Indentify this tree

Tree ID Forum

  • Like it

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Hate it

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
Mark,

Your conifer pics are a bit blurry...so I have to guess:

Dawn redwood, Metasequoia glyptostroboides.
or
Chinese Fir, Cunninghamia lanceolata

Edit, your trunk pic shows the foliage better, definitely China fir.
 
Who ever guessed Ailanthus ( tree of heaven ) was correct.

Mark , you beat me to the punch. I was gone all weekend and had a Dawn Redwood to post when I came back. So here is a full picture of the tree.

Greg
 

Attachments

  • 8701-dawn redwood.webp
    8701-dawn redwood.webp
    239.9 KB · Views: 43
Hey Mark! There's a few china fir around the PNW. Usually a bit ratty appearing. But unique and different, so cool. Cryptomeria, incense cedar, and dawn redwood are more attractive..and also rather uncommon.
 

Attachments

  • 8704-Prince fir Russell fir 060w.webp
    8704-Prince fir Russell fir 060w.webp
    166.2 KB · Views: 30
</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
Leaves resemble Quercus falcata

[/ QUOTE ]

Half way there...Quercus is correct. That norrows it down since there aren't too many fastigate Oaks.
 
This is in response to a post on this tree ID heading a while back.

Deodar Cedar grow in the east. There is one planted at the Virginia Tech Agriculture research station in VA Beach, VA. Pretty tree twin stem with with each stem measuring approx 45" plus. It is snowing here in coastal VA at 9 pm. Might have a rest day tomorrow.

Keep the ID coming.

Is there going to be a separate discussion forum for Tree ID?
 
Alright, I can't take this insanity any more! We need to start putting a number code along with the pictures and the guesses and the answers so we all know what pictures we're talking about!

So I'll start. This is a super easy one if you know it. Some of you may have never seen anything like this, though...

TREE ID #1...

I hope whoever goes next will follow suit :)

love
nick
 

Attachments

  • 8723-tree1.webp
    8723-tree1.webp
    14.5 KB · Views: 45
I have to agree with Kenton on your TreeID #1, nick. They do get tall Kenton. I'm not sure were they get two hundred feet , but in our area upwards of eighty to a hundred.

Try this Tree ID #2
 

Attachments

  • 8730-Tree ID #2.webp
    8730-Tree ID #2.webp
    218 KB · Views: 56
Klimbinfool - We just climbed a 186' tulip today in the Cataloochee district of the Smokies. We set up the ropes for next week when big tree guru Bob Van Pelt is coming to laser measure the volume (should have a lot of wood - circumference at breast height is 22'5" and circ. at 105' up is still 13'2"!) I've got some pics if you'd like to see them...
Mike
 
Big Tulipifera\'s

Kilmer Old Growth Forest
Just walking beneath towering Rhoedendrons is breath-taking; but to climb into the embrace of these limbs is awesome.

See you at the top, Dan House


Steve1.jpg
 
Re: Big Tulipifera\'s

I have heard that tulips once existed as tall as 220 feet!! Great to hear Robert Van Pelt is visiting the great tulip forest.

There are two biggies in Seattle. One is over 135 feet tall, in a smallish front yard, and growing very fast. The other is 105 feet tall, and is almost 20 feet in circumference, but it splits into two trunks down low, so is hard to assign AFA points to. We pruned and cabled it last year. It's in a tiny front yard. I took slides and prints, but haven't digitized any that I know of.

Another pic of Tree ID #3:
 

Attachments

  • 8805-Resize of IMG_1635.webp
    8805-Resize of IMG_1635.webp
    151 KB · Views: 42

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom