Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: Exciting times chez Moose

Subject: [OM] Re: Exciting times chez Moose
From: Andrew Fildes <afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 25 May 2008 15:09:14 +1000
Eucalypts are really bad in shallow soils - they'll fall over without  
a deep tap root. (This is a generalisation - does not apply to  
Mallees, Ironbarks and some others).
The redwoods around here don't have big limbs - they are big, fat  
conifer sticks with a myriad of small branches at 90deg. to the  
trunk. Great for climbing if you can get to the lowest branch.
Eucalypts drop the big widowmakers in the summer - resins seem to  
expl;ode in the brach although it's prbably a drying out process  
followed by an explosive stress fracture.
Now it is well established that the tallest tree is Eucalyptus  
regnans recorded at 144m  - it's just that none have again reached  
that yet following the depradations of loggers in the late 1800's.  
Redwoods are the biggest - because being a softwood, the bole is  
much, much thicker to support the height and, more importantly, the  
transport of water to that height. A eucalypt of the same height as a  
redwood is much skinnier. Oh and we've got older ones too - Huon  
Pine. So there.
Oh I love these pissing contests.
Andrew Fildes
afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx



On 25/05/2008, at 2:11 PM, Moose wrote:

> Our different experience may be because of a mismatch between the  
> trees
> and the climate, soil and/or terrain. I gather there are something  
> like
> 700 species, adapted to all sorts of situations. Perhaps the ones  
> here,
> originally chosen for Southern and Central Calif. are nsimply a poor
> match for NorCal near the coast, for steep slopes, etc. I fairly
> regularly see some of the 150ish year old wind breaks in rural areas.
> They are already pretty ratty looking in places and missing quite a  
> few
> "teeth".
>> I know where there are some fine old exotic redwoods around here -  
>> don't think we'll pull them out just because they drop a bit of  
>> litter
> I am very familiar with both trees in this local - and redwoods are
> compulsive neatnicks compared to our Eucalypts (mostly blue gum, I
> think). they also don't drop huge limbs at random times
>>  and might fall over sometime in the next hundred years or so.
>>
> HUH?   [The redwood] "is an evergreen
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evergreen>, long-lived, monoecious
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant_sexuality> tree
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree> living for up to 2,200 years,  
> and is
> the tallest tree in the world, reaching up to 115.5 m (379.1 ft) in
> height and 8 m (26 ft) diameter at breast height." A century is  
> nothing
> much to a redwood. The really big ones in areas never logged make any
> Eucalypt I've ever seen look tiny. they are hard to imagine even when
> you've seen one. The next visit is still a surprise. Like some other
> natural things, photographs just fail to convey the scale.



==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz