1392RE: [TalkAntietam] Re: Interrogating a witness tree
- Jun 30, 2004Tim and Brian,
It is a witness tree as it has been in (a tree witness protection program,
haha, could not resist)a historic tree program (I can't recall the proper
name right off the bat, but I was working for the Civil War Trust at the
time.)that they have made seedlings from. Some years back I was involved in
a promotional picture with Tom Clemens and Tom Lively as Union and
Confederate soldiers planting a new "cloned" tree for this historical tree
prgram that also featured treelings from other historic sites, civil war and
earlier eras. I have a flier from that program buried in my files somewhere.
From: tjrhys62 [mailto:tjreesecg@...]
Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2004 3:25 PM
Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: Interrogating a witness tree
I think you have a winner. Next time I'm over there (15 minutes
away) I'll take a closer look.
--- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Morris"
> Here's a better and closer picture of the tree. This is a sectioncut out of
> one of the pictures I took of the bridge (I take high resolutionpictures
> and then resize them down later) in April.the other
> As you can see, the tree looks much older than it does in any of
> pictures. I'm tending to think this one could very well be awitness tree
> now that I'm looking at these pictures I took with the tree inthem.
> > Hi Brian,
> > Looks like the Burnside's Bridge sycamore may very well be a
> > tree, judging by specs found atlocale.
> > http://www.2020site.org/trees/sycamore.html Have a look.
> > However, documenting such things seems impossible aside from
> > The tree depicted in the postwar (Forbes?) engraving, compared toreal
> > current size and breadth, strongly suggests a logical growth
> > progession.
> > Suffice it to say that odds are more in favor of it being the
> > thing. If it could only talk... despite recent injury.trees to
> > Tim
> > --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Morris"
> > <ironbrigade@k...> wrote:
> > > Found this website recently that purports to show witness
> > certainBaltimore
> > > Civil War battles. Some I know are correct such as the
> > St.Sycamore
> > > Sycamores and Locust tree in the Cemetery in Gettysburg but the
> > website also
> > > makes claims about the White Oaks at the Copse of Trees which I
> > know are not
> > > old enough to be witness trees.
> > > http://www.bivouacbooks.com/bbv2i1s4.htm
> > >
> > > For the Antietam Battlefirld they show a picture of the
> > that sitsbig
> > > alongside the Burnside Bridge and then show a picture taken
> > shortly after
> > > the battle that shows a tree in that same area. OK, I'm not a
> > treewas
> > > expert here but I've stood next to that tree by the Burnside
> > Bridge and it
> > > does not strike me as a 140+ year old tree. Just because there
> > a tree in2004
> > > that general location in 1862 doesn't make the one there in
> > the veryarea
> > > same tree.
> > >
> > > Is that tree next to the bridge a witness tree or do we have
> > someone jumping
> > > to conclusions here based off of two trees being in a similar
> > 140 yearsYahoo! Groups Links
> > > apart?
> > >
> > > Brian
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>