I noticed they handled the monrachs wings quite a bit, made me a bit nervous. I was also nervous watching the team walking while monarchs were mating on the forest floor. Then I wondered how many monarchs were hit by the truck windshield. I'm such the worrier! It was beautiful seeing thousands and thousands of monarchs. I wondered if any of them were from our gardens.

Robert: The narrow strip on unlogged trees along Redwood creek was left to provide access to what were then thought to be the tallest trees in the world. A big section of logged over land surrounding the "worm" was added to the park with the park expansion bill. I was one of two lobbyists for the Sierra club working to make sure our Senators and Congressmen had the right information and would support the bill. It is a shame that that land, and even more, was not included in the original park, which really did not preserve that much additional old growth redwood forest. By this time much of the Bull creek watershed has recovered somewhat--the cutting there was done close to 60 years ago. As for the incorrect measurement of the "Mother of the Forest Tree": As a percent of the total height, the amount of error is not that uncommon. The most frequent error, is what I noted in my discussion above--the top of the tree, or a point sighted as the top, was closer to the observer than a point directly above the base of the tree. So, when the angle for computing the height was read, the clinometer gave an angle steeper than the true angle would be. The problem occurs because the measurement to the base of the tree was made separately from the measurement of the angle. For these calculations, whether for the ENTS method, or the previous method, a right triangle is assumed, but unless the top sighted is directly over the base, no right triangle actually exists for the calculations, leading to distorted results. The ENTS method assumes TWO right triangles, and measures two distances and two angles, and then combines. So whether the tree leans, or whether the top is directly over the base, is not an issue. But this method, using the convenience of the laser rangefinder, is, after all, much easier and faster. The difficulty is finding a good window to the top, and judging what the true top is, especially when sightlines are difficult and the crown of the tree is broad and/or complex. When no good window can be found--if the tree is very special--it will be climbed, and a tape dropped. Now this is really difficult and takes both climbing AND measuring expertise. And one or two additional people. With the ENTS "sine top, sine base," the angle and the height are measured on the same sight line. The assumed right triangle always--and of necessity--always exists for the calculations. If an error occurs, it is usually to underestimate the height. This would happen when something other than the true top is sighted. The ENTS method will give a true height of whatever twig is sighted, whether the top or not. Note that Will Blozan, when he measured the tree, moved 600 feet away to ensure that from his angle--from far away--he could sight the true top. And, because the distance and angle are measured along the same line and from the same point, the issue of whether the top is perfectly over the base is not an issue. The base is measured the same way as the top, and the height added or subtracted, as the case may be. What may have happened with the "Mother" tree, is either someone did not have enough patience to try to find a visual "window" for sighting the true top of the tree.--so if he stood too close to the tree, allowing him to sight some twig that was more to the side of the crown towards himself rather than at the absolute top, and that twig were a relatively small distance closer to the observer than the base of the tree, whether it were the true top or not, a large overestimation of the height could occur. Or, if the true top was sighted, but that top were closer to the observer than a point directly over the base, that would lead to the same kind of error. Of course, errors could occur in measuring the distance to the trunk, even it the top were directly over the base. Of course, people using the ENTS method can make errors, but any error will not occur simply because it is built into the methodology, as has been the case with the method commonly applied previously. Want to have some fun: get some equipment and start measuring. The now discontinued Nikon 440 rangefinder is perhaps the most preferred rangefinder because it has a narrow laser beam that can pass through narrow openings without giving a false echo from surrounding clutter. Used ones usually available on e-bay, often for between $100 and $150. I also use a basic Suunto clinometer and $13 scientific calculator. If I can sight the top and the base without too much searching, I can get readings, punch in the numbers and get a tree height in maybe as little as two minutes. --Spruce

I love the pics on the PVC pipe with 10 feeding ports. It seems pretty obvious that the video with tons of birds is probably during the southward migration. I kept waiting for a male to poke his head up, but never saw one. I had around 75 birds at my previous location on 7 feeders in a ten foot area; all females during the last couple of weeks. I may have only had about 6 birds sometimes during the day on the 20 feeders that were put up. Had lots more in the evenings and when it rained. The birds weren't nesting during this time and spent most of the day on the feeders. The mature males all left a couple of weeks before the females and of course some of those females could have been summer hatched males. I do not get as many birds up in southern AR as I did in s. MS during the southward migration, but I think I am getting a few more during the summer. I sure don't think feeding hummers nectar is anything like feeding bears in Yellowstone cookies, BUT I am sure there are plenty of people that think so. Gosh, I sure miss all the bears.......

So according to the National Weather Service it is currently 41F at Haller Lake (and 39F in Edmonds, in a part of town near the water). What I would expect is that there might be cold air sitting over the lake and shoreline during an arctic period, but that properties any distance above the level of the depression the lake sits in would not be much different from surrounding areas. Some ponds and small lakes in this area that are roundish in shape and sit in holes are the result of blocks of ice that broke off of the retreating Vashon glaciation and melted into the ground. This post was edited by bboy on Thu, Dec 12, 13 at 17:44