the stem was scratched out and filled with concrete. The wound closed slowly. If you have a good look at it you'll still see the concrete inside. Nowadays we leave the trees at ease. The tree is perfectly capable of healing it's own wounds.
Judging by the flowering and cone production, the tree looks severely stressed now and looks to have reached its max height!?
The soil compaction in the photos around the tree base has not helped. In the UK once a tall tree is made publicly aware a notice is placed at its base, people visit, soil compaction and tree decline is the end result!
I prefer to keep trees out out the public eye to avoid this. But happy to upload here.
I imagine climate change is having a big impact now on mainland European forests?
I would still put my money on tallest trees in Europe being in Wales or Scotland. Which number in the hundreds now over 60m.
Well it still has a roughly 12-15 cm lead shoot there (2x cone length), so it is still growing taller, just not so fast any more! You'd also need to see photos from several years; this photo could just coincide with a good seed crop year, it isn't necessarily badly stressed.
Good point about compaction from increased visitors, though.
There are photos for comparing the top of the tree from 2015 and 2019. The drone photo of 2024 shows that there must have been a problem with the top shoot about 4 years ago, possibly a side shoot has taken over the lead.
Looks like it lost its leading shoot about 2 seasons before. In the 2019 photo in April the tree looks drought stressed by the very short shoot extension/cone production? But its not clear that this may also be early new shoot growth that season.
I am worried that climate change is going to push suitability further and further northwest for Pacific coast species in Europe.
Looks like it lost its leading shoot about 2 seasons before. In the 2019 photo in April the tree looks drought stressed by the very short shoot extension/cone production? But its not clear that this may also be early new shoot growth that season.
I am worried that climate change is going to push suitability further and further northwest for Pacific coast species in Europe.
Karlheinz, at 2024-04-05 00:42:02, edited at 2024-04-05 14:26:47, said:
Der Artikel ist vom 28.03., von Hannah Steiert, und die dicke Überschrift lautet:
"Ist Waldtraut noch der höchste Baum Deutschlands? Ein Freiburger hat einen höheren gefunden"
Ich nehme die Meldung ernst. Er hat Waldtraut gemessen und hat damit eine Vergleichsmöglichkeit. Die wahre Höhe eines hohen Baumes im Waldverbund erkennt man nicht durch bloße Betrachtung, das geht nur durch konkrete Messung, und da gibt es noch sehr viel zu messen!
Wer zum Beispiel an Waldtraut vorbei spazieren geht und auch zur Spitze hochschaut würde ohne entsprechenden Hinweis nie auf die Idee kommen, das könnte der höchste Baum Deutschlands sein. So ist es nur eine Frage der Zeit, bis höhere entdeckt werden. Vielleicht geht es schneller, wenn man durch flächendeckende LIDAR-Messung weiß, wo es sich lohnt zu suchen.
Es gilt also jetzt, den genauen Standort zu ermitteln (die zur Zeit eigetragenen Koordinaten dürften fiktiv sein) und die Messung zu überprüen.
Wenn man recherchiert, den Namen David Koch findet man häufiger, könnte ja auch ein Pseudonym sein. Soweit ich Emailadressen ausfindig machen konnte, hab ich diejenigen mit Bezug zu Freiburg oder zu Baumpflege mal angemailt, vielleicht wissen die ja auch was über ihre Namensvetter.
Die Badische Zeitung hat auch die Telefonnummern ihrer Redakteure veröffentlicht - falls da per E-Mail nichts kommen sollte:
Es ist der David Koch, der beim DAV Freiburg als Kletterer und Trainer bekannt war. Und er ist Baumkletterer, er spricht vom "Begehen" eines Baumes. Sein Standort ist Zähringen. Dann wird sein Messgerät das Bandmaß sein und ich vertraue seinen Messergebnissen. In älteren Veröffentlichungen des DAV findet man noch einiges über ihn und auch seine noch aktuelle TelNr. Und er hat erlaubt, seine Kontaktdaten weiterzugeben: 0176 67504666 (und WhatsApp) oder vietykoch@gmail.com.
Ich hab den Eindruck, er wird jeden Interessierten gern zu allen seinen Bäumen führen. Koordinaten habe ich nicht, aber er spricht von 500 m Entfernung von Pascal und Rapunzel zu St. Ottilien, und die könnten wunderbar von drei Wegen aus eingesehen werden - also das verspricht eine leichte Messung!
Ich checke schon meinen Kalender, ob ich mal eben nach Freiburg fahre ...
Es gibt seit heute wohl auch noch ein 75m Exemplar, den Triton. Ihn hat David heute erklettert und die Seillänge gemessen. Sollte daher relativ genau sein. Ich bin Mal gespannt was mich am Freitag erwartet. Wir machen eine Radtour zu den, seiner Ansicht nach, 12 höchsten Bäumen rund um Freiburg.
Ein Seil ist nicht gerade konstant in seiner Länge, auch wenn's ein statisches Kletterseil ist. Genauer wird's, wenn man ein Bandmaß von oben runter läßt, so haben Rainer Lippert und ich vor gut 10 Jahren die seinerzeit höchste Douglasie Bayerns (60,5 m) gemessen.
Mit der Radtour bin ich dann wohl außen vor - also wünsch ich Dir eine tolle Entdeckungstour mit David und warte ab, bis Du die neuen Rekordbäume dokumentiert hast! Gern würde ich aber mal hinzukommen, wenn David das vorführt, alle Einzelheiten interessieren mich. Vielleicht könnte er Triton noch mal besteigen und mit meinem 100m-Metall-Bandmaß einen noch genaueren Messwert erzielen. Noch spannend für mich ist die Frage, wie er den Rest des Baumes vom Bandmaß bis zur Spitze mißt.
Zu seinem 75m-Triton hat er mir jetzt auch den Standort am Mühlwaldweg bei Waldtraut bekanntgegeben. Das erscheint mir unglaubwürdig, ich halte ihn jetzt eher für einen Scherzkeks, jedenfalls nicht für einen verläßlichen Baumvermesser.
Also ich habe jetzt eine interessante und sehr anstrengende Tour hinter mir. Scherzkeks trifft es ganz gut. Die Waltraud ist und bleibt der höchste Baum Deutschlands. Ich habe heute sehr viele Douglasien vermessen. Es war der ein oder andere 66er dabei, aber keiner der höher ist als Waltraud. Waltraud hat nach meiner Messung 68.6m. Näheres heute Abend, da werde ich dann auch den hier korrigieren.
Habe heute Waldtraut besucht, habe einen Messwert von 67,85 m. Ist nicht ungewöhnlich, dass ich mit Trupulse bei hohen Nadelbäumen einen halben bis einen
Meter weniger raus kriege als die mit Nikon messenden Leute. Werden abwarten müssen bis der Herr Pfeifer mit seinen Lehrlingen und hochwertigen Landvermessergeräten ein neues Ergebnis bringt.
dg2405, at 2024-04-21 07:00:17, edited at 2024-04-21 07:01:55, said:
Ich habe noch das ein oder andere Bild hochgeladen, u.A. ein Drohnenbild der Spitze von Waltraud.
Die Messung hier wurde korrigiert. Eine Neue Douglasie habe ich angelegt. Ein anderer 66er, lt. meiner Messung, war hier schon von euch angelegt. Da habe ich eben eine neue Messung hinzugefügt. Dem Herr Koch legte ich nahe sich auch ein einfaches Nikon-Gerät zuzulegen, dann kann er auf die "Jagd" gehen und sich wieder melden wenn er was gefunden hat 🙂
Mich fasziniert das Drohnenfoto von Waldtrauts Spitze, die sieht ja noch richtig gesund und wachstumsfreudig aus!
Dieses Drohnenfoto gibt mir keine Information preis über das Aufnahmedatum und die verwendete Drohne/Drohnenkamera. Mich würde sehr interessieren, ob man mit Hilfe einer Drohne einen genaueren Höhenmesswert hinkriegt. Ich stelle mir vor, man positioniert die Drohne nahe und genau in Höhe der Spitze und misst dann mit unseren Lasern auf die Drohne. Dann hätte man einen präziseren Reflexionspunkt als von der natürlichen Spitze und man erhielte einen genaueren Messwert.
The photo on Wiki Commons clearly shows it to be multi-stem; the major low branches give a substantial increase in the girth at normal measuring height.
PS this photo has a cc-by-sa license, so it can be uploaded here. You need to state the source and license, and say who took it, that is all.
Ok Conifers. Je ne connaissais pas cette photo, seulement un grand nombre d'autres photos prises sous un autre angleet qui donnaient l'impression d'un tronc plus homogène. Je vais classer l'arbre comme multitronc si tu ne l'as pas déjà fait. DBZT.
Hi! Does anyone know if there's anyway to link the map of trees to my google maps account or other maps? Would be so useful to find when there"s one around :-)
That's sad - the only one in Britain that I've seen photos of, with a decent straight trunk. The lack of summer heat here usually leaves them a very poor shape as the wood doesn't ripen and harden up properly in late summer.
L'hybride Platanus x hispanica, d'après la littérature botaniste, est apparu en 1650. Son âge maximum devrait donc être de 374 ans. Comment cet arbre et celui de la Nie en Charente peuvent-ils être plus âgés ? Attention aux ''légendes'' historiques !...
Agree that is far too old! I've added an estimate of 1850 ± 40 years, which fits the size of the tree better. But there really does need to be a better mechanism for removing impossible ages (dates claiming a tree to be older than the species' existence in a region).
Someone should go to Railsback St. In southern Caddo Parish, Louisiana and measure the Southern Red Oaks at approx street number 457 around the hill. There were several gigantic ones there when I lived there as a child.
You have chosen "Laser with Three-point measurement". Could you please explain, how did you measure the tree? Which instrument did you use?
Regards
Kouta
Treeriders, at 2024-04-07 19:39:31, edited at 2024-04-07 19:55:23, said:
Dear Kouta,
Always nice to talk with you,
I was just about posting about this topic!
Using a lumberjack's cross or a common forestry laser (i had a trupulse 200L) is the same : Distance to the tree / angle to bottom / angle to top = Tangente method : Easy but subject to operator's aiming and parralax errors (deviation between top and bottom).
The Sine method (frequently seen on the measurements description) means you get the distance to the bottom and the distance to the top. It's more accurate (no influence of the tilt of the tree) but you need to "touch" the top wih your laser (so far, few forestry laser offer this option).
Sine method gives statistically lower heights, due to this "need" of consistent "material" to point at.
I'm consequently very interested in all community's experiences about shooting right!
We tried once to use the Sine method with a Leica Disto D8 aiming to a target hold by a climber at the top, to compare several method. Measurements were closer to the climbing ones but still not so accurate :)
Regards,
Bertrand
(After reading, Nikon forestry pro 2 offers both methods : Sine (2points) and Tangente (3 points). Most of the others lasers have only tangente method in routine)
I asked that because you have also added tape measurements on MT, so I thought maybe you have accidentally chosen a wrong method.
Wit Disto D8 it is almost impossible to get response from tree top. Its laser beam is too weak. Most measurers still use Nikon lasers, but today there are also other brands, like Chinese Suaoki, Huepar HLR1000, Boblov NK-1000 and Polish Yato YT-73129. TruPulse lasers are more expensive and accurate.
D'après les images street view de Google maps, en fonction du contexte (automobile, personnage), la circonférence de cet arbre doit se situer entre 8 et 9 mètres à 1,30 m du sol, absolument pas > 13 mètres ! Cette mesure est probablement celle de la circonférence au niveau du sol.
I'd say this should count as a multi-stem tree; the fork starts well below measuring height (close to ground level, going by the bark ridge running down from the join), and separated by about 1.8 m (assuming the person is average height!).
Hello, Does anyone know the location of the largest beech tree in the world, which is supposedly in the Soignies Forest in Belgium? I haven’t yet found the location. I love visiting trees.
BTW, I will have some to add to the list for Belgium. Thank you.
Bonjour, Est-ce que quelqu’un connaît la localisation du plus grand hêtre du monde, qui parait-il se trouve dans la Forêt de Soignes en Belgique?
Pour info, j’ai quelques arbres à ajouter pour la liste belge. Merci
Hello, Does anyone know the location of the largest beech tree in the world, which is supposedly in the Soignies Forest in Belgium? I haven’t yet found the location. I love visiting trees.
BTW, I will have some to add to the list for Belgium. Thank you.
Bonjour, Est-ce que quelqu’un connaît la localisation du plus grand hêtre du monde, qui parait-il se trouve dans la Forêt de Soignes en Belgique?
Pour info, j’ai quelques arbres à ajouter pour la liste belge. Merci
There are two old olive trees on this site. The tree mentioned is the oldest, but about 15 metres from this tree there is another one, that is maybe 600 years old or so. I do not remember the age rightly, might be much older, as it is also an impressive tree. I have pictures of both these trees, which I visited on 9 august 2020.
I try to add this tree. I do not know when it was planted exactly, but it is at least 100 years ago. I am not confident enough of the planting date to click on a specific date in the list. This seems to indicate that I cannot add further details.
I measured the circumference around the beginning of March 2024, at 1.30 m height as explained here. It was 2.06 m.
This is one of the golden cultivars of Cupressus macrocarpa, not x Cuprocyparis leylandii, which is less spiky-looking and more scruffy. I would guess a young specimen of 'Lutea', though it could be a big 'Goldcrest' (or 'Donard Gold'?).
Hi Aidan - I'd agree with Cupressus macrocarpa 'Lutea'. It doesn't look like pics of 'Goldcrest', that has more uniform, less 'spiky'-looking branch tips. 'Goldcrest' also isn't very hardy; I doubt it would get by without cold damage in the Netherlands, whereas 'Lutea' is hardier than average for Monterey Cypress clones.
Thanks for your comments. Funny thing .. my first guess was Cupressus macrocarpa 'Lutea'. I was not sure, so I asked someone else for his opinion . He tolded me that Cupressus macrocarpa is not "Winter proof" in The Netherlands, so it probably is "Cupressus x leylandii". I will ask him again.
Hi Nardo - Thanks! It's only a young tree, no more than 20-25 years old (it grows very fast!), so will not have experienced any severe winters, having lived only in the period of modern global warming. While Cupressus macrocarpa was not 'winter proof' in The Netherlands in the past, it probably is now.
Hi Conifers, We are not convinced ... yet. 2012 for example was a pretty cold winter in the Netherlands. I have been looking for photo's of both species and they can look almost alike. Leylandii can also be very spiky I found out. For example see:
This is definitely Cupressus macrocarpa! Big trees can be found all the way up in Scotland, granted they do have the benefits microclimates up there, but there is no reason to suggest that a young tree like this cannot survive in the Netherlands, especially with climate change.
I would agree that Cupressus x leylandii 'Gold Rider' is similarly spiky, but it still looks too wispy looking in my opinion for this tree to be one.
Check the cones when you next visit to be certain.
It is certainly Cupressus macrocarpa from the photo. 'Goldcrest' (seen a lot in England as a young tree) will probably get as broad and irregular as that as it gets older; 'Lutea' isn't usually as bright yellow as that but it's hard to tell the foliage colour for certain in a photo. But many other similar sports have been named and sold over the years and in Holland I expect some other clones will have been widely planted.
Today I visited the tree again and found some cones. All fullgrown cones were more than 2cm in lenght upto almost 3cm, so it must be a Cupressus macrocarpa. I changed it on MT.
But I would not expect the tree to grow this rapidly at 50° N. I wouldn't even expect that it could survive our winters. This winter we had up to -10 °C...
Yes, surprising it has survived at all in Belgium! The top is dead, though.
I remember one of these in a garden in Bangor, Wales, when I was at university; I measured it, 14 m tall. I asked the gardeners how old it was. They said it was 6, or 7, they couldn't remember which.
Could well be that it benefits from microclimate in between the houses. This plateau is relatively cold, with regular very cold eastern winds. Probably the top is exposed and suffered from frost.
Would you expect the leaves to survive, if they had been frozen in a cold night?
So I go for a thermal optimum at night between 1 m and 8 m high approx.
Exactly what I was thinking, it's grown out of the shelter, and its exposed top got hit bad. The dead part will resprout readily from thicker branches just below where it has been killed to. If a colder winter kills it to the ground, it will still resprout from the stump, unless the roots froze as well (in which case it will be outright dead).
Dieser Baum wurde im März wegen der Inanspruchnahme für den Tagebau Nochten gefällt. Aus ihm wird ein Brückenteil für die Brücke in Spreetal Neustadt-Ruhlmühle.
The dawn redwood was known only from fossils until a remnant population was discovered in China during WW2. This tree would have been planted in the 1950s at the earliest.
Het lukt me niet om een heel grootte zomereik(omtrek 5.75 om 1 meter hoogte) toe te voegen . als ik alles heb op geslagen zegt die bij een foto toevoegen dat de boom nog niet geregistreerd is.
The summit of “Pain de Sucre”, the high place and the symbol of the fight to save the Bager forest, a refuge for very rich flora and fauna, against a quarry project.
Je ne pense pas que cet arbre dépasse beaucoup les 8 mètres de circonférence. La base de son tronc n'est pas circulaire ; de ''profil'', on peut même tabler sur un diamètre deux fois inférieur au diamètre ''de face''.
Hola, buenos dias, estoy intentando crear como siempre la ficha de un nuevo arbol monumental en mi ciudad española de Elche, antes de subir despues la fotografia, y me aparece siempre un mensaje de error, por algun error tecnico cuando valido la ultima pagina del proceso.
Os sugiero si podeis verificar el correcto funcionamiento de la web, porque parece ser que finalmente he podido comprobar que se crea correctamente el registro del arbol pero se va duplicando y asi quedan vacias varias fichas de arboles, porque al aparecer un mensaje de error, ello a muchos usuarios nos hace pensar que no funciona y lo volvemos a repetir. Gracias, Raul Agullo Coves
Un fuerte abrazo y muchas gracias de nuevo por vuestra web y gran trabajo de divulgacion, que nos estimula especialmente como herramienta didactica para incentivar la conservacion de arboles monumentales en nuestro entorno local que es donde mas podemos influir a nuestros amigos, familiares, conocidos y ciudadanos.
A ver si Tim, el administrador y fundador de la web ve tu mensaje y le echa un vistazo pero suele estar muy liado. De todos modos es uno de los encantos que tiene esta página, suele dar algún problemilla. Se ha convertido en una gran base de datos y no hay presupuesto, supongo que es por este motivo.
sarevok, at 2024-03-10 03:34:54, edited at 2024-03-11 01:40:19, said:
Hi haavar! I have 2 questions for you. The norway spruces along Kluksgilet in Eitorn, Western Norway, how tall do you think they are today? Have new measurements been done since 2016? One of them was 46.4 metres in 2016. And how tall do you think the tallest spruce is today in south of Finede, Horn, Östergötland, Sweden? Have new measurements been done since 2016? It was 46.7 metres in 2020.
Hälsningar från Ulrik, also known as Sarevok in the skogsforum-site
Hi, it's hard to tell how tall these are today. First of all the lidar-data from this area is bad and old. Second it's very steep in this area so hard to judge exact. Likely the lidar data didn't get the tippy top of this spruce, so it could've been a bit taller too, but hard to tell. Today I would suppose this tree is among the very tallest Norway spruces in Scandinavia, probably close to Styggvanngrana!
sarevok, at 2024-03-11 22:41:03, edited at 2024-03-11 22:51:32, said:
I saw you were there and measured it from the ground some years ago, that measurement was accurate, right?
Now it maybe is even higher than Estonia's highest norway spruce which they say is around 50.4 metres tall.
Eitorn I want to go to, Estonia I will not. I've checked that area in Estonia with lidar and didn't find anything that tall. Not sure how they measured the spruce. Also Estonia isn't a part of Scandinavia, so not that interesting.
sarevok, at 2024-03-16 02:38:01, edited at 2024-03-17 17:20:31, said:
Haavar! I'm glad you want to go to Eitorn, You have checked so many trees in Norway, so why why would you not check the final location, and finally find out the which norway spruce is the heighest of styggvangrana and the ones in Eitorn? When will you try to get to Eitorn and check the Norway Spruces there?
I checked the site here on monumental trees, the site says Estonia has a record tall norway spruce that is 48.6 metres tall and a record tall scots pine that is 46.6 metres tall. So you have checked Estonias Norway spruces with Lidar? I would definitely go there if I had your job and if those 2 record trees still existed in Estonia.
sarevok, at 2024-03-17 17:26:11, edited at 2024-03-17 17:27:42, said:
One final questions my friend. The Norway Spruce in Estonia that they said was 48.6 metres, how tall was that spruce the LIDAR when the spruce still existed in the LIDAR?
The Scots pine in Estonia that they said was 46.6 metres, how tall was the scots pine in the lidar When the Scots pine still existed in the Lidar?
Dont remember exactly, but the tallest tree in that area was a few meters lower than expected. I'll probably check the area again soon. I found some other tall trees in Estonia, both larch, spurce and some deciduous.
sarevok, at 2024-03-20 00:55:23, edited at 2024-03-20 01:02:35, said:
Interesting picture. Well, I would say that the Estonia Norway spruce never became taller than the mölnbacka spruce here in Sweden, which died at 49.6 metres tall.
You would also say so right? That this estonia Norway spruce never got taller than the Mölnbacka spruce.
But if this Esotnian norway spruce somehow has survived to this date, how much do you think it has grown per year from 2015 to this date?
And what about the scots pine? how much do you think it has grown from 2015 to now?
Haavar Bunes, at 2024-03-20 10:54:18, edited at 2024-03-20 10:57:20, said:
Hard to say, can't see how the condition is higher up on the spruce in 2019. I think it got atleast close to Mölnbacka one, if it's not taller.
The pine too is difficult. The pines looked like they were in great condition in 2019. Also the pines are much more impressive than the Norway spruce to me. Just insane ones. I would assume the tallest should be 48-49 today maybe, although that's mostly guessing.
Sorry, not directly above, but nearer - for some reason there's still a rope barrier around it. Which could of course be ignored, but would sooner get permission first in case of unexpected reaction. Will ask.
in my last entry I changed the tree species to: Prunus subhirtella 'Acculade'. After that an error message was displayed preventing further entries. Can you please switch this off?
Hello Frank - I don't know if this is the cause of your problem, but the spelling should be 'Accolade', not "Acculade". Also, as its parentage is uncertain, it is usually just cited as Prunus 'Accolade', without any species attribution. Hope this helps!
Se trataría en principio del ejemplar piñonero vivo más longevo del término municipal de Elche, tras haber arrancado el Ayuntamiento de esta localidad otro magnífico ejemplar de propiedad pública municipal en el casco urbano, por haberlo secado con obras públicas en las que no se tuvo en cuenta este patrimonio arbóreo para desviar apenas unos pocos metros una excavación para la instalación de un nuevo entubamiento subterráneo en el popular barrio de San Antón donde el susodicho pino piñonero centenario y de porte monumental, estaba asociado a antiquísimas tradiciones ilicitanas que se celebran anualmente en su entorno.
Es la consecuencia de no tener todavía aprobado un catálogo municipal de árboles singulares a fecha de 23 de Marzo de 2024, y una sencilla ordenanza o similar normativa municipal para fomentar su conservación y divulgación como herramienta de gran valor educativo sobre los valores naturales del entorno ciudadano.
Looking at Maarten's photo I realise that this isn't Betula papyrifera (as it's always been catalogued) at all. B. ermanii x pubescens (an accidental hybrid from B. ermanii seed germinated here, as often happens) becomes the obvious identification and is a birch known to get this bigger.
From its shape, with horizontal limbs and the bole visible all the way up, I would guess this is Cupressus lusitanica (of which several have been recorded at Rostrevor) rather than C. sempervirens. It is certainly different from the bigger rather weeping tree here which is recorded on monumentaltrees as C. lusitanica (not previously measured), but this tree was reported by Aubrey Fennell (I think Aubrey and 'festscambo' were working together on this survey?) as the arguaby distinct C. benthamii. This latter tree seems not to have been measured before, but might be the same as a Mexican cypress described as an 'old tree' in Elwes and Henry and probably from Portuguese seed sent by Lord Ferrard in 1809 (though a 'much larger tree' had blown down at Rostrevor in 1903). I haven't checked the original text of Elwes and Henry to see if they were distinguishing C. lusitanica and C. benthamii; I suspect not.
Could be, but also C. sempervirens is very variable in shape with intergradation between the fastigiate cultivars and the natural wild type. I'd want to see some cones to be sure.
As an aside, C. benthamii is distinct from C. lusitanica in genetics; in all probability, "C. lusitanica" may turn out to comprise multiple species, as it has never been examined on a range-wide basis (think like the old "C. arizonica" now split into 5 or 6 species).
Conifers, I remind you that we have agreed not to change information before the uploader has expressed his opinion. However, in this case I guess DB will not disagree. Probably he has just forgotten to change the multitrunk setting.
@ KoutaR. Thank you Kouta. That's the way to do it; respectful and avoid conflicts. Don't change the characteristics of a tree if the guy who registered the tree is not made part of the decision.
Je comprends vos remarques, cependant c'est volontairement que j'ai classé ce noisetier comme mono-tronc, car jusqu'à 45 cm de hauteur moyenne au-dessus du sol, sur tous les côtés j'ai constaté que ce ne sont pas plusieurs troncs accolés, remplis à l'intérieur d'un mélange de terre et de feuilles séchées, mais bien un gros tronc ligneux et sans crevasses verticales majeures, assez lisse même, sur lequel et autour duquel viennent se rattacher de nombreuses branches, dont je n'ai pas tenu compte dans ma mesure. Je n'ai mesuré que ce tronc basal lisse et ligneux, compact, constatable sur tous les côtés. La photo de la base montre mal tout cela, je l'avoue. Dès que je pourrai je retournerai sur place et prendrai plusieurs photos supplémentaires, et après, vous jugerez... Je ne me vexerai pas si vous le considérez comme multi-tronc, don't worry !
In The Netherlands and I think that's not an isolated problem, people who have the mark of being a scientific employee, think they are in a position to tell others what they must and can do. I will never accept that. Remember that nowadays scientists are living in a buble and are parroting one after another in what must be the standard. A horror for the real scientists. I will resist them.
if you aim me in your last comment, I can tell you I'm not a scientist, nor an universitarian. My job was consisting in making plugs in drilling cores and maintenance of a core stock. I am only passionate for botanics from my youngest years, in amateur.
Why did you add new measurements for the 47-metre spruces? I understand that you wanted to correct 47.02 -> 47.20 but in such case you should correct the former measurement, instead of adding a new one. In case you don't have enough rights to edit a measurement, please ask somebody to do that. You refer to the measurements made by F. Melakari. I suppose you have not measured the trees by yourself?
Plenty of pics available with a google search (it's a famous tree). From these two, it has a good dense healthy crown, though looks like it's lost its top at some stage:
The original top has snapped a long time ago, but the tree is still almost 60 m tall. Otherwise the tree is, as far as I remember, in a good shape.
Still more than this tree, I liked neighbouring Olympic National Park. One of the greatest park I have hiked. A primeval wilderness with giant Douglas-firs, Sitka spruces and western redcedars, wild rivers and snow-capped mountains.
sarevok, at 2022-04-25 23:31:37, edited at 2022-04-30 02:52:08, said:
Koutar, I wanna ask you about the picea abieses in romania.
Vinca Veche. During research, a romanian discovered a spruce which is 62.5 meters high and maybe is the tallest in Romania at present. The measurements were performed with a digital ultrasonic hypsometer. The previous record is a 61.5 meter long spruce in the Penteleus forest in the Buzău area, discovered by Professor Ion Popescu-Zeletin.
Do these picea abieses still exists? where they taken down? if the spruces were measured, where they longer than the 62,26 metre spruce in slovenia? How tall were they?
There is a Norway Spruce called 'Vlado' at the Perucica Forest Reserve, Sutjeska National Park, Republika Srpska, in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The top of this tree has been broken off in the past, the tree has been taller even before this happened. How tall do you think this norway spruce was before the top broke off?
sarevok, at 2022-04-26 02:35:34, edited at 2022-04-26 02:36:19, said:
koutar, third question. Norway Spruces along the river Biogradska rijeka, Biogradska Gora National Park, Montenegro, Montenegro
In two days among many spruces only 5 trees were measured with a height of over 55 m in this forest reserve, but it is not impossible there are some spruces of 60 m or more. The best way to find these is to make a LiDAR survey of the whole forest.
Have a mission been made to measure as many trees as possible there? or is there still an unexplored area there that could have norway spruces above 60 metres?
Hello sarevok! Next time please place your question under the tree/location in question.
The "62.5-metre" tree in Sinca Veche is not spruce but silver fir (Abies alba). The measurement was made by the Romanian University of Suceava. Mr. Ghircoias from the local forestry office brought me to the tree in 2019. I measured it with TruPulse 200X laser and it was only 51.7 m. Mr. Ghircoias (and I) was very disappointed. This clearly shows how unreliable the ultrasonic hypsometers are when measuring single trees, and it is incredible that still today many university researchers don't understand how an ultrasonic hypsometer functiones and why it does not give accurate tree heights. The tree is also on MT here:
The researchers also "measured" a beech more than 50 m in height. I did not get an accurate height because of very dense canopy but anyway it is not much more than 40 m. However, I measured a very tall 48.10-metre beech which the researchers have not noticed at all, although it is clearly visible from the trail.
I have not see the "Vlado" tree. As Jeroen, Michael and Vlado measured it, I was alone in another part of the reserve. Next year I was not there at all. So I can say nothing about the "Vlado" tree.
In Biogradska Gora, there is definitely potential for 60+ m tree and still many unexplored locations as far as I know.
I measured the "Vlado"spruce in 2012 and 2013. How tall it has been before the top broke off I cannot say but it is not impossible the tree originally was around 60 m tall.
Jeroen
sarevok, at 2022-04-30 02:43:36, edited at 2022-04-30 02:53:31, said:
Ok, thanks for answers all. But, Kouta, what do you you think of the western russian forest? or ukraine or belarus? shouldn't there be a norway spruce there longer than 62 metres? Have no laser-scans been made there with airplanes to find high tops of trees there?
Western Russia and and Belarus are colder or/and more continental. The height potential of Norway spruce there is probably like that in Bialowieza at most, i.e. slightly over 50 m. The Ukrainian Carpathians could have potential to ~60 m. I am not aware of laser-scan data. In many European countries the data is not freely available.
sarevok, at 2022-05-13 00:59:21, edited at 2022-05-13 01:05:06, said:
yeah, laser-scans are not freely available in some countries. but in montenegro and bosnia they should do laser-scans and give them freely to people. I would seriously guess there is a norway spruce there that is higher than Sgermova Smreka. Wouldn't you guess that?
I also read somewhere that a picea abies that was 62 metres high had fallen in bosnia, is this true? if so, that was not a tree very far away in height compared to sgermova smreka.
It's possible. "InSearchOfGiants" reported one tree in Croatia with a broken top that according to him has likely been taller than Sgermova Smreka in the past.
With a fallen 62-metre spruce in Bosnia, you likely mean the tallest of the "three sisters" in Perucica. Very unreliable height. The other two "sisters" were much lower than the park administration claimed. In addition, Prof. Leibundgut and Prof. Pintaric reported a 63-metre spruce in Perucica, Bosnia. (It was not the "sister" because they described an entirely different growing site.) However, also this measurement is very unreliable for two reasons. Firstly, as is old, from the fifties, it has definitely been done with tangent method which usually results in over-measurements. Secondly, the figures by Leibundgut & Pintaric are unreliable anyway because they give different numbers in each of their publications.
sarevok, at 2022-05-17 23:27:20, edited at 2022-05-18 00:50:17, said:
How high did he think it was before the top was broken off?
kouta, i sent this question to that guy u mentioned too.
and why not make a lase-scan of high tree-points in that forest where he found such a tree?
Read the description. I think there are not equally tall trees in that reserve. It is a relatively small reserve and the rangers likely know it well. Thus, a laser scan would not help.
sarevok, at 2022-05-18 17:47:23, edited at 2022-05-18 23:42:27, said:
.
sarevok, at 2022-05-18 23:43:43, edited at 2022-05-18 23:44:05, said:
kouta, I guess this is the last question. It has been interesting.
In what year was the top broken off from that epic tree that maybe was taller than the sgerm-spruce?
well kouta, I thank you for the answer, but I think you are wrong about the Norway spruce in Estonia. You said it is probably is the same height today as in 2015.
Extremely tall norway spruces in scandinavia usually grow about 0.2 meters per year. So i would guess the spruce is 50.4 meters tall today. What do you say to that?
Well, I obviously meant that the tallest spruces grow 0.2 meters per year for about 13 years. I Thought you understood that I'm not that stupid.
Anyhow my friend, I would really thank you if you could travel to Estonia and measure the talles norway spruce and scots pine in Estonia. Has the Norway spruce in Estonia finally become taller than 50 metres?
Could we end this discussion under the large Sitka spruce. These topics have nothing to do with the American Sitka spruce. If you want to discuss about the Estonian trees, please go to the Estonian spruce or pine and click "Comment" (top right).
A better pic of the remains of the stump, taken 18th March 2024. Manna Ash, Fraxinus ornus, to the right (possibly also at risk as it's grafted on to Fraxinus excelsior).
Thanks! Even better if you can get a pic taken from directly above.
But looking at the front edge of the stump, appearing all twisted, I'm suspecting more it may have blown down before it was cut. The decay in the entire central area is very obvious.
De omtrek is niet te meten op 1,30 of 1,50 meter omdat de stam zich op ongeveer 1,20 meter vertakt in twee dikke stammen. Op ongeveer 70 cm, net onder de splising heeft de stam een omtrek van 3,20 meter. De dikste stam heeft net boven de splitsing een omtrek van 2,70 meter
The stump of the champion Macedonian Pine at Stourhead felled in the winter of 2023-24. Sorry it's not a better photo - I assumed somebody would have already mentioned it - this iimage was just in the background of a family snap.
Sad. Health and safety as usual! Perhaps we should stop driving cars equally dangerous!! 2700 killed on UK roads each year. How many trees fall on people in UK which are fatal? 10 per year perhaps?!
Would certainly be interesting to hear from the gardens management. At the moment, we don't even know whether it broke apart in a storm or not, before the stump was cleared.
A hollow cylinder of a trunk is still strong, but if it becomes a forked hollow down into the roots or up into large branches, there are very weak points where it is liable to break up.
Dans le tableau des cèdres de l'Atlas, un spécimen apparaît en tête (circ. 10 ,40 m ; h. 29 m) dans le Jardin Massey à Tarbes. Cet arbre n'existe pas. Le plus gros est celui de Jurançon (circ. env. 9 m).
