The Wild Trees by Richard Preston

[Tom Richards]

Ive read both books and think there both class iam not really a reader but stormed through both books,went out to see the red woods for our honeymoon a couple of years ago and it makes you realize that you need some serious knakers to carryout some of the stuff both these authors write about. Am now looking forward to reading some more of jerry beraneks stuff hes a really passionate arborist.

[mdvaden]

One redwood mentioned in the book was El Viejo del Norte. Since the forum does some image resize, it may be hard to show. But here's a couple of pics of a zoom photo to the upper two thirds or so of the canopy. With the mist in that forest, its not often that this old branch structure is visible from the ground. The size of the woody stuff shown here is huge. Over a meter thick limbs: or closed-over stubs if you want to call them that. The longer one to the left with the fern mat probably is 7, 8 or 9 meters out there. This tree is about as gnarly as they come.

 

I split the photo because the forum shrinks vertical shots a lot. And these two horizontal halves are the only way to stack the view. If it helps you understand what's here, the right side of these images is over the center of the main trunk. There is a small vertical slit of blue sky. That indicates where the huge reiterated extra stem is on this redwood, growing upward next to the main trunk. And all the broken, fused, twisted and grown-over formations on the left are on that extra giant stem. The researchers must have chuckled when they crown mapped this thing.

Edited February 14, 2011 by mdvaden

[mrtree]

The book is over rated in my opinion. So what that somebody has climbed the tallest trees, what about the others that have come before? WHat about the amazing discovery in the tree tops. Sillett's research is essentially ignored and not much is made of the very important work of Marie Antoine, let alone all the other great discoveries in the tree tops. I look upon the science as the important thing, the climbing is a tool in my opinion.

 

Who has read books by Donald Perry, Meg Lowman, Nalini Nadkarni or Mark Moffet? These are people who pioneered canopy research and literally showed Steve Sillett the way.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

The book is over rated in my opinion. So what that somebody has climbed the tallest trees, what about the others that have come before? WHat about the amazing discovery in the tree tops. Sillett's research is essentially ignored and not much is made of the very important work of Marie Antoine, let alone all the other great discoveries in the tree tops. I look upon the science as the important thing, the climbing is a tool in my opinion.

 

Who has read books by Donald Perry, Meg Lowman, Nalini Nadkarni or Mark Moffet? These are people who pioneered canopy research and literally showed Steve Sillett the way.

 

Whatever we do in life it will always be followed, and be compared to those who inspired it. The fact remains that the book was about steve sillett, and HIS life.

 

He is a legend in the scientific minded arb community, and who are you to judge the man any ways? how can it be over rated? it was a BIG seller, and that is as honest a rating as you can get.

 

I am interested to know however if these others you mention have books to be read, antything along the same vein will be a worthy read:001_cool:

[mrtree]

Look up any of the names I mention and you will find books and/or scientific articles. If you do some research you might even find who sat on Sillett's masters degree committee. A book entitled Forest Canopies (first and second editions) is an excellent place to start a scientific overview of the subject. The authors I mention each have very interesting generalist books written.

 

Is Sillett truely a legend in the scientific minded arboriculture community? Legend I think applies to only a few. I think he has done a little work related in someways to arboriculture but not much. His main research has recently focused on the structure of redwood canopies and recently the extent of trunk decay and hollows. He has published on reiteration growth and bryophytes in various canopies. I very much doubt more than a handful of arborists have read his papers which is a shame. Most arborists are in awe of his climbing and have not read his papers I would bet.

[mdvaden]

Look up any of the names I mention and you will find books and/or scientific articles. If you do some research you might even find who sat on Sillett's masters degree committee. A book entitled Forest Canopies (first and second editions) is an excellent place to start a scientific overview of the subject. The authors I mention each have very interesting generalist books written.

 

Is Sillett truely a legend in the scientific minded arboriculture community? Legend I think applies to only a few. I think he has done a little work related in someways to arboriculture but not much. His main research has recently focused on the structure of redwood canopies and recently the extent of trunk decay and hollows. He has published on reiteration growth and bryophytes in various canopies. I very much doubt more than a handful of arborists have read his papers which is a shame. Most arborists are in awe of his climbing and have not read his papers I would bet.

 

There are not many arborists who read articles comparable to content that would be in the American Journal of Botany. And the ISA bookstore isn't going to list that kind of writing either.

 

The work that Sillett is involved with has infiltrated public knowledge and awareness though. All these National Geographic specials on TV, the magazine article, and lectures have slowly but surely made people more aware of some basics.

 

And they work as a team. For example, Dawson works along with Sillett. And Dawson's work was briefly explained on National Geographic Explorer, how they are researching to understand where the redwoods get water, and that they can determine whether certain water was from the ground, or fog and rain. Its a small view into their work, but at least what they do is becoming known in bits and pieces.

 

Their networking is not widely known. But Sillett lists a few collaborators on the university website for his department. One man from Japan whom they nickname "Rocky" (Hiroaki) comes over to climb with them and gather samples for his own research. Or Koch from an Arizona University.

 

So I tend to view their work as a team effort behind the scenes, and not so much solo efforts.

 

As far as "The Wild Trees" goes though ...

 

It's a classic. It's in no way a research book. It's a story narrative told in a way I describe like an author telling the story around a campfire. The cover does say "story" on it, not biography. The Author's Note mentions that Preston is trying to reveal people and realms based on interviews. Although he may have stretched a few parts, considering the number of events and facts covered in the pages, I think he did a pretty good job writing.

Edited February 15, 2011 by mdvaden