[NatureNS] Very old oak tree

DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
References: <5061BF2A.11694.1C102D6@heather.drope.ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:48:11 -0300
From: Ian Manning <manningi@mcft.ca>
To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
Precedence: bulk
Return-Path: <naturens-mml-owner@chebucto.ns.ca>
Original-Recipient: rfc822;"| (cd /csuite/info/Environment/FNSN/MList; /csuite/lib/arch2html)"

next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects

Index of Subjects
--047d7b33d4862046de04ca88a2e4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Hello Dave, Heather and all,

I'd be inclined to side with Dave, it seems unlikely the tree was over 400
years old. I just did a little research, and found this
website<http://www.monumentaltrees.com/en/trees/quercusrubra/records/>which
claims that the oldest red oak (Quercus rubra) was measured in
Netherlands in 2011. It was 210 years old +/- 10 years, and had a diameter
of  5.84m! To put this in perspective, the red oak in the Nature NS
big-tree registry with the largest diameter was 2.84m.

It should be noted however that a large diameter tree does not always
indicate an old tree and vise-versa. A  long-lived tree that has grown in
unfavorable conditions  could live to a ripe old age without reaching an
enormous diameter. If you ever age black spruce in a swamp, you'd be amazed
how old a small tree can be!

This being said, it should definitely be looked at! If no-one checked the
age of trees, we wouldn't ever find the records! It would be great to get a
ring count. If you're not able to get a good look at the rings, can you get
a positive ID on the species of oak? If it's an oak from Europe, I think we
can say with confidence that it's not older than 400 years.

Ian

--047d7b33d4862046de04ca88a2e4
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello Dave, Heather and all,<br><br>I&#39;d be inclined to side with Dave, =
it seems unlikely the tree was over 400 years old. I just did a little rese=
arch, and found this <a href=3D"http://www.monumentaltrees.com/en/trees/que=
rcusrubra/records/" target=3D"_blank">website</a> which claims that the old=
est red oak (Quercus rubra) was measured in Netherlands in 2011. It was 210=
 years old +/- 10 years, and had a diameter of=A0 5.84m! To put this in per=
spective, the red oak in the Nature NS big-tree registry with the largest d=
iameter was 2.84m.<br>

<br>It should be noted however that a large diameter tree does not always i=
ndicate an old tree and vise-versa. A=A0 long-lived tree that has grown in =
unfavorable conditions=A0 could live to a ripe old age without reaching an =
enormous diameter. If you ever age black spruce in a swamp, you&#39;d be am=
azed how old a small tree can be!<br>

<br>This being said, it should definitely be looked at! If no-one checked t=
he age of trees, we wouldn&#39;t ever find the records! It would be great t=
o get a ring count. If you&#39;re not able to get a good look at the rings,=
 can you get a positive ID on the species of oak? If it&#39;s an oak from E=
urope, I think we can say with confidence that it&#39;s not older than 400 =
years.<br>
<br>Ian<br>

--047d7b33d4862046de04ca88a2e4--

next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects