What Kind Of Tree Is This?

[Carl Russell]

Yep, that is black locust. I can see the distinct early/late wood in each growth ring, cherry is more diffuse porous. Also it looks like there are rays that are more distinct than black cherry. The shiny character to the end grain of black locust makes it different than the logs that biglug had.

Boy, but from the bark it really looks like cherry.

Thanks, Carl

[lancek]

I know there are a few trees around here that realy stump you We are the pecan world capital around here but if you dont look real careful you would swear its walnut!

[Traveling Woodsman]

If both of the pictures are of the same log, and there was compound leaves and thorns on the branches, then I would have to call it locust, even though I’ve never seen black locust with bark like that. Although, honey locust could possibly have bark like that. But if I couldn’t see the leaves and branches, I might suggest that the log is some kind of elm. I’ve seen certain elm logs mistaken for cherry, and elm lumber can closely resemble locust. Not seeing everything, I can’t say for sure, just throwing it out.

[lancek]

well the thorns are not long enough for hony locast and they would be more of them, and they would have been on the trunk of the tree and not just on the limbs I have a minister that will verify that this cutt is from the same log as far as it being elm give me a break the bark is totaly different ! Lancek

[lancek]

Heres some of the oak we have around here almost looks like cypress

[Traveling Woodsman]

@lancek 12474 wrote:

as far as it being elm give me a break the bark is totaly different ! Lancek

If there’s one thing I’m picking up from this thread, it’s that there can be great variation in a tree’s identifying factors, depending on it’s locality. I might suggest that elm is included.

[lancek]

Heres a picture of the bur oak around here they look almost like a cypress the goofy looking guy is my saw hand jake

[lancek]

well this is true, if you could link us a picture I would find that real interesting lancek

[Scott G]

Chocust… its a mutant. The bark looks like cherry to me, but as Carl said, wood structure does’nt lie (nor do the compound leaves and thorns if I had been paying attention).

Acacia psuedoprunus or Prunus psuedoacacia….. that is the question…

I’ll just mumble while I stumble back into my high elevation conifer thickets….:(

[lancek]

O come on scott Im sure you can find some weird trees up there in that beautiful country that you live in 😀

[Traveling Woodsman]

I’m not sure that I communicated clearly what I was thinking. I was not saying that I think the log is elm, or that it’s not locust. I would agree that it is locust, as Carl said the grain type is clear. My purpose in mentioning elm is to contribute to the discussion on tree and wood ID, and the different factors that are involved, like locality that is being discussed.

As far as a picture, I do not make it a habit to photograph bark of various tree species, so I do not have a picture. And since I am currently living in Wyoming, I can’t go take a picture. I am however moving back to Virginia in a little while and I may be able to get a picture. I have to say that it won’t be very high on my priority list, so I can’t guarantee that it will happen. If I happen to think of it when I run into one, I may try to do it. Sorry.

I found this discussion very interesting…..

[Gabe Ayers]

I will attach a picture of a black locust in the Appalachians.

This is a specialty product species for us and we harvest them as individuals like every other species, looking for the worst ones first and there are indicators of low performance just like all other species.

We are looking forward to having the Traveling Woodsmen back in the Appalachians.

[Joshua Kingsley]

Jason,
That tree looks like what I was tought was honey locoust.

I worked for a local saw mill for over a year and then moved on to a tree service for 3 years. I will agree that trees in diffrent areas will have diffrent bark formations. Trees at higher elevations in this state look diffrent to some people than the same tree at a lower elevation might. I would love to be sure what trees were at first look and perhapse a class in denderology and tree Id should be in the future for me…
Joshua

[Carl Russell]

I agree with Josh. The first thing I saw was the corky bark, which is more like Honey Locust, but not being there puts me at a disadvantage, and more apt to take the word of the one skidding it out of the woods.

However regional common names can certainly confuse the situation. According to Donald Culross Peattie in A Natural History of Trees of Eastern and Central North America,

Sweet Locust, Gliditsia triacanthos can also be known as Thorny, Honey, or Black Locust. ….Bark is iron gray, thick, and divided by deep fissure into long narrow longitudinal ridges roughened with tough scales; somtimes very thorny. … Wood is very durable, very hard, medium heavy, with red or bright red-brown heartwood having a thick yellow ring of sapwood around it…..True that Honey Locust is the name given it almost throughout our horticultural, botanical, and forestry literature, but as country people usually apply “Honey Locust” to Robinia Psuedo-Acacia (Commonly known as black locust) because of its showy as well as fragrant flowers, both trees lay nearly equal claim to this as a name.

He also says Black Locust Robinia Pseudo-Acacia is also called Yellow, White, Red, Green, Post, or Honey Locust. …Bark is very thick and dark-brown or tinged with red, furrowed and sometimes cross-checked. …Wood is medium-heavy, very hard, very strong and stiff, the heartwood brown, the sapwood paler and very thin. …..But country people today, almost everywhere in the northern states, call this tree Honey Locust because of the sweet breath of the blossoms. Yet the botanical and horticultural works all try to confine the name Honey Locust to G. triacanthos. This confusion, which has persisted a century or so and promises to continue, is best circumvented here by designating our tree as the Black Locust, a name in good standing with the foresters.

This however does not speak to the variation of the bark on the tree that LanceK posted. This has definitle got me thinking.
Carl

[lancek]

Carl I agree with your assesment that tree names have differant meaning in differant parts of the nation, the tree that we are refering too is a sweet locost but the folks in this area will reffer to them as black locost!
The tree that jason posted looks to be yellow locost to me and could be easly mistaken for walnut if you couldnt see the green heart wood,and didnt look at the leaves I have seen seasond log buyers do this often if they are hurrying through the woods!
And to the traveling woodsman Iwas only inplying that a picture of this type of bark would be very interesting to see thats what makes this site great is folks cane bring up stuff like this and share with everybody there interesting situations that come along
And one more thing carll maybe we are on a new spiceys here and scott just named it, it could very well be a cross between a cherry and a locost or as scott put a chocust :D:D:D

[Author]

Posts