Foresters:

I am looking to purchase a clinometer for another cruising
vest I'm putting together. I see that there is a $13
difference between the brunton and the suunto. I have a
Suunto now, but not a brunton. Anyone have any
experience with the Brunton one - Is it any worse for wear
than the Suunto is? Is the sighting aperature good
in it? Any advice is welcomed from those who have
experience with the brunton clinometer.

Thanks,
Geoff Kegerreis

Geoff Kegerreis wrote:

Foresters:

I am looking to purchase a clinometer for another cruising
vest I'm putting together. I see that there is a $13
difference between the brunton and the suunto. I have a
Suunto now, but not a brunton. Anyone have any
experience with the Brunton one - Is it any worse for wear
than the Suunto is? Is the sighting aperature good
in it? Any advice is welcomed from those who have
experience with the brunton clinometer.

Thanks,
Geoff Kegerreis


You don't use a relaskop?

mhagen wrote:

Geoff Kegerreis wrote:

Foresters:

I am looking to purchase a clinometer for another cruising
vest I'm putting together. I see that there is a $13
difference between the brunton and the suunto. I have a
Suunto now, but not a brunton. Anyone have any
experience with the Brunton one - Is it any worse for wear
than the Suunto is? Is the sighting aperature good
in it? Any advice is welcomed from those who have
experience with the brunton clinometer.

Thanks,
Geoff Kegerreis


You don't use a relaskop?



At 1/10 the cost (approx) a clino makes a lot more sense when wanting to
measure slope. A lot less bulky too. (It's been my experience that a
relaskop is best on steep ground with large trees - I don't really like
them on the smaller dbh trees (when doing variable radius plots)).

As for a comparison between the brunton and the suunto; I've used them both
and I can't really recommend one over the other. I've got suunto's that
are ancient and still work fine. We haven't had the bruntons for that long
so I can't speak to their longevity. So far, so good though. Personally,
I'd stick with the Suunto because they've worked for me for years.

If you're wanting to use the clino for tree heights, try a Vertex
hypsometer. They're sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet.

Probably not what you wanted to hear.

Joe

Joe Shmoe wrote:

mhagen wrote:


Geoff Kegerreis wrote:


Foresters:

I am looking to purchase a clinometer for another cruising
vest I'm putting together. I see that there is a $13
difference between the brunton and the suunto. I have a
Suunto now, but not a brunton. Anyone have any
experience with the Brunton one - Is it any worse for wear
than the Suunto is? Is the sighting aperature good
in it? Any advice is welcomed from those who have
experience with the brunton clinometer.

Thanks,
Geoff Kegerreis


You don't use a relaskop?




At 1/10 the cost (approx) a clino makes a lot more sense when wanting to
measure slope. A lot less bulky too. (It's been my experience that a
relaskop is best on steep ground with large trees - I don't really like
them on the smaller dbh trees (when doing variable radius plots)).

As for a comparison between the brunton and the suunto; I've used them both
and I can't really recommend one over the other. I've got suunto's that
are ancient and still work fine. We haven't had the bruntons for that long
so I can't speak to their longevity. So far, so good though. Personally,
I'd stick with the Suunto because they've worked for me for years.

If you're wanting to use the clino for tree heights, try a Vertex
hypsometer. They're sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet.

Probably not what you wanted to hear.

Joe

My Suunto clino is more than 30 years old and still works fine. I just
try to reduce the number of gadjets tied onto me in the brush. An
r-skop is a cruising tool- if you're not cruising, definitely stick
with a clino or abney. As for Brunton - I've heard they now own the
Silva brandname. They have always seemd to be a few bucks cheaper than
the imports and have as good a reputation.

Been using an Opti Logic laser hypsometer/rangefinder for the last year
on big old growth timber in rough country. It's had to be fixed twice
but is worth it.

mhagen wrote:



My Suunto clino is more than 30 years old and still works fine. I just
try to reduce the number of gadjets tied onto me in the brush. An
r-skop is a cruising tool- if you're not cruising, definitely stick
with a clino or abney. As for Brunton - I've heard they now own the
Silva brandname. They have always seemd to be a few bucks cheaper than
the imports and have as good a reputation.

Been using an Opti Logic laser hypsometer/rangefinder for the last year
on big old growth timber in rough country. It's had to be fixed twice
but is worth it.


I agree to a certain point on the relaskop-for-cruising thought. That point
is about a BAF 6.25 (metric). Anything lower than that (ie you're in a
smaller diameter stand) and I've always found a prism to be more useful.
Usually equates to wanting a relaskop for the coast and a prism for the
interior. At least in this part of the world.

But I digress. I didn't know about the Brunton/Silva thing. I have one of
those plastic clinos that Silva put out years ago. That was a piece of
junk.

Hey Joe Shmoe, we know you want to keep your name secret- or at least your
email address- but tell us more about what sort of work you do and where you
do it- that's the fun part of being in any discussion group- learning about
other practitioners of the same profession.

In case you're real name is Shmoe- no offense. G

--
Joe Zorzin
http://www.forestmeister.com

"Joe Shmoe" wrote in message
a...
mhagen wrote:



My Suunto clino is more than 30 years old and still works fine. I just
try to reduce the number of gadjets tied onto me in the brush. An
r-skop is a cruising tool- if you're not cruising, definitely stick
with a clino or abney. As for Brunton - I've heard they now own the
Silva brandname. They have always seemd to be a few bucks cheaper than
the imports and have as good a reputation.

Been using an Opti Logic laser hypsometer/rangefinder for the last year
on big old growth timber in rough country. It's had to be fixed twice
but is worth it.


I agree to a certain point on the relaskop-for-cruising thought. That
point
is about a BAF 6.25 (metric). Anything lower than that (ie you're in a
smaller diameter stand) and I've always found a prism to be more useful.
Usually equates to wanting a relaskop for the coast and a prism for the
interior. At least in this part of the world.

But I digress. I didn't know about the Brunton/Silva thing. I have one of
those plastic clinos that Silva put out years ago. That was a piece of
junk.

I use a clinometer for about 1 minute each year- at the beginning of timber
marking season- I use it to see if I can still eyeball log heights. I always
find that I still can. I wonder what I could get for this ancient tool on
Ebay- might as well get rid of it. G
--
Joe Zorzin
http://www.forestmeister.com

"Geoff Kegerreis" wrote in message
...
Foresters:

I am looking to purchase a clinometer for another cruising
vest I'm putting together. I see that there is a $13
difference between the brunton and the suunto. I have a
Suunto now, but not a brunton. Anyone have any
experience with the Brunton one - Is it any worse for wear
than the Suunto is? Is the sighting aperature good
in it? Any advice is welcomed from those who have
experience with the brunton clinometer.

Thanks,
Geoff Kegerreis

Thanks for the advice, guys. I ordered a Brunton this time and we'll see how it
goes.
As far as the relaskop goes, I agree with Joe Schmoe that it is prohibitively
expensive and too damned bulky. A cool tool, but not worth the $1300 you'd
purchase one for new now as far as I'm concerned. The tallest tree in my main
service area is probably less than 150', and there are no requirements of any
agency or landowner that I am aware of that enforce the use of relaskops similar

to what the USFS does out there in region 1 and whatever the PNW region number
is - so I'll stick to using prisms (10 and 20 factor are all I need here), a
tape, and a
clinometer for the heights and other reasonably-priced tools that pay for
themselves
over and over again.

Joe Z - In most cases I don't use a clinometer much either (a 3-log tree is the
premium
here), but I think site index is a relatively valid concept to measure tree
growth
productivity, and since I promised to include that on the plan I will be writing
for my clients,
I have to have some valid way to measure the tree heights other than bringing
Bob Leverett
along.
The other clinometer is for my vest that I use for big marking jobs and that
vest scares
little children it's so painted up and faded. My thought is spend another $300
bucks and
get a vest that I can actually wear when I meet customers for the first time to
make at least
a decent impression. It's a cheaper alternative to buying one of those pretty
fancy new
dodges that the rich mills buy for the woodchucks...hopefully this year I can
afford to buy one
of their old used beat-up trucks that is slightly nicer than my current one, but
we'll see!

:-)

GK


Joe Zorzin wrote:

I use a clinometer for about 1 minute each year- at the beginning of timber
marking season- I use it to see if I can still eyeball log heights. I always
find that I still can. I wonder what I could get for this ancient tool on
Ebay- might as well get rid of it. G
--
Joe Zorzin
http://www.forestmeister.com

"Geoff Kegerreis" wrote in message
...
Foresters:

I am looking to purchase a clinometer for another cruising
vest I'm putting together. I see that there is a $13
difference between the brunton and the suunto. I have a
Suunto now, but not a brunton. Anyone have any
experience with the Brunton one - Is it any worse for wear
than the Suunto is? Is the sighting aperature good
in it? Any advice is welcomed from those who have
experience with the brunton clinometer.

Thanks,
Geoff Kegerreis

It must be a matter of age, I use a Haga.

"Geoff Kegerreis" wrote in message
...
Thanks for the advice, guys. I ordered a Brunton this time and we'll see
how it
goes.
As far as the relaskop goes, I agree with Joe Schmoe that it is
prohibitively
expensive and too damned bulky. A cool tool, but not worth the $1300
you'd
purchase one for new now as far as I'm concerned. The tallest tree in my
main
service area is probably less than 150', and there are no requirements of
any
agency or landowner that I am aware of that enforce the use of relaskops
similar

to what the USFS does out there in region 1 and whatever the PNW region
number
is - so I'll stick to using prisms (10 and 20 factor are all I need here),
a
tape, and a
clinometer for the heights and other reasonably-priced tools that pay for
themselves
over and over again.

Joe Z - In most cases I don't use a clinometer much either (a 3-log tree
is the
premium
here), but I think site index is a relatively valid concept to measure
tree
growth
productivity, and since I promised to include that on the plan I will be
writing
for my clients,
I have to have some valid way to measure the tree heights other than
bringing
Bob Leverett
along.
The other clinometer is for my vest that I use for big marking jobs and
that
vest scares
little children it's so painted up and faded. My thought is spend another
$300
bucks and
get a vest that I can actually wear when I meet customers for the first
time to
make at least
a decent impression. It's a cheaper alternative to buying one of those
pretty
fancy new
dodges that the rich mills buy for the woodchucks...hopefully this year I
can
afford to buy one
of their old used beat-up trucks that is slightly nicer than my current
one, but
we'll see!

:-)

GK


Joe Zorzin wrote:

I use a clinometer for about 1 minute each year- at the beginning of
timber
marking season- I use it to see if I can still eyeball log heights. I
always
find that I still can. I wonder what I could get for this ancient tool
on
Ebay- might as well get rid of it. G
--
Joe Zorzin
http://www.forestmeister.com

"Geoff Kegerreis" wrote in message
...
Foresters:

I am looking to purchase a clinometer for another cruising
vest I'm putting together. I see that there is a $13
difference between the brunton and the suunto. I have a
Suunto now, but not a brunton. Anyone have any
experience with the Brunton one - Is it any worse for wear
than the Suunto is? Is the sighting aperature good
in it? Any advice is welcomed from those who have
experience with the brunton clinometer.

Thanks,
Geoff Kegerreis

Geoff Kegerreis wrote:
Thanks for the advice, guys. I ordered a Brunton this time and we'll see how it
goes.
As far as the relaskop goes, I agree with Joe Schmoe that it is prohibitively
expensive and too damned bulky. A cool tool, but not worth the $1300 you'd
purchase one for new now as far as I'm concerned. The tallest tree in my main
service area is probably less than 150', and there are no requirements of any
agency or landowner that I am aware of that enforce the use of relaskops similar

to what the USFS does out there in region 1 and whatever the PNW region number
is - so I'll stick to using prisms (10 and 20 factor are all I need here), a
tape, and a
clinometer for the heights and other reasonably-priced tools that pay for
themselves
over and over again.

