Truly giant trees of the past
Posted: May 26th, 2018, 4:41 pm
Hello Everyone,
I'm new to this forum and this is a topic that I spend a lot of time thinking about, and is part of what sparked my "geeky obsession" with old growth forests.
I've seen some images on the internet and in Van Pelt's Forest Giants of the Pacific Coast of trees that were reportedly bigger and taller than anything known to be standing today.
I believe the tallest doug fir currently is the 320 ft brummit fir in Oregon, and the widest one that I know of is the Red Creek fir in BC. I've seen a few record/near-record sized trees but nothing quite like some of these historic trees.
There's this photo I found allegedly of a 22ft diameter douglas fir in Oregon:
http://www.vannattabros.com/histlog18.html
The "Nooksak giant" said to have been maybe 465 feet tall:
"Newspaper reports of a 465-foot fir, logged in 1897 at Loop’s Ranch...in the North Fork Nooksack River valley..."
https://www.seattletimes.com/life/giant ... forgotten/
"God's Valley Spruce", in Oregon, around 20 ft diameter: couldnt find much information about this one, I think I maybe read it about in Van Pelt's book.
this is the only picture I could find and only shows part of the base:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pinter ... rce=images
Does anyone think the reported size of some of these trees like the Mineral Fir were greatly exagerated? I find the idea of a 465 ft douglas fir really haunting but a bit far-fetched, most of these trees aren't too reliably documented.
It's fascinating though, I don't doubt a doug fir could reach heights up to or maybe over 350 feet in the right conditions. It makes me wonder if there is still a tree or a grove of trees like that out there still, though I'd be amazed if it survived the past century of logging. I'd love to see a douglas fir like that some day.
I'm new to this forum and this is a topic that I spend a lot of time thinking about, and is part of what sparked my "geeky obsession" with old growth forests.
I've seen some images on the internet and in Van Pelt's Forest Giants of the Pacific Coast of trees that were reportedly bigger and taller than anything known to be standing today.
I believe the tallest doug fir currently is the 320 ft brummit fir in Oregon, and the widest one that I know of is the Red Creek fir in BC. I've seen a few record/near-record sized trees but nothing quite like some of these historic trees.
There's this photo I found allegedly of a 22ft diameter douglas fir in Oregon:
http://www.vannattabros.com/histlog18.html
The "Nooksak giant" said to have been maybe 465 feet tall:
"Newspaper reports of a 465-foot fir, logged in 1897 at Loop’s Ranch...in the North Fork Nooksack River valley..."
https://www.seattletimes.com/life/giant ... forgotten/
"God's Valley Spruce", in Oregon, around 20 ft diameter: couldnt find much information about this one, I think I maybe read it about in Van Pelt's book.
this is the only picture I could find and only shows part of the base:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pinter ... rce=images
Does anyone think the reported size of some of these trees like the Mineral Fir were greatly exagerated? I find the idea of a 465 ft douglas fir really haunting but a bit far-fetched, most of these trees aren't too reliably documented.
It's fascinating though, I don't doubt a doug fir could reach heights up to or maybe over 350 feet in the right conditions. It makes me wonder if there is still a tree or a grove of trees like that out there still, though I'd be amazed if it survived the past century of logging. I'd love to see a douglas fir like that some day.