This tree was felled by the National Trust some time in the winter of 2023-2024. It was one of the earliest exotic plantings at Stourhead, apparently. "By far the largest in the country" according to their old tree list. Perhaps now one of the biggest stumps!
I personally believe that longevity of Giant Sequoia in its native habitat, will unlikely be reached in the UK? Partly due to evidence of observing decay in felled trees over 130 years in the heartwood, on some trees. Caused by Heterobasidion annosum and root death caused by Armillaria. But there maybe exceptions?
Apparently there are now more mature Sequoiadendon in the UK than in their native habitat. With a possible 500,000 UK specimens, the gene pool could provide a valuable resource for reintroduction to its native habitat in the distant future?
However with Sequoia sempervirens it appears no decaying fungi present in the UK are adapted to attacking it. So perhaps as it is even better suited to the UK climate and increasingly so with climate change. Subsequently it may outlive/outgrow Sequoiadendron?
Conifers, at 2024-03-13 14:44:14, edited at 2024-03-13 14:44:43, said:
Doesn't strike me as a very good article; spotted several points in a quick glance:
* Abstract: the "half million" trees in UK is both species, all ages (including newly planted); figures for California are only S. giganteum, mature trees - probably only those older than any in UK counted?
* Abstract: "We show that UK-grown S. giganteum can sequester carbon at a rate of 85 kg yr⁻¹ varying with climate, management and age" - with no per-area cited, this is meaningless! Per square metre? Per hectare? Per square km? Per tree?
* Introduction: "Sequoiadendron giganteum groves in California also have the highest AGB of any ecosystem in the world [4]" . . . wrong, it's S. sempervirens, as confirmed by their own reference #4!
* Fig 3: "For comparison, data are shown for the same period from Sequoia National Park, CA, United States, a key S. giganteum site. Given the elevation (>3000 m), the latter site is far colder overall with significant winter snowfall" . . . errm., >2000 m! Checked: 'General Sherman' is at 2100 m. Gymnosperm Database gives 900-2700 m for the species' overall range.
And yes, I'd agree that S. sempervirens is much the better adapted for high carbon sequestration in UK. As well as less liable to disease, it is much better adapted to our climate, self-seeding, which S. giganteum doesn't.
I only had a brief read conifers but it did sound interesting. Errors often creep in!
The scans of the trees I had not seen before. Crucially though a very limited sample of Giant Sequoias were studied and perhaps not the best specimens/sites in the UK either!
Regarding natural regeneration of Giant Sequoia in the UK. Seed can be at least 50% viable but as you know I am sure, the absence of the Chickaree and beetle which severs the stem to the cone causing cones to dry and shed seed, it remains problematic for natural regen. However cone fall from high winds with seeds settling on bare mineral soil, perhaps could germinate, but have never seen it yet. Also most of the mature trees in the UK are not in full cone production yet either.
Whereas Coast Redwood is now germinating prolifically in the UK. I put this down to the lack of -10c frosts now as opposed to 40 years ago. Allowing trees to flower, also frosts not killing small seedlings.
Giant Sequoia is doomed in the UK if humans were to vanish!
Thanks! Giant Sequoia cones do open quite readily in Britain, I've frequently found fallen open cones that were empty of seed by the time they'd fallen, and often seen brown open cones in the crowns of trees. UK specimens do also cone profusely, there's no problems there. I think its problems with regenerating here are more due to lack of suitable seedbed conditions - thick leaf litter, and intense competition from herbs & grasses in our much wetter summers compared to California's mountains. If it is going to regenerate anywhere in Europe, the places to look would be places that mimic its home environment better. High altitudes in the mountains of southern Spain or Italy would be my prediction; perhaps also the Atlas Mountains in Morocco.
sarevok, at 2024-03-09 19:08:39, edited at 2024-03-10 02:51:17, said:
so it was 44.4 metres in 2011 you say?
And now it is 46.7 meters?
Haavar, don't worry i'll go and check with my dad if the trees are alive. We couldn't go there during the winter. But now to the summer we can.
it doesn't look hard to measure them, but i'll leave that to you since you do this a bit better than us.
Haavar Bunes, at 2024-03-11 14:21:06, edited at 2024-03-11 22:06:58, said:
Hi, sadly the 46.7 meter one is logged today (checked in newer aearial photo). The 44,4 is another spruce, that is also gone today. Almost every spruce is either gone or dead, also including the second tallest in the area. The area got attacked by bark beetles alteast twice. The pines (atleast the tallest one) seems to be still standing and alive though!
sarevok, at 2024-03-11 22:37:55, edited at 2024-03-12 00:36:08, said:
oh ok! good to hear the very tall pine is left.
What about the third tallest tree of the area, the one spruce that was 45.10 metres tall, is it also gone?
Uhmm was this tree 45.10 metres in 2011, or do you mean it was 45.10 metres in 2022?
All trees are measured in 2022, but street view photos are from 2011. No newer street view available. Yes, all the tallest spruces are either dead or have falled / been logged.
Hi, these trees died somewhere between 2013 and 2019. It was for likely taller right before it died (compared to Styggvanngrana's height back then, which shouldve been around 46-47,5 in that span). Could try to find out more exact date of when these trees died.
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7013775,-97.4528309,3a,42.5y,259.07h,80.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sN4wPWBeZDj70KbSzKMS8DA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu shows the tree no longer there as of november 2023
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7013775,-97.4528309,3a,42.5y,259.07h,80.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sN4wPWBeZDj70KbSzKMS8DA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu It appears that sadly, Brian's tree was gone by November 2023. He seems to have switched to trying to raise a more climate-appropriate sycamore for his botanical legacy on the property.
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7013775,-97.4528309,3a,42.5y,259.07h,80.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sN4wPWBeZDj70KbSzKMS8DA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu was taken November 2023 and it appears that sadly Brian's tree is no longer there. He appears to have switched to attempting a more climate-appropriate sycamore as his legacy.
Beautiful trees. The bark looks very white in this photo, which is a slight indication for the closely-related E. viminalis (but that is seldom so straight when grown in Britain). The only sure way of separating the two seems to be that juvenile leaves of E. dalrympleana are roundish while those of E. viminalis are narrow and lanceolate, but a tree of this size may no longer be bearing any juvenile foliage.
The long straight trunk with such long hanging ribbons is also a feature of E. nitens, but I'm assuming you found flower-buds/fruit under this one (in 3s not 6s and 7s)?
Yes, very white bark, especially in the afternoon sun. The hanging ribbons of bark are probably the best of any Eucalyptus I've seen so far. I have a few more photos which I will send you in my full list of trees around the Shamley Green area. I couldn't find any juvenile leaves. The flower buds were I believe in 3s (though it wouldn't be a bad idea to go back at some point and double check), so I think its most likely a particularly shaggy barked E. dalrympleana.
Not a particularly 'monumental' tree, so added at least temporarily until I am sure of identification. I am 99% sure it is 'Accolade' due to the early flowering season and the semi double flowers. What are people's thoughts?
Bij de bomen wordt steeds aangegeven hoe oud hij is. Dat is mooi. Maar bij een boom die gekapt is loopt de leeftijdtelling door. Kun je daar wellicht iets op verzinnen?
Zie bijvoorbeeld deze: https://www.monumentaltrees.com/nl/nld/zuidholland/rotterdam/4210_crooswijk/9764/
Ik zie in het tekstje dat WB wel iemand wil rondleiden in het landengebied in het Zuiderpark. Dat zou ik graag willen! Ik ben biologiedocent en probeer wat opdrachten te verzinnen in het Zuiderpark voor klas 1. Als ik zelf wat meer weet over de bomen, kan ik er interessantere vragen bij verzinnen.
Ik ben die WB. Ik kom al jaren in het Zuiderpark en weet hoe handig het is als iemand wat basis-info verstrekt. Anders dwaal je er maar rond en weet je niet waar te beginnen. Je kunt contact met me leggen via wbrinkerinkatgmail.com. (Ik schrijf mijn exacte mailadres niet op om vervelende lieden te vermijden). Overigens lijkt het me verstamdig om te gaan kijken wanneer de blaadjes aan de bomen verschijnen, maar als het moet kan het ook zonder.
Nog een tip; in het verleden gaf de dienst Groenbeheer van de gemeente Den Haag een gratis boekje uit over het arboretum. Ik weet niet of dat nog steeds gebeurt, maar je kunt het proberen.
De kleinere broer van de "dikke " paardenkastanje die zich moest gaan bewijzen is om welke reden dan ook, ook geveld. Of er is gebleken dat ie misschien ook ziek is geweest of om een andere reden niet veilig meer was of misschien zelfs door de laatste storm is geveld is mij een raadsel, feit is dat de laatste boom van een vroegere oude kastanjelaan er ook niet meer is. Heel jammer.
Some people say that this is the biggest live oak in the USA, because other big ones are mutistemmed. This one is according to them the biggest one-stem tree. I utter some caution. Live oak usually develops as apparently "multistemmed". Not allways the case.
I don't know which Bunya-bunya Pine David based his painting on for the Tree Guide, but it can't have been in Britain. There were a couple of old records of mature trees in Cornwall, the larger of them 11m tall at Glendurgan in 1965, but the identification is in some doubt and the cold winters of the 1970s and 1980s put paid to them anyway.
Currently, there are a few young tree showing good promise, including a replacement at Glendurgan which I should be revisiting this spring. One in a group of nine at Mount Stewart in Co. Down was 10.4m tall by 2018 (not my record). There is even a small crowded sapling surviving in the Chelsea Physic Garden in London.
The grid reference for the group of Araucaria bidwillii at Mount Stewart is J5547870049. You can visualise that by pasting it into the grid reference field at https://irish.gridreferencefinder.com/.
Parana Pine Araucaria angustifolia grows rather slowly with us, but there are a few which I'd say were semi-mature. There are some pictures of these at https://www.treesandshrubsonline.org/articles/araucaria/araucaria-angustifolia/.
I'm the (volunteer) Registrar for the Tree Register, www.treeregister.org, which aspires to be a comprehensive database at least for rare trees like these. The online interactive database has a paywall, meaning that details like these won't show on a ordinary Google search. (This is partly because many of the trees are in private gardens where owners don't want indiscriminate publicity, and membership subscriptions also cover the costs of maintaining the Register.) For anyone with a deep interest in trees, becoming a member is well worthwhile.
Interesting aside, that Trees & Shrubs Online give A. angustifolia the English name Brazilian Monkey-puzzle; a much better choice than calling it a pine, which of course it isn't.
And now I think about Kew Gardens also has a para pine I remember seeing a few months ago, It was about 7-8 feet tall, I can't give an exact hight since of didn't bring my Nikon forestry pro.
What is most interesting is that this is a second planting of Douglas here, after the previous 1905 stand was partially felled pre 1948.
The remaining 1905 trees were exposed on the plateau and stood out for miles. With a max height of 37m. The younger circa 1948 trees rapidly grew and overtook the older trees to 40-47m. Now the older trees live in their shadows! Now the older trees are growing in height again due to shelter and reducing transpirational stress.
I measured the height of the Whitebeam I showed you. Recent thinning has given a better window for height measurement. Luckily this tree was left untouched.
Anyway 23.3m to the highest visible twig with laser on the tripod, so your vertical measurement was close.
Must be one of the tallest in UK? I hope to compare this with the one in Chesham Bois Wood soon.
I found a slightly higher twig on the nearby Wych Elm too @ 27.7m on the eastern stem.
So within 3km in this valley, one of the tallest Whitebeams, one of the tallest remaining Wych Elms in southern England and 2 Douglas Firs one we measured @46.3m and another recent tree nearby of 47.4m (Probably tallest tree in Home counties).
Thanks Owen that's great news. Do add it to your newsletter if you so wish.
The planted 1948 Douglas Fir some 3km from the Whitebeam are in fact on top of the Chiltern plateau on acid soil at about 140m od. Quite a few are over 43m, with at least a dozen 45m, in a plantation, still adding height. I will upload soon.
Another stand in the South Oxfordshire Chilterns has trees to near 48m. Quite a few to 46-47m. Hope to return to do a more thorough investigation.
Now with more accurate laser measurement one could almost draw contour lines on the country indicating max conifer tree height potential from TROBI records? Certainly moving north and east into the Midlands most conifers of 40m would be almost absent. Whereas to the south and west and northwest increasing tree height where shelter allows to over 60m.
Although I would be surprised its the world's tallest but who knows?
I will revisit to find its age sometime. The wood was planted at the same time as the Whitebeam so we can have a potential planting date too. Recent thinning work has been undertaken and it could have been quite easily felled!!
But as of no commercial value it stands. I seem to recall surrounding trees date to around mid to late 1930's on a ring count nearby.
Owen:-
Do you have any coordinates for the Whitebeam in Chesham Bois Wood, Bucks? I would like to find and remeasure with laser to compare. Thanks
The whitebeam at Chesham Bois was around SP96040020, near fence and footpath at top corner of the Woodland Trust reserve and forking at 1.5m. This was back in 2001 (David Alderman's record), so no guarantee that it's still there.
Here for general interest is a list of the tallest conifer recorded for each county in England (and excluding Essex and the Isle of Wight where only short conifers have been recorded). Demonstrating Stephen's point but also showing that soil is important (good soils on the Bedfordshire greensand, no good soils at all in Lancashire?).
Apologies for the poorly formatted list. Someone might be able to edit it to straighten the columns, I can't.
County Ht/m Year Genus name Species name Property name
Thank you very much Owen for that, very interesting. I can almost draw max tree height on contours on a map of England now in my head.
But perhaps not yet as some are still growing, some faster than others. I never thought Douglas would approach 50m in South Oxfordshire on the Chiltern Plateau however!
One thing might prevent us from ever knowing what the max height can be attained, maybe the fact that how many of these tall trees are standing in isolation, exposed to wind and max transpirational stress etc as opposed standing in a large block for example in a plantation?
@ Owen - fascinating list, thanks! But it deserves better visibility than a side-step in a discussion about a Sorbus aria photo. Can you repost as a separate thread, please?
Remember to tag it as a multistem tree, though - those stem centres will continue to close to ground level: it will have two pith centres well below measuring height.
Very difficult to say it has 3 pith centres. There is a strong union at 1.8m. More noticeable from the other side. This is where I suspect it forked when young sadly. From below this point I suspect its a single stem.
This tree has certainly grown faster than any in A. Mitchell's records. Examples include 3.43m in 104 years, a rate of growth half of this tree! Agree girth growth would be faster in this tree due to reaction wood below fork etc.
A classic example of how trees grow faster than most people realise and contradicts some claims that large trees are generally very old. Its the growing environment that counts!
Thanks! I'd still say multistem; if it was single stem below the level of the join, the join would be much more U-shaped to a narrower base below the fork, than the V-shape it is. And importantly, the forking is affecting the girth at measuring height, which is what the forking tag is about, "the girth can be larger than what would be expected of the tree of this age": if it didn't have that fork, its girth would be smaller (and more in line with other similar-aged Horse-chestnuts).
An analysis of the main stem indicates that a single stem is evident up to the 1.5m level. I don't think this tree is multistemmed. If the main stems divided at ground level then yes it would be.
Yes the growth in girth has been inflated due to buttress growth and reaction wood, but perhaps by only a metre in girth or so. If dividing higher up with a greater length of clear stem, then it still would be a potential champ for growth rate. There is something special about this valley for this species:-
1) High groundwater level beneath its root system. Its at the surface at present. No drought stress!
2) Deeply rootable well drained and aerated soil profile.
3) Slightly alkaline/neutral ph of high fertility probably high Nitrogen.
Hi Stephen - sorry, but that just doesn't make sense! The top of the fork where the stems become separated is at about 1.8 m (at the person's head height); for it to be single stem at the pith at 1.5 m height would require the pith centres to follow the green lines in this edit of your photo below, which just isn't how trees grow. The pith centres of the trunks will approximately follow the red lines below, with the divide at or very close to ground level.
One thing to remember is that the 'is the tree multi-stemmed?' box on this site is a tool that was originally designed to disqualify trees from appearing on the lists of the largest (unless the user deliberately includes such trees) - i.e. the implication is that the multi-stemmed nature of the tree makes the girth measurement meaningless. An example would be if I measured a hazel bush around all the little stems near the bottom and got a very big figure.
So it does a disservice to the site when trees whose girths are only slightly exaggerated by a fork or by heavy branches are also put into that category. You could argue that a tree that forks at 3m has a larger girth as a result than one which runs for 10m before it forks - certainly the tree with the 10m bole will be the impressive one if the girth is the same, but it's not helpful to 'disqualify' the one with the shorter stem from any comparison.
I'd agree 100% with Owen to "So it does a disservice to the site when trees whose girths are only slightly exaggerated by a fork or by heavy branches are also put into that category". But with this tree, it is a lot more than 'slightly' exaggerated; it's more like 50% greater than 5% greater. Heavily exaggerated, not slightly exaggerated. And that's my point!
Looking at the tree in question the volume and diameter growth of the 3 vertical stems without reaction wood 4m above the fork, would easily equate to a very large girth for a tree of this age. In this case I estimate a girth of 4.6-5.0m @ 1.5m, even if it forked at some 10m.
Still a potential growth record for this species. Therefore I disagree that the girth has been inflated by 50%. Other trees in this valley with single trunks have also grown very fast for the species, with single trunks.
The measurement was made at the narrowest point at 1.2m. The physiology of the tree indicates (perhaps where due to some accident the tree lost its leader) that it forked at that height, when very young. There is no evidence that the tree forks at ground level. If it did I would classify it as multi stemmed like a coppiced Hazel. There is no occluded bark which would indicate multi stems growing from ground level. It is a sound strong union. I agree the pith centres are evident above 1.2m for the near vertical limbs. With the fusing strong union above 1.2m increasing the height of the vertical trunk length.
Op 12-1-2024 tussen 6:16 en 9;57 zijn er een stel vreemde gebruikers bijgekomen. ALs je op info bij hun account kijkt zie je dat het spammers zijn. Geen serieus volk.
Similarly, there has been a rush of gas engineers joining up today (not that there is anything wrong with gas engineers). Can the bots do any real harm in this community or can we safely ignore them?
I noticed that too, plus a whole lot of "hvac" numbers. The potential for damage I see is that some day you'll find there are 2,000 spam posts advertising junk in the discussions, and/or with links that could compromise your computer's security if visited. Possibly other problems, I don't know.
Essentially it's not a problem as long as intruders cannot do too much damage. If they just want to spread a message no one reads there is no problem. It's essential that Tim can install guards. Dont think they can do much harm as long as Tim facilitates daily backups.
When I led the happenings descend and I've incorporated them, I think it's not so easy. Someone might build an army of trolls that, when acting together and coördinated, can inflict serious damage. Tim must have an opinion about it. I'm curious about it.
Yes, these are spam users. There is a check I wrote years ago that stops much more than are currently registering. I will have to revise that and send all users through that new scan.
As long as these are not posting spam messages or start editing, this is not very harmful.
Does anyone know what happened to the "Highwayman"? My parents went by there today (February 23rd, 2024), and stopped along a small bit of the trail adjacent, but saw no sign of it. I checked a different site¹ and it has nothing but a comment from October 7th, 2023 asking the same thing.
I measured the height of the Whitebeam I showed you. Recent thinning has given a better window for height measurement. Luckily this tree was left untouched.
Anyway 23.3m to the highest visible twig with laser on the tripod, so your vertical measurement was close.
Must be one of the tallest in UK? I hope to compare this with the one in Chesham Bois Wood soon.
I found a slightly higher twig on the nearby Wych Elm too @ 27.7m on the eastern stem.
So within 3km in this valley, one of the tallest Whitebeams, one of the tallest remaining Wych Elms in southern England and 2 Douglas Firs one we measured @46.3m and another recent tree nearby of 47.4m (Probably tallest tree in Home counties).
Difficile de dire si c'est un multi-tronc. J'aurais tendance à voir un arbre unique, dont les branches (ou ''troncs'' ???) se forment à partir d'au moins 2,50 m de hauteur au-dessus de la base inférieure du tronc (au bord de la route). Mais je préfère attendre le verdict des ''pros''...
From my observation and evidence the red line shows where the tree forked when young. From below this line a single stem for 1.2m. I reiterate that this tree is not multi stemmed from the base. See photo.
I feel you are being a little pedantic on this. There no way to tell for sure without the tree being felled.
Hi Stephen - I see where you're coming from, but the growth lines you have drawn, do not follow the grain of the trunk but cut across it at an angle; the ones I drew, do follow the grain. Also, by comparison with the other photo with the guy standing beside the tree, your horizontal line here is at hip height, about 1 m height or a bit lower, well below measuring height ;-)
You mention yourself (in the caption for photo 161439) that this is likely the fastest-growing Aesculus in the UK, because of its 3 massive upright limbs and associated reaction wood: but this is exactly why MT has the multi-stem disclaimer, that the tree's girth is larger than you'd expect for a single-trunk tree. You have to accept the results of your own conclusions!
Wim Brinkerink, at 2024-02-22 21:28:34, edited at 2024-02-22 21:42:12, said:
Hi Conifers,
I appreciate your contributions on multistemmed. I can learn from it. Without good discussion no progress. But if I confirm to the way you analyze and decide if there is multistem or single, a certain tree [22964] should be classified as multistemmed. But the first person who started to live in this house planted the tree herself. It is by 100% certainty just one tree. S all respect, but being decisive on multi- or single stemmed is not often very easy, but you are aware of it.
Thanks for the note! There's a big difference between multi-stem, and multi-tree! A single tree can still very easily become multi-trunk, if it has side branches, or multiple lead stems, which are not pruned. I have no problem accepting that Caucasian Wingnut (Pterocarya fraxinifolia) '22964' is a single tree; but when it was planted, some low side shoots (about a metre or a little more above the soil level) were allowed to continue growth until they became large branches, which add greatly to the girth at 1.3-1.5 m above ground. That is one very common way in which a single tree can become multi-stemmed. Hope this helps! - Michael (Conifers)
ronald1, at 2024-02-23 10:19:24, edited at 2024-02-23 10:22:32, said:
Deze linde bij de "mollenkapel" bij Maasbracht is de dikste en dus waarschijnlijk oudste van de drie bomen. Voor deze geldt dus de meting van ongeveer 3,2 meter omtrek en de leeftijd van ruim 160 jaar. De twee andere bomen zijn beduidend minder omvangrijk met respectievelijk ongeveer 1,5 en 1,9 meter omtrek en een waarschijnlijke leeftijd van tegen die 100 jaar. De minst omvangrijke boom heeft wel de meest indrukwekkende knot. Deze knot is in verhouding echt 'mega'.
Op de open plek waar veel beuken staan is te zien dat beuken in Nederland nauwelijks de 200 jaar halen. In de omgeving Wassenaar waar veel oude beuken op landgoederen staan, (Voormalig koninklijk bezit) he ik de afgelopen jaren veel beuken zien sterven. Jammer dat het in zo'n grote getale gaat. Met name op de open plek in de landgoederenroute (voormalig Backershagen) is de ravage groot.
Conifers, at 2024-02-13 11:24:49, edited at 2024-02-13 11:25:01, said:
We have one tree listed here as Quercus amplifolia. This name is listed by POWO as a synonym of Quercus pubescens, and not listed at all by the International Oak Database. Should it be moved to Quercus pubescens?
Estoy completamente de acuerdo con Saro . Sucede que como los ingleses no tienen apenas árboles autóctonos silvestres en su isla, porque los cortaron todos hace tiempo para calentarse en ese clima miserable , tienen que andar ahora, que se han quedado sin imperio y sin árboles, metiendo sus narices en los árboles de otros países pensando que aquí somos colonias y andamos en taparabos. Qué harto estoy del POWO y de los Kew Gardens!
AmisDesArbres, at 2024-02-11 13:15:01, edited at 2024-02-11 13:27:35, said:
Hi everyone,
I am trying to get started with "Monumental trees.com". Unfortunately, when trying to add a new tree, I keep getting this error-note: Warning: Undefined array key "subgroup" in /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/process.php on line 792 Fatal error: Uncaught TypeError: mysqli_num_rows(): Argument #1 ($result) must be of type mysqli_result, bool given in /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/process.php:854 Stack trace: #0 /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/process.php(854): mysqli_num_rows(false) #1 /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/process.php(145): Process->procAddTree() #2 /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/process.php(2661): Process->runConstructor() #3 {main} thrown in /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/process.php on line 854
The tree is a Aesculus hippocastanum, with white blossoms, I don't know of any "subgroup". Besides this, I filled in all the lines in the form,even the one about when the tree was planted (which can't be said, exactly, just an estimate from old photos), and don't know what happens here. Can anybody please let me know what to do? Thanks a lot!
Hi, I'm new to the site. I'm an experienced climbing arborist interested in measuring the UK tall trees. This Beech is close to my home in Derbyshire and would love to get an accurate measurement by climbing it.
Wim Brinkerink, at 2024-02-02 19:19:49, edited at 2024-02-02 19:29:45, said:
Jammer dat het een plek is met getallen en er geen relevante foto's zijn of bewijs van het bestaan van een boom. Op deze site is het beeld (foto) toch zeer belangrijk of? Gemiste kans lijkt me. Ik snap dat Leo Goudzwaard dit ooit met een andere blik heeft geüpload. Maar nu anno 2024, kun je hier niet zonder fot'os en beeld bezig zijn. Sorry Leo, maar doe meer je best. En voor de niet kenners. Sorbus is Leo Goudzwaard.
Thanks for registering this tree. I have changed it a bit. You tried to shield the location to protect the owner. I saw on the internet that the tree is part of a series of films on intenet. No one hesitates to show the tree and the location. So I changed things and changed location. I took care of respect to your input. It's still your registered tree (that doesn't facilitate claims by the way) and I have added some info.
Wim Brinkerink, at 2024-01-28 18:30:40, edited at 2024-01-28 18:31:39, said:
Dit is één van de meest opvallende beuken in Zuidholland. Mooi. Ik heb er nooit moeite voor gedaan om hem te registreren. Eén van de velen wat mij betreft. Maar, dank Gerrit dat jij dat hebt gedaan. Hij (of zij?)is het waard.
Als je de (uitvergrote) foto ziet zou je de boom schuin tussen 50 en 80 cm moeten meten. Maar wellicht trek je een andere conclusie als je de boom van een andere kant benadert. Altijd lastig met dit soort plastische bomen.
Dentro de dos años estoy seguro que alcanzara la altura de un cuarto piso,llevo 20 años viéndolo crecer y es impresionante ,eso sí el tronco es bastante fino y parece un abeto de navidad, tengo fotos pero no sé cómo subirlas ,en un rato libre miraré como subirlas
I am not certain of the definition for "multiple trunks". The people who handle the list in Michigan, USA indicate that they have changed how these trees are handled in the past five or six years. Using the description for "multiple trunks" from the Michigan officials, when I look at pictures for the largest US Black Cherry tree listed for the US in 2016 and the largest one in Canada for 2023, they both appear to start as individual stems at ground level that separate at some point above the ground. Do you have anyone that can make a consistent determination? I am asking this due to a tree that I had added back on 2022-12-06. Please let me know your thoughts. Thanks. Mike
Hola Mike, buenas noches. En Monumental Trees tenemos discusiones sobre el tema y existen varias opiniones al respecto. Yo considero que si hay un solo tronco que se divide por encima de 1,30 mts. no es multitronco.
So, Monumental Trees considers the definition of a single trunk if the separation is above 1.3. Is this correct?
If true, I had input the information a Black Cherry (Prunus Serotina) #58792 tree into the list back in December of 2022. It is noted to be multi-stemmed per some foresters that use different criteria. Can the entry for this tree be changed to be single-stemmed in the Monumental Trees list?
And I'd say that is a multi-trunk tree. Although the divide into two trunks is at about 2.5 m height, the centres of each trunk will be well below measurement height. When young, the fork was close to ground level, but the stems have gradually fused as they grew in diamater. This means, as the multi-trunk citation says, "the girth can be larger than what would be expected of the tree of this age". That is what matters.
I am still planning to measure the west stem of this tree. It is somewhere near 15' (over 4 meters) in girth. But it will need to be measured about 4 meters from the ground in order to get a clean measurement for girth. I expect that might still set this up for being 4th or 5th on your list.
My estimates would put this tree around 300 years old.
roburpetraea, at 2024-01-19 11:37:12, edited at 2024-01-20 09:48:56, said:
It's pending of aproval, but it seems that Quercus robur is going to be separated into Quercus orocantabrica and Quercus estremadurensis, sufficiently separated of European Quercus robur to be considered its own species. This adds another two endemic oak species to the already big iberian oak family. Quercus estremadurensis is also thought to have been native in Northern Africa, now nearly extinct. Here is an speciemen of Quercus estremadurensis recolected from Tanger:
Coming to Quercus orocantabrica, this is the description: "When comparing with typical Q. robur, the diagnostic characters are related with leaf length, shape, and texture. Typically, Q. orocantabrica has a thicker and leathery blade, with oblong to oblong-transovate shape. Moreover, the leaves are wider and glossy with unequal lobes, more than 6(8) secondary nerves and larger cups, with brownish and acute not-fused scales. Q. orocantabrica often presents both longer petiole (up to 15 mm) and peduncle (up to 15 cm) in comparison with Q. robur. These characters are collectively distributed across all syntypes, that are cited by the authors (Schwarz, 1937; Rivas-Martínez et al. 2002) in the protologues of both Q. robur subsp. broteroana and Q. orocantabrica."
It's going to be a challenge to differentiate this new species, as as far as I know Quercus orocantabrica grows together with Quercus robur in all the Cantabrian Mountain Range. It's going to be a real challenge, as with the phenomenon of the advance of the atlantic forest we are seeing all this species returning after centuries to their old habitats massively expanding their thought habitats from 50 years ago.
Classical image of todays Cantabrian Mountains, young trees growing of a thick Cistus shrubbrery. This were rye fields 50 years ago, today a woodland of Quercus pyrenaica, Quercus rotundifolia, Arbutus unedo, Castanea sativa and this lonely exemplar of Quercus robur/Quercus orocantabrica? is growing.
Honestly I can't differentiate between Quercus robur and Quercus orocantabrica, maybe because I learned to identify Q. orocantabrica with Q. robur?
Another potential exemplar of Quercus orocantabrica growing between two meadows, also feeding cows with its leaves.
They are wide, hard, glossy and with unequal lobes.
Yo pienso que en un género tan fluido como Quercus es muy arriesgado hacer nuevas distinciones claras entre especies , por la gran variabilidad de las mismas y las hibridaciones.
No se por qué se arrogan autoridad suficiente para nominar nuevas especies en base a unas diferencias morfológicas sutiles y discutibles, máxime cuando parece que ni han hecho estudios genéticos, los cuales serían indispensables para comprobar si realmente existe una disparidad lo suficientemente grande entre los ejemplares.
Es gracioso que unos autores portugueses y españoles publicando en una revista española escriban el artículo en inglés.
Buenas Ernesto, hombre también son diferencias genéticas las que entran en juego. La lengua científica internacional es el inglés, si quieres que te lean en el extranjero tienes que escribir en inglés, así está la cosa nos guste o no.
Pues no veo yo el análisis genético por ningún sitio. Otros trabajos sí se basan en ellos y podrían decidir sobre el tema.
En cuanto a que el inglés es el idioma internacional científico no veo por qué. Dónde está escrito eso ? Hay muchos trabajos publicados en español o en otros idiomas.
In a first visit I scrolled through some pages. It's very promising. And escpecially that on your first visit one sees the most beautiful pictures about forests. Thank you. .
The single most important improvement I would suggest would be following the IUCN or BSBI exactly for English vernacular names of species, thus Scots Pine, Macedonian Pine, Silver Birch, etc., not lowercase, which looks unprofessional in modern botanical writing.
The main list of virgin forests would be better indexed alphabetically by country (like they are in the subsection 'Other virgin forests'), rather than alphabetically by site. Currently, it is difficult to find e.g. all sites in Bulgaria.
Why are right-click and text highlight / copy disabled? Seems a bit pointless, mildly annoying (like with 'Other virgin forests' above, I had to type that out, rather than copy-paste as one normally would), without actually protecting the images from download.
Thank you for your comments. At the beginning we considered all the issues you mentioned.
Lower vs. uppercase. Both are used in English literature and websites. Lowercase is used, for example, by Wikipedia, Gymnosperm Database, Euforgen and Oaks of the World. Don Welsh said we should use lowercase and that was decisive for me. Could you give me a link to the suggestions of IUCN and BSBI? Has there been a change in recent years from upper to lowercase? Perhaps lowercase is used more in North America and uppercase in the UK? If you can convince me that lowercase is routinely used in the British literature today, I am could change the names, though it will be a big task to do.
The order of the forest in the list. I asked opinions of all the contributors and the current system won. A reasoning could be 1. that if one wants to quickly check a forest he knows, e.g. Bialowieza, it is easy to find, or 2. that the site is not mentioned to be a complete listing of all the virgin forest. If there would be a list item [Bulgaria: Dzendema, Parangalitsa, Rilski Manastir, Steneto], one could more easily think, these are the only virgin forests in Bulgaria.
Disabled right-clicking. You guessed, it is an easy, though clumsy, way to protect photos from easy download. Of course, any photo can be copied by Print Screen, it only makes copying more difficult and probably protects downloading the full size photos if the monitor is smaller. I put this in my todos list and we consider another way to prevent downloading.
Thanks! Yes, lowercase is used more in USA than UK; here, uppercase first letters is fairly routine. But also, lowercase tends to be used more by journalists and newspaper writers, and uppercase more by scientists (botanists, zoologists, etc.). Wikipedia used to use uppercase, until a bunch of primarily American journalists forced a change, which caused massive acrimony and resulted in a lot of expert editors leaving wikipedia to the trolls. The use of capitals for English species names has a very long history, for example Philip Miller's 1768 Gardeners Dictionary, or, even further back, William Turner's 1551 A New Herball - the very first botanical textbook in the English language - used capitalised English names.
Here are a couple of sample pages, from IUCN and BSBI, respectively. All, or virtually all, of the increasingly popular citizen science recording websites also use capitals, such as iNaturalist and Bubo Listing. So too does the International Dendrology Society's Trees and Shrubs Online.
Ok, I think you are right. The problem is that it makes a lot of work to read everything just for the first letters of species names. Particularly for gallery image captions, as the gallery images are not saved with the texts but in a separate library. I just estimated it would take six and half hours to go through and edit all the 839 photos.
Looking at the Rila photos, some of those Pinus peuce look strikingly tall - have any measurements of them been done? If not, it would be well worth tracking down the tallest.
Unfortunately, I have no measurements of P. peuce from Bulgaria. I only noticed afterwards from the photos that the trees look tall, indeed. Definitely on the todo list should I return there.
Thank you very much for creating this website, it contains so much interesting information that you couldn't easily find otherwise. And the photographs are really amazing. It inspires me to go visit some of these beautiful places and learn about them.
What is really missing in my opinion is an overview map of all virgin forests. I understand that you might not want to include all exact locations, for example if a forest is not open to the public. But for these i think a good solution is to place the marker somewhere else, for example at a nearby town, and add a disclaimer like "location disguised" to the pop-up, to avoid confusion.
Thanks Bomarni! You are right: The reason, why there is no overview map, is that all the locations cannot be revealed. We think about it, maybe the solution you proposed can be implemented.
When I try to access through "Main page" in spanish I get this
Warning: mysqli_connect(): (HY000/1203): User monumentaltrees already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/database.php on line 78 Fatal error: Uncaught ArgumentCountError: mysqli_error() expects exactly 1 argument, 0 given in /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/database.php:78 Stack trace: #0 /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/database.php(78): mysqli_error() #1 /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/database.php(795): MySQLDB->makeConnection() #2 /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/session.php(9): include_once('/customers/0/1/...') #3 /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/site/index.php(11): include('/customers/0/1/...') #4 {main} thrown in /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/database.php on line 78
Has anyone noticed any odd rapid accumulation of views in their photos? It has happened quite a bit recently to me, and in all of these cases, no votes or comments on these trees. Other trees have taken several years to approach these higher number of views. Just wondering if there is a potential glitch.
By now this site exists approximately 15 years. Originally inituated to register Sequoiadendron but luckely brothened wider. That's the moment when I stepped in. At that moment I added quite some German trees and other Germans picked it up. Later on this happened in Italy. By now it is settling itself as a database wherein monumentaltrees all over the world can be found. Let's thank Tim for it. Tim has managed the site/database and is able to keep it working despite his normal everyday obligations. So be aware that it can only exist with the contributions and coöperation of us all.
Die Website hat einige Programmierfehler, die es unmöglich machen, einen Baum hinzuzufügen. Man sollte auch eingeben, wann der Baum gepflanzt wurde. Woher zum Teufel soll ich das wissen ?
ik ben heel benieuwd waar je de gegevens over de plaats en de nabij staande boerderij hebt gevonden. Kun je mij daar meer over vertellen? Bij het Streekarchivariaat kwam ik geen informatie tegen.
Ik heb de kaart toegevoegd waarop de Kousekiek met naam wordt weergegeven. Ik kreeg een kopie van die kaart bij boerderij Busselserf in het buurtschap Leuvenum. Ik heb zelf in het Streekarchivariaat en verder op internet ook geen verdere informatie kunnen vinden.
Me llamo Jose Roces, y soy profesor (ayudante) en ciencias forestales en la Universidad de Oviedo (España). Mi línea principal de trabajo se basa en estudiar los principales beneficios que los bosques y los paisajes proporcionan a la sociedad.
Estamos interesados en hacer un trabajo científico, explorando los patrones geográficos de los árboles monumentales en España/Península Ibérica, así como estudiando los principales factores que afectan a que así se consideren (e.g. la especie, el tamaño del individuo, etc.).
Para ello, estaría genial disponer de la base de datos de los árboles (Españoles & Portugueses) incluidos en esta pagina web, con sus datos asociados (tamaño, especie, nombre, etc.) incluyendo las coordenadas X e Y donde se encuentran. ¿sería posible?
Por supuesto, el uso no sería comercial, y nos comprometemos a no distribuirlo, y citar de forma adecuada la fuente de datos.
No dude en contactarme en rocesjose@uniovi.es
Gracias por su tiempo y trabajo
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Hello, good afternoon
My name is Jose Roces, and I am a professor (assistant) in forest sciences at the University of Oviedo (Spain). My main line of research is based on studying the main benefits that forests and landscapes provide to society.
We are interested in doing a scientific work (a paper), exploring the geographical patterns of monumental trees in Spain/Iberian Peninsula, as well as studying the main factors that affect them to be considered as such (e.g. species, size of the individual, etc.).
For this purpose, it would be great to have the database of the trees (Spanish & Portuguese) included in this website, with their associated data (size, species, name, etc.) including the X and Y coordinates where they are located. Would it be possible?
Of course, the use would be non-commercial, and we undertake not to distribute it, and to properly cite the source of the data.
Do not hesitate to contact me at rocesjose@uniovi.es
De beuk op de veldmaarschalk montgomerylaan in eindhoven zag ik dat deze prachtige boom ook monumentaal is,mijn vraag is is deze beschermd want afgelopen zomer hebben ze deze boom geïnspecteerd maar weet niet bij wie ik moet zijn,en een gezonde boom op dit zelfde stuk grond is verwijderd weet ook niet waarom,ik woon op de grond van deze prachtige beuk en kijk hier iedere dag naar en zou hem niet willen missen,vriendelijke groet miranda blankers.
De bomen op deze site zijn soms monumentaal, soms ook niet. Het is heel vaak een persoonlijke mening van iemand. Het is niet anders. Het feit dat een boom hier geregistreerd is geeft geen garantie op monumentaliteit of iets anders. Helaas zijn monumentale bomen in Nederland niet of nauwelijks beschermd. Wel wordt er door veel personen of organisaties gehandeld als er gevaar is voor "monumentale " bomen. Dat hangt echter sterk van de plaatselijke omstandigheden af. Met name de Bomenstichting wil daar nog wel eens een rol in spelen. Maar dan moet er in de regio wel iemand zijn die dat op zich neemt. Zo niet is het kansloos. Ik zal eens kijken hoe de situatie bij de Bomenstichting in Eindhoven is. En anders pikt iemand uit de omgeving dit wellicht op.
Ciao buonasera sono Raffaello ci siamo visti oggi a Bolzano! Sono il ragazzo appassionato di botanica che sta a Castiglione della Pescaia. Grazie per il tuo suggerimento di monumental trees mi sono iscritto ora. Se vedo alberi di noci o di semi duri che penso potrebbero essere interessanti ti avviso, la mia email è rgar2309@gmail.com, e il mio n con whatsapp è 388 8747515, se passi da Castiglione della Pescaia fammi sapere, ci facciamo un caffè! Buona serata e buon lavoro a BZ!
I see regularly a comment that someone changed a description. It is often difficult to see what has been changed. Furthermore, sometimes I have doubts about the legitimacy of the change. I see that someone who is seldomly present, changes a description.
Agreed, it would be useful to have more details about what changed - if I just correct a minor spelling error, or if I change substantial details completely, both would show exactly the same summary.
1:22 Conifers has changed the description of a Sessile Oak in Windsor Great Park, Windsor, United Kingdom.
All I did was correct a typo ('succombed' → 'succumbed') and added a missing fullstop. But I could have changed a whole lot more substantially altering the entire text, and the summary in the Recent changes would be no different. It isn't possible (except presumably for Tim / Admin.) to see what changes have been made.
Er is een nieuw boek verschenen van de hand van Gert fortgens, de voormalige hortuaris van Trompenburg. Het boek lijkt alleen te koop in de winkel van Trompenburg. Ik denk dat niet iedereen in de gelegenheid is om daar even langs te gaan en Trompenburg verstuurt de boeken niet. Ik heb Gert gevraagd hoe ik aan het boek kan komen. Nou: bestellen bij LM publishers. Je betaalt slechts 2,50 verzendkosten en het boek kost 29,95.
Zie hier de link. (en Tim dit is geen commerciële boodschap) De liefhebber wordt graag geïnformeerd over Trompenburg.
Not sure if you know this fact, but Puck Pitts, Boulderwood and Rhinefield Drive were planted by the Deputy Surveyor Lawrence Henry Cumberbatch.
This will include the probable Corsican Pines, Giant Sequoia, Coast Redwoods Champion UK Norway Spruces and European Silver Firs etc at the above localities.
(A Modern Sylva or a Discourse of Forest Trees by H.L. Edlin)
The main English page link https://www.monumentaltrees.com/en/ is broken; it gives this error message:
Warning: mysqli_connect(): (HY000/1203): User monumentaltrees already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/database.php on line 78 Fatal error: Uncaught ArgumentCountError: mysqli_error() expects exactly 1 argument, 0 given in /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/database.php:78 Stack trace: #0 /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/database.php(78): mysqli_error() #1 /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/database.php(795): MySQLDB->makeConnection() #2 /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/session.php(9): include_once('/customers/0/1/...') #3 /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/site/index.php(11): include('/customers/0/1/...') #4 {main} thrown in /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/database.php on line 78
The only way I can enter the website is to go to one of the other languages (e.g. replace /en/ with /nl/ ), and then click on 'View in English'; other pages like https://www.monumentaltrees.com/en/discussion/ are OK, it is just the main link.
I had the same problem. Tried another browser (Fireworks) and it worked. In the next step I started with chrome again and pressed F5. That was the solution. No problems anymore.
Yes, that error message appeared on all pages for short time yesterday while I was working on the site. I know why, will not explain :-)
It is likely some of those pages (in Conifer's case the English main page, could just as well have been another one) made it into your browser's cache. Simply hitting F5 in your browser after that time would have solved it (no need to go to another browser) or simply waiting until it expired in the browser's cache, would have helped too.
Na de storing van gisteren is er toch nog een foutje blijven hangen. Op de boompagina's wordt de boomhoogte niet altijd goed weergegeven. Bij enkele metingen is er geen probleem maar als een boom meerdere keren is opgemeten wordt de tabel met hoogtemetingen niet weergegeven. Zou je daar naar kunnen kijken?
¿Estas seguro de que en esta ubicación esta el "Castiñeiro do Maestro? En este lugar concretamente no hay ningun arbol monumental. El famoso castaño es el que he registrado yo después, sin saber que estaba aqui este otro registrado por tí y que está a unos 250 metros de distancia.
Creo que seria bueno para el sitio web no registrar árboles que no visitemos o midamos nosotros mismos, al no ser que estemos muy seguros de su ubicacion o que hayan muerto y solamente quede constancia de él en archivos o fotos.
Hola Alberto, buenas noches, no estoy seguro, recuerdo haber pasado con el coche por la carretera y haber visto un castaño grande en la entrada del pueblo, supuse que era ese el Castaño del Maestro, pero me puedo haber equivocado, quizás debí preguntar al del bar-hotel del pueblo, con el que estuve hablando . Cámbialo si crees que es otro.
Pero no veo que pusiera yo que ese era el Castiñeiro del Maestro. En fín , en la entrada del pueblo hay un castaño grande, no se si será ese u otro.
Alberto C F, at 2023-11-27 19:34:11, edited at 2023-11-27 19:35:58, said:
Hola Ernesto,
Disculpa, no he visto tu mensaje hasta ahora.
La verdad es que yo en esta ubicación no vi ningun árbol muy grande aunque hay buenos castaños por todo el pueblo y toda esa zona. Por la parte más alta del pueblo hay varios castaños de 5 o 6 metros de circunferencia. Fue un paisano el que me indico cual es el Castiñeiro do Maestro y fue él quien me dijo que perdió la rama mas grande y alta hace no muchos años, de hay la discordancia en altura de la medicion que anotaste tu y la mia.
Lo que he hecho, si no es inconveniente por tu parte, ha sido editar el nombre dejandolo vacio y poniendoselo al que registre yo.
De haber visto que estaba registrado este árbol antes de registrar el mio, hubiese modificado la localizacion simplemente.
Hola Alberto, creo que me equivoqué al colocar la localización, que la puse cientos de mts. antes de entrar en el pueblo. Si el que tu dices está al entrar en el pueblo por la carretera a la izda. ese es el que yo vi. Tengo un amigo en ese pueblo que vive saliendo para el puerto de Ancares, y como te dije estuve hablando con el del hotel que es primo suyo, pero no me preocupé de preguntar por el Castaño. Un saludo Alberto.
Hi, I was wondering how I could get in touch with you guys. We are a group from Chile with a project called Gran Arbol. Very similar approach and we see so much potential for collaboration. Let me know if there is an email I could explain to you more, or even better, schedule a meeting with the team.
the technical part behind this is just a one-man project I started when I was a student.
Now, many years later, I'm still extending the functionality and maintaining the site (for which the magnificent content gets added by many) every time I have a little time. I like the idea of collaboration but I'm afraid I cannot make any commitments due to time lacking on my side. I would like to keep it fun for myself (doing something because there is time) and not make if feel like a job or obligation (doing something/having meetings/... because I committed to something I cannot support).
a long standing request was taken care of: it is now possible to not only "edit" your own measurements (which is: change the value, measurement method, ...) it is not also possible to remove your own measurements. Note that these measurements are never really deleted, they are simply marked as deleted and can be recovered on request.
It is now also possible to add multiple measurements in the same year. That might cause some troubles with the growth rate calculations, have not tested that thoroughly. Let me know if something goes wrong.
Certain users can now also delete measurements of others - obviously, please only use this in case of obvious errors (typo, incorrect tree measured, ...), in any other doubtful situations it would be polite to initiate a discussion first.
today a long standing known bug was solved: if a tree got marked as timbered, cut down, collapsed, ... the girth measurement for the entire location in the lists was not necessarily updated. This is now the case.
Désolé de vous déranger, mais j'aimerais vous acheter du quercus trojana et des glands libanais si possible. S'il vous plaît, aidez-moi, donnez-moi un prix et je paierai via PayPal. Salutations: Zoltán
Désolé de vous déranger, mais j'aimerais vous acheter du quercus trojana et des glands libanais si possible. S'il vous plaît, aidez-moi, donnez-moi un prix et je paierai via PayPal. Salutations: Zoltán
Die grössten Zapfen aller Nadelhölzer besitzt die im westlichen Nordamerika heimische Zuckerkiefer. Sie können eine Länge von bis zu 60 cm erreichen und sind im geöffneten Zustand bis zu 25 cm breit. Die Zuckerkiefer ist auch die höchste aller Kieferarten (bis über 80 m).
Vorig weekend heb ik in de Uddeler Heegde in het Kroondomein een boom ontdekt die mogelijk de hoogst gemeten boom van Nederland is of kan worden, zie hier de registratie: Common Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) '61086'. Na twee bezoeken en uitgebreid meten met een Nikon Forestry Pro kwam ik tot 51,1 meter. De huidige recordhouder Common Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) '3028' in het Paleispark in Apeldoorn had in 2020 een hoogte van 50,5 meter (op deze website ingevoerd) en 50,8 meter (in het register van de Bomenstichting) dus dat scheelt niet veel, en de boom zal in de afgelopen 3 jaar ook nog wat gegroeid zijn. Het zou mooi zijn als iemand anders mijn meting in de Uddeler Heegde kan controleren en dat de boom in het Paleispark ook opnieuw gemeten wordt om uitsluitsel te geven.
Vandaag heb ik de Douglas in het Paleispark gemeten en kwam op 50,6 meter dus wat mij betreft is de Douglas in de Uddeler Heegde de hoogst gemeten boom van Nederland, maar zoals ik hiervoor al aangaf zou het mooi zijn als iemand mijn metingen kan controleren. Wat mij vandaag wel opviel is dat van de boom in het Paleispark de naaldbezetting een stuk beter is dan die van de boom in de Uddeler Heegde. De laatste zal waarschijnlijk meer last hebben gehad van de droogte van de afgelopen jaren. De locatiehoogte speelt daarin een rol, die is in de Uddeler Heegde 47 meter en in het Paleispark 21 meter en in het Paleispark valt jaarlijks ook meer neerslag. De levensverwachting van de boom in het Paleispark schat ik dan ook hoger in.
baldwald, at 2023-11-14 03:56:59, edited at 2023-11-14 03:57:53, said:
Wir würden gern für unsere Waldseite baldwald.de einige, wenige Fotos von munumentaltrees nutzen. Wie und wo können wir die Fotografen um eine Genehmigung anfragen?
J'ai retrouvé l'article : le 5 mars 2022, Elijah W. et Jeff Riddle ont mesuré un Q. rubra près de la jonction Armes Gap/Fodderstack Mt./Lookout Tower Trail (Frozen Head State Park), le premier, muni d'un Trupulse 200X, a mesuré 50,29 m (165 ft.) ; le second, muni d'un Nikon Prostaff 440, a trouvé 50,08 m (164,3 ft.)
Quelqu'un peut-il dire si les appareils de mesure sont équivalents au Nikon Forestry Pro ?
Jeroen Philippona, at 2023-11-12 23:03:23, edited at 2023-11-12 23:20:18, said:
Yes, these lasers are probably more accurate than the Nikon Forestry Pro, so these measurements are reliable. Jess Riddle is one of the most experienced tree height measurers from the USA. They realise that it is a Quercus height regord for the USA and outside Mexico for Northern America.
Yes, these lasers are probably more accurate than the Nikon Forestry Pro, so these measurements are reliable. Jess Riddle is one of the most experienced tree height measurers from the USA.
Wim Brinkerink, at 2023-11-08 21:32:43, edited at 2023-11-09 09:40:48, said:
Vandaag Trompenburg weer bezocht (in the rain). Jaap Smit is daar de nieuwe Hortuaris. Veel ambitieuze plannen.Onder meer verplaatsen van de ingang naar de Oostzeedijk. (Dat zou niet mijn prioriteit zijn, maar zolang anderen (gemeente) dat betalen is er niets mis mee. Erg toegankelijk. Mooi. Daar gaan we veel meer van zien en horen. Jaap leidde me in de regen langs de toppers in zijn ogen. Ik ga die plaatsen. Die toppers zijn onder meer Maytenis boaria en Acer sinopurpurascens . Jaap leidde me ook op mijn verzoek langs de verschillende Koelreuteria's.
J'ai retrouvé l'article : le 5 mars 2022, Elijah W. et Jeff Riddle ont mesuré un Q. rubra près de la jonction Armes Gap/Fodderstack Mt./Lookout Tower Trail (Frozen Head State Park), le premier, muni d'un Trupulse 200X, a mesuré 50,29 m (165 ft.) ; le second, muni d'un Nikon Prostaff 440, a trouvé 50,08 m (164,3 ft.)
Quelqu'un peut-il dire si les appareils de mesure sont équivalents au Nikon Forestry Pro ?
I have a huge (equivalent not seen anywhere) of Vachellia Sieberiana with a diameter at its widest of approximately 30m or more. I believe it may be a record
In meinem Wald sowie ebenfalls in Nachbargemeinden stehen jeweils Fichten, die ich mit meiner (allerdings auf cirka 0,3 m ungenauen) Meßmethode auf Gesamthöhen von 50 und 51 m gemessen habe. Leider gelingt es mir nicht, diese Informationen in das dafür vorgesehene Formular einzutragen. Bitte um Rückmeldung unter Daniel.Brucker.1900@web.de
Wim Brinkerink, at 2023-11-03 17:02:51, edited at 2023-11-03 18:43:48, said:
Im testing to add pictures to a discussion, It has something to do with embedding I think. I'll try it for the moment. Excuse me. https://futuretreehealth.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Cotton-Tree-Sierra-Leone-1024x574.jpg
I think this one didn't work. couldn't embed it. I could make a QR-code, but that's not enough. This one is copying a link to the pic. I do not want the link but the picture shown, as I have seen others do.
Conifers, at 2023-11-03 22:04:34, edited at 2023-11-03 22:08:48, said:
Hi Wim - you want {img src="link to picture" alt="name of picture"}, except replace the curly brackets { } with triangular brackets < >. But in general, it isn't a good idea, as it can lead to copyright problems for the website owner Tim, unless you own the copyright of the picture.
gefeliciteerd met deze bijzondere vondst. Ik ken dat eikenlaantje als ik vanaf een tankstation naar het zuiden van NL-limburg rijd. Ik ga er zeker eens op letten.
Added. Though (as with Quercus acerifolia) we don't have any specimens listed here: MT isn't a global listing of all tree species, we generally only add new species, when a notable specimen of that species is measured and added to the database. There isn't any point in adding names for which we don't have measured specimens!
Thank you for joining. We can appreciate your contributions. But please complie to the ways we do our things in this community? Please?? And contribute in the normal way? And you perfectly know what is normal and what is not. Or? Any doubts about what's normal?
AggloTrees, at 2023-10-29 21:42:59, edited at 2023-10-30 21:26:13, said:
Der Baum steht im Baugebiet, hat schätzungsweise einen Durchmesser von mindestens 80cm (Umfang ca. 2.5m) und eine eindrückliche Höhe. Er soll nächstens zu Gunsten von Parkplätzen, von denen es in dieser Gemeinde mehr als genug hat, gefällt werden!
In diesem Gebiet dürfte künftig ein neues Quartier entstehen. Das ist gut so. Trotzdem sollte meiner Meinung nach diese Pracht-Hagebuche erhalten und integrierender Teil des Grünraums dieses Quartiers werden. Sie wäre nicht nur schön, sondern könnte auch einen wertvollen Beitrag an die künftige Siedlungsqualität leisten.
Schöne Bäume sollten nicht nur in Pärken, Wäldern oder im Offenland stehen, aber auch in einfachen Quartieren und in Agglomerationen. Was meint ihr dazu?
■ Die älteste Baumwurzel hat der 'Huon Pine", eine Kiefer.
Sie befindet sich in Tasmanien. Zahlreiche Stämme lassen auf einen Kiefernwald schliessen, aber es ist nachgewiesen, dass sie alle aus ein und demselben Wurzelgeflecht entspringen und ein einheitliches Genom besitzen.
10.500 Jahre alt ist das Wurzelgeflecht der sogenannten "Huon Pine" in Tasmanien - das haben Wissenschaftler herausgefunden. Aus den uralten Wurzeln sprießen immer wieder neue, genetisch identische Kiefern. Die Pflanze klont sich also immer wieder selbst. Die älteste Kiefer darunter ist etwa 2000 Jahre alt. Diesen Trick nutzen vor allem viele, sehr alte Pflanzen. Im Jahr 2009 haben kalifornische Wissenschaftler einen Busch gefunden, der sich seit 13.000 Jahren selbst klont. Er stammt also noch aus der letzten Eiszeit. Mittlerweile hat sich der Jurupa-Eiche getaufte Busch an die sengende Hitze Kaliforniens gewöhnt und sich demtentsprechend angepasst. Genug Zeit dazu hatte er ja.
■ Die älteste Baumwurzel hat der 'Huon Pine", eine Kiefer.
Sie befindet sich in Tasmanien. Zahlreiche Stämme lassen auf einen Kiefernwald schliessen, aber es ist nachgewiesen, dass sie alle aus ein und demselben Wurzelgeflecht entspringen und ein einheitliches Genom besitzen.
10.500 Jahre alt ist das Wurzelgeflecht der sogenannten "Huon Pine" in Tasmanien - das haben Wissenschaftler herausgefunden. Aus den uralten Wurzeln sprießen immer wieder neue, genetisch identische Kiefern. Die Pflanze klont sich also immer wieder selbst. Die älteste Kiefer darunter ist etwa 2000 Jahre alt. Diesen Trick nutzen vor allem viele, sehr alte Pflanzen. Im Jahr 2009 haben kalifornische Wissenschaftler einen Busch gefunden, der sich seit 13.000 Jahren selbst klont. Er stammt also noch aus der letzten Eiszeit. Mittlerweile hat sich der Jurupa-Eiche getaufte Busch an die sengende Hitze Kaliforniens gewöhnt und sich demtentsprechend angepasst. Genug Zeit dazu hatte er ja.
■ Die älteste Baumwurzel hat der 'Huon Pine", eine Kiefer.
Sie befindet sich in Tasmanien. Zahlreiche Stämme lassen auf einen Kiefernwald schliessen, aber es ist nachgewiesen, dass sie alle aus ein und demselben Wurzelgeflecht entspringen und ein einheitliches Genom besitzen.
10.500 Jahre alt ist das Wurzelgeflecht der sogenannten "Huon Pine" in Tasmanien - das haben Wissenschaftler herausgefunden. Aus den uralten Wurzeln sprießen immer wieder neue, genetisch identische Kiefern. Die Pflanze klont sich also immer wieder selbst. Die älteste Kiefer darunter ist etwa 2000 Jahre alt. Diesen Trick nutzen vor allem viele, sehr alte Pflanzen. Im Jahr 2009 haben kalifornische Wissenschaftler einen Busch gefunden, der sich seit 13.000 Jahren selbst klont. Er stammt also noch aus der letzten Eiszeit. Mittlerweile hat sich der Jurupa-Eiche getaufte Busch an die sengende Hitze Kaliforniens gewöhnt und sich demtentsprechend angepasst. Genug Zeit dazu hatte er ja.
Das natürliche Verbreitungsgebiet der Schuppenrindigen Tanne liegt in China. Dort findet man sie in den Gebirgen Süd-Gansus, Süd-Qinghais, West- und Nord-Sichuans sowie Südost-Xizangs. Sie wächst in Höhenlagen von 3000
■ Die schuppenrindige Tanne (Abies squamata) wächst auf 4600 m Seehöhe am Ost-Himalaya in Sichuan und ist damit der Baum, der der dünnsten Luft ausgesetzt ist.
■ Die schuppenrindige Tanne (Abies squamata) wächst auf 4600 m Seehöhe am Ost-Himalaya in Sichuan und ist damit der Baum, der der dünnsten Luft ausgesetzt ist.
Der Baum, der auf der Welt am häufigsten vorkommt .
Eine Frage die man wohl derzeit nicht eindeutig beantworten kann. Es ist eine recht exakte Schätzung möglich.
Mit sehr hoher Wahrscheinlichkeit sind dies Nadelbäume in der Taiga. Da dort auf Grund des harten Klimas eine geringe Artenvielfalt herrscht, überwiegen hier die Nadelbäume. Auch die Ausbeutung durch den Menschen wird durch das rauhe Klima doch sehr erschwert als in anderen Regionen unserer Erde.
Gemäß Expertern gelten die drei dort vorkommenden Baumarten als die häufigsten unserer Welt:
■ Kanadische oder Schimmelfichte (Picea glauca)
■ Dahurische Lärche (Larix gmelinii)
■ Sibirische Lärche (Larix sibirica)
Eine Statistik gibt es darüber aber nicht. Die drei Baumarten werden sozusagen von Experten als die Favoriten angesehen.
■ Die vorherrschendste Baumart der CH mit rund 48 Prozent als auch in Europa
Der Baum, der auf der Welt am häufigsten vorkommt .
Eine Frage die man wohl derzeit nicht eindeutig beantworten kann. Es ist eine recht exakte Schätzung möglich.
Mit sehr hoher Wahrscheinlichkeit sind dies Nadelbäume in der Taiga. Da dort auf Grund des harten Klimas eine geringe Artenvielfalt herrscht, überwiegen hier die Nadelbäume. Auch die Ausbeutung durch den Menschen wird durch das rauhe Klima doch sehr erschwert als in anderen Regionen unserer Erde.
Gemäß Expertern gelten die drei dort vorkommenden Baumarten als die häufigsten unserer Welt:
■ Kanadische oder Schimmelfichte (Picea glauca)
■ Dahurische Lärche (Larix gmelinii)
■ Sibirische Lärche (Larix sibirica)
Eine Statistik gibt es darüber aber nicht. Die drei Baumarten werden sozusagen von Experten als die Favoriten angesehen.
■ Die vorherrschendste Baumart der CH mit rund 48 Prozent als auch in Europa
Die nachweislich ältesten Bäume der Welt stehen ebenfalls in Kalifornien, in den White Mountains: Es sind die "Bristlecone Pines" oder Grannenkiefern (Pinus aristata). Ihr Holz zeigt etwa 100 Jahresringe auf einem Zentimeter. Der älteste von ihnen heißt "Methusaleh" und ist über 4.700 Jahre alt. Die Tamrit-Zypressen im algerischen Tassiligebirge sollen 4.000 bis 5.000 Jahre alt sein. Hier fehlt aber ebenso der exakte Beweis wie bei einer japanischen Sicheltanne auf der Insel Yakushima, die alles andere in den Schatten stellt: Ihr Alter wird auf ungefähr 7.000 Jahre geschätzt.
Die nachweislich ältesten Bäume der Welt stehen ebenfalls in Kalifornien, in den White Mountains: Es sind die "Bristlecone Pines" oder Grannenkiefern (Pinus aristata). Ihr Holz zeigt etwa 100 Jahresringe auf einem Zentimeter. Der älteste von ihnen heißt "Methusaleh" und ist über 4.700 Jahre alt. Die Tamrit-Zypressen im algerischen Tassiligebirge sollen 4.000 bis 5.000 Jahre alt sein. Hier fehlt aber ebenso der exakte Beweis wie bei einer japanischen Sicheltanne auf der Insel Yakushima, die alles andere in den Schatten stellt: Ihr Alter wird auf ungefähr 7.000 Jahre geschätzt.
Der Riesen-Eukalyptus (Eucalyptus regnans), auch Königs-Eukalyptus genannt, ist eine in Australien beheimatete Laubbaumart aus der Gattung Eukalyptus (Eucalyptus) in der Familie der Myrtengewächse (Myrtaceae).
Der wohl höchste Laubbaum der Welt.
Beschreibung
Der Riesen-Eukalyptus ist ein immergrüner Baum, der ein Alter von etwa 400 Jahren erreichen kann. Er bildet eine schmale Baumkrone an einem geraden Stamm aus. Die Rinde ist grau und an den untersten 5 bis 15 Metern grob gefurcht, darüber eher glatt.
Der Riesen-Eukalyptus (Eucalyptus regnans), auch Königs-Eukalyptus genannt, ist eine in Australien beheimatete Laubbaumart aus der Gattung Eukalyptus (Eucalyptus) in der Familie der Myrtengewächse (Myrtaceae).
Der wohl höchste Laubbaum der Welt.
Beschreibung
Der Riesen-Eukalyptus ist ein immergrüner Baum, der ein Alter von etwa 400 Jahren erreichen kann. Er bildet eine schmale Baumkrone an einem geraden Stamm aus. Die Rinde ist grau und an den untersten 5 bis 15 Metern grob gefurcht, darüber eher glatt.
Die Edle Tanne oder auch Silber-Tanne (Abies procera) genannt, hat die größten Zapfen aller Tannenarten. Diese sind oft so schwer, dass sich die Zweige nach unten biegen und die Tannenzapfen schräg nach unten hängen. Aufgrund der schönen blaugrünen Färbung und der Haltbarkeit der Nadeln ist die Edle Tanne ein sehr geschätzter Weihnachtsbaum.
Die Edle Tanne oder auch Silber-Tanne (Abies procera) genannt, hat die größten Zapfen aller Tannenarten. Diese sind oft so schwer, dass sich die Zweige nach unten biegen und die Tannenzapfen schräg nach unten hängen. Aufgrund der schönen blaugrünen Färbung und der Haltbarkeit der Nadeln ist die Edle Tanne ein sehr geschätzter Weihnachtsbaum.
Wer auf der Suche nach sehr langsam wachsenden Bäumen im Garten ist, der sollte eine Gewöhnliche Eibe (Taxus baccata), Grannen-Kiefer (Pinus aristata), Korea-Tanne (Abies koreana), Nobilis-Tanne (Abies procera, Syn.: Abies nobilis) oder Nordmann-Tanne (Abies nordmanniana) pflanzen.
Zu den schnellwachsenden Nadelbäumen im Garten mit mehr als 30 cm Längenwachstum im Jahr zählen die Gemeine Fichte (Picea abies), Koloradotanne (Abies concolor), Große Küstentanne (Abies grandis) und Waldkiefer (Pinus sylvestris).
Schnellwachsende und langsam wachsende Nadelbäume :
Wer auf der Suche nach sehr langsam wachsenden Bäumen im Garten ist, der sollte eine Gewöhnliche Eibe (Taxus baccata), Grannen-Kiefer (Pinus aristata), Korea-Tanne (Abies koreana), Nobilis-Tanne (Abies procera, Syn.: Abies nobilis) oder Nordmann-Tanne (Abies nordmanniana) pflanzen.
Zu den schnellwachsenden Nadelbäumen im Garten mit mehr als 30 cm Längenwachstum im Jahr zählen die Gemeine Fichte (Picea abies), Koloradotanne (Abies concolor), Große Küstentanne (Abies grandis) und Waldkiefer (Pinus sylvestris).
Die größten Zapfen der Welt bei Nadelbäumen findet man bei der Zuckerkiefer (bis 60 cm lang und 25 cm breit), die mit Wuchshöhen um die 80 Meter auch die höchste aller Kiefernarten ist.
Die Fortingall Yew gilt als Europas ältester Baum; sie steht im Dorf Fortingall in Perth and Kinross in Schottland; ihr Alter wird auf 3000 bis 5000 Jahre geschätzt.
Dies ist das schwerste, kommerziell genutzte Weichholz und wächst in den gesamten USA in einem Bogen von Virginia über Florida bis an den Golf von Mexiko.
Erscheinungsbild
Das cremerosafarbene Splintholz ist recht dünn und kontrastiert mit dem gelbroten bis rötlichbraunen Kernholz mit seiner auffälligen Wachstumsringzeichnung. Es ist harzig mit einer groben Textur.
Eigenschaften
Darrdichte liegt zwischen 650-690 kg/m³. Holz trocknet gut mit geringer Schwindung. Arbeitet kaum und verfügt über hohe Biege- und Druckfestigkeit, hohe Tragfähigkeit und mittlere Schlagfestigkeit. Nicht zum Dampfbiegen geeignet.
Verarbeitung
Kann gut von Hand und maschinell bearbeitet werden. Der Harzaustritt kann Probleme bereiten. Bietet guten Schrauben-, Nagel- und Klebehalt. Die Oberfläche läßt sich leicht behandeln.
Holzschutz
Moderat alterungsbeständig, wobei es hin und wieder zu Käferbefall kommt. Holz ist resistent gegen Holzschutzbehandlung, aber das Splintholz ist permeabel.
Dies ist das schwerste, kommerziell genutzte Weichholz und wächst in den gesamten USA in einem Bogen von Virginia über Florida bis an den Golf von Mexiko.
Erscheinungsbild
Das cremerosafarbene Splintholz ist recht dünn und kontrastiert mit dem gelbroten bis rötlichbraunen Kernholz mit seiner auffälligen Wachstumsringzeichnung. Es ist harzig mit einer groben Textur.
Eigenschaften
Darrdichte liegt zwischen 650-690 kg/m³. Holz trocknet gut mit geringer Schwindung. Arbeitet kaum und verfügt über hohe Biege- und Druckfestigkeit, hohe Tragfähigkeit und mittlere Schlagfestigkeit. Nicht zum Dampfbiegen geeignet.
Verarbeitung
Kann gut von Hand und maschinell bearbeitet werden. Der Harzaustritt kann Probleme bereiten. Bietet guten Schrauben-, Nagel- und Klebehalt. Die Oberfläche läßt sich leicht behandeln.
Holzschutz
Moderat alterungsbeständig, wobei es hin und wieder zu Käferbefall kommt. Holz ist resistent gegen Holzschutzbehandlung, aber das Splintholz ist permeabel.
Ich bin relativ neu auf dieser Web-Seite unterwegs. Daher habe ich auch wenig Erfahrung mit dieser Seite.
Ich hätte eine Frage dazu : Welches sind die Kriterien, um eine Baumart in der Liste aufzunehmen ?
Müssen es sehr hohe, oder Bäume mit extremem Stammesumfang sein ? Ausschliesslich ? Denn es fehlen ja viele Spezies, z.B. bei den Tannen (Abies). Kann mir jemand Auskunft geben, was da gefordert ist ? Oder ist es gewünscht, dass auch weniger bekannte Baumarten hier gespeichert werden ?
Did you check the All tree species list? We already have 33 species and 3 hybrids of Abies with specimens registered here. But yes, if you have specimens of any of the remaining species not listed here, you are very welcome to add them.
There are no hard criteria in what you can post. You have to feel the atmosphere. Initially it started with sequoiadendron. Later on it expanded to "monumental" trees. What that is, isn't specified. If you scroll the lists you see funny examples. You might see a Nothofagus obliqua as a monumental tree in the Netherlands with a circumference of 1,07 metres. That's not monumental if you see the worldwide collection. But it's the only one in the Netherlands. ! .
So there is your answer. You have to take in account what species it is, but also where the tree is located. I just registered an Aesculus californica with a hardly relevant circumference. But it's the only one in the Netherlands.
So if you want to register a Tilia x europaea somewhere in Germany I would say not lower than about 3 or 4 metres circumference and even then. But in Asia??? I don't know if there aren't registered any.
Thank you for your information. I have to explain you what I have done for my own : I work as a carpenter in a small carpentry in Switzerland. We produce only wooden toys for children. We use just local kind of woods and a limited sort.
But in my free time I built a data base of mainly trees of which I had an image of the tree and above all an image of the surface (texture) of the wood. I saved all information in an own programmed data base. I added all species mainly with the botanical name and aswell a common name of the tree or kind of wood. I have a list for example of all abies species with wood surface and also without wood surface. I also listed all subspecies of the abies varieties. I could show you this list, as an example. But I do not know how to upload Bitmaps in our discussions. I would like to show you my complete list of all Abies types. My relatively "old" database is written with Delphi (Object Turbo Pascal) with a 32-bit computer. At the moment I use a 64-bit Lap Top and I can not use this database with my newer computer. But I collected a huge amount of pictures of trees with botanical names. But all without indication of position around the world.
Please let me know, how I can upload Bitmaps to show you the complete list for example of Abies types.
I cannot speak for the website. I can only tell you about what's been going on. And for sure this website is not a kind of encyclopaedia of tree species. Other databases (sites) are better for that purpose. Essential on monumentaltrees is that the location and measurement and picture of a specific tree is shown.
And I do not know how to show or upload your list of trees in general. As I said you can register a tree on a specific location and add a picture and measurement of it.
Thank you for your detailed explanations. Now I am sure that my information about trees are insufficient then I never have the accurate data about the location of the tree and also no measurements of the corresponding tree. It is more an enzylopedic collection of trees and woods. So the question was answered, thank you for that. As I could see, here on this collection of trees it is necessary to have the location and some measured data of the tree. And these data I do not have. Therefore I do not upload my data.
I would like to inform you that today I have upgraded the systems behind this website so more photos can be stored.
This costs me some additional money each month but is covered by the Google ad fees (the financial model behind this site: ad fees (income) and hosting costs (costs) more or less in balance so the site can continue to exist for many many years to come). In the course of the next weeks I will make about 500-600 TB full resolution photos available for download again, as older photos were only visible in smaller format to save disk space. I saved these offline but now I have more disk space online, I will upload them again.
This record doesn't seem to have attracted any comments. The recorder places this tree, with apparent confidence, a few miles away from the 'Doerner Fir'. But in a brief online search I can find nothing to corroborate this lidar measurement.
Lack of photos means it is rather hidden in the database - I'd not noticed it existing here at all! Very impressive if true, but definitely needs verification.
Ich würde gerne eine Gruppe von 3 Ginkgo Bäumen im Schlosspark Grafenegg hinzufügen, leider weiß ich nicht wann diese gepflanzt wurden, aber ich habe die GPS Koordinaten, da ich selbst dort war: 48°25'45.3"N 15°44'38.7"E. Die Bäume sind wirklich sehr groß und entsprechend alt. Ich habe sie hier nicht gefunden, es scheint nur einen Ginkgo Baum im Schlosspark hier zu geben und das ist laut Foto, der falsche.
Ich konnte keine Baum hinzufügen, weil ich das Pflanzjahr nicht weiß, vielleicht kann sich das mal jemand ansehen und mehr heraus bekommen.
Waarom staat deze boom in de lijst niet als gekapt. ? Tim?
Jeroen Philippona, at 2023-10-26 22:16:47, edited at 2023-10-26 22:21:17, said:
Ha Wim,
Soms is de wijziging dat een boom is gestorven of omgezaagd niet verwerkt in het systeem van de database met bomen van die soort op volgorde van dikte of hoogte. Tim zal kunnen aangeven wat daarvan de oorzaak is, maar het blijkt meestal makkelijk te corrigeren, door de boom heel even weer als 'levend' te vermelden en vervolgens opnieuw als gestorven te melden. Dat heb ik bij deze moeraseik gedaan en nu staat hij inderdaad doorgestreept, dus als gestorven, in de lijsten.
Groeten, Jeroen
PS: vreemd genoeg werd mijn tekst na opslaan in drievoud weergegeven. Ik heb de bovenste tekst daarna nog iets aangepast maar kan de twee onderste niet verwijderen.
Soms is de wijziging dat een boom is gestorven of gekapt niet verwerkt in het systeem van de database met bomen van die soort op volgorde van dikte of hoogte. Tim zal kunnen aangeven wat daarvan de oorzaak is, maar het blijkt meestal makkelijk te corrigeren, door de boom heel even weer als 'levend' te vermelden en vervolgens opnieuw als gestorven te melden. Dat heb ik bij deze moeraseik gedaan en nu staat hij inderdaad doorgestreept, dus als dood, in de lijsten.
Soms is de wijziging dat een boom is gestorven of gekapt niet verwerkt in het systeem van de database met bomen van die soort op volgorde van dikte of hoogte. Tim zal kunnen aangeven wat daarvan de oorzaak is, maar het blijkt meestal makkelijk te corrigeren, door de boom heel even weer als 'levend' te vermelden en vervolgens opnieuw als gestorven te melden. Dat heb ik bij deze moeraseik gedaan en nu staat hij inderdaad doorgestreept, dus als dood, in de lijsten.
Ik ben in de loop der tijd meerdere bomen tegen gekomen die als dood of gekapt geregistreerd stonden, maar niet doorgestreept waren in het overzicht. Ik heb Tim er al eerder oop gewezen en hij heeft toen correcties aangebracht. Dank je voor de tip zodat ik het zelf kan doen en Tim niet hoef lastig te vallen.
Zu den Baumrekorden habe ich folgendes herausgefunden :
■ Hyperion - Der höchste Baum der Welt
Der höchste Baum der Welt ist einer jener Küsten-Redwoods (Sequoia sempervirens). Erst im August 2006 wurde der 115 m hohe Gigant entdeckt und erhielt den Namen "Hyperion".
Der Hyperion ist der derzeit höchste anerkannte Baum der Welt (Stand 2007). Er ist ein Küstenmammutbaum (Sequoia sempervirens) im Redwood-Nationalpark in Kalifornien mit 115,55 m Wuchshöhe. Benannt wurde der Baum nach dem Titanen Hyperion in der griechischen Mythologie. Er löste 2007 den bisherigen Rekordhalter Stratosphere Giant, ebenfalls ein Küstenmammutbaum, ab.Hyperion wurde am 8. September 2006 von Chris Atkins und Michael Taylor entdeckt. Die Baumhöhe wurde vom Baumforscher Steve Sillet bestätigt. Weil Küstenmammutbäume extreme Flachwurzler sind und eine Verdichtung des Bodens durch Besucher die Wurzeln des Baumes schädigen kann, wird der exakte Standort des Baumes nicht veröffentlicht. Es ist daher nur die Lage des Waldgebiets, nicht aber die des individuellen Baumes bekannt: 41° 12′ 40″ N, 124° 0′ 10″ W
Wo genau der Hyperion steht, wird übrigens geheim gehalten – Behörden befürchten, dass Touristen den Boden um den Baum herum platt trampeln und damit die Wurzeln des Küstenmammutbaumes schädigen könnten.
Bis 1995 war das mit 112 Metern der "Tall Tree" im Redwood National Park. Dann brach seine Spitze ab und der "National Geographic Society Tree" aus demselben Park rückte auf Platz eins vor. Neuere Messungen im Park ergaben aber, dass der Küstenmammutbaum "Hyperion" mit 115,5 Meter Wuchshöhe als Rekordhalter.
"Stratosphere Giant" im Humboldt Redwoods State Park (Stammhöhe 112,87 Meter, zweithöchster Baum auf der Erde).
Der höchste Baum der Erde stand bis zum Anfang des Jahrhunderts (20.) in Australien. Das Exemplar einer dort beheimataten Eukalyptus - Art wurde nach dem herbeigeführten Fall mit rund 133 Meter Höhe und einem Stamm- durchmesser von 5.5 Metern eingemessen.
Mit einer Höhe von 132,58 Metern hält ein im 19. Jahrhundert gemessener australischer Rieseneukalyptus den historischen Rekord.
Sowohl die Eukalyptusbäume Australiens als auch die nordamerikanischen Mammutbäume der Art "Sequoia sempervirens" können über 100 Meter hoch werden. In der kalifornischen Küstenregion stehen auch die aktuellen Rekordhalter. Bis 1995 war das mit 112 Metern der "Tall Tree" im Redwood National Park. Dann brach seine Spitze ab und der "National Geographic Society Tree" aus demselben Park rückte auf Platz eins vor.
■ Die grösste Kastanie der Welt
Die grösste Kastanie der Welt steht in St. Alfio, Sizilien. Eine Sage berichtet, bereits im 14. Jahrhundert war sie so mächtig und ausladend, dass es einer Königin samt ihrem Gefolge von 100 Reitern gelang, unter ihrem Kronenmantel Schutz vor einem Unwetter gefunden zu haben.
■ Deutschlands höchster Baum
Mit 62.45 m ist eine Douglasie im Stadtwald von Ebernach bei Heidelberg der höchste Baum Deutschlands.
■ Der grösste Wacholder der Welt
Der grösste Wacholder der Weltist der „Bennett – Wacholder“ in Kalifornien.
Er soll über 2000 Jahre alt sein.
■ Der größte Cashewbaum der Welt
Wer unter diesem Baum spazieren geht, glaubt, er steht im Wald. Aufgrund eines genetischen Fehlers wachsen die Äste dieses Cashewbaumes am Strand von Parnamirim im Nordosten Brasiliens nicht nach oben, sondern zur Seite. Ihr eigenes Gewicht drückt die Äste schließlich an den Boden, wo sie neue Wurzeln schlagen - ein vermeintlich neuer Baum entsteht. Der Cashewbaum von Parnamirim hat mittlerweile die Größe eines Waldes erreicht. Er erstreckt sich auf eine Fläche von 8500 Quadratmetern.
Falls mir bei meinen Recherchen ein Fehler unterlaufen sein sollte, bitte melden.
"Falls mir bei meinen Recherchen ein Fehler unterlaufen sein sollte, bitte melden" - those historical Eucalyptus height claims are not reliable, they can be ignored. The 115.55 m of Hyperion is the tallest tree verified to have existed at any time.
ich hätte eine Frage bezüglich der Fraxinus excelsior (Common Ash) "25171", welche entlang der Moosstraße in Freising zu finden ist. Wie alt schätzen Sie diesen Baum?
da Eschen unter günstigen Bedingungen recht zügig wachsen können und ich bei diesem Exemplar davon ausgehe, würde ich vielleicht grob die Tendenz 150 Jahre einschlagen. Auf jeden Fall älter als die Wohnsiedlung daneben, aber alles andere als unglaublich alt.
ich hätte eine Frage bezüglich der Fraxinus excelsior (Common Ash) "25171" entlang der Moosstraße in Freising, welche Sie meines Wissens nach 2020 zuletzt besucht und gemessen haben.
I'm curious if one considers this one as multistemmed or not. I'm aware of the fact that Zocher has been playing a role in this premises. I know Zocher often used multistemmed trees. But at this particular place? As a non-comitted observer I would say definitely multistemmed. But...???
I think I'd be inclined to give it the benefit of the doubt, it's hard to tell if that apparent cleft in the trunk is a sign of two coalasced stems, or a sunken lightning scar on a single stem. The only real way to tell would be to take a set of cores and see if it has a single centre at measuring height or not - this can surprisingly hard to tell.
Wim Brinkerink, at 2023-09-29 21:03:55, edited at 2023-09-29 21:06:32, said:
Beste Gerard,
Het toeval is af en toe ondoorgrondelijk. Ik nam me gisteren voor een oude bekende op te zoeken. De Hemelboom in Bloemendaal en een paar bomen in Haarlem en éen in Amsterdam. Toen ik bij de boom in Bloemendaal was liet ik de dame in het huis voor de boom zien wat ik in het verleden fotografisch had vastgelegd. Ik wilde uitleggen dat het om de zo veel tijd meten zin heeft en inzicht geeft. Maar ik zag ineens een onbekende die een meting had toegevoegd.
Later op de dag zag ik dat jij me zo'n 3 uur voor was. Merkwaardig. En leuk. Welkom in de gemeenschap. Ik heb de meting ook gedaan en kwam 1 cm hoger.
Tot mijn ergernis lukte mijn Amsterdams avontuur niet. Ik ben tot 3x toe vastgelopen in afgesloten wegen. Ik kon de Falckstraat niet bereiken. Maar ja...Amsterdam.. achterlijke provincie .. Ik heb steeds meer weerzin tegen die anarchistische enclave.
Grappig dat jij die boom ook net kwam meten. Ik ben een half jaar geleden voor de bomenstichting actief geworden, vooral om een wandelboekje 'Langs monumentale bomen in Haarlem' te maken. Ik hoop dat dat volgend jaar gaat lukken. Via Jeroen ben ik toen ook boominspecteur geworden. Ik doe vooral mijn best de bomen in Haarlem netjes in het register te hebben en af en toe loop ik met een vriend door aanpalende gemeenten en inventariseren we een paar bomen. Jouw naam ben ik natuurlijk al menigmaal tegen gekomen. Laat het weten als je nog eens in de buurt bent, dan kunnen we kennismaken en mogelijk samen op pad.
Dat is een mooi initiatief. Haarlem is een belangrijke plaats qua bomen, Al is het maar omdat Zocher hier zijn domicilie zocht in de 19de eeuw. Dat is een bron van ontdekkingen wat mij betreft. Ik ontdekte een paar jaar geleden bijvoorbeeld de Castanea sativa in het Florapark. Die was er zonder ZOcher zekr nooit geweest. Maar ook Haarlem is niet vrij van zeewind en dat is niet altijd goed voor bomen. Mijn Haagse en Wassenaarse ervaringen relativeren dat enorm.
Graag bereid tot samen denken en onderzoeken. (En ik ben ook al jaren boominspecteur bij de Bomenstichting)
Ja, die tamme kastanje heb ik ook voor de bomenroute geselecteerd. Om het een of andere reden staat die nog niet in het register van de Bomenstichting, maar dat gaat eerdaags gebeuren.
Thank you Conifers for picking it up. I thought I had to make it part of this database. Wasn't easy and you finetuned it. Thank you for that. This tree has to be saved for common memory. I was stunned when I read the news of vandalising the tree, but was even more surprised it wasn't in this database.
Thanks! Awful admission that I've never been to see it (it's very difficult to get to without a car); and now, I can't, ever. I've been looking at more pics to see if I could estimate the height better, I think I may be a metre or two over with my 15 m estimate yesterday, 14 m would probably be a bit closer.
Today I tried to add a new tree. It didn't work. I couldn't register it. Tried twice. Got the message that the webmaster was informed, but I'll let you know via this way, so others can take notice.
Wim Brinkerink, at 2023-09-29 15:18:32, edited at 2023-09-29 15:32:15, said:
Tim.
Thanks. Now it works again. Aiaia but the coördinates are missing and cannot add or change them..
The interesting thing is, it is likely very close to the actual measurement of this tree, in line with its previous growth. So with any luck, no need to remove or change it.
Wim Brinkerink, at 2023-09-20 18:57:59, edited at 2023-09-20 20:29:57, said:
Tim,
I know you are aware of the insult that's happening when people can overscribe other one's posts. I have too often experienced I placed a measurement and someone else places a new one a tiny bit higher and my measurement disappears. This is not acceptible in my opinion. What do you think? I know it's on your agenda but does it have enough urge? And do you have enough time to deal with it?
I also think that should be forbidden. If I have understood correctly, a new measurement can only be added one year after the former measurement. Then the older measurement remains and the both are shown in a table. That's fine. However, if one want to add a new measurement in the same year, the only possibility is to edit the older measurement and then the older measurement disappears. I think nobody should do that. Why it would be necessary to measure a tree twice in a years at all? One solution would be to allow multiple measurements in a year in the table.
It is however a fact that any measurement is kept in the system, only the most recent one in a given year is shown.
It is on the list of things to improve once my small children are older and I have more time (absolutely none at the moment, not even able to read the hundreds of mails I'm getting).
ugh, wonderful website but I just spent 15 minutes trying to add a tree and it ended up failing. please fix this! i know you guys do this without pay...
Fantastic tree. Thanks for registering. But I think it is not a Ceiba. Some kind of Ficus is more likely. The guy in the article you added, thinks Ficus albipila. I'd rather think Benghalensis or benjamina.
Since alpibila is not native to Indonesia, I suggest to register it as benghalensis. That's the most likely species. And it makes sure that someone in the near future collects more information/photo's.
I don't have problems with making mistakes. I do have a problem with cnsciencely accepting a wrong registry. One thing is sure; it is certainly not a ceiba pentandra. And it certainly is a Ficus. My brother in law is there this week. I'll ask him to make some pics.
@Wim - just to add, although their maps are very coarse, Kew POWO do give Ficus albipila as native in Indonesia; scroll down to 'Distribution' here. So we can't rule this species out. They also do not accept F. benghalensis there, mapping it as native only in the Indian Subcontinent.
Voir aussi la liste rouge de l'IUCN : les gisements de ficus les plus proches de Bali sont des F. albipila (Genteng, east-Java, à quelques encâblures de Bali).
No - Quercus x ludoviciana is a good species (hybrid). It is just that some trees distributed in the 20th century under this name were actually Q. nigra - these trees are now known as Q. nigra cv. 'Beethoven'.
OK. Did I than make a mistake to change the species of this tree.? https://www.monumentaltrees.com/nl/gbr/engeland/cityoflondon/965_royalbotanicgardens/41371/
It was registered as Q x ludoviciana and I must have misinterpreted your earlier contribution in which you made your point concerning Q. nigra Beethoven.
Not easy to see the details of the leaves, but it isn't Q. nigra. But I'd also say not Q. x ludoviciana either; it looks very like a rather ordinary Q. rubra to me.
Are you sure this magnificent tree is Scarlet oak (Quercus coccinea)? It really looks more like Northern red oak (Quercus rubra). The bark (and shape) is typical of Northern red oak.
There is some closer footage of the foliage on street view here; this shows large leaves with shallow lobes, typical of Quercus rubra too. So I agree with it being that. Sorry, Saro!
I am not Italian, but close: Slovenia:) Anyway, if this species is indeed Scarlet oak (Quercus coccinea), it is probably the biggest and most beautiful Scarlet oak in the world. And the oldest one :D Because Quercus coccinea is usually medium sized, short lived species. No offense, I'm just amazed that a scarlet oak can reach such dimensions ...
Can someone visit the tree to get close-up photos of the foliage? Photos of the leaves from both above and below, before they fall next month, if possible.
Il y a une erreur de ma part au sujet de la localisation de tous les arbres situés le long du chemin d'Allias : ils appartiennent à la commune d'Asson, non de Nay.
Zoeken gaat het makkelijkst via de kaart, zie "Wereldkaart van monumentale bomen" op de hoofdpagina. Of je kan zoeken in de bovenbalk rechtsboven. Ik zie dat er enkele bomen bij het klooster geregistreerd staan op deze site: Dommel, nabij het Clarissen klooster
Bedankt voor je antwoord, maar ik krijg geen monumentale bomen te zien in het ommuurde deel van het clarissenkloosters, uitsluiten bomen "in de buurt van". klopt dit?
Ik snap heel goed dat je niet op alles kunt reageren. Deze site is tenslotte een hobby voor je. Maar ik krijg stelelmatig geen reactie en erger belemmeringen. En dat terwijl ik in het verleden een grote aanjager ben geweest voor Duitsers en Italianen. Ik heb denk ik ook de meeste posts in België gemaakt van allen. Ik heb destijds in die landen stevige posts gemaakt en er volgden allerlei mensen enthousiast. Dat weet je donders goed. Ook heb ik gemakzuchtige posts van Leo Goudzwaard zonder ophef gecorrigeerd en aangevuld.
Als je meent mij nu te moeten irriteren...doe het dan openlijk en eerlijk svp.
Ik probeer een nieuwe ondersoort van Morus nigra toe te voegen. Dat lukt niet meer. Dat gaf nooit problemen tot nu toe.
Maarten Windemuller, at 2023-09-01 17:05:25, edited at 2023-09-01 17:15:18, said:
Ha Wim, jij hebt vast Boomzorg gelezen vanochtend. 😉
Vond het wel een bijzonder verhaal. De boom staat wel in het Landelijk Register van Monumentale Bomen dat beheerd wordt door de Bomenstichting. Zie bomen.meetnetportaal.nl/index.php? en ga naar boom met Boom ID: 1691134.
Zeker heb ik het gelezen. Ik heb de boom direct hier geregistreerd en het artikel toegevoegd in de beschrijving. Bijzonder exemplaar. Bij de bomenstichting staat ook een meting uit 2001, maar die is onvoldoende specifiek. Er wordt 1,50 meter aangegeven zonder hoogtebepaling en aangezien de boom ligt....De boom is ook moeilijk te meten. Ik denk dat ik één dezer dagen nog even langs ga om te kijken wat ik kan doen.
Mooi dat je herm geregistreerd hebt. Zou mooi zijn als je bij bezoek aan de boom betere foto's kan maken dan die nu op de site vd BS (Bomenstichting) staan. De foto bij het artikel in Boomzorg is als stuk beter.
Het plantjaar op de site van BS behoeft ook wel enige aanpassing. Goed idee om het stuk uit Boomzorg bij de boom te plaatsen, ik zal dat op de site van BS ook doen.
Hartelijke groet,
Maarten
Wim Brinkerink, at 2023-09-02 20:58:09, edited at 2023-09-02 20:59:55, said:
Top!. Fijn dat je meeleeft. Ik hoop dat Tim er ook iets van mee krijgt.
Me gustaria saber si las imagenes subidas tienen copyright. Y si lo tuvieran, como contactar con el autor. Tendría interes en utilizar una fotografía en un libro. Naturalmene citando al autor de la fotografía
Hola, buenas noches, que yo sepa todas las fotografías , salvo que se diga lo contrario, tienen los derechos reservados. Puedes ponerte en contacto con el autor mandándole un mensaje.
We went to visit this today - spoke to a man from Whitley Auto Repairs on the farm, and he told us that the tree has fallen down / gone. He pointed to the area where it used to stand.
A large part of the crown had fallen by 2020 (https://ati.woodlandtrust.org.uk/tree-search/tree?treeid=22&from=3523&v=2357660&ml=map&z=13&u=1&up=v&nwLat=52.353790279513774&nwLng=-2.5581657366350874&seLat=52.24072466455779&seLng=-2.1187126116350874#/), but a few low branches remained alive below the break. Google aerial imagery from spring 2023 shows the shadow of these low branches still, so I don't think the tree is dead. Losing bits of the crown and regrowing smaller, lower, more stable branches is part of the natural ageing process of an old oak.
It's right next to a public footpath, though it looks as if the mapped route of this frequently gets ploughed up. I think this is a case of the landowner discouraging legitimate access - which might be because they're afraid of vandalism (there are signs of fire-damage in older photos) but might also be because they want to get every penny's-worth of profit from their land by cultivating it intensively right up to the tree itself - rather than having the tree as the centre of its own little nature reserve as one might reasonably expect for one of the world's very largest and oldest oaks, were it to become a little better-known.
Wow - have you had the chance to look at it close up?
Thank you for this information - it’s much appreciated. I came across an old Wildlife magazine on ancient trees a few weeks back and found it fascinating - it’s making me look at trees in a whole new light, and I love how there are so many monumental trees in Worcs.
Ik heb een speciale interesse voor anders dan anders. Open voor het nieuwe kan ik ook zeggen. Ik heb meerdere Celtis australis en celtis occidentalis ontdekt en geregistreerd. In Nederland dan. Is de boom zo vreemd aan ons klimaat dat hij zo weinig voorkomt?
Hello, I would be interested in that tall tree in junebäckens källor in jönköping, if you thunk it’s worth go there, i’m mostly a fan och big girth on spruces and firs.
Haavar Bunes, at 2023-08-24 13:47:35, edited at 2023-08-24 13:49:49, said:
Sure! What kind of coordinated do you prefer, UTM or LAT or something else? :)
It is likely either a silver fir or grand fir. Measured 47,2 meters in LIDAR and looks really big.
Haavar Bunes, at 2023-08-24 20:31:48, edited at 2023-08-24 20:33:00, said:
Not sure why I didn't get notification on mail and nothing new on MMT, weird!
Beste, ik heb de linde op het Dorpsplein te Massemen gisteren geïdentificeerd als een Tilia x europaea (Hollandse linde). Ik probeerde de naam op de site te wijzigen maar dit is maar gedeeltelijk gelukt blijkbaar. Misschien moet dit verder aangepast worden.
Kennelijk is de juiste benaming voor deze boom Quercus nigra "Beethoven". Als je het er mee eens bent, wil je hem dan veranderen?. Ik wil het ook doen voor je. Owen Johnson leverde het volgende artikel.
Specifically sitka spruce, western redcedar, Douglas fir, and possibly others do not match the records on those trees' pages. Is it at all possible that this could be fixed?
I think it is compiled automatically; but note the point at the top, this list only includes accurate 2-point laser & tape-drop measurements, trees measured by other less accurate methods are not included in this list.
I take most of the height measurements from the BC Big Tree Registry. I know they use lasers, but I don't know whether they use two or three point methods. Which is why I marked them as "unknown measurement method".
Bob, how can the height measurement method be unknown if you have measured the tree by yourself? If you have taken the measurement from another source, you should choose "Measurement taken from book, in which the exact measurement method is not elaborated" or "Measurement taken from info sign near tree, on which the exact measurement method is not elaborated".
Still better would be to write the source as measurer, but you may not have enough rights to change the measurer. Anyway it would be good to write the source in the description.
Nardo Kaandorp, at 2023-08-15 07:44:13, edited at 2023-08-15 07:48:14, said:
Hi Arborius,
I saw that a couple of years ago you climbed the sequoia of Chateau Bleu in Trooz. Sad to inform you that this tree is struck by lightning last month. The tree survived, but it will never grow as tall as before.
Quite difficult to see one, bears are quite lazy and usually don't go outside their caves that often. We put the camera in an oak woodland of Quercus pyrenaica and Quercus petraea in the top of a mountain, far away from any human disturbance.
Bij het uploaden van foto's was er een mogelijkheid om foto's te uploaden van een boom, een specifieke locatie en van een groepje bomen. Die functie werkt sinds enige tijd niet meer.
In the summer of 2022, the world-famous British artist Antony Gormley (1950) took over the Voorlinden museum and estate. With his sculptures, installations and art in public space, Gormley explores the relationship between the human body and the space around us. The GROUND retrospective shows his extensive oeuvre, from his lead sculptures from the 1980s to his most recent installations. The exhibition could be seen from May 26 to September 25, 2022. This sculpture is one of many that he has placed. Men in varying meditative poses.
Conifers asked me too make some pictures of this Thuja so we can tell if it is Thuja occidentalis or plicata . I've made some pictures. There were no fruits to be seen. I don't how to add pictures in this reaction. But I will add some of the pictures on the tree.
Thankyou for adding your height from climbing this tree, Dave.
I've added the girth measured by Aubrey Fennell in 2010 for what I assume is the same tree - the larger of two big old Sitkas along this track (I've not been to Downhill myself). At that time it was only about 38m tall to the highest live growth after dying back, but it seems to have regrown very well since then - in an exposed place.
In 2000, Co. Derry had one marginally taller tree, a 46.5m Sitka at the private Drenagh estate.
I think that giving anyone the power to remove anyone else's trees or photos is a bad idea. Most sites that allow anyone to contribute have a problem with vandals messing things up, and I'm surprised this feature hasn't already been used to wreck havoc on here. I think the threat of someone coming along and removing a whole bunch of stuff is very real, and I'm worried it might happen.
To resolve this, I think only certain people, or the person who registered or uploaded something, should be able to remove it. Otherwise, you should be able to "report" something of someone else's if you feel it should be removed.
While on the topic of the functioning of this site, I have noticed some bugs in my time on here. I am aware this site is quite old, so I guess that is to be expected. But anyway, here they are:
-after you add a new location, city, or village while adding a new tree, it will not let you give the exact location. It will jump to the tree's age section. Because the exact location is mandatory for adding a new tree, you must re-fill out everything again once you've added the new place. This is very annoying for me, and was also very confusing when I first joined.
-Also about adding a new tree, when you select "I don't know" for the trees age, you must re-click it in order to allow the next option. This one is more minor, but is still a bit confusing for new users.
-Not really a bug, but there is no warning that says all photos must be in the .jpg format, so it's kind of frustrating when trying to add a photo of a different format. The solution to this one easy, just add some text that says only .jpg's are allowed.
-If you sort photos by an option where there are no results, all the sorting options will disappear too. Making it impossible to view the photos until it eventually automatically resets to the default sorting option.
And the numbers on the front page are out of date, by the way.
Does anyone else have these problems? Or is it just me.
SInce a few months adding information, trees, loction or something else isn't working correct. What I am doing lately, is skipping to another location, tree or subject and from then on it is normally possible to scroll further and jump to the next box.
And your vandalism remark is intriguing. It is nice to realize that until now there haven't been any problems, but indeed things can change.
Tu confirme mes doutes. J'ai compté 9 à 11 folioles, ce qui est un maximum pour regia, mais sur certaines feuilles, j'ai cru voir 13 folioles... L'apex des folioles assez acuminé, oui, et surtout le foliole terminal de le même taille que les autres ; ça correspondait assez mal à regia. J'avais aussi pensé à x intermedia. Je pense qu'on peut l'insérer sous ce nom.
I have suspected a long time that all the tallest tree species are in the western North America and in eastern Australia just because trees have been intensively measured in those regions, and that the Himalayas might have an enormous potential for super tall conifers. There is an estimate of 95 metres for Cupressus cashmeriana in Bhutan by Miehe. As the estimate sounded quite incredible, I wanted to go to measure those C. cashmeriana stands a few years ago but did not get a permission.
In the recent years the Chinese have started to search and measure trees with modern instruments with imposing results: Pinus bhutanica 77 m, Taiwania 72 m in China and 84 m in Taiwan, Abies chensiensis 83 m. Now they have found a 102.3-metre Cupressus gigantea (= Cupressus torulosa var. gigantea) in Tibet, and Miehe's estimate begins to sound plausible.
The only thing to suspect is which point at the base they used for measuring the tree. We know that the height of the tallest Shorea ("Menara") was inflated by 3 m by reporting the measurement to the lowest part of the buttress. This could be the case for the cypress, too, as it grows on a steep slope.
Was just going to post about this, but you beat me to it! Very impressive trees indeed. Didier Maerki (Cupressus Conservation Project) thinks Cupressus austrotibetica rather than Cupressus gigantea (and definitely not Cupressus torulosa as given in some of the news reports).
Conifers, quickly this afternoon you went there, to that canyon in Tibet, to see the tree, and you and that Didier verified that the cypress is not torulosa , definitely. Thank you very much, I don't know what would be of us or the Chinese without you and Didier.
Kouta, are you going to upload the tree, or are you waiting for something? It can be put in Tongmai, with approximate location.
First point is that Cupressus torulosa can easily be discounted; it only occurs in the western Himalaya, from the Kali Gandaki (mid-west Nepal) west to Kashmir. The Yarlung Tsangpo gorge is over 1,200 km east of the easternmost locations for C. torulosa. It is also distinct in foliage (example here).
Cupressus gigantea does grow much more close by, but is further to the north, importantly on the dry side of the Himalaya, whereas these trees are in the temperate monsoon rainforest on the south side of the Himalaya crest.
More later on the others, too late in the evening to go into details now!
Well, I wouldn't rule out Cupressus torulosa so quickly. If Chinese scientists say that the tree is Cupressus torulosa, it must be for a reason. I believe that the criteria and measures of its discoverers, by principle have to be respected, especially if they are scientists.
In my opinion, taxonomically speaking, the genus cupressus in Asia is currently chaotic, so we have to accept provisionally what the Chinese say.
Hi Ernesto - it is safe to rule out Cupressus torulosa. Yes, Asian Cupressus taxonomy is somewhat 'chaotic', but that is largely due to confusion caused by the incompetence of some prominent European botanists being unable to distinguish C. gigantea from C. torulosa and saying (wrongly) that they were the same thing. This is now firmly disproved from genetic data, but old ideas in textbooks don't get removed easily. There are also some problems with cultivated and invasive Cupressus in parts of Asia, but that is obviously not relevant with these ancient trees. And the Chinese discoverers do say Tibetan Cypress (i.e., C. gigantea, not C. torulosa) as in the youtube video Kouta posted. The C. torulosa report is in a secondary news agency report, not by the scientists.
The tree is obviously called C. torulosa, because Tibetan cypress is sometimes considered a variety of C. torulosa, as C. torulosa var. gigantea. In the news agency, they have thought it is enough to give the taxon in species level.
Cupressus cashmeriana does not grow wild in Bhutan. The estimate by Miehe is wrong. The discovered tree at 102 m. is a Cupressus austrotibetica and it has nothing to do with either C.torulosa or C.gigantea. To put gigantea as a variety of torulosa shows that Farjon was prejudiced and never saw living material of those two species growing together. All those species have very different distribution ranges which do not overlap. They are all isolated in valleys separated by high mountains.
I added the tree. I put the location along the Yarlung Zangbo River at a tall conifer grove I found, likely cypresses, and wrote that the coordinates are not exact. Take a look to the area with Google and Bing Maps! There are many tall cypress groves. It would be a fantastic area to explore! Unfortunately, the travelling in Tibet needs a special permit.
I think we can safely reject C. torulosa s.str. as it is today considered an western Himalayan species, indeed. Conifers also had a good point that the youtube video says "Tibetan cypress" = C. gigantea. Silba (the author of C. austrotibetica) has a serious credibility problem, so I am convinced we should follow the view of the researchers, who likely wrote the description on youtube until there are more detailed studies from the area.
It's fine like this, you've placed it about 40 kms. south in a straight line, of Tongmai o Tangmai village , which is the last place mentioned in one of the news. I also think that C gigantea is better for now.
As for the measurements, apart ignoring from where on the base they measured it, I see in the large photo that it seems to have a few meters of the upper tip dry, I don't know if that matters.
@ Kouta - thanks! Yes, that looks as good a point as any we'll be able to find; I've not tried bing, but google's satellite views are very dark in the region, making it hard to detect.
It is true that Silba has a "credibility problem", but he did do more serious work on Cupressus than on other genera, and conversely, Farjon's (it was he who treated it within C. torulosa) highly 'lumping' viewpoint has been shown wrong in numerous cases in Cupressus and many other genera. There is also no doubt from both herbarium material and cultivated trees that there is a distinct cypress in this region that is not the same as C. gigantea; Silba does deserve credit for spotting that. It is easy to forget just how dramatic the changes in climate and growing conditions are over surprisingly short distances in this region; the habitat of the new trees is clearly temperate rainforest, while the C. gigantea site is a thousand metres or more higher altitude and a much drier rain-shadow climate. A comparable example would be to equate the new trees with Sequoia sempervirens (tall and relatively slender in a mild wet climate), and C. gigantea with Sequoiadendron giganteum (drier, colder, climate; less tall but stouter trunks).
Kouta , in the video you can see a little road next to the river and then they cross the river on a boat easily. The only road there is the G318, which goes through Polong to Tangmai, it does not enter the gorge to the southeast. The forest is near Polong ( Trulung )and Tangmai. You have placed the tree very far to the south, I think.
on the youtube film, we can clearly see at the extremity of the gorge the summit of the Namcha Barwa (7782 m) ; it confirms the location in the upper Yarlung Zangpo Canyon.
Reviewing the video and comparing it with Google Earth, at 1 minute 27 seconds, in the drone shot over the forest, the road and the banks of the river appear clearly, and I think I have located the point in Google Earth. I'm going to move the location to that site, if you don't mind Kouta, I think it's the right one. If you don't think so, tell me.
DBZT , That bridge is Tangmai and the view is from the south towards Tangmai and the mountain to the north of Tangmai, 5500 mts. it is not the Namcha Barwa, there is no road there.
I have changed to the new location, see what you think compared to the video.
Now there is a big problem : why the youtube cinese film introduces us in error by situating the tree in Yarlung canyon when the true situation is in Parlung canyon ? Is it an erroneous approximation or a fake ??? Where is the tree, in Yarlung canyon, as the TEXT seems to confirm that, or in Parlung canyon, as the PICTURES seems to situate that ? If it is an erroneous approximation of the writer I hope the height of the tree is not of the same ilk !...
Near and west to Tangmai and along the Yigong and Parlung valleys is the core region of the Cupressus austrotibetica distribution range. This species is quite isolated on the slopes of those tributaries of the Yarlung Tsangpo. It has nothing to do with Cupressus gigantea. The county is Bome which is outside the Yarlung Tsangpo Reserve. THis is to demonstrate how reliable some articles are. Why people are relying on news articles without taxonomy scientific contents is beyond my understanding. Common names are no valid scientific names. Cupressus gigantea common name is Giant Cypress.
I am wondering how many people here saw a Cupressus austrotibetica. If they would have see one, they would know that it is one of the most easy species to distinguish from all other Cupressus species.
Sequoia, if you are from the Cupressus Conservation Project, or you master the genus cupressus, it would be very useful for us if you review the cupressus from the Himalayas uploaded in MT, and you can change the species that are wrong, writing in "Edit" the species that you think they are and why.
To change the species completely, you would have to delete the tree and upload them again, which is more complicated, so it is better to leave the rectification written in "Edit".
Even this last tree you can add your opinion about the species by editing it and writing what you want.
Ernesto & DB, you have done good work to clear the location, thanks!
We accept dead tops.
I guess we will soon get more information about this stand. I am almost sure the measurers will write an article to a scientific journal about their study.
Let's remember that the Chinese science has advanced with huge steps and is already in many brances in the same level with the western science.
Sequoia, DO NOT start to change cypress species names!! Ernesto, you should NOT encourage anybody anonymous to do that! We want to name the trees after generally accepted standards. This is not a place for revolutionaries!
Too read such crap tells a lot about the "quality" of this website. I will be blunt.
The Parlung Tsangpo is a tributary of the Yarlung Tsangpo. They are two different rivers, of course.
To name that record tree Cupressus gigantea is the most stupid thing from someone who does not know anything about cypresses, their different distribution areas, their morphologies and molecular analyses. Even when all is written in the Bulletin of the Cupressus Conservation Project with maps and great details.
Now the Chinese (they are much, much better with molecular analyses than the western researchers, but for taxonomy they are unfortunately still a lot behind following blindly some foreign taxonomy) seem to favour Cupressus rushforthii for an unknown and mistaken reason. The locality of this tree will not be disclosed for protection reasons. Rightfully so.
Cupressus austrotibetica is an accepted name here:
Dans The Gymnosperm Database (qui assimile C. austrotibetica à C. duclouxiana ou à une sous-espèce de celui-ci), je lis ceci :
''Description : Arbres jusqu'à 25 m de haut et 80 cm de dhp. Couronne conique lorsqu'elle est jeune, arrondie ou largement bombée lorsqu'elle est âgée. Branches minces et horizontales, densément disposées'', etc... Cela ne semble pas correspondre au cyprès de 102 m, bien que certaines photos ou images anciennes font état de grands arbres coniques. L'aire de répartition, par contre, incluant le S.E. du Tibet, correspond bien.
L'aire et l'écologie de C. torulosa, par contre, ne correspondent pas. Donc on peut éliminer.
Quant à C. gigantea, l'aire correspond parfaitement (exclusivement le S.E. du Tibet), ainsi que le port ''irrégulièrement conique'' et la taille (spécimens de + de 50 m déjà répertoriés) ; je cite TGD : ''Distribution et écologie : Au sud-est du Tibet, dans la vallée du fleuve Yarlung Zangbo (Tsangpo) à une altitude de 3 000 à 3 400 m (Farjon 1998 , Fu et al. 1999). Il pousse également dans les vallées des rivières Nyang et Nize (Debreczy et Racz 2011). Voir la section Big Tree pour un lien Google Maps où vous pouvez explorer la répartition des bosquets le long de la vallée''.
Je veux bien que Farjon, TGD et beaucoup d'autres se trompent, et je suis prêt à admettre ton hypothèse, mais une chose m'interroge : en l'absence de vues détaillées des feuilles, des fruits et du reste, comment peux-tu être aussi sûr que l'on a affaire à un C. austrotibetica ?
Le Bulletin du CCP n° 24 est très intéressant concernant C. austrotibetica et le nouveau C. rushfortii. Le premier est dit par Silba atteindre 60 m, et son aire de répartition en 1994 (Trulung, Bome ; Tsangpo Tsangden, Yigung), est exactement celle de l'arbre de 102 m. De plus, Rushforth l'a identifié en 2003 avec C. gigantea au niveau du Parlung Tsangpo (op. cit., p. 56). Quant à C. rushfortii, découvert en 1999, on le trouve exactement dans le même secteur que C. austrotibetica, près de Tangdui. Les photos prises sur place montrent des arbres d'assez grande taille mais moins grands et moins pointus que les C. austrotibetica, qui est l'espèce dominante dans cette vallée.
Le doute n'est donc pas facile à lever entre C. austrotibetica et C. gigantea. Donc je le répète : possèdes-tu des données sur la forme des feuilles et des fruits, et disposes-tu d'analyses palynologiques ?
P.S. : la galerie photo des pages 90 à 100 du Bulletin CCP n° 24, montrant C. austrotibetica, évoque effectivement beaucoup l'arbre de 102 m. On le trouve entre 1600 et 2400 m d'altitude, ce qui correspond à l'arbre géant, situé au niveau et au-dessus du pont de Tangmai, donc entre 2200 et 3000 m). Quant à C. gigantea, qui lui aussi évoque notre arbre géant, il est signalé surtout dans la proche vallée du Yarlung Tsangpo, entre 3000 et 3300 m d'altitude, ainsi qu'en quelques autres sites un peu plus éloignés.
Hi DBZT, first: my apologies, if I am misunderstanding what you say; my French is very poor, so I am having to rely on a translating machine. So what I read of your contribution may well be mistranslated.
The translation I am offered says: "As for C. gigantea, the area corresponds perfectly (exclusively the S.E. of Tibet)". If this is an accurate translation, this statement I fear is not correct; 'S. E. Tibet' is a huge area, and because of the extreme high altitudes involved, climatic changes are abrupt, over very short distances and altitudes. The sites are about 80 km apart, but importantly because of the positions of the mountain massifs, Cupressus gigantea is on a relatively dry site (rain shadow of the ridge SW from Namche Barwa summit), while Cupressus austrotibetica is, as the photos clearly show, in rainforest (monsoon track funnelled up the Tsangpo Gorge, with no high ridges to capture the monsoon rain). It is also nearly 900 metres lower altitude, so its temperatures are, on average, roughly 9°C warmer. So the two do not correspond at all in their habitat or climatic conditions.
Further on, I am offered this translation: "but one thing puzzles me: in the absence of detailed views of the leaves, fruits and the rest, how can are you also sure that we are dealing with a C. austrotibetica?". For this, I can understand your scepticism, but two points to mention: (1) Cupressus austrotibetica has, for the entire genus, uniquely slender, thread-like shoots. The very fine structure of the foliage of the 102 metre tree agrees with this. And (2), herbarium specimens from the immediate vicinity - while not from this tree, but from trees likely within direct sight of it - are available for examination, and are of Cupressus austrotibetica. There are no herbarium specimens of Cupressus gigantea (or any other Cupressus species) in this immediate vicinity.
OK, it's clear. The altitude seems to be a good indicator. And the evidence of neighboring trees as C. austrotibetica too. However, the aspect of the bark seems much more the one of C. giganta or C. torulosa, than the one of C. austrotibetica / duclouxii. But I could be wrong, so that the 102 m tree is so big that the bark of an ''only'' 35/40 m C. austrotibetica could be different when reaching 100 m...
I have added in Edit of the tree : " Although it has been uploaded as Cupressus gigantea, in the absence of a better description and samples of the tree, the taxonomy of the specimen is not clear. Could be Cupressus austrotibetica or another species or variety of the area."
Hello everyone, it makes people confused about the species of this giant tree, because the Chinese media has reported its species inaccurately. In fact, Chinese researchers published it as a new species in 2021. You can check out this page:https://powo.science.kew.org/taxon/urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:77234942-1
Conifers is right,climatic changes are abrupt, over very short distances and altitudes.According to the information I have obtained, C.torulosa is native to the west of the Kali Gandaki River in the Himalayas; C. austrotibetica is mainly distributed in dry-hot valleys in eastern Tibet and western Sichuan; C. gigantea is distributed along the Yarlung Zangbo River and Niyang River at an altitude of 3000m~3500m On dry river beaches, and the number of adults does not exceed 50,000; therefore, these three species can be excluded only from the distribution.
In fact, C.rushforthii is only distributed in the valleys of the Palong Zangbo River and the Yigong Zangbo River at an altitude of 2200m~3000m. The forests in these valleys are temperate rainforests, similar to the forests on the northwest coast of North America.
1) I do not seize why you exclude C. austrotibetica, whose all scientific publications attribuate the same geographic repartition than the giant tree, and wet and low situations, not dry ones ;
2) C. rushfortii do not reach such a gigantism, and its shape is not columnar.
Remark : Frank Ludlow in 1957 wrote :
''One march beyond Trulung brought us to an encampment opposite the village of Tangme (Tangmai), where the (Po) Yigrong and (Po) Tsangpo meet, and here on a spur overlooking the junction grew specimens of Cupressus torulosa which exceeded in size any tree I have seen in the Himalayas. One trunk we measured was 36 ft in girth at 5 ft from the ground, and we estimated its height at over 200 ft. These monarchs grew sparingly, but such was their magnificence that they were discernible from afar, towering aloft above the heads of all their rivals.''
I thing Ludlow spoke about our 102 m tree. Ludlow calls it a C. torulosa, so for him this giant tree was very similar to this species.
Okay, glad to join in the discussion about this giant tree. Regarding the questions:
1) I found few evidence that C. austrotibetica grows in humid low-lying areas, and many articles point out that the height of C. austrotibetica is usually below 20m;
2) C. rushfortii is a newly published species, and the past records are indeed lower than 70m, but it should also be noted that trees of the same species can have huge differences in morphology under different growth environments, especially in a place that climate changes so abrupt.
I searched for more information. In fact, the Beijing News conducted an exclusive interview with expert who participated in the scientific research of the tree.
Here is the interview address: https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/s9wFlQdYavF3ZFFXOLyYhw
During the interview, the person in charge of the Xizijiang Ecological Conservation Center gave some information. He and Guo Qinghua's team from Peking University inspected the giant tree.
1) This tree belongs to C. rushforthii, but this new species has not been included in the national plant protection list of China. For better protection, it is disclosed as C. austrotibetica.
2) The expedition team measured a 86m-high C.rushforthii last year and noticed the potential of C.rushforthii in height.
3) After measurement, they found that the diameter of the tree was 293cm, the height from the lowest point to the top of the tree was 104.6m, and the median value was 102.3m.
4) In addition to this tree, they also found 25 large trees over 90m in Tongmai.
In addition, I think the species seen by Professor Frank Ludlow is C. rushfortii, but it is also located in the Pan-Himalayan region, and C. rushfortii was not published at that time, so he thinks it is C. torulosa. However, the distribution of C. rushfortii is very narrow, only located in the valleys of Parlung Tsangpo and Yigong Tsangpo.
Great to have information directly from China! The article can easily be read with a translator (the best one is likely deepl.com).
I added girth 920 cm (calculated from the diameter) and corrected the measuring date. I also added note "Height to the lowest point of the trunk: 104.6 m. Height to the average ground level: 102.3 m." and a link to the Chinese article.
So I think we should change the species to C. rushforthii. My former suggestion that the species should be called C. gigantea was based on the formerly linked articles, which said it is C. torulosa, which is apparently impossible (but possible if considered C. torulosa var. gigantea).
zhichuliao, if you are aware of other accurate Chinese measurements you are very welcome to add them on this website. Also for lower species, like oaks etc.
Btw, I suppose those Tibetan forests are not very similar with those of the Pacific Northwest of North America. The latter region has relatively dry summers (with wet autumn, winter and spring) whereas SE Tibet likely has a monsoon climate with very heavy precipitation in summer. The photos also show that there is a strong broadleaf component in the forest composition whereas the Pacific NW forests are almost pure coniferous forests, likely results from the mentioned climatic differences.
OK, mais nous ne pouvons pas éliminer complètement C. austrotibetica, en attendant de plus précises observations et analyses. La forme, les dimensions, le biotope, la localisation, l'altitude et l'aspect du tronc sont identiques, et il me semble que l'aspect et la couleur claire du feuillage de l'arbre de 102 m, correspondent mieux à austrotibetica qu'à rushforthii, dont le feuillage est plus foncé et moins pleureur.
Kouta, I couldn't agree with you more. In the absence of more information, it is reasonable to designate this species as C. rushforthii.
Btw, I think I may not have expressed well the similarities between the forests of Parlung Tsangpo and Pacific Northwest of North America (the former is relatively humid in summer, while the latter is more humid in winter), they have something in common: year-round high Humidity, low wind speed, tall trees on a genetic level, etc.
In addition, the extremely high proportion of coniferous trees in the forests of the Nearctic may be related to the glacial period—They have high adaptability to the cold. Even in Florida, there are pure coniferous forests of Bald cypress trees. But this rarely occurs in the Palearctic at the same latitude.
I changed the species to C. rushforthii and added in the description a note: "According to Chinese scientists (source), the tree belongs to newly (2021) published species Cupressus rushforthii. It has also been suggested that the tree could rather be Cupressus austrotibetica."
I hope all are happy with this change.
DB, the Chinese scientists, who studied the tree on the spot, say it is C. rushforthii. I suppose they have done precise observations and analysis. It is difficult to make more precise observations and analysis from online photos.
I think that there are big chances that the species limits of the Himalayan cypresses will change in the future when more collections will be made. Thus, C. rushforthii may not be the last word.
zhichuliao, you are right in that the conditions in the past is an important factor determining today's forest composition. Similarly, in Tasmania, for example, with quite similar climate with the Pacific Northwest, there are almost no conifers in the forest composition.
“Chinese researchers published it as a new species in 2021.”
Cupressus rushforthii was discovered by Keith Rushforth. He is not Chinese.
This new species was described by two authors. None is Chinese.
Lies #2 and #3:
“C. austrotibetica is mainly distributed in dry-hot valleys in eastern Tibet and western Sichuan.”
This species is not distributed in “dry-hot valleys”. Cupressus gigantea is. (If a climate can be described as “hot” at 3000m altitude.)
C. austrotibetica is not present in Sichuan.
Lie #4:
“In fact, C.rushforthii is only distributed in the valleys of the Palong Zangbo River and the Yigong Zangbo River at an altitude of 2200m~3000m.”
C. rushforthii in China is only known currently from two trees close to the road East of Tangmai and close to Tangdui. Apart from those two specimens, the distribution area is unknown. There is no record of this species in the Yigong valley where C. austrotibetica is present.
Lies #5 and #6:
“I found few evidence that C. austrotibetica grows in humid low-lying areas, and many articles point out that the height of C. austrotibetica is usually below 20m;”
There is no reference that C. austrotibetica grows on dry areas. There is no article about C.austrotibetica saying it is "usually below 20".
All witnesses (Bailey, Ludlow, Rushforth, Businsky, etc.) point that C. austrotibetica is a huge tree. Ludlow wrote that he estimated it over 200 feet. And the types of C. austrotibetica chosen by Silba were collected by Ludlow and Bailey. Typical ignorance of the rules of taxonomy.
Lie #7:
“I think the species seen by Professor Frank Ludlow is C. rushfortii”
The types of C. austrotibetica chosen by Silba were collected by Ludlow and Bailey. Typical ignorance of the rules of taxonomy.
Lie #7:
“the distribution of C. rushfortii is very narrow, only located in the valleys of Parlung Tsangpo and Yigong Tsangpo.”
See lie #4.
Lie #8:
“but possible if considered C. torulosa var. gigantea”
This combination by Farjon is invalid. C. torulosa var. majestica Carrière has priority. C. austrotibetica and C. gigantea are two different species with quite distinct separated ranges.
Lie #9:
“In the absence of more information, it is reasonable to designate this species as C. rushforthii.”
There is enough information. All is written in the Bulletin of the Cupressus Conservation Project: diagnoses, range maps, complete list of herbarium specimens, taxonomy, photos of huge trees belonging all to C.austrotibetica. Nobody is free to pick up a name randomly like some are doing here. Every species has a description and is fixed by type(s) in herbaria and localities.
Error #10:
“There is an estimate of 95 metres for Cupressus cashmeriana in Bhutan by Miehe.”
This specimen is not a C. cashmeriana which is not present wild in Bhutan, but a C. tortulosa.
The estimation is erroneous. It is not 95m.
Conifers, at 2023-07-02 22:47:19, edited at 2023-07-02 22:50:53, said:
@ Kouta - the problem with listing it as Cupressus rushforthii is that the describing authors of that species say it is not that, but is C. austrotibetica . . .
Sequoia, thanks for your comment. It is great to have such a lively discussion before getting to the right conclusion, but please focus on the tree itself.
Response 1# You are right, I didn't review the author carefully before.
Response 2#3#5#6# In Chinese, C. austrotibetica is written as "Southtibetan cypress", while C. torulosa is written as "Tibetan cypress", which causes me some confusion. The tree that is distributed in Sichuan and rarely exceeds 20m in height should be C. torulosa (this is controversial), as rushforth says "there is considerable variation in eastern Asian Cupressus, variation that is not encompassed fully by is not encompassed fully by modern taxonomic treatments".
"If a climate can be described as "hot" at 3000m altitude." In some rain shadows in the Hengduan Mountains, river valleys at 3000m altitude are also dry and benefit from plateau effects It can also be very hot during the day. Simple experience does not apply.
Response 4#7# Li Cheng from Xizijiang Ecology Center (one of the people who measured this tree) mentioned that this tree belongs to C. rushforthii, and that 25 other trees over 90m also belong to C. rushforthii. Also Li mentioned on social media that there are many C. rushforthii in the Palungzangbo valley.
Response 9# Yes, "There is enough information written in the Bulletin of the Cupressus Conservation Project: diagnoses, range maps, complete list diagnoses, range maps, complete list of herbarium specimens, taxonomy, photos of huge trees,etc". This is not sufficient reason to map this tree to a particular species, especially if you have not visited it in the field. Before getting more information, it would be more sensible to trust the conclusions of the expedition teams, Xizijiang Ecological Conservation Center, Guo Qinghua of Peking University, Shanshui Conservation Center, they are all very professional organizations.You can check the website of shanshui.
http://www.shanshui.org/
What can be emphasized is what Li said, This tree belongs to C. rushforthii, but this new species has not been included in the national plant protection list of China, while C. austrotibetica is written in it. For better protection, it is disclosed as C. austrotibetica.
zhichuliao, at 2023-07-03 07:34:16, edited at 2023-07-03 07:50:37, said:
Conifers,The characteristics of this tree does not contradict rushforth's description , the paper on this species has not been published and it would be irrational to draw conclusions based on descriptions and online photos alone, we all understand in different growing environments how morphologically diverse the same species, typically Cryptomeria japonica on the rainy Yaku-shima is very different morphologically from their relatives in Honshu.
"this new species has not been included in the national plant protection list of China, while C. austrotibetica is written in it. For better protection, it is disclosed as C. austrotibetica"
You probably mean it is discosed as C. torulosa? In the articles in English, it has described as C. torulosa, like here:
It is referred to as C. torulosa in CGTN report, but some Chinese media also refer to it as C. austrotibetica, due to the unprofessionalism of the media and the confusion of the related Chinese designations (西藏柏木，which means Tibetan cypress-C. torulosa,。藏南柏木，which means Southern tibetan cypress-C. austrotibetica), some reports are very confusing.
Kouta,you are right.C. rushfortii may not be the final word for it, and now we just have to wait for a more scientific definition from the relevant papers.
@DBZT - yes, a temperate rainforest. If you look at a map of the area, you can see the mountain ranges either side of the Tsangpo Gorge funnel the monsoon rain directly to this site, like a concentrated arrow. Yet just short distances away on the other side of the 6,000-7,500 m high ridges, very little rain falls at all. The sharpest climate contrasts of anywhere on the Earth, from the highest mountain ranges on the Earth.
Somebody posts photos of the "102-metre tree" with a climber. However, in the interview the researcher said, the tree was NOT climbed due to conservation issues. Apparently the photos are of another tree in another stand?
the stand is the same,but climbed by another team, read this:https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1769188093209802415&wfr=spider&for=pc, and according to the image from report, the stand may relocate to 30° 7'10.11"N, 95° 3'13.22"E on the GE，which at left riverbank and acesssble from road
L'écorce est la même, et au vu du feuillage et de l'allure générale je pense qu'il s'agit de la même espèce. On remarque la finesse des branches et de l'extrémité des rameaux. Dommage que les photographes n'aient pas pensé à prendre des photos plus rapprochées du feuillage !...
...mais la photo de la jeune pousse sur le facebook en chinois permet enfin de se faire une idée. Le feuillage très clair et très fin, ainsi que l'aspect de l'écorce me font définitivement penser à C. austrotibetica, et non à C. rushforthii.
No, the stands are not the same. The one from the video is on the left bank of the Parlung Tsganpo opposite the road, while the 102.3m tree is on the left bank of the Yigong Tsangpo.
All these giant cypresses are Cupressus austrotibetica. Except Conifers and DBZT it looks like nobody read the article:
"Cupressus rushforthii, a new cypress species in Xizang, China, with an introduction on the Chinese cypresses and a survey of C. austrotibetica."
Note: "a survey of C.austrotibetica".
And more lies.
The max temperature for Milin in Summer is below 23°C. It is not very hot, it is not even hot.
"many articles point out that the height of C. austrotibetica is usually below 20m"
Which articles? In Chinese scientific articles I could find only 2 articles mentioning C. austrotibetica. And none says something about its height. Moreover, Silba's diagnosis reads: "Arbor ad 20-60 m. alta" that is usually more than 20 m high.
"C. rushfortii is a newly published species, and the past records are indeed lower than 70m"
The maximum size of C.rushforthii is unknown. There is no "past record" of that species. There is no herbarium sheet of that species in the Chinese harbariums.
"This tree belongs to C. rushforthii, but this new species has not been included in the national plant protection list of China. For better protection, it is disclosed as C. austrotibetica."
Total nonsense. Taxonomy and conservation are two different matters. Taxonomy is not under the influence of conservation while conservation needs taxonomy.
"I think the species seen by Professor Frank Ludlow is C. rushfortii"
A lie and a stupid comment as Ludlow specimens were used as the type and paratype of C.austrotibetica. The second paratype by Bailey is close to the locality of the 102.3m tree.
"In Chinese, C. austrotibetica is written as "Southtibetan cypress", while C. torulosa is written as "Tibetan cypress", which causes me some confusion."
Common names are variable, hence the use of Latin names. You can name it as you want, it has no bearing on the only scientific name which is in Latin. If you have no knowledge on taxonomy, educate yourself first.
The worst thing is that you are doing all to bring the confusion from common names over to the Latin names. Care about your common names as you want, but stay away from the Latin names.
"In some rain shadows in the Hengduan Mountains, river valleys at 3000m altitude are also dry and benefit from plateau effects It can also be very hot during the day. Simple experience does not apply."
Drought and heat are two different things. Meteorological data do apply. The max temperature for Milin in Summer is below 23°C. It is not very hot, it is not even hot.
"Li Cheng from Xizijiang Ecology Center (one of the people who measured this tree) mentioned that this tree belongs to C. rushforthii"
And what is Li Cheng experience with cypress taxonomy? None. No article, nothing. Did he read the original article about C.rushforthii and C.austrotibetica? By giving the wrong Latin name to those giant trees, he will make a fool of himself and only bring more confusion in taxonomy.
The people in charge of conservation should direct their activities to care about Cupressus fallax when already two populations have or will be destroyed by dams. The Parlung and Yigong valleys are under study to analyse if they are fit for dam buildings.
"This is not sufficient reason to map this tree to a particular species, especially if you have not visited it in the field."
The maps are done on the basis of herbarium sheets. How do you know if I did not visit those valleys? You know nothing. Please, have a look at the backcover page of the journal where the article about C.rushforthii is published.
"For better protection, it is disclosed as C. austrotibetica."
Again: conservation has no bearing on taxonomy. About protection: Cupressus gigantea is on the red list. Do you want to know what happened to many of those cypresses when a road was built along the Yarlung Tsangpo valley? Several dams were built along along the Yarlung Tsangpo above the main population of those cypresses. Can you guess what would happen when the river flow will change? Where are the studies on the environmemtal impacts of the dams?
"The characteristics of this tree does not contradict rushforth's description,"
Yes, it does.
"the paper on this species has not been published and it would be irrational to draw conclusions based on descriptions and online photos alone."
This contradicts altogether what you wrote before. And yes, it is possible to id several cypress species on photos only. Obviously you cannot. Especially C.austrotibetica is easy to id for it has a unique foliage.
"It is referred to as C. torulosa in CGTN report, but some Chinese media also refer to it as C. austrotibetica, due to the unprofessionalism of the media and the confusion of the related Chinese designations (西藏柏木，which means Tibetan cypress-C. torulosa,。藏南柏木，which means Southern tibetan cypress-C. austrotibetica), some reports are very confusing."
And you are the one who brings confusion here. Again you are showing that you do not understand taxonomy at all. Once again: taxonomy does not care about common names.
"the taxonomy of the specimen is not clear. Could be Cupressus austrotibetica or another species or variety of the area."
No, it cannot be another species. The taxonomy is very clear, based on herbarium specimens and distribution range and sizes of the cypresses. So far there is no "variety" in the area.
Someone tried to use my pseudo... A new password was sent to me when I did not request one.
No, the stands are not the same. The one from the video is on the left bank of the Parlung Tsganpo opposite the road, while the 102.3m tree is on the left bank of the Yigong Tsangpo.
Correction:
No, the stands are not the same. The one from the video is on the LEFT bank of the Parlung Tsganpo opposite the road, while the 102.3m tree is on the RIGHT bank of the Yigong Tsangpo.
Sequoia, it seems very complicated and difficult identify a species of tree that is ten thousand kms. away, without having samples or good photos of the specimen, whose exact position is unknown. In addition, we do not know well the floristic communities of these valleys nor the species that form them.
Complicated? Difficult? No, it is not. For you it is impossible because you never saw a live Cupressus austrotibetica and a live C. rushforthii. For people who have seen both of them, they are very easy to distinguish.
By the way, it is not any tree, it is a Cypress and I guess some Cypress specialists know what they are talking about.
And the exact locality of this giant Cypress is perfectly known, now.
Sequoia, you should contact the Chinese researchers mentioned in the articles and interview. This is no taxonomical database. In my opinion, we should list the trees under the names given by researchers who found and studied them.
Perhaps you are right that the record tree should be called C. austrotibetica… in YOUR taxonomy. We must keep in mind that the taxonomy of Asian cypresses is anything but fixed. POWO has adopted your concept, but it does not mean that it would be an established taxonomy. The time will show which taxa and species are accepted by the scientific community. I guess there will be fewer species, some of your taxa perhaps considered as var./ssp.
The Chinese researchers had some reason to call the tree C. rushforthii, perhaps correctly, perhaps incorrectly. At the best you would ask them directly. If you are a serious researcher, you should have channels to contact them. So you would also have possibility to influence their very probably incoming scientific paper.
Another thing is how to behave on Internet forums. I don’t think that it is the best way to push your agenda to come on forums insulting others. It also gives a feeling that one is ultimately an amateur, if he behaves aggressively on a hobbyist forum, as it was the only place to express one’s opinion. You should take lessons from your buddy “Conifers”. He also sometimes has different opinions than me and the others but he is always polite.
Btw, the species of the tallest trees in Borneo is a bit questionable, too. The tallest tree Dial & Mifsud measured in 2008 was identified as Shorea faguetiana by their guide, who was the best available person to identify trees. However, one of the best experts of the Asian rainforests, Peter Ashton, identified it later from the material sent to him as Shorea gibbosa. From the moment, all the tallest trees were dubbed as Shorea faguetiana, although Dial’s work showed that numerous trees can reach similar heights. I guess a reason could be that these trees are called “yellow meranti”, but yellow meranti is actually not a species but a species group including numerous species of relatively similar appearance. (Note: Ashton has grumbled on no Internet forum that the species name is wrong! For him it was enough to write it in his monumental book.)
The opinions above are mine and this is not my website. Perhaps Jeroen has an opinion, too.
Ik herinner me jouw uitspraak over de acer campestre/monspessulanum in de Doelentuin Delft. Ik heb er een item van gemnaakt. Kun en wil je er in meedoen?
I have a redwood growing in my pasture (Eastern Washington). A previous owner planted two of them in the 1970's however only one lived. It is a beautiful tree and has a huge trunk.
Martin Tijdgat zei jaren geleden dat dat dit mogelijk een Acer monspessulanum is geënt op een Acer campestre. Ik heb wat foto's genomen van het blad laag bij de grond en hoger in de boom. Laag bij de grond is het inderdaad meer acer campestre en hoger zijn de bladeren onmiskenbaar monspessulanum. Ook de stamvorm is zeer afwijkend tov campestre, maar ook van monspessulanum. Hoewel de paar monspessulanums die je in NL treft er vaak struikachtig bij staan.
In the Netherlands Poly was the most severe in the western and northern parts. I live somewhere in the middle and checked some registered trees yesterday and today and they were all OK, only some minor damage.
The humidity level on the ground is THE SAME as in the Sahara Desert. It's the first time of my life that I see the grass dry in April. And where I live isn't in the slightless the most affected area by the drought.
Fortunately the drought is over, June has been pretty rainy in all Spain, but it's effects are quite bad. Pic of cereal dry and stunted but ironically the green grass is twice as tall. Rain has come too late for a lot of cereal fields.
I'm very interested in blossom periods. For Western Europe it's obvious for me. Once I was in Mexico and saw the Jacaranda bloom in Februari 2011. .https://www.monumentaltrees.com/nl/mex/ciudaddemexico/benitojuarez/3099_palaciodebellasartes/
I was in San Diego in december 2019 and there was no blooming. I asked the son of my partner to keep an eye on it and he sent me pictures of blooming in may 2023. https://www.monumentaltrees.com/nl/usa/californie/sandiegocounty/23113_intersectionof25thstreetenastreet/
I've seen them in Nepal (april 2008) and Bulgarya (august 2016) but for the moment I cannot reproduce my findings at that time. Maybe later.
A second object is the Erythrina caffra in San Diego. At 21-4-2021 it was in full bloom. In decemeber 2019 there was nothing as far as I remember. But I must have seen some blooming at the time, otherwise I couldn't have determinated the tree.
https://www.monumentaltrees.com/nl/fotos/122808/
For the moment a very interesting topic to me. I hope also for others.
Wim
Wim Brinkerink, at 2023-06-25 19:15:14, edited at 2023-06-25 19:20:14, said:
Nepal, Kathmandu august 2008. Jacaranda. Full bloom. I cannot share the pic. don't know how.
Voor smalbladige es weet ik dit niet zeker, maar meestal worden in een land of regio moeilijk in zuivere vorm vanuit zaad verkrijgbare soorten soorten en variëteiten gestekt en geënt op een onderstam van een veel voorkomende verwante soort.
Dit is voor boomkwekers meestal een eenvoudigere en goedkoeren manier om een soort in flinke aantallen te kweken. In Nederland zal zuiver zaad van Fraxinus angustifolia relatief moeilijk verkrijgbaar zijn omdat hier veel meer stuifmeel van F. excelsior rondzweeft. Het zaad aan angustifolia moederbomen zal dus vaak bestoven zijn door stuifmeel van excelsior. Zuiver zaad zal wel te vinden zijn maar het kost tijd en moeite om dit uit te zoeken.
Stekken en enten is dan goedkoper en levert zuivere angustifolia enten op. Vermoedelijk zal men tegenwoordig wel angustifolia 'op eigen wortel' kunnen leveren, want dit wordt de laatste tijd veel meer gestimuleerd in de boomkwekerij en boom-aanplant-wereld.
These are not just particularly good specimens, most large red cedars look like this. So you can see why I think the western red cedar deserves a spot among the monumental tree species. What do you think?
Bob, if the photo you are going to upload is not yours and you do not have written permission from the author to use it , it is better to go in the tree to " Edit data of this tree " and write the internet address where the photo can be seen . So there are no problems, sometimes people are annoyed that their photos are used without permission.
Link to the original paper: https://britishandirishbotany.org/index.php/bib/article/view/144 (click on the 'PDF' button). As a caveat, all these highest-altitude 'trees' are saplings or young bushy seedlings which could be finished off by a poor growing season (or a particularly hungry sheep). Also, the Scots Pine in the BBC article at 1160 m was reported as long ago as 2003 and has very probably failed since. In her paper, Sarah Watts suggests that the highest-altitude upright-growing mature 'tree' might be an aspen found by Gus Routledge in 2022 at 706 m on Stac na h-Ioliare (Cairn Gorm).
The very highest record seems to be a seedling juniper at 1200 m on Ben Macdui, historically reported by Jim Macintosh and cited in the above article.
Sitka Spruce seems the likeliest candidate to make real trees at these altitudes. Alastair Firth found a measurable one at 990 m last year: https://ati.woodlandtrust.org.uk/tree-search/tree?treeid=228000&from=3523&v=2318426&ml=map&z=13&nwLat=56.782399942300714&nwLng=-5.096657409041576&seLat=56.68098254616487&seLng=-4.657204284041576#/.
Noble Fir would probably do better than Sitka Spruce at making an erect single-stem tree at very high altitude in Scotland, providing there was a seed source of course.
Very interesting. I wonder what seed source the Sitka was? I suspect Queen Charlotte Islands. If Alaska sources were used they would be even more tolerant. Yes Conifers, Noble perhaps even better suited but as usual we can't make any assumptions as its too little planted to tell or for it to seed naturally? BUT we have to get rid of the wretched sheep/deer problem!!
Never underestimate nature! I always suspected tree species would be capable of growing to over a 1000m in Scotland. I suspect these trees or in this case shrub sized ones are subjected 100mph winds almost annually at 1100m!
In Wales there are forestry plantations at the economic tree line at 700-800m somewhat higher than in Scotland due to lower windspeeds, so in theory trees would grow even higher here if the mountains were taller, so perhaps hypothetically the tree line would be 1200m or so. If we had mountains in south east England of 1800m I suspect the tree line would be 1500m and so fourth as this area as the lowest windspeeds in the UK.
ik ben op zoek naar jouw telefoonnummer -heb het gehad, maar ben het kwijt-. Ik zoek namelijk informatie over een paar bomen bij ons in de gemeente en krijg eigenlijk maar weinig resultaat via heemkunde of andere bronnen. mogelijk dat jij hier iet s over weet of een bron kent die hier iets over kan vertellen. Hier is mijn 06 nummer -0612681338-. Ivm met vleermuisonderzoeken is het het handigst om even te appen, kan niet altijd de telefoon oppakken.
de info heb ik nodig voor een heel leuk project over veterane bomen en het specifieke beheer hiervan en hoe je deze bomen in de toekomst kan behouden.
I'm trying to add a box in Essex that was germinated in 1841AD it came to me as logs, taken from a dead or dying tree but it was the second largest one recorded in the UK based on it's girth at 5ft which is 82cm minimum.
I thought I would record it for posterity before I mill it, happy to add photos of the trunk and endgrain section, I have counted the rings, the only thing I don't know is the exact location and height but I will try to find this out from the tree surgeon who's driveway the logs were on.
Las fotos están en el enlace que se indica en el árbol : https://www.nationalregisterofbigtrees.com.au
Para que lo sepas : no se pueden subir fotos a MT sin el permiso escrito del que la hizo, por ese motivo no se pone la foto sino el enlace donde está o de donde se ha extraído la información.
You can see it on google street view here. The claimed height of 50 m is clearly nonsense (I'd estimate about half of that!), and the girth - as with all these banyan-type figs that produce adventitious hanging roots to "enhance" their girth - rather meaningless; it should be listed as multi-stem as it probably has 100++ stems.
non ha senso inserire degli alberi che non si conoscono personalmente, sbagliando misure, circonferenza ed altezza! ci sono dei criteri che si devono rispettare, quando si parla di cironferenza del tronco. Inoltre, i Ficus non dovrebbero essere inseriti nell'elenco generale, ma dovrebbero far parte di un altro elenco a parte, essendo un genere atipico, per quanto riguarda la crescita
Looking at the photos, it is not possible to get a girth at 1.3 m height; the valid girth measurement is the one taken above the swelling, at 2 m height (girth 3.8 m).
Appunto..non so dove sono i 2 metri di altezza, ma sarebbe giusto eliminare la misura della circonferenza a 0.5 metri (7.30 metri) perchè non è vera. Per vedere le reali dimensioni di un albero ci vuole un termine di paragone, dato da una persona accanto all'albero stesso
De Valse Christusdoorn net naast de toren is recent gekapt omdat hij de toren beschadigde. De tweede die een paar meter verder staat, is mogen blijven staan.
Ik mat voor deze boom 3,25 terwijl de boom bijna gehalveerd is omdat de kern weg is en de helft van de buitenschil. Dus in vol ornaat zou de boom wellicht meer dan een meter of 5 zijn. Absoluut de kampioen in Nederland. Intrigerend.
Working on a project to find the largest shrubs & bushes (not trees) in the world. I'm not plant expert so it's hard to shift through all the scientific names. I have a few below but hoping I could use your expertise and knowledge to identify more. Looking for specific plants taller than 50 feet.
My List so far:
-Meikleour Beech Hedge - Perthshire, Scotland
-Yew hedge - Cirencester, Gloucestershire
-Rose Bush - Tombstone, Arizona
Thank you and appreciate your time,
Trent
Nardo Kaandorp, at 2023-05-30 19:03:34, edited at 2023-05-30 19:44:00, said:
One of the dividing issues on this community is multistem. It is an important issue because if once a tree is registered as multistemmed it doesn't bother anymore. It disappears from the list. You have to add it over and over again to make it part of the collection. Off course I am aware of the fact that a few ages ago architects made landscapes or gardens and planted more than 1 trees in a hole. And it also is true that sometimes spontanuous merging of trees appeared.
Essentially this issue is something to be aware of in valuing your commitment. Some of us have purely intrest in biological value, some of us in historical and some on imaging and some on natural and more. .
But. There are numerous trees that develop as a lookalike of multistem trees. For instance: Montereycipres, Quercus virginiana, Acer palmatum. Are these always multistemmed?
I think we must have some explicit attention to this issue.
By the way my commitment is to esthetical value and historical importance.
Hi Wim, multistem ≠ more than one tree planted together. It can also be a single tree planted open-grown where its low branches (below 1.3 m height) continue to grow without being shaded out or pruned off; with time they develop into multiple stems. See my annotations here, where each colour indicates the outline of separate branches that started off below 1.3 m, and developed into additional trunks:
Note in particular, the pale blue cross-hatching, indicating sky (empty space with no trunk!) directly above the centre of the tree: there is no single central dominant trunk. It is a giant shrub, more than a tree. This can happen with any open-grown tree, but Monterey Cypress does appear to be particularly prone to it.
If you look at the text regarding multistem trees, it says: As this tree is a tree with multiple trunks, the girth can be larger than what would be expected of the tree of this age (my emphasis); what matters is that a multistem tree has a markedly greater girth than a single-stem tree of the same age, so cannot be compared in things like calculations of growth rate. This obviously applies in the case of Monterey Cypress (Cupressus macrocarpa) '54946' that precipitated this discussion - if it only had a single stem, its girth would be well under a half of what it is with many stems adding to its girth.
Also of course, a tree tagged as multistem does not 'disappear from the list'; it is only excluded from lists of single-stem trees that are directly comparable with each other. You can always tick the 'include multistemmed trees' option to make them show.
Thank you for sharing your point of view. The discussion on the Pescadero Montereycipres is a good example of a third category. Next to deliberately planted trees together and spontanuous seedlings. In the Pescadero-case things are obvious, but as we have seen earlier it is not allways that simple as we all know.
We have a very large and very old Sugar Maple tree in our woods. A tree man, in 1983, said it was probably 300 years old. In the past 10 years, it has been dying- losing very large limbs and the center is rotting. The hollowing has caused many of these limbs to just break off. It now is a very dangerous tree to be near but I am still reluctant to have it cut down. Any suggestions? Steve Stout
You're doing the right thing! Keep it, but keep your distance, particularly during windy or wet weather. Dying trees are of immense importance to wildlife, the decaying wood provides food and homes for numerous animals, fungi, etc.
J’aimerai savoir comment estimer /mesurer approximativement la taille d’un arbre?
(sans appareil prof ou laser spécifique)?
Merci d’avance pour vos infos, j’aimerai bientôt rajouter sur ce site qq infos et infos d’un petit groupe de cyprès chauve très âgés sur Pessac (33600 FR), découverts dans un parc urbain durant le confinement 😉
Wil je svp de blokkade van mijn emailadres stoppen? Ik krijg geen berichten. Alleen omdat ik elke dag alle berichten check krijg ik reacties te zien. Ik kan dat niet blijven doen en dat is uiteindelijk schadelijk voor jouw database.
Hallo Wim, waarschijnlijk komen de berichten in je spamfolder terecht, heb ik ook weleens.
Groet, Alfred
Wim Brinkerink, at 2023-05-18 19:31:17, edited at 2023-05-18 19:43:59, said:
Ik bekijk mijn spamfolder dagelijks. Daar komen slechts 2 a 3 berichten per dag in. De enige die er voor kan zorgen dat ik berichten wel of niet krijg is Tim. Tim ontkent, maar ik geloof er geen moer van. Leo is kwaad op me geworden en heeft Tim aangezet tot blokkade. Sommige mensen ontkennen gewoon in situaties waarin ze wel de macht hebben maar niet de wil. Ik heb geen andere verklaring. Ik moet nu dagelijks per se alle berichten chequen om bij te blijven. Ik heb de tijd dus doe het, maar ik zal best wel iets missen op zijn tijd. Zo had ik ook zelfs het antwoord van Tim niet gezien. (!)
en... Het is bekend dat Nederlanders nogal direct zijn en Belgen en vele andere volken niet. Nederlanders zijn daar een uitzondering in. Dat is groepsdenken, maar ja wat wil je? Ik ben socioloog en opgeleid om kenmerken van groepen te identificeren. De (gemiddelde) Belg gaat niet zo snel de confrontatie aan. De gemiddelde Nederlander wel. Ik benoem wat me dwars zit en erger me aan schijnheiligheid. En me uitspreken betekent niet dat ik iemand veroordeel, maar ik zoek helderheid. En sta voor wat je vindt svp.
Hallo Wim, ik wou alleen maar behulpzaam zijn door je te wijzen op je spamfolder en ik heb geen zin in een onzinnige discussie en helemaal geen zin om Tim onderuit te halen.
Ik wil niemand onderuit halen en waardeer je poging. Maar mogen we svp nog steeds benoemen en beschrijven wat er aan de hand is? Of mag dat zelfs niet meer?
Als een nieuwe boom wordt geregistreerd is die alleen op de kaart zichtbaar als daarbij een meting (omtrek of hoogte) wordt ingevoerd. Zonder metingen is de boom onzichtbaar, is daar iets aan te doen? Oudere registraties zonder meting zijn trouwens wel zichtbaar.
inderdaad, dat kan beter. Het schijnt bij sommige nieuwe bomen op te treden en bij de meeste niet.
Het is me nog niet duidelijk hoe dit precies komt. Om toch garanderen dat alle bomen op de kaart komen, loopt om de zoveel dagen een automatisch scriptje die bomen die om één of andere reden niet onmiddellijk op het kaartje terechtkwamen daar toch aan toevoegt. Dat zijn er meestal 1 tot 3 per week. Ik probeer het uit te zoeken, maar sowieso is het effect tijdelijk en komen ze er toch op terecht.
Wim, goedenavond. Vorige keer deed ik het op 1.30m, waarschijnlijk vanwege de stamopslag. Nu leek de smalste stamomtrek me beter vanwege die laag aangezette arm. Dus nu twee waarden voor dezelfde boom.
Ik heb recent contact gehad met de beheerder/eigenaar van het Australische "Nationaal Big Tree Register". Ik heb zwart op wit dat ik hun foto's mag gebruiken. Soms gebruik ik google street view, maar dat mag omdat Google een fair use policy hanteert. Ik gebruik streetview fair use. Ook de foto's van Enrico & Erna Liebenberg mag ik gebruiken. Zij sturen mij zelfs de hoge resolutie-foto's toe.
ik kan niet goed volgen. Kan je aangeven welk antwoord van mij (een stukje tekst waarop ik kan zoeken in de databank is voldoende) kwam terecht in welke (verkeerde) discussie en in de welke had die gemoeten? Het is inderdaad niet de bedoeling dat dit door elkaar zou komen.
Ich komm nicht klar und gebe auf: Also Kinderspielplatz am Südbahnhof ehenalige Nelsee-Anlage Ahornblättrige Platane Umfang 3,83 m auf einer Erdaufschüttung aus der Zeit nach dem Bau der Miltenberger Bahn (1876)
Une photo de l'arbre entier trouvée sur internet permet de situer sa hauteur entre 46,6 et 57,1 m ; mais comme ce cliché est pris en légère contreplongée, on peut penser que le chiffre de 60,4 mètres est possible, à l'extrême limite. Mieux vaut supposer une hauteur comprise entre 50 et 60 mètres.
European legislation is very strict, if you take a photo on private property, even from outside, it is life imprisonment, and if in addition you post it on MT, they will directly cut off your head. Such is life in the EU. I do not understand how the owners of Google earth are not in jail with an orange jumpsuit.
I saw that all the Wych Elms I've registered have been marked with Ulmus Glabra "Exoniensis" even though most of them are the pure species. From what I could see it was not only the Wych Elms I have registered that have been marked with "Exoniensis", but almost all U.Glabra registered on this site have been marked with "Exoniensis". Why has this happened?
I see there's also separate entries for Ulmus glabra 'Camperdown' and Ulmus glabra 'Camperdownii'; these are of course the same cultivar and should be merged; the latter name is the original [correct] spelling.
L'arbre n'est toujours pas visible sur la commune d'Estaing (Hautes-Pyrénées, France) ; la carte qui apparaît est la bonne, mais l'arbre n'y apparaît pas.
Merci! The location I gave it is from the coordinates it already had (42.886088, -0.226324), even though the map showed it wrongly in the USA. They were the same coordinates as this tree, so it may be a duplicate of it. I suspect Tim may need to sort it out properly.
It might be Thuja plicata, but better photos are needed. If you want an identification, take photos of the leaves, and cones / flowers / fruit. A selfie with just the bark doesn't really help much.
Il y a un problème avec cet arbre. J'ai visité les lieux où il est censé se situer sur le plan : il n'y a aucun douglas à cet endroit ; la plantation n'est pas une plantation de sapins ou de douglas, mais une immense plantation de pinus radiata, dont le plus élevé ne dépasse pas 40 mètres.
Soit l'arbre est mal situé sur la carte, soit son identification ET l'estimation de sa hauteur sont erronées.
Bei meiner Auswahl der Dominikanischen Republik kann ich für den Kapokbaum in Las Terrenas keine Region (Samaná) oder den Ort eingeben, bitte um Hilfe.
Would think beetle attack after the trees were stressed by drought and extreme high temperatures (so basically, global warming). Don't think John, Paul, George, and Ringo had anything to do with it 😂
Well at least their drough only lasted one summer, some places of the Mediterraean Coast in Spain have not had continuous rain for over a year. If the tendency does not change in this spring, we will have massive mortality of trees due to mere drough, there is no water left in the soil.
Hello! This is a great database and maps of trees. Is this also integrated to current Google maps somehow as a layer? Is there anyway to get this data of trees on some kind of a table or database or CSV format?
I usually round girth measurements to the nearest 10 cm rather than the exact measurement and mark it as "exactly".
I do this because most of the trees I measure are quite large -usually 5-7m girth- and it is very difficult to get the tape to be level around the tree. This is made worse by the fact the ground is never completely level either. Because of the size of the trees, the measurement can be several centimeters more if one side of the tape is 5-10 cm lower. Sometimes even just getting the tape around the tree is a hassle.
This isn't to say I don't try though. I try to get it level as best I can, but I can never be certain. My measurements are only off by a few cm (if any), so I round it to the nearest 10 cm, as I said before.
I've noticed a lot of the measurements on this site are exact to the centimeter. Should I put the exact number even though it might be inaccurate?
I would not worry too much about the measurements, for me it is enough that it approximately reflects the size of the tree. The Uncertainty Principle occurs in MT measurement : we cannot know , with perfect accuracy, the size of a tree, It's a physical law.
I think it is best to put the exact numbers. Every experienced tree measurer understands the girth numbers are never truly exact. If you round the numbers to the nearest 10 cm and mark the measurement as "exact", it looks like you have measured exactly 610 cm, for example. Thus, it does not change the situation.
Abc123 is me!😲😲😲 check out some of my trees! Don't forget to comment about problems. I will edit right away. Of course, if I did not edit, I probably did not notice your comment and once I do, I will improve the article! Bye, and have fun exploring my pages. I am new and I do not know a lot about this website and please help if you can.
Just on top of Objada Forest, a well-preserved Quercus petraea natural woodland, one of the remaining fragments of the great woods of Hijedo, a medieval oak woodland that extended more than 20km from east to west, from Bricia to Endino.
Hallo allemaal. Mijn naam is Rick en ik woon in Culemborg. In de tuin van het oude Seminarie, het huidige stadskantoor van Culemborg, staat een vrij forse boom, volgens mij een mammoetboom, Volgens Ahn viewer zou deze ruim 30 meter hoog moeten zijn en met behulp van oude foto's zou deze rond de eeuwwisseling in de vorige eeuw geplant moeten zijn. Ik zie deze niet terug op dit portaal. Zelf ben ik slechts een amateur bomenliefhebber maar hoe kan ik deze laten toevoegen? Ik heb er een foto van.
Tot mijn ontsteltenis bleek deze boom begin 2023 gekapt. Ik volg de kapvergunningen, had ook gezien dat dit huis te koop stond, maar dat deze gezonde boon gekapt zou worden, musselijkmakend!
J'ai ajouté un arbre aujourd'hui (platane à Nantes, place de la Patience), et ai ajouté deux fois la même photo. Je n'arrive pas à en supprimer une des deux, comment dois-je m'y prendre ?
This has a typo 'Thorpe' in its name here; the correct spelling is Thorp Perrow (see their website). I can't find out how to correct it; Tim, could you do this, please?
Thankyou for taking the trouble to add this tree (and to the Ancient Tree Inventory). It becomes the largest monkey puzzle recorded in Scotland, and only just pipped by one in Ireland and a couple in southern England - in a part of the country where so few other trees have been measured, though I did manage to get to Ardtornish gardens along the road a few years ago.
There is no such species as "Metrosideros tormentoso". This appears to be a misspelling of " Metrosideros tomentosa", which is an illegitimate synonym for "Metrosideros excelsa", the New Zealand pohutukawa.
A giant Chiltern Hills Cherry discovered. A huge tree for the species and quite possibly 170 years old, planted the same time as the beech.
It towers above the surrounding beech forest and emerges out of the beech canopy like a tropical rainforest giant. Still in good health. Cherry is a short lived species when open grown but in a forest environment lives far longer like Beech?
Largest Douglas Fir in the Home Counties remeasured at 46.3m. There are younger trees locally 44-46m tall catching up within a few miles of this location in the Chiltern Hills within south Oxfordshire.
Tallest Douglas Fir within a 50 mile radius from East Gloucestershire to New Forest in Hampshire to south Surrey. Counties in southern England.
Hello all, can anyone help please? I'm trying to add my first tree - a monkey puzzle. I fill in all the fields, hit save, then get this on an otherwise white screen...
Warning: Undefined array key "subgroup" in /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/process.php on line 786 Fatal error: Uncaught TypeError: mysqli_num_rows(): Argument #1 ($result) must be of type mysqli_result, bool given in /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/process.php:848 Stack trace: #0 /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/process.php(848): mysqli_num_rows(false) #1 /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/process.php(145): Process->procAddTree() #2 /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/process.php(2603): Process->runConstructor() #3 {main} thrown in /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/process.php on line 848
thanks for your message. It looks like there is something wrong with what was provided on the "add tree" page for the question: "Specific location:". What value was selected there?
I would be useful to send me e.g. a screenshot of the filled in page right before you hit save and run into the error so I can try to reconstruct and prevent the issue in the future.
Email is: info@ m o nument al_trees.com (without the spaces and underscore)
Hi Tim, thanks so much for your reply. I've managed to upload the tree now - I changed browser from Chrome to Firefox and that fixed it: https://www.monumentaltrees.com/en/gbr/scotland/argyllandbute/32542_fuinary/
However, I'm still having problems attaching a photo of the tree. The image I'm trying to upload is a .jpg and its size is 9.4mb. I can get through all the stages of the form after pressing the Upload photos button, and I can browse and select the image, but then I get this message;
Warning: imagecreatefromjpeg(): gd-jpeg: JPEG library reports unrecoverable error: Not a JPEG file: starts with 0x4d 0x4d in /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/site/upload/upload.php on line 128 Warning: imagecreatefromjpeg(): "../../db/148/full/148851.jpg" is not a valid JPEG file in /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/site/upload/upload.php on line 128 Fatal error: Uncaught TypeError: imagecopyresampled(): Argument #2 ($src_image) must be of type GdImage, bool given in /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/site/upload/upload.php:129 Stack trace: #0 /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/site/upload/upload.php(129): imagecopyresampled(Object(GdImage), false, 0, 0, 0, 0, 25.529100529101, 50, 772, 1512) #1 /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/site/upload/upload.php(59): resize('../../db/148/fu...', '148851.jpg', 25.529100529101, '../../db/148/50...') #2 /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/site/upload/thanks.php(40): include_once('/customers/0/1/...') #3 {main} thrown in /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/site/upload/upload.php on line 129
Sinds kort werkt de zoekfunctie van Google rechtsboven op de site niet meer, is dat op te lossen of is dat een financiële zaak van Google? Wat al langer niet lukt is de overzichtskaart per land bekijken, zou je daar ook naar willen kijken?
I got informed by some that the search functionality was not working anymore.
Indeed, Google changed something at their side, and I have now restored and improved the search functionality on this site. Please let me know if there would be any other issues.
Yes, in Taiwan there are many valleys with numerous giant trees, some to be discovered. I uploaded some and tried to put order, but it's not easy: I couldn't find any updated list on the internet. I contacted with "epiphyte", who is the administrator of that facebook site, Taiwan champions trees, just in case she wanted to upload some trees to MT, but apparently is very busy.
Recently a Chinese team climbed and measured a 83.4-metre Abies chensiensis subsp. salouenensis in Tibet. (In China called Abies ernestii var. salouenensis. Very nice website with many species named in the photo:
Comme je l'ai indiqué à propos des chênes fastigiés de Saugnac et Saint-Sever (Landes), bien des éléments laissent penser que le Quercus robur fastigiata pourrait être une variété, présente antérieurement à 1795 dans divers secteurs de l'Aquitaine et des Pyrénées. Hélas, cette présence s'est trouvée ''polluée'' par la propagation par bouturage, dans presque toute l'Europe, des clones du ''Schöne Eiche'' allemand. De ce fait, il est devenu très difficile de faire le tri et de savoir si Q. robur fastigiata est un cultivar ou une variété, voire, pour les individus antérieurs à 1795, une sous-espèce.
Quercus robur with erect branches and twigs are best treated as a Cultivar Group, the Fastigiata Group (eg. https://www.rhs.org.uk/plants/324363/quercus-robur-fastigiata-group/details.) The alternative designation would be forma (f.) fastigiata but nowadays scientists prefer to avoid latinate, botanical names for freak forms like this: they represent a mutation or sport which is only widespread because people choose to plant them for ornament - they are not a natural variety or subspecies of the species. But as you say, many slightly differing versions have been found and propagated over the centuries, so it is not helpful to treat all these trees as a single cultivar ('Fastigiata').
I don't think that the choice 'Cultivar Group' is currently available on this site. Something for Tim to consider adding?
OK, j'adhère à ce qui est dit. Cependant ma question n'était pas exactement là. Je voulais savoir si l'éventuelle découverte d'un ''cluster'' (ou plusieurs) de Q. robur fastigiata ANCIEN(S), précisément dans les zones déjà mentionnées vers 1770 par Borda (Chalosse), en 1783 et 1788 par Lamarck et Palassou (vallée de Barèges et Basse-Navarre) et en 1813 par Lapeyrouse (Navarrenx), c'est-à-dire dans une région géographiquement bien délimitée, ne pouvait pas conduire à la reconnaissance de Q. robur fastigiata comme sous-espèce. Certes cet arbre semble avoir disparu des bois de Pragnères (Hautes-Pyrénées) et de Navarrenx (Béarn), à cause d'abattages massifs historiquement référencés ; mais il semble avoir persisté en Chalosse (Saint-Sever-ouest) et peut-être autour de Saint-Etienne-de-Baïgorry (Pyrénées de Basse-Navarre). D'autre part, la présence d'arbres très anciens et de très forte corpulence, comme celui de l'abbaye de l'Escaladieu (Hautes-Pyrénées) plaide en faveur d'une origine dans cette même région dès la fin du XVIIe siècle.
A cela s'ajoutent deux constatations :
1) ce chêne reproduit ses propriétés (notamment sa forme fastigiée) par germination. On ne peut donc pas parler de ''cultivar'' à son sujet ;
2) ce chêne paraît avoir eu (et avoir encore) une aire de répartition ANCIENNE délimitée géographiquement, à savoir les Landes, l'est du Pays Basque, le Béarn et les Hautes-Pyrénées. Si c'est avéré, on peut dès lors parler de sous-espèce.
Aidan: I think the RHS was bending the rules a bit by giving their fastigiate oak at Wisley its own clonal name, as it was almost certainly planted here as a purchase from another nursery (probably called 'Fastigiata') rather than arising as its own, unique form as a seedling. But if it's not grafted this means that the original nursery could have sold it as a seedling of a fastigiate oak (the mutation often breeds true, as DBZT comments), and so it might have its unique genes. It means the RHS will now be able to make money by selling grafts of this particular and famous tree at the Wisley garden centre!
DBZT: a subspecies will generally have been isolated for long enough (by geographical features or breeding habits) to have acquired lots of distinctive genetic features - but not enough for these features to actually prevent interbreeding with individuals from other subspecies (if it was this different, it would have become a new species). The mutation that created the population of fastigiate oaks which you describe could have been in just one gene - but the same fastigiate habit could be passed to (a proportion of) its seedlings if the gene was a dominant one (or if both parents carried the same mutation). The designation 'forma fastigiata' ('f. fastigiata') would probably be most appropriate to describe a wild population like that.
Tu as écrit : ''The mutation that created the population of fastigiate oaks which you describe could have been in just one gene - but the same fastigiate habit could be passed to (a proportion of) its seedlings if the gene was a dominant one (or if both parents carried the same mutation).''
OK, mais n'est-ce pas ainsi qu'apparaissent de nouvelles variétés, sous-espèces ou espèces : à partir de mutations génétiques ?
Conifers, at 2023-02-26 21:22:39, edited at 2023-02-26 21:24:04, said:
Something I've posted before, a very usefully defined set of morphology-based guidelines for selection of the ranks forma, variety, and subspecies, published by K. I. Christensen (1987; Nordic J. Botany 7: 383-408; see p.384):
The species concept used in the present work is morphological, and mostly in line with Rothmaler (1944) and Du Rietz (1930). The taxonomic ranks used are defined as follows:
Forma of a variety, subspecies or species occurs sporadically within the distribution area of the taxon of higher rank to which it is referred and differs from that taxon in a single character.
Varietas of a subspecies or species is to some extent allopatric and forms local, distinct populations as well as mixed, integrating populations within the distribution area of the subspecies or species. They differ from each other in usually more than a single, distinct character.
Subspecies of a species are both regionally and locally allopatric. They differ from each other in several, distinct characters, but intergrade in overlapping areas.
Species of a genus differ from each other in numerous, distinct characters and have a characteristic distribution area of their own. Where closely related species meet occasional hybridization and introgression may occur.
Given that these fastigiate oaks differ in only a single very minor character (branching angle), they fit better as a forma, than as either a variety or a subspecies.
I've seen some measurements being credited to Wikipedia or other places. Some of my measurements were taken from elsewhere, and I don't know when they were taken either. How do I credit the measurements to someone else and add an "unknown date"?
Edit: I forgot to put a question mark in the title, I thought I should say that in case anyone gets confused.
Some members of MT have authorizations granted by the administrator of the website to change certain specific data. The data that you cannot upload or modify can be recorded in " Edit data of this tree ", where you can freely enter, inform or clarify everything you want .
Would it be possible to collect a seed(s) from this historically monumental tree in an attempt to transpalnt a piece of my late father's legacy to his resting place here in Canada since this is located close to his birthplace - Kosinjski Bakovac - and especially now since his birthplace may soon be buried under the water of a hydroelectric retention lake? Reply to email prsa15@gmail.com would be gratly appreciated with "Jela Car" in the subject line.
Does anyone know if this tree is stil alive? Can't seem to find it on street view. Looks like many pine trees in this aria have died, maybe because they have chopped a lot of trees here in the past, which have changed the habitat too much for some of the trees.
The street view photos was taken back in June 2012, which was about one month after the last registered measurement which was in in May of 2012.
Street View: https://www.google.com/maps/@52.6972402,23.79919,3a,75y,287.17h,112.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH7rPMmmzLvSukkVKvNVSmw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Does anyone know if this tree is stil alive? Can't seem to find it on street view. Looks like many pine trees in this aria have died, maybe because they have chopped a lot of trees here in the past, which have changed the habitat too much for some of the trees.
The street view photos was taken back in June 2012, which was about one month after the last registered measurement which was in in May of 2012.
Street View: https://www.google.com/maps/@52.6972402,23.79919,3a,75y,287.17h,112.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH7rPMmmzLvSukkVKvNVSmw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
I am very local to these trees and know them well. It is known locally as 'The Glade'.
Possibly planted for the Smith family who started WH Smith. I measured 42m for the tallest and maybe the tallest in Buckinghamshire? The tree with the stripped bark was the result of a lightning strike in 2012.
There are some large Corsican/Crimean Pines here and Sessile Oaks (uncommon in the Chilterns.
Also there were some large Noble Firs now lost as the result of climate change.
Vandaag was ik weer even op Amazon.nl. Ik zag dat er flink wat Franstalige bomenboeken met stevige kortingen en zonder verzendkosten worden aangeboden. Ik heb ze voor veel grotere bedragen en hoge verzendkosten gekocht bij Amazon.fr. Grijp je kans.
weiß jemand, warum dieser Baum (und andere Bäume) auf der Übersicht https://www.monumentaltrees.com/de/deu/brandenburg/potsdam/5739_schlossparksanssouci/
gestrichen wurde? Umgebrochen? Umgeschnitten? Fehlbestimmung? Zu lange unbestätigter Baum? Wer - außer dem jeweiligen Bearbeiter des Baums - kann Bäume löschen?
Ich fände es gut, wenn man als Leser dieser Seiten dafür eine kurze Erläuterung erhalten würde. Danke für konstruktive Antworten.
Bonsoir, j'ai essayé et ne me donne aucune erreur, sélectioner dans les listes déroulantes : Pays France, Province Gers, Municipalite Mirande, Village Plaisance. Essayez à nouveau de cette manière et si ne l'accepte pas, écrivez l'erreur qu'il vous donne, pour en informer l'administrateur.
Some of you might think what's he doing in San Diego again. I'm not there. The son of my partner lives there. I visited him in december 2019. At that time I discovered lots of monumental trees. I registered them here. Once and a while I ask him to make a pic of a tree that's special or interesting to me. I have an enourmous admiration for the Jacaranda. So he visited it today on an old request of me, but there was no flowering or even buds. He said that it was extreme cold in the past weeks and rainy. Keep you informed.
Ik mis in het overzicht 'Oudste bomen' de acacia die aangeplant is op het voorplein van Kasteel Doorwerth in 1678. Daarmee is hij al bijna 350 jaar oud. De omtrek is 7 meter.
The location of this oak on the map does not coincide with that of google earth, where it appears further south following the A346. Also on the map there is a "Spiral Oak" that does not coincide its place with none loaded of that forest. It is one that is not described?
You can read about its past history on wikipedia here. While not true 'wildwood', fragments of it have at least remained under semi-natural tree cover for the last thousand years or more, and is probably as close to natural woodland as you will find anywhere in England.
Thanks Conifers, the Iberian Peninsula, although very humanized too, is better preserved than Central Europe, Italy or the United Kingdom. In some parts of Spain the native forest has been little altered, luckily.
roburpetraea, at 2023-02-03 20:51:45, edited at 2023-02-03 20:54:10, said:
A good thing about forests is that they recover their natural state fairly fast in good conditions. Las Mijaradas forest near the city of Burgos was an open woodland 50 years ago, and today is a close forest, and looks fairly similar to how a tertiary era forest would look like on the northern plateau. The state of preservation is unvelievable in biological terms, there is nothing like it in all the geographical area, it should quite literally not exist. An oasis in one of the most dreary areas of Spain. If you eliminate the old pollarded oaks that are still left inside the forest, nobody would guess this was an open woodland in the 50's. Everything from the undergrowth grasses to the biodiversity of the forest points towards a virgin forest.
Even nice well formed oaks are developing, something exceptional for this region.
Beste Han, We hebben lang geen contact gehad. Hoeft ook niet. Ik hoop dat het goed gaat in Frankrijk, Ik kom graag een keer langs. Maar ik probeer Trompenburg een mooie uitstraling te geven. Een paar foto's van jou zouden kunnen worden verwijderd? Alsjeblieft?
Wim Brinkerink, at 2023-02-03 19:43:48, edited at 2023-02-03 19:46:56, said:
Dit is een prachtig arboretum. Helaas draagt onze database niet bij om mensen daar bewust van te maken. Mensen zonder werkzaam te zijn in de groensector maar die wel geïnteresseerd zijn in mooie natuur en mooie bomen, zullen hier zeker niet verleid worden, Gemiste kans. Helaas. Gelukkig heb ik na overleg met Tim het soort onzin dat hier als monumentale boom prioriteit krijgt (in foto's) in Trompenburg kunnen verwijderen. Zo'n excercitie zou hier ook welkom zijn. Weg met die onzin. Al die flauwekul foto's van de Langhe zou moeten worden verwijderd wat mij betreft.
Looks Like a lovely tree. Not far away are Giant Sequoia 42m in the Valley Gardens of Windsor Great Park and also 42m near Hambleden in Bucks. All of much greater size.
I've been fascinated by Jacaranda's .. Pretoria was a start. but I've seen them in Mexico, Nepal, and San Diego. Recently I discovered the in the original place. See for instance Grafton in Australia. https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=AJOqlzUAgz55N94ODbFZ-7A7lbdyZarcgg:1674334019675&q=grafton+jacaranda&tbm=isch&source=univ&fir=Wt9vhDNMzYjKnM%252CY7hWl0eK7eeeQM%252C_%253B6SIzbo--3GqImM%252CcNYN3xEGxkWrSM%252C_%253BjdWASQeb5tbt0M%252CVW2yP2PeajjvtM%252C_%253BCTHkJUFbo1MOHM%252CEPlBlTA1ZAkEUM%252C_%253BB3MuC2g8qjvqfM%252CaxezjqZgH8dgPM%252C_%253B_-V1eCAvqp0BLM%252CXQmxEGSAn8UWXM%252C_%253BYIBblgcpKtIX7M%252C5lJbfkI56IcWkM%252C_%253Br-WRPSknL2Y5mM%252CcNYN3xEGxkWrSM%252C_%253BrmwglhYrd1ruiM%252CZ8B2TnEKg_jifM%252C_%253B5m-wweZxxct0FM%252CVW2yP2PeajjvtM%252C_&usg=AI4_-kSK7Oz2AC8KzKwcGbOmRgd8GjD_bw&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjepemjxNn8AhXfg_0HHR4fBbIQjJkEegQIFBAC&biw=1366&bih=625&dpr=1#imgrc=Wt9vhDNMzYjKnM
This is what I mean. https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=AJOqlzUAgz55N94ODbFZ-7A7lbdyZarcgg:1674334019675&q=grafton+jacaranda&tbm=isch&source=univ&fir=Wt9vhDNMzYjKnM%252CY7hWl0eK7eeeQM%252C_%253B6SIzbo--3GqImM%252CcNYN3xEGxkWrSM%252C_%253BjdWASQeb5tbt0M%252CVW2yP2PeajjvtM%252C_%253BCTHkJUFbo1MOHM%252CEPlBlTA1ZAkEUM%252C_%253BB3MuC2g8qjvqfM%252CaxezjqZgH8dgPM%252C_%253B_-V1eCAvqp0BLM%252CXQmxEGSAn8UWXM%252C_%253BYIBblgcpKtIX7M%252C5lJbfkI56IcWkM%252C_%253Br-WRPSknL2Y5mM%252CcNYN3xEGxkWrSM%252C_%253BrmwglhYrd1ruiM%252CZ8B2TnEKg_jifM%252C_%253B5m-wweZxxct0FM%252CVW2yP2PeajjvtM%252C_&usg=AI4_-kSK7Oz2AC8KzKwcGbOmRgd8GjD_bw&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjepemjxNn8AhXfg_0HHR4fBbIQjJkEegQIFBAC&biw=1366&bih=625&dpr=1#imgrc=Wt9vhDNMzYjKnM
In de database van Oceanië komt Australië niet goed uit de verf. Het zou fijn zijn als steeds duidelijk is om welke staat het gaat. Nu is alles op één hoop gegooid. Zoals ook ooit in de USA. Kun je er iets aan doen?
roburpetraea, at 2023-01-08 17:15:01, edited at 2023-01-08 18:24:10, said:
Nice Quercus faginea forest you have there, specially in an area arid and deforested like the Iberian Northern Plateau, let us put a bunch of giant plastic windmills in the middle of it destroying the landscape and disturbing the ecosystem!
Environmental impact report? They are windmills! Ecological! Green! If you don't like them you are a global warming denier! Don't care so much, feel fortunate, in other regions like Omaña we are building them in extremely sensitive areas for Tetrao urogallus cantabricus, an species in critical danger of extintion.
And don't waste your time trying to talk to any regional administrative, we have bribed them galore to keep their mouths shut, sign everything we ask and ask no questions, all paid for with European funds!
Also don't mind us destroying your nice rural roads with our giant machinery rendering them unusable. Signed your average windmill building company. (When making the road for the machinery to build the windmills they completely dammed the crossing road, a bit trenched due to its age, and the water goes up your waist, good luck trying to go through)
Thank you for sharing your opinion. Nowadays it is quite courageos to speak out against windmill and solar panels. Criticism against biomass is accepted, but don't attack windmills or solar panels. And we ruïn the landscape we invest money in monstrosities and we are a tiny player in the world. What really matters is what China, India and Africa do. In the meantime we ruïn our world to put an example? Buy off criticism?
This while the environmental-idiots have outplaced the only solution to climate change. Nuclear energy. Even now Germany and Belgium close the nuclear plants. Rationality is gone in Europe and I have a very big problem with that. Apparently you do so too.
Wim
roburpetraea, at 2023-01-08 18:31:04, edited at 2023-01-08 18:45:54, said:
In some places the people of the villages are really pushing to stop the windmill invasion, but the Spanish state is using a loophole in the legislation where, since many of the rural mountains in Spain are for public and communal use, there is nothing that prevents the government from doing whatever they want on those lands without having the approval of the neighbors. Originally, the lands for communal use were intended for their use to be determined by the "council", a medieval oriental government organization that is the group of neighbors who distribute their use democratically, each person counts as one vote, democracy in its purest form.
But now councils are being actively supressed, deprived of any legal protection. Of course the state wants to put an end to any hint of real democracy in the imposition of this representative fraud where it doesn't matter who you choose, they will do what they want and will abuse their corrupt power with no constriction. You can imagine that the companies that build these mills are closely related to the politicians of the regional governments. The mayoress of a village called Pinilla ended in jail for accepting bribes for the construction of wind farms, the news of course censored on any newscast. And like her there are hundreds of cases that go unnoticed since no one dares to persecute these untouchable green companies.
In Spain, the government has already dismantled several coal-fired power plants (the private ones, the public ones are still in use, of course), coal being the main source of energy from which Spain can be self-sufficient in the event of war, for example, same with nuclear plants. Of course, all by mandate of Brussels. As we do not have how to produce electricity we have to buy it from France at the price of gold, curiously France does have thermal and nuclear power plants in use, it must be that in France coal does not pollute. Something like this would be unthinkable 40 years ago, loosing your energy self sufficiency because some german polititian says so. We are loosing touch with reality, rational thinking as you say is gone, we go straight into our self destruction.
It's really threatening to hear that in Spain, democracy is even nowadays a charicature. It feels real bad to hear this. But...reality must be adressed. And European democracy is apparently a carthouse.
I also hate windmills and solar panels but I think it's the best solution in the short term (several centuries) until we colonize other planets or reduce our population to iron age levels based on wars and pandemics. The problem really is that we are too many, there is no formula to be able to live so many people (and growing like foam) with a consumerist and wasteful lifestyle. We all want heating in winter, air conditioning in summer, a car, a mobile phone, all kinds of appliances, eating a lot of meat, dressing well, etc. and we do nothing but waste and more waste, we pollute, squeeze the earth and devastate entire ecosystems. Of course I agree that we are going to our self-destruction. Solution: Renewable energy, drastically reduce the birth rate making savings so no one has to pay us pensions, get colder and hotter and eat and live as our ancestors did. Very difficult solution in the case of a selfish species like nature itself, but not impossible.
Al fondo la Sierra de Gredos, inusual y tristemente sin nieve en los comienzos del invierno más cálido de la historia. A la izquierda de la imagen el Pico Almanzor, montaña más alta del Sistema Central con 2.591 metros de altitud. 5 de enero de 2023. - Alberto C F
and there won't be any more Quercus faginea forests (dead of drought and heat), nor any Tetrao urogallus cantabricus (unable to survive in hot weather). I'm sorry, but those windmills are necessary, and are much less damaging to the environment than coal-, gas-, and oil-fired power stations and petrol-powered cars. CO₂ production MUST be cut to zero, and cut to zero quickly, if our trees, the enviroment, or humanity, are to survive.
No more tilting at windmills, please! They are not your enemy.
roburpetraea, at 2023-01-09 22:42:32, edited at 2023-01-09 22:51:05, said:
Sorry Conifers, I refuse to see the landscape destroyed by windmills, it's a big no-no for me, like I refuse to see hundreds if not thousands of hectares of fertile land destroyed by a desert of solar arrays. Also I don't know where Alberto extract the affirmation that this has been the warmest winter ever, wich is false as far as I know, is the warmest since the 60's.
And I must say that for the moment being those Quercus faginea don't show any sign of drought, matter of fact ecosystems aren't moving or migrating to colder places, we have discussed some time ago the transformation of mediterranean ecosystems into atlantic ecosystems, an inverse migration of atlantic species into mediterranean ecosystems. While warm this winter is going to be pretty wet, specially in the northwest, Galicia being specially gifted with copious ammount of rain, I think more than 1800 mm in the last 3 months.
And there will be plenty of time for snow to fall, this coming monday will bring snow to the northern plateau according to predictions, lets hope it holds on.
Pic of a a Snow shower south of the city of Burgos this december, with your friends the windmills on the background. It caught me offguard when I was returning from the train station to the village where I rent a room.
Logically I was referring to history since there are records.
I am not satisfied with seeing these changes in the weather, these irregularities and explosive anomalies.
What they should do is build wind farms in the most urbanized areas and protect nature, but for economic reasons and not to disturb the citizens they take them out into the countryside.
Logically I was referring to history since there are records.
I am not satisfied with seeing these changes in the weather, these irregularities and explosive anomalies.
What they should do is build wind farms in the most urbanized areas and protect nature, but for economic reasons and not to disturb the citizens they take them out into the countryside.
Logically I was referring to history since there are records.
I am not satisfied with seeing these changes in the weather, these irregularities and explosive anomalies.
What they should do is build wind farms in the most urbanized areas and protect nature, but for economic reasons and not to disturb the citizens they take them out into the countryside.
The idea that saving the eartjh can be accomplished by builing windmills and solar parks in Europe and the USA is so ridiculous and misleading and folksy. It will not be enough and in the meantime we've ruïned and polluted the landscape in the wWst. China, India, Africa will not follow, they're just starting welfare and will not abolish natural resources. . So start with building lots of nuclear power stations with urgency-legislation. Moreover, we cannot stop evolution. The scientists of our era are parroting after each other and are afraid to think or speak out of the box.
China may not be an ideal society (it isn't, far from it!), but it is doing a lot more to install renewable energy generation than most other countries 😉
The problem with discussions on climate change is that it is dominated by scientists in biology "climate" environment aso. Te social and behavioural sciences don't take part. That's a big mistake. The climate change is also and for a big part a social and behavioural issue. Human behaviour doesn't let itself steer in the wanted direction through laws and panic. So one shouldn't tell populations that all problems will be solved if they act according to your demands. It won't work. In my view we should aim more at adaptation. Adapt and prepare for what is inevitable to come and be prudent with moneyburns. What's happening now is seeding the big disappointment that will arise, once populations see that the laws, measures, investments, moneyburns and suffering didn't work. I wouldn't like to live in that era.
One contribution from social sciences could be an eyeopener for scientists who think onesided from just one discipline. Try to understand the prisoner's dilemma. A theory that's often applicable in social, behavioural, political and economic relations. It's surely relevant for issues in relation to climate change.
Core question in that theory is: will others do the same necessary thinga as I do? Or will he/she lean on me and lift on my expenditures. Be sure that China, India, Africa, South America are leaning backwards and won't voluntarily tribute in sufficient way or provoke uprisings from their own people by denying their acces to welfare. (i.c. use of gas, aso)
@Conifers oh yea, the not far from ideal society of China, where if you get run over in the street if a citizen wants to help you, he has to pay the doctor's costs. That is why there are dozens of videos on the internet where a person run over dies on the road while the rest of the people pass by as if nothing had happened, like soulless automatons.
roburpetraea, at 2023-01-11 20:13:48, edited at 2023-01-11 20:23:56, said:
From the air the deforested landscape of some parts of the Northern Iberian Plateau becomes more evident. You can search for various kilometers around you and won't ecounter a single tree. Windmills are the only thing protruding from the dry plowed fields that in winter become a muddy mess. Wind blows all year round through the barren landscape making worst the aridity of the area. It wasn't like this in the distant pass.
The Iberian Northern Plateau was covered by dense forests until the last ice age, when humans started burning the forests to create pasture for hunting. The potential of colonization of Quercus faginea, Quercus rotundifolia, Quercus pyrenaica and even Quercus robur is still there, but there are no trees to serve as seedbeds. The industrialization of agriculture makes things even worst. The last thing farmers need is losing land in favor of forests or trees that interfere with the operation of machinery.
You can still find those acient pastures in abandoned farmland, like this failed repopulation of pines that it has inadvertently served its original purpose by giving the natural regeneration of native species the opportunity to take its course. Fortunately, nearby is a small but valuable relict forest that serves as a seedbed. The dense grass of annual graminea, that lives only for spring and early summer, is up to half a meter thick in some places, and little by little oaks (Quercus faginea and Quercus pyrenaica, but also some Quercus robur!), colonizing species in dry but deep soils appear. Here ecosystems are adapted to extreme continuous hydric stress, even atlantic species like Quercus robur, we literally only see green grass from May to July, the rest of the year the landscape is wellow or grey.
@Wim of course China and India are the main polluters of the planet, but it seems that the economical elites aren't interested in touching those manufacturing slave countries.
Despite the ominous predictions, it seems that winter is finally coming to the north of Spain and we will have several days of snow in the northern sub-plateau. Seems that those voices that talked about the first year without snows are going silent once again. And as the time of writting this continous to snow copiously.
And once again our favourite Burgalese meteorologist, Jorge Rey, predicted this cold spell like in 2021.
Not that i'm aware of. Much of the area has been logged (and continues to be).
This is one of the largest trees in the area, there would probably be some documentation of some kind if it fell. From what i can tell, it has not been felled, but it might be in the future, unfortunately.
In relation to gigantic trees cut for their wood, one always thinks in third world tropical countries, with very poor loggers. It is incredible that in Canada, with its wealth and progress, these things happen.
room100, at 2023-01-16 16:05:15, edited at 2023-01-18 00:52:52, said:
Hello Ernesto
Yes I agree, it is unbelievable. Only the dollar matters. Only exports matter. Only developers matter.
In my area, the GTA, Greater Toronto Area, there is a new push to sell developers 8000 acres of protected land in an area called The Greenbelt. It will be a significant loss for wildlife habitat and of wetlands. These developers will also be allowed to bypass municipal development charges, allowing the projects to start sooner and finish sooner, all the while ignoring environmental issues. And all this land will become housing, for an estimated 500 000 new immigrants coming to Canada every year for the foreseeable future. We do not have the infrastructure or the hospital system to support this, and most of these people will end up in the GTA.
There are few laws to protect trees and their removal on private property that I am aware of, however, there are some rules about tree removal in some urban centres. These developers rarely retain the natural beauty of the environment with these large scale projects. They bulldoze everything in sight, alter the water course, and pave every square foot they can.
Trees don’t matter to most people in Canada. It’s terrible, really.
Ik heb je er al een paar keer op gewezen. Ik heb een keer een voor Leo Goudzwaard onwelgevallige opmerking geplaatst. Hij heeft toen contact met jou opgenomen en sinds die tijd krijg ik geen berichten meer door. Ik heb je er meermaals op aangesproken, hoe lang laat je dat nog bestaan? Mijn geduld raakt op. Leo is belangrijk maar niet god? Of?
I've been trying to upload an image for over an hour, but it keeps coming up with an error page about 30 seconds to a minute after i hit "upload". I can't figure out why. I've renamed the file, duplicated it, compressed and decompressed it, and so on. But it just won't work. I'm not going to share the full error code because i'm not sure if there's any account information encoded in it. But it starts with this every time:
Fatal error: Uncaught DivisionByZeroError: Division by zero in...
If anyone knows or has an idea what's going on, it would be very helpful.
Hi Wim - it's just a flower colour variant, not a significant difference, just a cultivar or cultivar group (group of cultivars with similar characteristics). Most plants with blue flowers produce odd individuals with white flowers, and also often odd individuals with pink flowers. Hope this helps!
Here in Lorain county along one of our rivers I have found a STAND of 6-7 trees that are the biggest I’ve ever seen. One was over 28• around. These trees dwarf the tree at Days Damn. Easily twice the size. I have never seen trees this big in Ohio anywhere else. I hesitate to say where they are I don’t want them harmed. But they are there. I’ll post photos when I can get back to them
Hi Kelman, you don't have to put the precise location, you can place the tree in a nearby city or something like that, writing in "Edit" of the tree that the location is not exact. There are trees in MT that are not well located for their protection.
Hi Wim - Sounds a lovely idea, but, like Greta Thunberg, my flying days are finished, it is too damaging to our fragile world. So I am happier to encourage indigenous South African tree experts take on the task of recording South African trees here instead ☺️
Today I was starting to register an Afrocarpus falcatus in South Africa. Once I arrived at the point of adding the exact place on the map, I saw that there was an existing registration on the spot. I opened a second screen and saw that the tree I wanted to register was already registered as Podocarpus falcatus.
So now we have some Afrocarpus falcatus (4) registered and some Podocarpus falcatus(4). Indeed it is the same tree. I think that Afrocarpus falcatus is the correct name. Whatever the conclusion, it is preferred to have one tree under one name.
If it is one of those that I have uploaded, I have to say in my defense that I always add in "Editar" that Podocarpus and Afrocarpus are synonymous. Watch it in Spanish.
Wim Brinkerink, at 2022-12-30 17:29:04, edited at 2022-12-30 17:31:44, said:
Hi Ernesto.
Indeed a tree you registered. I don't have any objection to that. I only want an accurate classification, whatever the choices we make. I appreciate what you;ve done. And Tim, appreciate your shift to public discussion. You want more input. So everybody . feel free to involve in the discussion.
Yes, the two are the same; current taxonomy accepts Afrocarpus as distinct from Podocarpus (substantial differences in cone structure, and genetically well separated), so Afrocarpus falcatus is the correct name to use.
Usually I am not very susceptible for the ultimate just identification, but Conifers makes a real difference. Thank you Conifers. We can trust your opinion.
Wim Brinkerink, at 2022-12-30 22:38:26, edited at 2022-12-30 22:39:10, said:
On second thought I see you still make a difference on afrocarpus or podocarpus?
Hi Wim - thanks! Yes, there are two separate genera, Podocarpus and Afrocarpus; in the past Afrocarpus was included within Podocarpus, so all 5 Afrocarpus species also have synonyms in Podocarpus. But there are also lots of other species (about 100) that remain in Podocarpus (e.g. Podocarpus elongatus, Podocarpus salignus, Podocarpus totara, etc.). Hope that helps clarify!
I've updated the specimens here of Juniperus oxycedrus to deal with the splits of Juniperus macrocarpa (Large-fruited Juniper; Mediterranean, strictly coastal, on sand) and Juniperus deltoides (Eastern Prickly Juniper; eastern Mediterranean region) per the Gymnosperm Database; I think I've caught them all, but let me know if I've missed any.
You should ask others before making such edits. In the case of Juniperus macrocarpa, I oppose your edit because it is usually called Juniperus oxycedrus subsp. macrocarpa in Europe, thus resulting in confusions and disputes in the future.
Well, if we are following latest the latest scientific results, what about changing the Sorbus species with hybrid origin to Borkhausenia, Hedlundia, Karpatiosorbus, Majovskya and Normeyera?
Apologies! But I would very strongly support recognition of J. macrocarpa, it is very distinct, in both morphology and ecology as well as genetics. Listing as a separate species also makes it much easier for people to find specimens.
And yes, I would support adoption of the splits in Sorbus (also the genera Aria, Cormus, Torminalis of course). But that will be a much larger task with all the genus transfers!
I doubt it is much easier for people to find specimens if they are listed as J. macrocarpa because people don't know what J. macrocarpa is. Members will also continue to add those trees as J. oxycarpa, so there will potentially be a mess. Keep in your mind that MT is no taxonomical database. Our naming choices should be those that are most used. For the same reason I don't think it would be a good idea to introduce Hedlundia, Borkhausenia etc. Almost nobody knows what they are.
Sorry, I'm not convinced that's true! People will be familiar with the names 'macrocarpa' and 'Juniperus' as applying to a taxon; at what rank they are combined will not affect that so much, unlike the greater visibility on MT at species rank compared to its being hidden as a subspecies (cf. Wim's point in Discussion 5271). Also, if the subspecies combination is made into a redirect to the species (as has been done with many other names here), then anyone trying to upload as "J. oxycedrus subsp. macrocarpa" will get their specimen automatically directed to the species page. Remember it is also accepted as a species by Kew POWO (and ditto J. deltoides), which has often been your baseline in past discussions; familiarity with both at species rank is increasing steadily.
I meant people are not familiar with 'macrocarpa'. They are familiar with 'oxycedrus' (I think all the trees were even here added under J. oxycedrus, until you changed them).
I have never referred to KEW POWO, you have referred to it. I have referred to the Euro+Med and GRIN in the past. However, KEW is also a reliable European source, and as it calls the taxon spp. macrocarpa, I am okay with that, even if I am still thinking it potentially results in confusions.
I have to admit I'm struggling to remember all the Sorbus splits, but sooner or later, we'll have to bite the bullet and add them, or increasingly be seen as out of date. And then there's also Acacia as well... At least with the junipers, it's only a small step, rather than a huge leap.
Conifers , as a new reincarnated Linneo , is dedicated to discovering new species without asking anyone and ignoring, like a good Anglo-Saxon subscribed to "The English Garden", that in the area where J oxicedrus macrocarpa live, there is an indigenous population with numerous universities equipped with Departments of Botany, which they would have occupied of the Juniperus if they had seen it necessary.
So now you know: for new species go to Conifers, or to Kew POWO , and don't waste time.
I propose that instead of Juniperus Macrocarpa, the new species be called Juniperus coniferis , or Juniperus Kewesis, in honor of its discoverer.
Hola Ernesto - not sure what you're trying to say there, apart from complaining about Anglo-Saxon imperialism (which I appreciate is a problem!). Linnaeus was of course, Swedish :-) and I don't claim to be a reincarnation of him, either! Nor is Juniperus macrocarpa a new species; it was first described, as a species in its own right, in 1816, in Greece (#2323, here). It was only much later, in 1868, that the Austrian botanist August Neilreich reduced it to a subspecies of J. oxycedrus, without a great deal of investigation. Now, genetic analysis has shown that the original publication as a species was correct after all, that it should never have been reduced to a subspecies in the first place.
See also here, a research paper by Spanish botanists treating it as a species 👍
Hi Kouta - R. P. Adams 2000. Systematics of Juniperus section Juniperus based on leaf essential oils and random amplified polymorphic DNAs (RAPDs). Biochem. Syst. Ecol.28: 515-528.
Well, Adams found nothing that would REQUIRE the species level, like that another species would be more closely related to J. oxycedrus s.str. According to his analysis, J. oxycedrus s.str. and J. macrocarpa cluster together. Thus, it is the old question of clumping vs. splitting. He has chosen the splitter approach and says J. macrocarpa merits species level. Similarly he has also lifted several other taxa to the species level:
J. communis var. oblonga -> J. oblonga (according to POWO J. communis var. saxatilis)
J. communis var. saxatilis -> J. sibirica (according to POWO J. communis var. saxatilis)
J. oxycedrus subsp. badia -> J. badia (according to POWO J. oxycedrus subsp. badia)
J. taxifolia -> J. taxifolia & J. lutchuensis (according to POWO J. both in J. taxifolia)
There may well be additional subsequent papers (by Adams and/or others) that encouraged recognition of J. macrocarpa, but not the other taxa; I'll take a look and see what I can find.
Conifers, I was just kidding . I think you should have commented on the issue before changing the species. But it doesn't matter, the boundaries between species are blurred.
I sowed and cultivated a J Macrocarpa from a seed collected in the Huelva coast .Although it is the King of the Dunes, it also grows in clay soil. Juniperus are super hardy.
In the past I added some South African trees. Since some days I added more trees from this country and saw you have added from the same source. I won't start a competition. I just add what I like. And since I have contact with Enrico Liebenberg I will add his photo's in the nearby future. South Africa is a big source of understanding and scientific investigation, that's my only interest. Feel free to ask for specific pictures. Enrico wants to share them with us but needs time. See this youtube film https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xtd6_Gol0uQ&t=322s
Hi Win, It's sad that two Europeans have to be uploading trees from South Africa to MT, I don't understand why no one from South Africa or other distant countries with big trees doesn't do it.
As soon as I found the TM website I realized its potential, but it seems that people in the rest of the world are not very interested in trees, or what happens?
Ernesto.. Love you! I am really touched and crying right now. West-european lack of curiosity is degusting. But...if we are openminded in the right sense we will make the difference in the end. Enrico Liebenberg will deliver the pics and we will enjoy...trees and life.
This site (database actually) is an extreme important place to share or change opinions (concerningtrees but..) . Nowadays free opinionchange is more and more disputed. And even in a non-political environment you feel strenghtening of opinion. Vulnerability is main topic. If I pose an opinion on whatever matter, there might be some vulnerable guy or girl who is disturbed by my opinion and he/she/her/she/him must be meeted. I will oppose this idioty until death. Never give in to irrationality.
In sommige gebieden en arboreta is het interessant om de gebieden wat logischer te rangschikken. Zo heb ik al lang moeite met de presentatie van Trompenburg in Rotterdam. Men zou wensen dat de belangrijkste deelgebieden als eerste te zien zijn. Helaas is dat niet zo. Ik heb dat ook bij meerdere gebieden en arboreta ervaren. Kun en/of wil je daar iets voor bedenken?
Nee dat zou een vrij subjectief criterium zijn Wat zijn de belangrijkste bomen in een gebied. Daar zou je toch bepaalde stakeholders moeten kunnen aanwijzen. Mensen die meer dan gemiddelde kennis hebben van een gebied. ??? Of?
Wim Brinkerink, at 2022-12-30 18:59:02, edited at 2022-12-30 19:00:11, said:
En Tim...
Dit (stakeholders of beheerders of iets dergelijks) zou het laatste zijn wat ik wil, maar ik denk dat het onvermijdelijk is als je de lange termijndoelstellingen van deze database zou moeten formuleren. Als het ons gegeven is moet deze database op de lange termijn de plek zijn om iets over bomen op een bepaalde plek of een bepaalde soort zijn. Dat is ambitie maar een zeer realistische.
Wim Brinkerink, at 2022-12-16 20:35:43, edited at 2022-12-16 20:36:59, said:
For me it is a pity that I cannot see a list of Fagus sylvatica pendula or purpurea group or Fraxinus angustifolia Raywood, or Quercus petrea mespilifolia ....Tim I ask you to make these subcategories available. I think it would imorove the site a lot. Is it possible? Or Taxodium distichum imbricarium. I know Leo Goudzwaard blocked this in the past but thinking forwards makes this an issue. I hope you all support my plea.
It is not possible. I tried it with Fagus sylvatica pendula and you only see an image of a lot of pics of the tree. You can click on soecifuc pics, but it is not a list as we usually see on a tree species.
Hi Wim - "It is not possible. I tried it with Fagus sylvatica pendula and you only see an image of a lot of pics of the tree. You can click on specific pics, but it is not a list as we usually see on a tree species." - sorry, yes, you're right; I had been thinking of the photos list, not a trees list. My mistake!
I've registered some trees in South Africa. I used a.o. "We are the champions, the Champion Trees of South Africa" by Enrico & Erno Liebenberg. I just had contact with Enrico and he confirmed to help and send me the pictures he made of the trees I want. I've also made a suggestion to him to add the pictures himselve. I don't know if he wants to, but anyway it's very good news to receive the fantastic pics of him. The ones of you who know his book will affirm that I think. For the moment we'll start with pics of about 25 top trees.
According to the article, it is Eucalyptus saligna, but if I recall correctly, there has been opinions, that the South African record trees may have a false name.
Mi farebbe molto piacere se tra le lingue possibili ci fosse anche l'italiano. Ho delle difficoltà a registrare gli alberi e la mia "traduzione" mi risulta una ulteriore diffcicoltà.
An interesting record, but obviously needing corroboration. Google aerial imagery shows a Cedar of Lebanon at this spot (likely to be multistemmed?) with a Giant Sequoia to its north, and perhaps no room for a pine as well; Streetview only shows the tops of the Cedar and Sequoia.
I'm seeing the top of a Pinus nigra on Google Streeview (though you have to look at the 2009 footage, as the hedgerow in front in too overgrown to see anything by 2011). It looks like subsp. pallasiana as recorded - many vertical stems, though I have no idea how accurate the girth measurement is, or how multi-stemmed the tree is. I would assume a tree of this size, if the girth measurement is correct, to be at least low forking, if not a giant bush of many stems branching off at or near ground level. A visit to confirm would certainly be needed at some point.
Ditto to a Pinus nigra there, I see it in the street view too. No way to identify subspecies or variety though; this idea that 'subsp. pallasiana' ... 'has many vertical stems' is a myth; it is purely down to growing conditions in the tree's youth, nothing to do with origin or genetics. Typical subsp. nigra can easily have multiple stems; var./subsp. pallasiana usually has a single stem, as in these trees from its native range in Crimea:
Hola , buenas tardes, la verdad es que llovía mucho el dia que fuí y estaba todo enfangado y mojado, por lo que no lo medí con precisión, pero me pareció más grande que el de Lisboa, por eso le puse la misma medida. Habría que medir los dos con exactitud, un saludo.
El de Lisboa lo había medido a 14,05 m a 1,40 m del suelo, pero preferí redondear a 14 m porque es muy incierto medir con precisión este tipo de árbol, cuya base está en campana... Suerte con tu medida!
Hola , buenas tardes, hoy he medido el árbol y me da sobre quince metros, aunque es muy grande y tiene multitud de recovecos la superficie del tronco . He subido una foto más donde se aprecia mejor el gran tamaño.
Hola, buenos días , no tengo una cinta tan larga, usé un metro metálico flexible y solo seguí los contornos generales, sin meterme mucho en los agujeros del tronco, por eso he puesto " sobre " en la medida. Un saludo.
It has been discovered that this tree is actually 90-110 years of age in the last week.
At around 4m up the stem, a side branch was broken off, by a falling branch from another tree last winter. A clean cut to this branch revealed a ring count of around 100 rings, which was unexpected. This tree had clearly grown slowly until recently when 'released' from adjoining competition. It now continues to grow rapidly.
This discovery is even more remarkable considering its age and the number of disease outbreaks it has escaped from, so far. But for how long? This tree is literally one in a million!
Agree, it´s really remarkable that this Wych elm has survived this long, especially for the lack of resistance "Ulmus Glabra" as a species usually has.
I personally think that there are a few specimens of U. Glabra that has some resistance to the disease because, in some stands, there are sometimes one or two trees that seem to resist the disease for much longer than other Wych Elms. But I believe that there are very few, prob one in a million that have good resistance to DED. There is this Elm not far from where I live that has survived in a heavily infected area for over 15 years that must have some kind of resistance. https://www.monumentaltrees.com/en/swe/vastragotalands/uddevalla/28592_ljungskileskolan/53004/
About this Elm you found, is it very isolated or are there other Elms around? I think the most plausible explanation for this Elm's survival could be a combo of both. It should definitely be checked for resistance. :)
Time will tell whether this tree is resistant to a degree. Far more likely I think it may be a little more tolerant.
There are plenty of Ulmus hollandica and Ulmus minor Atinia to keep the elm bark beatles happy. So this is why perhaps they leave this tree alone, for now?
Interesting about Ulmus glabra in Sweden. How far north does the species extend? presumably The Elm is protected by a colder climate than here in the UK?
There is another Elm locally of an unknown clone which is thriving despite 'regrowth' Elms surrounding it dying off.
In Sweden, there are scattered populations of Ulmus Glabra up in the far north. They are a reminiscence of a warmer climate a few thousand years ago when Sweden was dominated by deciduous forests. These populations live in a climate far too harsh and isolated from bark beetles so there is no risk (yet) for infection. But in the main population in southern Sweden where I live, the infection rate is just somewhat slower than in the UK, even though Ulmus Glabra is the only Elm species present inland. Only on the islands Öland and Gotland Ulmus Minor and Ulmus Laevis are also present.
About Elm bark beetles not preferring U.glabra, interestingly on Öland which had plenty of Elms 10 years ago (there were literally pure Field Elm forests that were 35 meters tall), I didn´t see any signs that the Elm Bark Beetle preferred U.Minor more than U.Glabra when DED arrived. Both species declined at the same rate and are now almost gone as big trees except for a few more tolerant trees. There are still some larger stands of U. Glabra on the eastern and southern side of the Island and there is one small strain of U.Minor on the western side that seem to have a very high tolerance of DED. Only U.Laevis is left in bigger numbers there now but is also slowly getting infected.
Overall, there are still some areas of Inland Sweden that still have large numbers of Elms left and there are even a few forests of almost pure Wych elm left. There is this area called "Västgötaslätten" It´s a large open and flat area dominated by farmland and it´s plenty of farms there. The area has plenty of Elms and is still fairly free from DED. Many of the farms in the area are surrounded by tall trees, but the trees that clearly stand out together with the Ash trees are the tall, beautiful Elm trees which remains me somewhat of what I´ve seen Britain looked like before DED. Unfortunately in my area, DED first passed around 10-15 years ago but there are still a reasonable number of Elms left interestingly.
It will be interesting to see what you will upload about the other Elm :)
Thank you so much SK about the Elms in Sweden. I have been educated. Its satisfying to read that not all Elms are lost and there are pockets still alive and well. I hope they survive.
Het is idioot dat deze website ook mensen uitnodigt om dit soort bomen te plaatsen. Komt wel door de Nederlandstalige aanhef waarin mensen worden uitgenodigd om vooral mammoetbomen te registreren. Ik heb dit eerder aan Tim gemeld, maar dat had geen resultaat. Het is ook teleurstellend voor die mensen want het is natuurlijk kleutergedoe.
Don't want to start a discussion here. But...I want to explain my point of reference. Unfortunately we are in World War 3. And this one is a copy of the start of WW2. Hitler who started conquering Poland and Czechia and was allowed to.
Putin congered parts of Georgia, Ukarïne, , moldavia aso. And is even more rude and cruel and genocide than anyone is been ever before. He is even allowed to devastate the essential sources of life for normal people. (essential energy facilities for nstance).
So..I think that all Russians must be banned for decades from now.
Bybby fascist and nazi Ruzzia.
And I really think that anyone who defends Russia is backing up Hitler. And that;s one step to far.
Hi all. some weeks ago Leo Goudzwaard had problems with my reaction to an idiot claim of him. Afrerwords he messaged Tim and since that moment I did not receive messages. So I react if I see a question. But...cannot guarantee a reaction because I am excluded some way. Off course I asked Tim an explanation, but he got out of the way and said I am not excluded in any way. Pity and it isn't very professional. But it is as it is. 'll struggle along and do not confirm to dubious claims.
Have a nice holidays and a bright new year. And most of all peace for Ukraïne
Good news to see this tree remeasured, and your pictures are excellent! Knightshayes has been on my list of places to visit for a while now, but I haven't quite managed to visit yet. Did you measure anything else here or just this? Turkey Oaks get a bit of a bad rap in the UK, which is justified to be fair, because they host knapper gall wasps which go on to infect the native oak species, however there is no denying how magnificent a big specimen such as this one is.
I only had time to measure this tree. Its time consuming to get an accurate height measurement. The tree is magnificent. An Oak the biggest you will see. Its growing rapidly, but this worries me slightly.
Trees as big as this growing rapidly in girth usually mean one thing. Internal stresses in the trunk are increasing. Internal decay in the heartwood are stimulating 'reaction wood' to support it vast weight against gales etc. In this case about 120 tonnes I would estimate by my forestry experience. Many decades ago lower branches were removed. Decay may have entered via this route. But hopefully not. The tree would benefit considerably from bracing and some limbs being shortened to prolong its life.
That's fair enough, as with trees with huge domed crowns like this one it is difficult to find the true top.
Cable bracing and limb shortening are probably good ideas. I believe the staff at Kew do the same to their big Chestnut-leaved Oak, which is also growing rapidly, and this has obviously proved successful so far. Hopefully both trees survive for many more years to come.
Hello, good morning, I have extracted from famous redwood a list of the 23 most voluminous trees :
General Sherman 1395 m3 Sequoiadendron giganteum
General Grant 1357 m3 Sequoiadendron giganteum
Lincoln 1275 m3 Sequoiadendron giganteum
Hail Storm 1267 m3 Sequoia sempervirens
President 1262 m3 Sequoiadendron giganteum
Stagg 1249 m3 Sequoiadendron giganteum
Boole 1248 m3 Sequoiadendron giganteum
Franklin 1230 m3 Sequoiadendron giganteum
Juggernaut 1194 m3 Sequoia sempervirens
King Arthur 1151 m3 Sequoiadendron giganteum
Robert E Lee 1145 m3 Sequoiadendron giganteum
Monroe 1136 m3 Sequoiadendron giganteum
Adams 1103 m3 Sequoiadendron giganteum
Column 1056 m3 Sequoiadendron giganteum
Euclid 1023 m3 Sequoiadendron giganteum
General Pershing 1015 m3 Sequoiadendron giganteum
Diamond 999 m3 Sequoiadendron giganteum
Adam 992 m3 Sequoiadendron giganteum
Roosevet 991 m3 Sequoiadendron giganteum
Nelder 991 m3 Sequoiadendron giganteum
Above Diamond 983 m3 Sequoiadendron giganteum
Genesis 980 m3 Sequoiadendron giganteum
Lost Monarch 978 m3 Sequoia sempervirens
At a great distance are other species such as eucalyptus , for example: "Two Towers ""only" 386 m3, according to Russell Du Guesclin. Would have to calculate the Chamaecyparis of Formosa, but they are lower.
Some of the other very large conifers would also be worth mentioning - Agathis australis, Fitzroya cupressoides, Picea sitchensis, Pinus lambertiana, Pinus ponderosa, Pseudotsuga menziesii, Thuja plicata.
A great pity that the individual names given to so many of these trees are so awful, after an assorment of military thugs and warlords who had zero connection with the trees. I wonder if any of them have, or had, native names, like the largest Kauri in New Zealand?
I´m thinking in put pretty names to some of the ones I´ve uploaded to MT and were unknown , my girlfriend name, or mine, or beautiful girls name , for example : The Monica Bellucci Oak , the Beyonce Baobab, and so.
You are quite right about the names of warlords etc. not fitting the beautiful trees.
About the Famous Redwoods website: to my opinion it is a pity it is anonymous, there are no autors or sources given of the measurements or ages. The volume measurements differ from some other well known measurements done by teamslead by Steve Sillett and Robert van Pelt. I suppose these are volumes of the trunks only without the limbs and branches.
Conifers, at 2022-12-06 22:14:07, edited at 2022-12-06 23:06:31, said:
It's long been a problem that accents and special characters are not well supported by the MT software, which isn't too good a look for an international website. Just today I noticed that the Nothofagus antarctica page is titled "?irre" instead of the correct "Ñirre". There are also problems with rendering of the degree symbol ° in latitudes and longitudes.
Is there any chance this could be improved, please?
Edit: the problem is particularly bad if you edit a post.
Hi Tim - thanks! It's something I see most often on the Discussion page; I put in a line of text containing some accented characters, or a location with degrees. The most common problem time is if I spot a typo, and click on 'edit' to correct the typo; then when I save, the accented characters and the degree symbol are changed into some other strange text. One recent one, I had to re-edit 3 times to get all the characters right, as each time one character was changed when I corrected another; in the end I had to cut the whole section out, correct it in a word processor, and re-insert it.
The desired text was:
Tal des Tasna südlich von Selca (ca. 40 km Luftlinie suidlich der Station Kricim an der Bahn Sofia-Plovdiv), ca. 1000 m u. M. (Mattfeld no. 833, 17. VII. 1924, steril)"] (i.e., a few km south of Селча, = approx. 41.80°N, 24.39°E)
Which was changed to this:
Tal des Tasna südlich von Selca (ca. 40 km Luftlinie suidlich der Station Kricim an der Bahn Sofia-Plovdiv), ca. 1000 m u. M. (Mattfeld no. 833, 17. VII. 1924, steril)"] (i.e., a few km south of Селча, = approx. 41.80°N, 24.39°E)
In this case, the affected characters were the u-umlaut, and the degrees symbol.
There is a problem with accentuations in Spanish, when you edit some comment those rare characteres appear in the place of where an accentuated letter was.
Thanks, can you give me an example page so I can have a look?
Kind regards,
Tim
Conifers, at 2022-12-19 16:16:57, edited at 2022-12-19 16:24:52, said:
Hi Tim - another two that need corrections (and perhaps others from the same location), please, where "Forest in Pra?nik Special Reserve, Croatia" needs the '?' replacing:
roburpetraea, at 2022-12-20 21:02:22, edited at 2022-12-20 21:03:25, said:
I edit the comment, @Tim it seems like the accentuation problem in Spanish is fixed, thanks.
Ik ben, samen met mijn man, eigenaar van Landgoed Schepersheg in Nieuw Milligen en heb de pekdennen gesignaleerd. Helaas is de dikste pekden met de januari-storm omgevallen. Heel jammer van deze prachtige boom. We hebben het hout tot planken laten zagen en gebruiken dit nu in onze schuur in het bos.
This has been discussed before. Owen Johnson knows the tree good and was not convinced it is a multi trunk tree. I have visited the tree also and I did not see convincing reasons to judge it as a multi trunk tree. In Knighthays Court, also in Devon, I saw several big Turkey Oaks with a comparable trunk. I think it is a tree with one core and a flared bole and large buttresses. Also it has a short trunk and splits up in many heavy branches at 3 - 4 m height.
"Also it has a short trunk and splits up in many heavy branches" - that causes the trunk to have a larger trunk diameter than would be expected, which is exactly the point of the multi-trunk tag. If the branching had been 2 or 3 metres higher up, the trunk diameter would have been a lot less. So yes, it should be tagged multi-trunk.
Multitrunk is only right by definition if the main trunk splits below measuring height and there are several trunks at this measured height of 1.50 m (UK, Belgium) or 1.30 m (Netherlands, Germany and many more countries) or if there are several cores at this height, in case of several fused trunks at this level. In this case the single core is very probable going up to 3 to 3.5 m height and after that splits in trunks and branches. This is the definition of the Dutch 'Bomenstichting' but also for the Belgian Dendrological Society and the Tree Register of the British Isles.
This oak has the same habit of branching as lots of solitarian trees, especially Broadleave trees, wich are seen as single trunk trees. This one is just bigger than most of these in temperate climate.
I've just been looking again at this one, and it is obvious to me from the photo below, that it fits with the multitrunk definition above (and my italics here:) "Multitrunk is ... if the main trunk splits below measuring height and there are several trunks at this measured height ... or if there are several cores at this height, in case of several fused trunks at this level". The left, front, and right major stems (and likely the other stems behind) all look to continue below girthing height as separate cored stems that have fused together subsequently. They are just too deeply divergent to the base to be derived from a single trunk. I would say this tree started as a 4- or 5-stem shrub from close to ground level, certainly below a metre height, and should be labelled as multi-stem. Perhaps from breakage of an original single main trunk within a few years of planting?
I don't think this was ever a multi-stemmed shrub whose stems have merged, as to me its clear this was always a single stemmed tree. I think the deep divergences on the trunk is where the tree has produced excess wood under the big spreading branches to support them (It does have the largest spreading unsupported crown of any tree in Britain, after all), producing huge ribs with gaps in between. Limes frequently produces similarly shaped stems, yet it is clear that they are part of the same bole. There's no denying that this is a low branching tree, probably due to damage from humans, weather or animals when it was young, but I'm not convinced that its multi-stemmed.
Jeroen Philippona, at 2022-12-20 18:13:59, edited at 2022-12-20 18:15:36, said:
As I said before I agree with Aidan that I think this always was a single stemmed tree. The low branching is to my opinion not necessarily due to damage but just the habit of a tree from the start full in the open space, especially when there is no cattle grazing under the tree. Some other Tukish Oaks at Knighthayes Court show the same habit although a bit less pronounced, see: https://www.monumentaltrees.com/en/gbr/england/devon/2485_knighthayescourt/4590/.
The biggest one in that park also has rather deep divergences:
I've just added a licensed photo of this tree from wiki commons, but when I tried to add a new photographer, it didn't work (I got a long error message) - Tim, could you change the photographer from 'Conifers' to Martin Püschel, please!
roburpetraea, at 2022-12-18 18:44:10, edited at 2022-12-18 18:47:25, said:
It appears that what was formerly known as Quercus robur subsp. broteroana will become its own species, Quercus broteroana. The controversial Quercus orocantabrica would also enter this classification. Roughly speaking, what in theory identifies this oak are leaves that are more irregular and leathery than Quercus robur, and sometimes with some hairiness. All adaptations for a drier and warmer climate. Not much really, so it must be more of a genetic issue.
A friend of me (the hortuaris of Trompenburg tuinen, Rotterdam) asked me if I have a picture of the weeping beech at Knap hill nurseries. I'll see him next tuesday and ask him why he needs it. Do you have any??
Wim Brinkerink, at 2022-12-16 19:04:42, edited at 2022-12-16 19:51:46, said:
Het meten van deze boom is kennelijk een hachelijke zaak Ik mat hem in juli 2021 en zag er van af om de meting op te voeren. I mat de boom 2x omdat ik mijn ogen niet kon geloven en twijfelde aan mijn vaardigheden. Maar ----7,31 was de meting. Tot 2x toe en met een partner die toekeek of ik het lint recht had. Ik voeg een foto toe om te aten zien dat ik er echt was.
This tree California Incense-cedar (Calocedrus decurrens) '54580' currently does not have any photos on MT. There are some good ones on this blog page. It would be good to ask premission to add the photos here, but contacting the photographer needs a google account which I don't have, so can't contact myself. If someone here does have a google account, could they ask the photographer for permission to add their photos here, please? Thanks!
Hola , buenos dias, le he añadido al árbol el enlace del blog por si alguien quiere ver las fotos , se por experiencia que es más rápido y práctico que andar pidiendo permisos . Muchas veces no te los quieren dar, hay gente repelente por ahí, aunque no digo que sea el caso con este señor.
Aunque el árbol se bifurca, lo hace a tres o cuatro metros, por lo que para mi , que fuí el que lo subió, no es multitronco.
Gracias! Even though the top of the fork is 3-4 m high, it is clear that the centres of the two trunks extend well below the 1 m point, probably right to ground level (I even wonder if it might originally have been two separate trees, that grafted together as they grew). The girth at 1.37 m height is considerably larger than the girth of either of the two stems at 5 m height. If it had only had one trunk, its girth at 1.37 m would have been much less. So the reason for the forked listing still applies. Hope this helps!
Ik probeer al meerder malen foto’s via de link upload foto’s toevoegen voegen. Maar krijg steeds weer de melding dat ik eerst de boom toe moet voegen, echter heb ik dit al meerder malen gedaan. Maar wanneer ik de foto’s kan uploaden zie ik niet of krijg ik niet te zien.
Als je naar de pagina van die boom gaat, en vervolgens rechts bovenaan op de knop "Upload foto's" klikt, krijg je normaal gezien een keuzemenu met 3 opties.
Je kan de eerste selecteren: "Specifieke boom". Dan verschijnt normaal gezien een knopje "Choose file" zodat je jouw foto kan selecteren. Eens dat gedaan, klik op "Opslaan".
Klopt specifieke boom kan ik aanklikken maar vervolgens moet ik weer alle gegevens invullen over de standplaats van de boom en helaas geen “ choose file” ….
Klopt Tim, na vele malen proberen lukte het op een moment wel. Echter niet altijd, ik wilde later nog wat foto’s toevoegen en kreeg ik weer niet de juiste melding. Maar voor nu vind ik het prima zo.
roburpetraea, at 2022-12-12 20:50:02, edited at 2022-12-12 21:00:03, said:
For some reason this lonely square has preserved the original field boundaries, the rest has been levelled to the ground into giant parcels during the parcelary concentration of the 80's in an attempt to industrialize and optimize agriculture in Spain to the maximum level possible. The environmental consecuences were (and still are) devastating.
The little vegetation that remained relegated to the edges of the fields disappeared, and with it the population of many birds. The traditional landscapes disappeared, as did the old roads, some of them Roman roads, causing irreparable damage to the heritage. Sometimes economic prosperity at any cost brings dire consequences.
The only thing the land consolidation law achieved was that the land was consolidated, yes, but in the few hands of those who could afford industrial agricultural machinery and tons of toxic fertilizers. The villages emptied and traditional farming methods went with them.
Measured the big Hemlock with the Trupulse 200x. Somewhat taller than you had estimated! My girth game out pretty much the same at 4.6m. A difficult tree to measure in girth with a tape on this slope. Its a lovely tree.
Spent several hours taking heights of the conifers in this valley
Great that you have got some height measurements for some of the tall Wakehurst trees, as I hadn't yet got my rangefinder when I visited. I need to visit again, as there are plenty of trees that I didn't manage to measure. Shame about the crown reduction on the Beech; it's a fine tree.
Measured 26.9m but it was taller until recently. The weak forks in the lower trunk resulted in Arb work with a crown reduction. Its heavily Cobra braced upper crown is to prevent its break up in gales, although it survived the October 1987 storm!
I was led to believe that the Gosling Ash was named in respect of Sir Arthur Hulin Gosling, Director General of the Forestry Commission from 1948 till his retirement in 1982. My step mother is a neice of Sir Arthur.
while fixing a bug (a date label sometimes not appearing in the 'recent changes list'), which got solved, I in the end accidentally deleted the recent changes list. I'm trying to recover, but in the meantime it might look rather empty.
Wim Brinkerink, at 2022-11-27 19:21:43, edited at 2022-11-27 19:26:50, said:
De Zelkova's intigeren me al een tijdje. Zelkova serrata tref je wat meer in Nederland en België, Zelkova carpinifolia zelden. In deze database zijn er slechts enkele Zelkova carpinifolia's in Nederland in Den Haag te vinden.
Ook als ik Leo's boek er bij neem, zijn er nauwelijks bomen van deze soort. Doorenbos effect? Maar hoe verklaar je dan dat er geen Zelkova Carpinifolia in het Haagse Zuiderpark te vinden is. ?
I'm preparing a Southafrican trip in January and/of februarti 2023 to South Africa. I'm aware of the risks. South Africa is a country in which the hate to white people is courished. Nevertheless, I will try to ignore those criminal and racist intentions.
I know that a better period for trees is the spring in march and april. But I want to escape the cold in Europe in January.
With trees with extensive buttress roots like this, a girth measurement at 1.4 m is not valid; it needs to be measured higher up, just above the buttresses.
You'd need several people, one to climb along the top of each buttress, and then to pass the tape round between them. Granted it wouldn't be too easy!
The other option is to measure the part-circumferences between all the buttresses at 1.4 m, and then add on 10 or 20 cm extra for each buttress for the extra girth "behind" the buttresses. In theory, you could drill holes through each buttress to pass the tape through to get the exact circumference of the trunk, but this would damage the tree, so not a good idea.
On peut tabler, d'après les photos visibles sur internet, sur une circonférence d'environ 50 à 75 m à 1,40 m du sol (+/- 10 cm), ce qui en ferait l'arbre le plus gros de la planète.
With trees with extensive buttress roots like this, a girth measurement at 1.4 m is not valid; it needs to be measured higher up, just above the buttresses.
Je suis bien d'accord, mais cela figure-t-il quelque part dans les normes définies par MT ?
En fait, plus généralement, c'est là toute la difficulté d'évaluer la ''vraie'' circonférence d'arbres au tronc ''conique'', très larges en bas et fins au sommet : où est la ''vraie'' circonférence ?
I think it is not possible to compare trees with buttresses and trees without buttresses. In my head I use a classification based on subjective criteria, such as "Monumentality", which is not defined but we can all understand: it is monumental.
I take this opportunity to comment that in my opinion it would be interesting to add a classification table based on the volume of the trunks, because with the current perimeter, height and age, giants like the sequoias are a bit relegated, but in a volume table they would occupy the first places.
This is beautiful to see! I would say that it´s a real possibility that this clone has some resistance against DED. It should definitely be tested for resistance and maybe use the clone as a part to restore the Elm population :)
But I suspect as with the European Elm population they are vulnerable to a degree to disease? Some more so than others. Tolerant would perhaps be a more better description rather than resistant.
It is not well understood why some clones appear to survive whereas others are highly susceptible. The bark and leaves are a factor, leaves can be unpalatable to the beatle.
There is ongoing work into developing resistant clones, but I doubt any breeding will resemble our past imported Ulmus minor 'atinia' in the UK.
Think I've mentioned it before, but all the Wych Elm resprouts and saplings around here are doing well, I've not seen any Elm Disease for quite a few years now. No idea why this should be, my best guess is that Elm Bark Beetles have died out through lack of food, but there are other possibilities too.
Even here in the Chilterns there are growing Wych Elms. As long there are sufficient Ulmus minor Atinia for the beatle to feed on they tend to leave the Wych Elms alone. Until the local Atinia regrowth sucker population declines. then they are just as vulnerable. As I said I think the surviving elms listed here are tolerant, but not immune?
About 25 years ago genetic engineering of Atinia Elm was attempted and would likely have proved successful. It never went to trial, but due to the anti's of genetic engineering it never progressed. A terrible shame I think as there was no risk to interbreeding with other Elms as Atina was completely sterile.
"As long there are sufficient Ulmus minor Atinia for the beatle to feed on they tend to leave the Wych Elms alone" - that can't apply up here, as 'Atinia' was never planted to any extent this far north. Didn't stop the beetles from using Wych Elm, though.
I assume this is the Eucalyptus gunnii recorded at Somerleyton on the Tree Register? If someone could correct the species that would be great.
The trees at Somerleyton need sorting out - they are registered in two different locations, one in Norfolk and one in Suffolk. They should all be moved into the Suffolk location as Somerleyton is not in Norfolk!
Good to see that the counties are sorted out. One issue still remains of the trees being recorded within two separate locations. There's the location which includes this Eucalyptus, the Arboretum of Somerleyton Hall, as well as gardens of Somerleyton Hall, where 3 other trees are registered. If one of you could transfer the trees from the second location into the first that would be fantastic. Just for the sake of organisation!
as you are a longtime trusted user in need of some additional functionality, I have now "increased your user level" which means you can now:
* change tree's species
* add/change measurements for others
* change a trees group and/or subgroup
* edit genus/species/vernacular names of species
This 3 bullet means you can move trees at one Somerleyton Hall to the other one (so I'm not the bottleneck). After moving the last tree the empty location will disappear automatically.
Good luck, and use these new "great powers with great responsibility" :)
I really wanted to comment on something else. The second to the largest tree listed in Indiana on your site is at the Notre Dame Grotto. But, your site has it listed in the wrong county - Elkhart County. The correct county is St. Joseph. Can you make a correction and delete Elkhart and replace it with St. Joseph? Thank you, so much!
Edmund Schulman, however, did not live to see the publication of this report. The article was published about two months after his death from a heart attack at age 49.
I noticed there is a huge mistake in the countries list, where the Republic of Kosovo is missing, and in Serbias regions there is a region called "Kosovo and Metohija" which doesnt exist in this planet.
Not all countries are available. They come available at request to the administrator. And politics isn't an item here
Only international accepted standards and confirmed countries and/or regions are accepted as far as I know. Nevertheless, enjoy the site and ad trees of your region or elsewhere. It's really a nice thing to do.
Just read on this site about the Tennessee Dawn Redwood found in Nashville. We have one in Knoxville behind the house we just bought. Huge and stunningly beautiful!!!
Ik zou graag van betreffende welke deze boom bij nader inzien als meerstammig heeft omgedoopt willen weten vanwaar deze conclusie, aangezien mij door mijn brede ervaring met wilgen ik niet echt tot eenzelfde standpunt overtuigd ben. Met vriendelijke groeten, Dennis
Jeroen Philippona, at 2022-11-02 14:24:21, edited at 2022-11-02 14:24:41, said:
Dag Dennis,
Op de foto zijn duidelijk uit elkaar wijkende stammen te zien. Of het om twee of meer stammen gaat vind ik op de foto's moeilijk te beoordelen. Het is wel goed mogelijk dat het gaat om stammen die gegroeid zijn vanuit een gemeenschappelijke onderstam van één genetisch individu. Deze boom doet mij denken aan de bekende Kroezeboom (zomereik) van Ruurlo, waar meerdere stammen met ieder een eigen groeikern zijn gegroeid vanuit een gezamenlijke onderstam, mogelijk nadat de stam in een vroege levensfase was afgezet; zie https://www.monumentaltrees.com/nl/nld/gelderland/berkelland/932_borculoseweg/. Als het echter uit elkaar gebroken en sindsdien wijkende stamdelen zijn die oorspronkelijk een gezamenlijke stam vormden, is de situatie vergelijkbaar met de eveneens vermaarde Femeiche in Erle, Duitsland https://www.monumentaltrees.com/nl/deu/noordrijnlandwestfalen/borken/1010_erle/1788/ of de Marton Oak in Engeland: https://www.monumentaltrees.com/nl/gbr/engeland/cheshire/7602_aprivategardeninoaklane/ .
Bedankt voor je reactie. Ik ben het er totaal mee eens dat het moeilijk is hierover een conclusie te vormen is. De wilg doet mij echter denken aan de als dikste wilg gedocumenteerde wilg bij Wilp. Deze stam is ook getordeerd en zonder dat de andere stamhelft zou zijn afgebroken zou, door zware belasting in het verleden, een vergelijkbare vorm zijn ontstaan. Het uiterlijk van wilgen kan nu eenmaal zeer divers zijn naar gelang de leeftijd. De Kroezeboom ken ik maar naar past meer de schietwilg bij Arnhem bij die verschillende uitlopers heeft op eenzelfde stambasis. Dat is hierbij niet het geval want beide stamstukken zijn van nagenoeg dezelfde leeftijd en sluiten redelijk op elkaar aan. Nogmaals dank voor je reactie en als ik van plan ben er langs te gaan zal ik het laten weten. Met vriendelijke groeten, Dennis
This is a very large American Elm on the rear of a neighbor's yard located at 7 Cook Road, Media, PA 19063. It is possibly well over 100 years old.
There are also two young American Elm trees 3" in diameter and about 20' tall growing near the rear edge of our property, 6 Foxcroft Lane, Media, PA 19063
Leider ist der Bäum nicht an erster Stelle der Ahornblättrigen Platanen in Deutschland zu finden. Ziemlich schade bei diesem Exemplar. Wie kann man das den ändern?
Together we've made a fantastic database and it can be better and better,
But it can only grow by relevant contributions. To my regret only Conifers adds relevant and helpful contributions. I hope other experts realize te importance of this daatabase.
A big lightning scar down one side, with the large branch that was hit killed by it. But the rest of the crown looks healthy. The different measurements can easily be affected by the exact positioning of the measuring tape, and by the bark falling off the dead lightning scar section.
In het Bomenregister staat bij tamme kastanje, Molenweg 1a, Maastricht, boomnummer 1679950:"...boom zou door Russen meegenomen zijn..." Als hobbyist bij een heemkundeclubje in Maastricht probeer ik te achterhalen of die bewering klopt. Is misschien in de Franse tijd gebeurd? Bezetting Maastricht door Fransen 1794. 1813-1815 Maastricht wordt ontzet en Franse leger verdwijnt. De Bomenstichting heeft getracht om de vraag te beantwoorden maar weet het antwoord helaas niet.
Is er iemand die over genoemde bewering misschien iets meer kan vertellen? Een reactie zou ik graag vernemen via mail chris.vandenende53@gmail.com
in het limbrichterbos, als je vanuit de manage linksaf loopt, rechtsaf over het spoor gaat en het pad naar links volgt het bos in dan kom je bij een veld beukenbomen. Grenzend hieraan op de noordoostzijde staan meerdere bomen tussen het overige boombestand.
Deze beuk gaat gekapt worden begin november 2022. De boom droeg al niet veel blad meer dit jaar. Droogte schade icm met een verdichte standplaats. Het idee was deze zomer deze boom nog even de kans te geven maar onlangs bleek dat geheel rond de stamvoet Meripilus giganteus zochtbaar te zijn. Gezien de standplaats moet deze boom voor de veiligheid gekapt worden.
Binnen 50 meter staan nog 2 beuken die ook om de zelfde reden gekapt zullen worden.
The foliage and cones look OK for Pinus pinaster; certainly not Pinus strobus, though it would be nice to see close-ups - any fallen cones or needles, please, Aidan?
Certes, le port et l'aspect du feuillage à distance font plus penser à P. pinaster qu'à P. strobus. Pour le reste (cônes, aiguilles groupées par 2), effectivement, je demande à voir. Je sais qu'il existe un hybride naturel entre P. pinaster et P. mugo dans le Valais (Suisse), mais il ne correspond pas à la zone géographique ici présente. J'ignore s'il existe d'autres hybrides du P. pinaster, et si oui, s'ils ont une écorce semblable à celui qui nous occupe.
Il serait intéressant notamment de savoir s'il existe des hybrides naturels de P. pinaster et P. sylvestris (présent en Angleterre), ou des hybrides artificiels avec P. contorta, dont l'écorce et le port ressemblent à ceux de ce pin anglais.
Hi DBZT - there are no verified hybrids of Pinus pinaster; the only ones that could plausibly occur are with the closely related species P. halepensis and P. brutia, but neither hybrid is actually known yet. It is too distantly related to P. mugo, P. sylvestris, or P. contorta to hybridise with them.
The only other option for this tree is that it is a different species altogether; from the current photos I can't rule out one or two of the Mexican pines (e.g. Pinus montezumae), though these are highly unlikely as they are so rarely cultivated in Britain.
Just noticed, it has already been discussed at the photo
Also, looking closely at that photo, there are old needles in 2s visible on the ground, so that definitely excludes any Mexican species after all; realistically, it can't be anything other that a Pinus pinaster with unusual bark.
The foliage is right for P. pinaster from what I remember. I didn't take any close up pictures unfortunately. It's recorded on the Tree Register as P. pinaster as well, so I think it is almost certainly a curious P. pinaster with odd bark.
A few comments about the bark of Pinus pinaster. In the UK at least, young trees have a bark with small, shallow, dull-coloured scales (like this Bolderwood tree) - it's only in old age that they develop the characteristic, larger, flat (almost shiny) colourful purplish plates, divided by deep blackish fissures. By this stage, you'd expect the tree to be adding girth very slowly. The Bolderwood tree is not young - planted 1861 - but has been adding girth surprisingly fast again over the last 20 years.
In humid conditions, the bark of many trees tends to rot away before it's old enough to erode into flat, shiny plates. The New Forest isn't a wet place compared with some parts of the UK, but this tree is growing in deep woodland shelter and the humidity must be higher than it is across most of its natural range.
This is also a tree with a wide range and is divided into subspecies by some authorities (subsp. escarena from the Mediterranean basin, subsp. renoui from the Atlas). I'm not sure that much is known about the origins of the seed of the older trees planted in the UK, but it could have been from a long way away from your wild populations in SW France.
In Nederland zijn er weinig Tilia cordata. Ik trof deze in Leiden vandaag. In Zuid-holland zijn winterlindes zeer zeldzaam. Ineens geopende ogen voor de dikste van ZH.
Ik zou u heel graag willen spreken of per e-mail contact met u hebben aangezien ik een vraag heb over een boom waar u ongetwijfeld meer van weet. Het gaat te ver om dat hier allemaal uit te leggen maar in een gesprek of mail gaat dat vast lukken.
Kunt u met mij contact opnemen aub? Ik heb geen adres of telefoonnummer van u, vandaar dat ik het op deze, misschien ongebruikelijke, manier doe.
Pour mémoire : la plus grande cordyline australe se situe à Pakawau, à la pointe nord de l'Ile Sud de la Nouvelle-Zélande ; elle mesure 56 pieds (17,07 m), et sa circonférence à la base est de 9 mètres. Elle aurait 400 à 500 ans.
Except of course, he didn't; millions of people already knew about it and lived there, they just called it something different (probably something vaguely like 'home' in all their respective languages) 😂
True, but it had 0 historical relevance, a fact even ignored by the native population, which makes me suspect the true truth of this event. It never ceases to impress me that such a small and frugal settlement, which can be located along hundreds of kilometers of coastline, was found so quickly, while other much more modern and powerful settlements with a much more accurate location such as the Colonia de San Miguel de Guadalupe, established by explorer Lucas Vázquez de Ayllón on the Virginia coast in 1526 and home to almost 1,000 people, remains a mystery.
In any case, assuming that it was true, it is also quite plausible that in the fifteenth century French and Spanish whalers were already fishing off the coast of Newfoundland.
Lijkt me een echte zwarte populier - Populus nigra, zowel door habitus als bladvorm. Geen honderd procent zekerheid, maar die is zeldzaam in ons bestaan.
Register a new tree, at the end click save, and there comes a white screen with this text:
Warning: Undefined array key "subgroup" in /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/process.php on line 786 Fatal error: Uncaught TypeError: mysqli_num_rows(): Argument #1 ($result) must be of type mysqli_result, bool given in /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/process.php:848 Stack trace: #0 /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/process.php(848): mysqli_num_rows(false) #1 /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/process.php(145): Process->procAddTree() #2 /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/process.php(2603): Process->runConstructor() #3 {main} thrown in /customers/0/1/c/monumentaltrees.com/httpd.www/login/process.php on line 848
I tried to add some trees to your site today but your site would not let me do so. As soon as I clicked on save it just stayed grey. If you want to know about these trees just send me an email and I will answer you. Trevor.
Het is verbazend om de jaarlijkse groei van deze boom te zien. Ik heb de meting wel drie keer verricht vandaag (8-10-2022) met hulp van voorbijgangers. Heel even dacht ik dat de boom op een lager niveau wellicht minder omtrek zou hebben, maar dat is niet het geval. Menselijke resten doen er kennelijk toe bij de groei van bomen.
Conifers, I just struggle like hell to upload photos on this site at the moment, what the reason is? The photo here is actually of the 51.2 metre Douglas Fir, would you be able to copy it and then upload it to the 51.2 metre tree?
Probably better to drop an email to site owner Tim ( info [at] monumentaltrees [dot] com ), he can move the photo directly; if I did it, it would come up as my photo not yours!
Done, while I was uploading Rob's other new images.
Depending on your user's rights, it's possible to upload a photo under another user's name by clicking the arrow at the right side of the 'Photographer' box. This gives you the full list of site users and you can scroll to the right name and select it. Only problem is, the list is now many 1000s long and takes a while to upload (and scroll through).
AlfredHuizinga, at 2022-10-03 20:10:38, edited at 2022-10-03 20:33:22, said:
You can easily transfer a photo to another tree by clicking on the pencil by "specimen", right of the photo. You can than fill in the number of the new tree. Photographer, number of views and ratings will be transferred also.
Thanks Owen, I appreciate all the photos that you were adding and just thought Conifers may be able to do this swap without asking you yet again. I could have done it myself, have to try and remember how to swap the photos, send an email to myself with it on.
Cannot a tree photo to upload, to confirm, Pinus strobus cones? Needles were lying about in depth but when picked up disintegrated so I couldn't determine how many needles in a bunch.
