Author Topic: Two Legged Tree (Read 3248 times)

Gary_C · « **on:** January 03, 2007, 02:45:43 am »

Have you ever seen one of these?

It actually has gender, too.

johnjbc · « **Reply #1 on:** January 03, 2007, 08:11:33 am »

Reminds me of some I saw hunting in the Adirondacks years back. Several times I saw a large round rock 6 or 8 ft. high with about 8” tree on top. The roots of the tree would surround the rock like an octopus and go to the ground on all sides.
I remember thinking that it must of rained at least a couple times a week for years till the roots made it clear to the ground.
The rocks were setting on top of the ground, most likely dropped when the glacier melted after the last ice age. So the roots were 6 or 8 foot long.
Have never seen anything like it in the woods here. (Pa)

WDH · « **Reply #2 on:** January 03, 2007, 09:44:20 am »

That is a funny looking picture. Are you trying to pull our leg, Gary_C?

Somebody has been logging in those woods, and it looks like a forked top that fell upside down and stuck into the ground. The two legs should be cumulatively larger than diameter than the diameter of the trunk above the crotch (you did saw the tree had gender too, right???), but it could just be a weird tree. Only your hairdresser knows for sure, Gary_C!!!!

WDH · « **Reply #3 on:** January 03, 2007, 09:50:01 am »

My bad! I must be wrong........

From the looking at your pic, you can't have a hair dresser!! Just kidding!

pigman · « **Reply #4 on:** January 03, 2007, 10:11:59 am »

With all the mud, me thinks Gary is spending too much time on the computer playing with a photo editing program. Then again someone may have planted the tree seed upside down causing the tree to grow that way.

Bob the doubter

Gary_C · « **Reply #5 on:** January 03, 2007, 11:50:24 pm »

You guys give me too much credit to say that I know enough about photo editing programs to make that tree look like that.

I did talk to the DNR Forester about the history of that land and he believes it was last logged in the 60's. Some people say that land may have been used for pasture before it was tax forfetid to the state. His speculation (he has not seen the tree yet) was that it started from two sprouts from an old stump, but I do not see any signs of a stump.

The view from the other side (the male side if you look closely) makes me question the upside down fork stuck in the ground theory.

Furby · « **Reply #6 on:** January 04, 2007, 12:07:09 am »

You do know that lots of folks love to take a walk in the woods and then "modify" some saplings along the way.
The ones that live will give you odd things as in your pic.

A real common one is a simple X.
Used to be a good sized one just off the road by my Gandma's place.
One top peice broke off and some years later a leg rotted off, but the rest is still there.

I found one near my parents that was dead, but had a perfect U shaped arch sideways with the trunk above and below perfectly straight.

WDH · « **Reply #7 on:** January 04, 2007, 12:47:06 am »

So,

You are not photo editing and you are not trying to pull a-fast-one on us...........That sure is a weird tree. Must be quite a story behind that one as Furby suggests. That tree is mossy on the bottom like the tree in the in the background, so you must be shooting straight!! I have seen tow trees grow together, but not like that!

Gary_C · « **Reply #8 on:** January 04, 2007, 01:07:20 am »

Here is another tree not far from the two legged tree.

Furby · « **Reply #9 on:** January 04, 2007, 01:08:59 am »

What kind of trees are these?

Gary_C · « **Reply #10 on:** January 04, 2007, 01:32:00 am »

I think the two legged tree is a maple and the crooked one is a basswood.

Ron Wenrich · « **Reply #11 on:** January 04, 2007, 05:58:54 am »

I've seen them in the past. It comes from 2 saplings too close together and one consumes the other one. I wonder if there wasn't a branch between the two at one time. The branch rots away and you have these results.

SwampDonkey · « **Reply #12 on:** January 04, 2007, 07:29:40 am »

Yellow birch will germinate in the moss of a stump, downed tree or boulder and the roots will migrate around the object, often the old stump rots away and you have a yellow birch on stilts. Never seen a maple do that before like Gary's. Are there scars on the inside faces of the two stems?

I could see in a thicket where two saplings rub one another in the wind at a crotch and then lodge long enough so the cambiums connect.

Gary_C · « **Reply #13 on:** January 04, 2007, 12:07:12 pm »

I took those pictures back before Thanksgiving and from what I recall, both the two legs show only a slight oval shape and the main trunk is round with no signs of scaring other than the crotch. When I look at the pictures now it appears there is a slight ridge running up the main trunk.

