Search results for query: *

I reckon I've done it enough to say that...“ yeah, on a 100’ tree I can be within 5’ ". Almost all the time, but not every time in my career. Moreso the last 20 years over the first 20 :).

Well, I had to go pull my copy off the shelf and leaf through...sure enough, right there. I am sure I'd read it in the past, but that method didn't take for me :). Gunning sticks I'm down with, but that's still sighting rather than actual measuring. Never needed to use that method either, but...

That's going at it pretty precisely. I've never heard of anyone doing it that way...not to say it hasn't been. Not a method that would work very easily in uneven and/or steep terrain covered in trees and brush, like where I worked :D.

Much further is better. Especially for trees that are not real tall...like 200 feet tall.

Both good points, Sean. Here's a good discussion of that issue there... Parallax problems | The Tree House (masterblasterhome.com)

I'll be interested to hear what Gerry has to say. In my experience, odd grain can produce results that vary some from what would be expected. But usually not by a great deal. Once in a rare while, it can be more pronounced. But the fact of the matter is, there are so many variables in play...