Subject: Re: Estimating Tree Age

From: *** <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 1 Dec 1996 22:56:42 +0000

In article <[email-masked]>, Victor Engel <Stop@The-
Light.com> writes
>
>"Steve Blight" <[email-masked]> wrote:
>
>>I am interested in finding a way to estimate the age of hardwoods
>>(specifically northern red oak and sugar maple) simply by measuring
>>diameter and estimating height.  It is only for my own interest (I own a
>>woodlot), so I do not want to core or cut down any trees to generate
>>correlations.  I have done considerable research in libraries, but have
>>drawn a blank so far.  Does anybody have any ideas?
>>
>>Steve Blight
>>Ottawa, Ontario
>
>
According to the late Alan Mitchell (highly respected dendrologist) the
average growth of a tree, measured at five feet up is one inch a year.
He includes Red Oak (Quercus rubra) in a list of exceptions that average
two to three inches a year, describing it as having particularly fast
early growth. (Whether this is the same species as your Northern Red Oak
I don't know).
Hope this helps.
-- 
bex

---

From: jim bouldin <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 1996 13:19:05 -0800

> drawn a blank so far.  Does anybody have any ideas?

Steve you're going to have to either core some trees or get some data
>from  the USFS or Canadian forest service on the growth rates relative to
site factors.  Try the Northeast Forest Experiment Station of the USFS
(not sure where located).  Also I think sugar maple is pretty shade
tolerant, so age-diameter correlations are likely to be highly variable.
Red Oak I'm not sure about, but being an oak it's likely to be less
shade tolerant and therefore easier to predict age from diameter.