Worcestershire Record No. 17 November 2004 p. 61

A correction to the article in Worcestershire Record No.16 page 18, April 2004.

Brian Stephens

In the paragraph estimating the age of the tree, the diameter of the trunk was used to calculate the age. This was wrong. The radius should have been used. Half the diameter divided by estimates of the growth rate gives estimates of age.

Thus:

diameter of trunk = 5ft 4in. (1.62 m), Radius of trunk = 2ft 8in. (0.812 m)

Dividing the radius by an estimated growth rate of 0,07in. (1.7mm) per year = 457 years, and an origin of about 1547 AD.

Using a growth rate of 0.124 in. (3.14mm) per year = 258 years, giving an origin of about 1746 AD. This lower estimate of age seems more plausible.