(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/39004/bark.jpg)
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/39004/bark2.jpg)
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/39004/tree.jpg)
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/39004/leaf.jpg)
Hi,
I was wondering if someone can help me identify this oak tree as I would like to get an advanced one for my back yard.
The oak is growing at my parents place. Dad planted it 30 years ago and thinks it could be a Red or Scarlet oak however the bark does not match what I have seen online. The bark is what I like about this oak. He collects oaks and has about 38 different types on this property so it is a little hard to keep track of them all. The tree is about 10 – 15m high/30+ feet. It has about a two foot wide trunk and the large leaf is about 8 inches/ 20 centimetres long. The dollar coin is about the same size as a US quarter. The leaf is dark green when compared to a pin oak. The soil is about 1 foot deep, good quality slightly acidic, then just clay.
Any help would be appreciated as I don't want to spend 100's on the wrong tree.
Thanks,
Welcome to the Forestry Forum, poke2323.
I am not a tree identity person by any means, but for sure that one is of the Red Oak family. :)
I'd also like to say welcome, there's a lot of people here that I won't question and Magicman would be right at the top of the list ;).
Since you are in Australia, I am not sure what oak you have but it looks a lot like a Shumard Oak (Quercus shumardii) to me.
Caveman
If it is an oak species native to North America, it would most likely be northern red oak as the sinuses do not penetrate more than halfway to the mid-rib. Down here, shumard oak has sinuses that do penetrate more than halfway to the midrib. However, since the tree is planted on another continent from its native range, all bets are off.
That's why I love this place! I have never seen or heard of a Shumard Oak, until today. Those leaves in you pic don't look exactly like the pics I saw on the internet, IMO. Doesn't matter, 'cause I learned something new anyway. Please tell us when you get a positive ID.
Whichever one it turns out to be, it sure likes its new home. It is growing like a rocket. just look at how fast those pruning cuts have covered and how tight and smooth that bark is stretched. I wouldn't be surprised if it isn't putting on 1/2 to one inch per year of trunk diameter. :)
Thanks for all the responses,
I think I maybe a northern red oak (Quercus rubra), best match so far. I like the look of the Shumard Oak (Quercus shumardii) leaf, however I do think the 'sinuses' (New term I learnt, Thanks) are very different on the leafs that I collected.
My Father's favourite oaks are from north America that's why I chose this forum, He is rather sure that it is a red oak, just not curtain of the exact type.
Could someone please explain why the bark would be so smooth on this tree compared to most of the other photos of the bark that I have seen on northern red oaks online, if that is what it is?
Thanks again,
Cause the bark is really down under.... ;D ;D
The bark changes with age; on northern red oak it is smooth when young.
Fastest growing trees tend to have smoother bark than slower growing ones of the same species.
BTW, everyone knows northern red oak, most often referred to as "red oak" by the northern living, frozen, glaciated types on this Forum.
In the deep South (US), shumard oak is one of the finest bottomland red oaks. This one is a State Champion for Georgia. 150' tall.
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/14370/IMG_0369.JPG)
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/14370/IMG_0370.JPG)
Looks like a lightning rod to me. :-\
This was the prior state champion. It was a lightning rod.
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/14370/Newshumard2.jpg)
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/14370/oldshumard1.jpg)
It happens all too often to our tallest and nicest trees.
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/20011/2410/Image0042.jpg)
Two 36"+ Cherrybark Oaks nailed by the same lightning strike, or at least during the same storm.
Those cherrybarks are very nice. Cherrybark and shumard are the two best bottomland red oaks.
I'm not so frozen that I can't feel envy; those are some impressive oaks.
"Beware the oak, it draws the stroke".
once again i thought you guys were talking about me :D :D i have never been hit by lightning, my pith is off center and i'm getting some spungy spots usually associated with age 8)
sure looks like us northern red oaks tree to me :)
The tree in the op looks like the red oaks we had when I lived in central Texas that we called Spanish Oak. I don't know the true name for them. Same bark. Leaves may be a little different.
Quote from: WDH on February 12, 2015, 08:29:35 PM
Fastest growing trees tend to have smoother bark than slower growing ones of the same species.
BTW, everyone knows northern red oak, most often referred to as "red oak" by the northern living, frozen, glaciated types on this Forum.
In the deep South (US), shumard oak is one of the finest bottomland red oaks. This one is a State Champion for Georgia. 150' tall.
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/14370/IMG_0369.JPG)
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/14370/IMG_0370.JPG)
can it be cut or does it get to live because its a state champion
It is in a bottomland on a State Wildlife Management Area. It could be cut if that area gets harvested. Being the State Champion does not afford it any protection, although it would be a shame to cut it.
It is a shame. Another example of how something with communal value is transformed into value for only a few.
All things that live die. The biggest and most spectacular are generally closest to that fate.
New ones will grow.
Very true.
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/20011/3609/DSCN0481.JPG)
My Champion tree is dying. It's steadily dropping limbs and is about ¾+ gone. This picture was taken during a Chickin Crispin a couple of years ago.
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/20011/2410/20100403_Magic__007.jpg)
This one will become my Champion tree. It makes fishpharmer and I look like dwarfs.
QuoteIt makes fishpharmer and I look like dwarfs.
The pic of the texas size steak on the BBQ grill comes to mind....
That crispin was the one with the hot romance going on... had us all on edge. ;D
QuoteThat crispin was the one with the hot romance going on... had us all on edge. ;D
Yup, maybe I should have used a different picture. :-\
(https://forestryforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/20011/2410/20100403_Magic__025.jpg)
Here it was when the entire crown was still alive. This was taken early in the Spring of 2011, when it was just beginning to leaf out. :)
nevertheless, when whether something lives or dies is our choice, then it is our choice, and we shouldn't pretend that this is the same as when it isn't. also, it is very different when those making the choice have little concern for what others who care would choose.
I would rather see something useful come from such a tree before it turns into mulch. Just because a tree is big doesn't make it any more valuable a life than a small one. Death is the norm in the forest and all who live there reach that end whether by storm or disease or axe. Seems to me we should worry more about the overall forest health and productivity than the life of a single large tree, no matter how beautiful and rare the individual.
I didn't mean to come across as overly attached to an individual tree. I've never even met this one before. The point was that decisions are made all of the time about things that have value to people who are not involved in the decision making. Perhaps that's the way things are, doesn't mean that that's the way things should be.
If it became mulch it would also get turned into something (other than the mulch). it might get turned into several more young trees if its left standing (who knows, one of them might even become the next state champ), also, in becoming mulch it will have played a role in numerous processes that are part of a functioning forest.
Aren't dying trees (left in the forest to turn to mulch) important to "forest health," no matter how beautiful or rare the individual?
Thats all fine as long as it is on public land.
If it is my place then just back off. I will manage it as I see fit. I don't need somebody who has no resposibility to pay the taxes or get a return on his investment telling me how I should or should not operate. If you think you should never cut a tree and just want to go play in the woods buy your own woods. You will find they are not cheap and the work is hard if you want to make a living.