On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 10:43:44 -0500, Rusty Mase wrote:

I had a 36" dbh live oak that I babied for ten years after I moved in
my home and it died of oak wilt in 1986. I sectioned it for aging it
and then split the tree into fire wood. My best estimate was the tree
was born prior to 1825 but after 1820. By about 1836, the tree was
large enough for some camper to use a brace and bit to drill a hole in
the tree that was used to hold a support for a cooking pot that he
built a fire under - killing the bark on that side of the tree. Then
someone took an adze to the tree, etc. There was alot of history
buried in that wood - sort of the science of dendroarcheology as trees
have the capacity of burying their wounds.

By the 1870's the tree was large enough to attract other campers,
including military units, as I have retrieved a number of artifacts
buried in the soil under where the tree stood. That could have been
George Custer, himself.

Rusty Mase



You raise an interesting point. I would think that could be an excellent way to
determine age. That, or they may not have done it because the limb may not have
been as old as the base trunk? I've personally never seen the tree. Tell me
where it is?

I do know the first crime I recall hearing on the news when we moved down here
was about that nut who poisoned it. Fortunately, it didn't die.

Anthropology and archeology are two topics I wish I would have taken more
interest in when in school. I mean, there's probably just as LITTLE money in it
as horticulture and growing! In growing, the only people making the money are
the owners of the huge greenhouse operations.

Eh, I'm tired and they're climbing the hill in Tewer Duh Frayance...said as
Brooklyn as I can just for Steven!

V