next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
Index of Subjects
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------070109070604030806040909
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Annabelle,
From the comment I made when measuring the large hemlocks at the
Berwick Church Camp (see Big Trees List on http://www.naturns.ca)
Species: Eastern Hemlock
County: Kings
Diameter(m): 1.05
Height(m): 32
NSFT Score: 137
Submitter: Larry and Alison Bogan
Date: July 2008
: This is the largest of many tall Hemlocks. Several were measured but
the next largest were 2.62 m and 2.69 m in circumference. This
particular one is just north of the covered pavilion behind the open-air
air worship area. A nearby stump 0.81 m in diameter had 275 growth
rings. Scaling up to this tree makes it about 350 years old. The Church
camp has been here since in 1874.
====
So for another estimate, you can scale from this stump that we
measured. Your largest is 0.58 m in diameter and that gives about 200
years old for your oldest on this scale. It of course depends on the
environment while growing. As Paul mentioned the later rings are usually
closer together and so this estimate is probably an over estimate.
regards,
Larry Bogan
On 19/07/2011 11:38 AM, Paul MacDonald wrote:
> Hi Annabelle
> The trees are approximately 27 cms in radius. For easy calculations.
> I'm sure some others on the site will give more accurate calc but anyway
> I took a piece of hemlock from the work shop and counted the rings on it.
> There was 46 rings or years growth in 9 cms. That would give an estimate
> of the age of the trees at 138 years old.
> The size of the rings will vary as to the age of the tree - older
> trees tend to
> have smaller rings - younger larger. Should there be a change in the
> trees environment
> say a larger tree blows down nearby the rings will be larger.
> Better soil will result in larger rings and so on.
> So you can see my piece of hemlock can only give a rough estimate of
> the age of your trees.
> Perhaps some others can get out and count the rings on a piece of hemlock?
> Have a nice summer
> Paul
>
> *From:* Annabelle Thiebaux <hamst@xplornet.com>
> *To:* naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
> *Sent:* Monday, July 18, 2011 1:57:02 PM
> *Subject:* [NatureNS] Age of hemlock trees
>
> Martial and I would like to estimate the ages of three eastern hemlock
> trees in a little woodland graveyard near Georgefield. Here are their
> measurements in metres. Circumferences are at breast height.
>
> Tree A B C
> Height 22 21 17
> Circumference 1.52 1.75 1.83
>
>
> Even very rough estimates would be of value to us with lower and upper
> bounds such as 125-150 years.
>
>
>
--------------070109070604030806040909
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Annabelle,<br>
From the comment I made when measuring the large hemlocks at the
Berwick Church Camp (see Big Trees List on http://www.naturns.ca)<br>
<table bgcolor="#ffffff" border="1" cellpadding="2" width="400">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Species: <span>Eastern Hemlock</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>County: <span>Kings</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Diameter(m): <span>1.05</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Height(m): 32</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>NSFT Score: <span>137</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Submitter: <span>Larry and Alison Bogan</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Date: <span>July 2008</span></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
: <span>This is the largest of many tall Hemlocks. Several were
measured but the next largest were 2.62 m and 2.69 m in
circumference. This particular one is just north of the covered
pavilion behind the open-air air worship area. A nearby stump 0.81
m in diameter had 275 growth rings. Scaling up to this tree makes
it about 350 years old. The Church camp has been here since in
1874.</span><br>
<br>
==== <br>
So for another estimate, you can scale from this stump that we
measured. Your largest is 0.58 m in diameter and that gives about
200 years old for your oldest on this scale. It of course depends on
the environment while growing. As Paul mentioned the later rings are
usually closer together and so this estimate is probably an over
estimate. <br>
<br>
regards,<br>
Larry Bogan<br>
<br>
On 19/07/2011 11:38 AM, Paul MacDonald wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:1311086288.50146.YahooMailNeo@web36205.mail.mud.yahoo.com"
type="cite">
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255,
255); font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif;
font-size: 12pt;">
<div><span>Hi Annabelle</span></div>
<div><span>The trees are approximately 27 cms in radius. For
easy calculations.</span></div>
<div><span>I'm sure some others on the site will give more
accurate calc but anyway</span></div>
<div><span>I took a piece of hemlock from the work shop and
counted the rings on it.</span></div>
<div><span>There was 46 rings or years growth in 9 cms. That
would give an estimate </span></div>
<div><span>of the age of the trees at 138 years old.</span></div>
<div><span>The size of the rings will vary as to the age of the
tree - older trees tend to</span></div>
<div><span>have smaller rings - younger larger. Should there be
a change in the trees environment</span></div>
<div><span>say a larger tree blows down nearby the rings will be
larger.</span>&l