Joe Z - In most cases I don't use a clinometer much either (a 3-log tree is the
premium
here), but I think site index is a relatively valid concept to measure tree
growth
productivity, and since I promised to include that on the plan I will be writing
for my clients,
I have to have some valid way to measure the tree heights other than bringing
Bob Leverett
along.
The other clinometer is for my vest that I use for big marking jobs and that
vest scares
little children it's so painted up and faded. My thought is spend another $300
bucks and
get a vest that I can actually wear when I meet customers for the first time to
make at least
a decent impression. It's a cheaper alternative to buying one of those pretty
fancy new
dodges that the rich mills buy for the woodchucks...hopefully this year I can
afford to buy one
of their old used beat-up trucks that is slightly nicer than my current one, but
we'll see!



This shows how different inventory can be in different places. A
relaskop is standard equipment for cruisers in the far west, as
necessary as corks. I haven't seen a prism used since I taught a bunch
of fish bios how to determine basal area in riparian strips a few years
back. It was the simplest tool for the job.

It's possible to eyeball trees accurately - if circumstances are good
and there are times we all do it - but in the not very long run the
error will get you. West coast cruisers are instrument-centric.

Most cruises on the west side are done on the basis of sorts, which mean
you're using variable length logs limited by appearance and minimum
diameter. Since the most often used cruise program uses Behre's
hyperbola as the model, diameters are taken at dbh and formpoint and at
the top of each log, plus the bottleneck at the top. A typical tree has
three to six measure points on it. The sometimes steep country
occasionally means you've got to relaskop the dbh too. Those of us who
use em a lot have memorized all the BAF and bar/scale measures for
different distances out from the tree. They even serve as a fair
rangefinder when the 75 foot tape breaks.

Must be a matter of that "Texan pride" thang :-)

Don Staples wrote:

It must be a matter of age, I use a Haga.

"Geoff Kegerreis" wrote in message
...
Thanks for the advice, guys. I ordered a Brunton this time and we'll see
how it
goes.
As far as the relaskop goes, I agree with Joe Schmoe that it is
prohibitively
expensive and too damned bulky. A cool tool, but not worth the $1300
you'd
purchase one for new now as far as I'm concerned. The tallest tree in my
main
service area is probably less than 150', and there are no requirements of
any
agency or landowner that I am aware of that enforce the use of relaskops
similar

to what the USFS does out there in region 1 and whatever the PNW region
number
is - so I'll stick to using prisms (10 and 20 factor are all I need here),
a
tape, and a
clinometer for the heights and other reasonably-priced tools that pay for
themselves
over and over again.

Joe Z - In most cases I don't use a clinometer much either (a 3-log tree
is the
premium
here), but I think site index is a relatively valid concept to measure
tree
growth
productivity, and since I promised to include that on the plan I will be
writing
for my clients,
I have to have some valid way to measure the tree heights other than
bringing
Bob Leverett
along.
The other clinometer is for my vest that I use for big marking jobs and
that
vest scares
little children it's so painted up and faded. My thought is spend another
$300
bucks and
get a vest that I can actually wear when I meet customers for the first
time to
make at least
a decent impression. It's a cheaper alternative to buying one of those
pretty
fancy new
dodges that the rich mills buy for the woodchucks...hopefully this year I
can
afford to buy one
of their old used beat-up trucks that is slightly nicer than my current
one, but
we'll see!

:-)

GK


Joe Zorzin wrote:

I use a clinometer for about 1 minute each year- at the beginning of
timber
marking season- I use it to see if I can still eyeball log heights. I
always
find that I still can. I wonder what I could get for this ancient tool
on
Ebay- might as well get rid of it. G
--
Joe Zorzin
http://www.forestmeister.com

"Geoff Kegerreis" wrote in message
...
Foresters:

I am looking to purchase a clinometer for another cruising
vest I'm putting together. I see that there is a $13
difference between the brunton and the suunto. I have a
Suunto now, but not a brunton. Anyone have any
experience with the Brunton one - Is it any worse for wear
than the Suunto is? Is the sighting aperature good
in it? Any advice is welcomed from those who have
experience with the brunton clinometer.

Thanks,
Geoff Kegerreis

Ok, I can definitely see why everyone west of the Rockies owns one of those
suckers! In the case you mentioned below, it would really be the only tool that
is practical for the job (at least to date). Sometime someone will come out with
a laser relaskop that is completely automatic. It will probably cost 10k, but people
will buy it - I will stick to the cheap, pratical tools.

Geoff Kegerreis

mhagen wrote:

Geoff Kegerreis wrote:
Thanks for the advice, guys. I ordered a Brunton this time and we'll see how it
goes.
As far as the relaskop goes, I agree with Joe Schmoe that it is prohibitively
expensive and too damned bulky. A cool tool, but not worth the $1300 you'd
purchase one for new now as far as I'm concerned. The tallest tree in my main
service area is probably less than 150', and there are no requirements of any
agency or landowner that I am aware of that enforce the use of relaskops similar

to what the USFS does out there in region 1 and whatever the PNW region number
is - so I'll stick to using prisms (10 and 20 factor are all I need here), a
tape, and a
clinometer for the heights and other reasonably-priced tools that pay for
themselves
over and over again.

Joe Z - In most cases I don't use a clinometer much either (a 3-log tree is the
premium
here), but I think site index is a relatively valid concept to measure tree
growth
productivity, and since I promised to include that on the plan I will be writing
for my clients,
I have to have some valid way to measure the tree heights other than bringing
Bob Leverett
along.
The other clinometer is for my vest that I use for big marking jobs and that
vest scares
little children it's so painted up and faded. My thought is spend another $300
bucks and
get a vest that I can actually wear when I meet customers for the first time to
make at least
a decent impression. It's a cheaper alternative to buying one of those pretty
fancy new
dodges that the rich mills buy for the woodchucks...hopefully this year I can
afford to buy one
of their old used beat-up trucks that is slightly nicer than my current one, but
we'll see!



This shows how different inventory can be in different places. A
relaskop is standard equipment for cruisers in the far west, as
necessary as corks. I haven't seen a prism used since I taught a bunch
of fish bios how to determine basal area in riparian strips a few years
back. It was the simplest tool for the job.

It's possible to eyeball trees accurately - if circumstances are good
and there are times we all do it - but in the not very long run the
error will get you. West coast cruisers are instrument-centric.

Most cruises on the west side are done on the basis of sorts, which mean
you're using variable length logs limited by appearance and minimum
diameter. Since the most often used cruise program uses Behre's
hyperbola as the model, diameters are taken at dbh and formpoint and at
the top of each log, plus the bottleneck at the top. A typical tree has
three to six measure points on it. The sometimes steep country
occasionally means you've got to relaskop the dbh too. Those of us who
use em a lot have memorized all the BAF and bar/scale measures for
different distances out from the tree. They even serve as a fair
rangefinder when the 75 foot tape breaks.

This year I replace my 16 year old 250,000 mile truck with a "new" one. Old
one ran better. Haga the same, I been using one for 35 years, and it works
for me. Other than that, I agree 100% on the tape and a 10 or 20 factor
prism.

Yup, works in Texas.

"Geoff Kegerreis" wrote in message
...
Must be a matter of that "Texan pride" thang :-)

Don Staples wrote:

It must be a matter of age, I use a Haga.

I use a clinometer for about 1 minute each year- at the beginning of timber
marking season- I use it to see if I can still eyeball log heights. I always
find that I still can. I wonder what I could get for this ancient tool on
Ebay- might as well get rid of it. G
--
Suuntos clinometers bring $40-75 on ebay.
Jerry- collector of old forestry crap

"Jerry Mohlman" wrote in message
...
I use a clinometer for about 1 minute each year- at the beginning of
timber
marking season- I use it to see if I can still eyeball log heights. I
always
find that I still can. I wonder what I could get for this ancient tool on
Ebay- might as well get rid of it. G
--
Suuntos clinometers bring $40-75 on ebay.
Jerry- collector of old forestry crap

Well, since I've only used it for one minute per year- I can advertise it as
in mint condition! G
--
Joe Zorzin
http://www.forestmeister.com