Recent Articles from BRMC Newsletters

Trail Talk

After the big snowstorms this winter and a few stretches of heavy rain that followed, each time I went into the woods I expected to see trees down all over the place. But while there were a couple big ones that fell, as well as a few branches as big around as your wrist, overall, I was surprised how little had fallen.

Someone ought to study this, I thought. I mean really study it scientifically, not in the anecdotal manner in which I've considered it in the past. I wondered what that would take if I had the time and the equipment and the knowledge. And I'd be proud to announce that I had undertaken such an effort, but alas, I do not have the aforementioned time, equipment, or knowledge.

So I did the next best thing. I searched the Internet. Fortunately, someone else has already done such a study, and though its conclusions are still being written, much of the methodology and data are available. It was conducted by Wolf Read, a science fiction writer and artist who lives in Oregon. Due to his location, he considers several tree species that don't apply to the Virginia Piedmont, but I'd suspect much of it applies nonetheless. The study is available at: http://www.sff.net/people/windrummer/ReadWebSite/NewWindTreeStudy.html.

The thesis of the study is that "unhealthy trees are more likely to suffer damage in high winds." The author also considers the relation of several other factors to wind damage, including tree species and the time of year. Read first did an extensive survey of a 5-acre plot, noting tree species and which trees appeared healthy. He then set up an anemometer to record wind speed. He paid special attention to "large wind events," recording them as they happened. He checked the plot for damage after every "wind event" that included gusts of 19 miles per hour or more.

One interesting assertion in the study is that trees are active during the spring and summer and more likely to shed their "accumulate[d] weakened material" in late season. Anecdotally, I'd agree, but I can't give a good reason why tree damage in the winter, when logic indicates trees would be at their most brittle, seems to be less frequent than in the fall. Read also notes several instances of obviously dead or damaged branches not falling in a decent sized wind, but toppling a month later in a lesser storm. I've noticed that too: maybe you can predict which branches are coming down, but not when exactly they will do so.

Anyway, look up the study if you're interested. Surely I'm not the only person -- besides Read, of course -- who thinks about this often. OK, maybe I am. But you might enjoy it anyway.