If two trunks joined, how did they do it so uniformly all the way up? I do not recall a split at the top, but I do not have a picture of the top.

From what little I know, I thought that Aspen was one of the few trees that could grow from just a stick. If maple does not have that ability, how could an upside down fork stuck in the ground grow like that?

WDH · « **Reply #14 on:** January 04, 2007, 12:16:28 pm »

All I can figure is that it did not result from a broken top stuck in the ground that rooted. That would be hard to believe, though not impossible. Do you remember if it had a crown that looked alive?

Jeff · « **Reply #15 on:** January 04, 2007, 01:42:23 pm »

I'm thinking an expedition ofr Gary and a couple other members may be forming to get better photos on this.

Gary_C · « **Reply #16 on:** January 04, 2007, 02:42:22 pm »

This picture shows the most height. That tree seems very healthy and it is along a trail so it survived a lot of disturbance nearby. As far as I remember, the top was very normal and healthy.

Jeff is right, there will be further investigation next Wednesday. We are thinking many $$$ for the pictures. Perhaps a "Believe it or not show."

WDH · « **Reply #17 on:** January 04, 2007, 03:00:38 pm »

It could be one of those exhibits at the fair that you have to pay a dollar to see. All proceeds to the Forestry Forum!!

srjones · « **Reply #18 on:** January 04, 2007, 03:18:38 pm »

I've heard doug-fir split tops referred to as "School-Marm" I was a little slow on the uptake that day, but then I figured out why...

Not sure what you'd call this, though...

OneWithWood · « **Reply #19 on:** January 04, 2007, 03:47:37 pm »

Someone bent a branch down into the ground as a marker some years ago. The branch rooted and filled out. The main trunk is intact from the point of juncture on up.
Take a shovel and a metal detector

SwampDonkey · « **Reply #20 on:** January 04, 2007, 03:49:43 pm »

I'm thinking that when the cambiums joined the weaker top died and healed over time. Was there any evidence of a stub pointing up sharply at the crotch? It doesn't look like stilted maple as birch does. The root wood is somewhat different than the bole wood.

SwampDonkey · « **Reply #21 on:** January 04, 2007, 03:55:56 pm »

Sugar maple doesn't layer or root that easily. I don't even think beech can, although it seems to root sucker down south. I never seen beech sucker up here, we had someone try to find some on a hardwood management course. Every time he thought one did root sucker, you could pull the seedling out of the ground with it's own root system. Blew that theory.

Beech seeds real thick here when it's stressed from beech scale.

WDH · « **Reply #22 on:** January 04, 2007, 03:59:49 pm »

The crack investigation team (a veritable Forestry Forum CSI no less) will gather all the evidence next week and will come up with a brillant answer to this mystery.

OneWithWood's theory sounds plausible.

WDH · « **Reply #23 on:** January 04, 2007, 04:07:36 pm »

If SwampDonkey's point about maple layering is taken into account, that could shoot down OneWithWoods theory. I guess the mystery is in the hands of the Forestry Forum CSI Team............................

SwampDonkey · « **Reply #24 on:** January 04, 2007, 04:15:13 pm »

If a branch layers, the top does not develop into root. At the point of contact a bud may root, but the tip of the branch grows vertical toward the sky. It's possible that tip of the branch could die, but the link from the rooted bud back up to the old trunk would die also. That connection always dies eventually on any layered tree I've seen. Go into the boreal where there are a lot of black spruce layered trees and you'll see how it works. Northern white cedar does the same.

OneWithWood · « **Reply #25 on:** January 04, 2007, 04:18:09 pm »

Hooskay. Instead of sticking a branch they twisted up a nearby sapling. Take to shovel and metal detector

Gary_C · « **Reply #26 on:** January 04, 2007, 05:06:00 pm »

One of the puzzling things about this tree is the total cross sectional area of the two legs are approximately equal to the cross sectional area of the main trunk. Although the legs are somewhat oval in shape, the bark appears the same all around, ie. there are no visible scars to show the bark has had to regrow around the inside. If it was two separate and approximately equal saplings, wouldn't the legs be the same size as the main trunk?

The only explanation that makes any sense is that a sapling was somehow split part way up, both legs somehow took root, and the bark regrew around the inside of the split without scars.

Ron Scott · « **Reply #27 on:** January 04, 2007, 05:52:54 pm »

http://www.arborsmith.com/treecircus.html

Ron Wenrich · « **Reply #28 on:** January 04, 2007, 05:53:54 pm »

You said it was logged in the '60s. So, you have a top laying there that is starting to rot. One year a maple seed falls on the top and germinates. It sends out tendrils that root in the soil. The top rots away, and you would have your 2 legs.

In that case, your legs are actually roots. Roots normally have bark so they would all look the same.

Gary_C · « **Reply #29 on:** January 04, 2007, 06:03:03 pm »

Ron
But would that root crotch grow higher and higher or would it remain the same height above the ground? That crotch is at least three feet above the ground.

Ron Wenrich · « **Reply #30 on:** January 04, 2007, 07:41:58 pm »

I thought about that. Is it a crotch or a seam or a split? It seems that if it was high off the ground, a split could develop especially with any type of snow or ice load. There wouldn't be the same amount of support that another tree has at the root collar.

Tom · « **Reply #31 on:** January 04, 2007, 08:01:14 pm »

Back in the 1950's, before the turn of the century, the 20 miles between Stuart and Ft. pierce, florida, was nothing but sand and scrub oaks, with a few pines. General Development came in with their bulldozers and created a golf club with Saints and Sinners courses. Then they began to build homes, and now, it is known as Port Saint Lucie. It is bigger than Ft. Pierce, the county seat of St. Lucie county and Stuart, the count seat of Martin county.

In those days, young boys were entertained with hikes, fishing and camping trips. I've been on a few. We had adults with us because I think the men enjoyed an excuse to get out of the house and Boy Scouts was still big.

I've walked that area quite a bit and, don't tell anyone, I've tied a few trees together too. A bruise on opposing sides of two saplings that are then tied together will enhance the chance that they will "meld" into one trunk, or at least be joined above the stumps and beneath the tops.

What is really fun is to tie a knot in them, or tie a knot in one tree. Sometimes we would climb an oak and it would bend to the ground. Then we would make an effort for that portion to take root. Just think of the number of trees that 20 or so boys could twist over a 3 or 4 years.

If the Bulldozers haven't destroyed all of our efforts, There may still be remnants of Tommy's and Ugly Eddy's boy scout troops and Royal Ambassador camping trips.

SwampDonkey · « **Reply #32 on:** January 04, 2007, 08:03:11 pm »

I tend to agree with Ron W's explanation, also as I explained about the yellow birch. Not real common with sugar maple, but it can happen if it's a moist site and not a dry ridge, or in a rain belt. The outter surface of rotting wood dries easily unless it has a good layer of moss. Exposed roots do grow bark as Ron said, and it may be hard to differentiate with the untrained eye. And there seems to be a crack developing at that crotch probably as the weight of the main stem gets heavier and bearing down on the crotch. It must have been a good sized tree that was down and rotting during germination. Who knows it could have been a big old hemlock or white pine laying there rotting, or a stack of firewood, hardwood would rot a lot faster than softwood, but 40 years is a long time when a tree is already partially decomposed.

SPIKER · « **Reply #33 on:** January 04, 2007, 08:12:22 pm »

I've been out in woods a good bit myself, and seen some similar (but not as drastic) split trunks, bent woven oddities. One of the oddest places to see things like this was an arboretum out west which has trees growing in all different shapes, lattus works, Hearts openings ect. these were grown by a guy who lived and started it back in the early 1900's and he dies sometime in the 50's/60's took his secrets on HOW he did get these trees to grow this way to his grave

they are really amazing to see photos and on the tube, I would like to go there and see them in person! I think it was out in either California or Saint-Luis I forget which

(I think my memory is failing me. at least it matched my body

) anyhow I saw it on TV back 2~3 years on a HGTV or Discovery channel...

Personally I HAVE seen some trees that have been made into shapes but nothing like what was on this show. I really liked this one which was grown looking like a bio-sphere or one of those monkey bar contraptions... the amazing thing was that the bark had no deformities where the tree had been grown together and or cut, no one ever knew exactly how he was doing it... SO it is anyones guess...

mark M

EDIT IN: I guess I should have looked at that link up above first, it was one I rememberd seeing all about I think. dang memory is failing me if I remember that right

markm edit end

Tom · « **Reply #34 on:** January 04, 2007, 08:46:09 pm »

We've discussed this museum on the forum before. It's pretty interesting but not as much a secret as one would think.

http://www.arborsmith.com/treecircus.html

Jeff · « **Reply #35 on:** January 04, 2007, 09:10:59 pm »

If you go to this page of that site and scroll down, you will see an example that looks a lot like Gary's tree.

http://www.arborsmith.com/index.html

Furby · « **Reply #36 on:** January 04, 2007, 09:23:54 pm »

Take a look at the willow on the page Jeff linked to.
It has a larger upper portion supported by to smaller stems shaped like a heart.

SwampDonkey · « **Reply #37 on:** January 04, 2007, 09:26:15 pm »

Yeah I still haven't ruled out the cambial grafting. I still wonder if there is evidence of a dead branch/top just above the union. As time passes and the tree gets older the evidence is harder to find. I think once the union takes affect the more vigorous stem become dominant and the weaker one is suppressed and dies.

Furby · « **Reply #38 on:** January 04, 2007, 09:30:30 pm »

If done properly, the entire top of one could have been remove right from the start.

SwampDonkey · « **Reply #39 on:** January 04, 2007, 09:31:25 pm »

I'm also thinking if that was a germinant on a rotting log, there would be many more roots (fingers) going into the ground. That is how yellow birch grows in nature at least.

SwampDonkey · « **Reply #40 on:** January 04, 2007, 09:35:47 pm »

Quote from: Furby on January 04, 2007, 09:30:30 pm

If done properly, the entire top of one could have been remove right from the start.

Yes, no dought about it.

Mr Mom · « **Reply #41 on:** January 04, 2007, 09:42:40 pm »

When my dad was growing up he would go out behind my grandmas house and tie two trees togeather.
Well grandma and grandpa had there place logged off before they sold there house and the logger was talking to them one day and said that there was some of the weirdest shaped trees he has seen

.
Dad said that he would haved liked to seen the trees just to see what they looked like after 40yrs.

Thanks Alot Mr Mom

WDH · « **Reply #42 on:** January 04, 2007, 10:16:30 pm »

If the seedling grew on a log and two roots became the two supporting bases, there would not be an obvious seam where the two trunks come together. There seems to be a seam (ha!) where they join, so maybe the graft theory is right.

Tom,

Are you sure your that some of your tree tieing/bending scouts did not make a road trip up north?

Gary_C · « **Reply #43 on:** January 04, 2007, 10:32:15 pm »

Actually there is a branch (dead) just above the crotch. It looks more overgrown rather than a normal branch that just died. Here is a close up of the "male" side of the crotch from the original photo.

After looking at that enlarged area, I suspect that someone created this work of art.

If that is true, the question still remains of how did they create that seamless trunk that runs all the way up.

beenthere · « **Reply #44 on:** January 05, 2007, 12:00:50 am »

So Gary_C, along wit da camera, dis crew should bring da chainsaw and disecting tools too? Oops! Maybe a handsaw that makes no noise, and some anasthetic to keep da two-legged tree from screemin while the operation takes place.....An increment borer to count the rings above the crotch and in each leg.....

These guys are going to wanna know a whole lot after Wed, ya know.

Furby · « **Reply #45 on:** January 05, 2007, 12:08:53 am »

It's not seamless, you can see the seam at the bottom (or is it now the top) of the Y.
The rest has simply grown over as the two trees became one.
All it really is now is a second trunk spliced into another trunk.
It is really possible that dead "branch" was the other top.

How is it possible to find nails, horseshoes, and many other things in the middle of trees with no entry point on the outside?
The tree grew around them.

Gary_C · « **Reply #46 on:** January 05, 2007, 12:59:30 am »

beenthere

Steve and I can watch for the forester while you do the surgery. I am no longer supposed to cut anything down, but sometimes things get run over with the forwarder while picking up, or I could just maybe wrestle it out of the ground, roots and all with the harvester.

Ron Wenrich · « **Reply #47 on:** January 05, 2007, 05:52:17 am »

Tree # 3? That one died, but the other 2 didn't.

SwampDonkey · « **Reply #48 on:** January 05, 2007, 07:28:15 am »

The dead branch solves the mystery for me as I asked earlier about it when suggesting cambial grafting between two trees.

WDH · « **Reply #49 on:** January 05, 2007, 08:36:11 am »

The increment borer idea is a good one. You might need to take some DNA sample, but it might be hard to swab a tree!

Gary_C · « **Reply #50 on:** January 05, 2007, 10:00:35 am »

That dead branch is foreign to that tree, it looks very much like it was just stuck there and the tree grew around it.

It's just an artistic prop.

News:

Author Topic: Two Legged Tree (Read 3248 times)