Open main menu

Not all designated "Lone Pine"s are Pinus brutia. How much does it matter? What do we want to do about it?Edit

Lake Rowan War Memorial Lone PineEdit

Copied from User talk:Mattinbgn#Lake Rowan War Memorial Lone Pine

Howdy! I've been looking at the Category:Lone Pine (tree) and the article en:Lone Pine (tree). Despite File:Lake Rowan War Memorial Lone Pine 001.JPG having a plaque that says it's a lone pine, to me it doesn't look anything like all of the other lone pines. What do you think? Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:42, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi. I am happy to be guided by you. I know very little of botany and was purely relying on the plaque. Having said that, I do think trees that claim to be "lone pines" need categorisation ins one sense, even if a botanist would rule them out. Also, I am aware of the potential for offense that may be caused when denying a claim to having a lone pine. A visitor to Finley in the Riverina accused the local council and the RSL sub-branch of deceitfully claiming the following as a lone pine - File:Finley Memorial Park Lone Pine.JPG and File:Finley Memorial Park Lone Pine Plaque.JPG. Needless to say it did not go down too well with locals. In my opinion, we should be careful and very sure of our facts before dismissing any claim of "lone pine" status. Cheers, Mattinbgn (talk) 23:14, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
LOL! If I were in a position to guide you, I'd be making stronger statements and/or asking stronger questions than "What do you think?" I agree with your summary. (However, the Finley tree at least looks like the right species.) Not only does the Lake Rowan tree not look like the right species, but the photo caption says it's a Juniperus chinensis 'Torulosa' tree, which is not the same species as the Lone Pine. I see the species caption was added by User:MPF in December 2012 - i.e. no-one seems to have complained in the last four years and it doesn't appear on any page that claims it's a Lone Pine. As you imply, perhaps the best solution is to "let sleeping dogs lie". Thanks for your reply. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 02:27, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
Nah, I dont lie (that often) - there is one at File:SunsetAnzacEveBlackboyHill2010.jpg - that is claimed to be from a pine nut/seed from Lone Pine in Blackboy Hill - Greenmount, Western Australia - hope that muddies things for you folks JarrahTree (talk) 08:02, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
@Pdfpdf: @Mattinbgn: @JarrahTree: Coming at this from a botanical standpoint, I guess the question 'What constitutes a "lone pine"?' needs to be raised. In a strict sense, it should only be allocated to seedlings (1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc. generation) of the original tree on the battlefield at Gallipoli. If so, then it has to be a Turkish Pine Pinus brutia - and many of the trees currently in the category are not that. Some are outrageous errors; as mentioned, File:Lake Rowan War Memorial Lone Pine 001.JPG is a Chinese Juniper Juniperus chinensis, while File:Finley Memorial Park Lone Pine.JPG is an Arizona Cypress Cupressus glabra. Several others are pines, but not Turkish Pine (e.g. File:Balranald Anzac Park Lone Pine 001.JPG is an Aleppo Pine Pinus halepensis, and File:Lone Pine cemetery May 2002.jpg is a Stone Pine Pinus pinea). Yes, I can see that some might be offended to be told that their treasured tree is not genuine, but I think one has to face up to facts - these are not descended in any way from seeds brought back by returning soldiers, and their owners have been defrauded by whoever gave / sold them their trees (as an aside here, I'd not accuse the Finley council or RSL sub-branch of deceit - far more likely victims of fraud, than perpetrators). Perhaps a subcategory 'Misidentified Lone Pines' could be started to include the trees that were planted as labelled lone pines, but which have proven to be something different? - MPF (talk) 19:01, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
@Pdfpdf: @Mattinbgn: @JarrahTree: @MPF: Mattinbgn: Thanks for indulging me. As the conversation now has a broader audience, now is probably a good time to move it to Category talk:Lone Pine (tree), so I have done so. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:33, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
@MPF: - so does the Blackboy Hill one look like the right stuff then? I used to have innumerable arguments with friends and rellies about a monterey cyprus that grew in front of the family home in the Perth Hills many years ago, so am reluctant to make any claims for the Blackboy Hill one - the ground it is grown in is so crappy bauxitish clay I am astonished it go to the size it did JarrahTree (talk) 11:45, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
@JarrahTree: It's a Pinus halepensis - slender shoots, short, slender needles, cones angled down the stems. So can't be a descendant of any of the original Lone Pines, unfortunately. Looking through the category, the ones that are definite genuine Pinus brutia are File:Lone Pine tree at entrance to Oatley Park.JPG and File:Lone Pine Wattle Park.jpg; there's one or two others where the pic resolution not quite good enough to be certain between P. brutia and P. halepensis, but most of the rest are P. halepensis. - MPF (talk) 10:24, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

How much does it matter?Edit

I think the above demonstrates that it matters "enough" to do "something" about it. Pdfpdf (talk) 11:33, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

What do we want to do about it?Edit

I think the above demonstrates that whatever we do about it, the Course Of Action (COA) needs to be chosen with care and diplomacy!

Before I start suggesting Courses Of Action (CsOA), I need more information. (Comments: I'm not a botanist. It looks like MPF probably is a botanist.)

  • It seems there is no dispute that the "Lone Pine" was a Pinus brutia. (Or am I missing something?)
  • Yes, correct - MPF (talk) 00:30, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
  • en:Lone_Pine_(tree) says: The resultant seedlings were found to be Turkish pines, sometimes regarded as a subspecies of Pinus halepensis (Aleppo pine), but usually classified as a distinct species, Pinus brutia.
    [Spencer, R.D. (1995) Horticultural Flora of South-eastern Australia 1: 248-249 (University of NSW Press)] (It's a shame I can't read what Spencer actually did say ... )
  • @MPF: Is Pinus brutia a sub-species of Pinus halepensis, or are they distinct species?
    (One of the reasons for my question is the content of the plaque by the AWM Lone Pine - If the AWM "Lone Pine" isn't a "real" Lone Pine, I think the best COA is to take the can of worms I've opened, and bury it in a very deep hole ... )

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:33, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

  • @Pdfpdf: It has sometimes been considered a subspecies (as Pinus halepensis subsp. brutia), but is not usually now. The effect if this is that specimens of Pinus halepensis (including the AWM tree) have been planted under the erroneous impression that they were exactly the same as Pinus brutia (which they are not, of course). Hope this helps! - MPF (talk) 00:30, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
  • @MPF: Hmmm. And then again, there is another (group of) scenario(s): A tree may actually be a Pinus brutia, but the person/people writing about it either thought that Pinus brutia and Pinus halepensis were the same thing, or didn't know that there was a difference, or didn't know about brutia and thought the "correct" name was halepensis, or some other similar scenario.
So I'll ask you a different question: Are you able to classify the AWM tree, and if so, into which species do you classify it? Pdfpdf (talk) 11:12, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
From the tone/content of your responses-to-date, it appears you may feel that the AWM tree is not a brutia. If so, I find it hard to understand that the AWM would get it wrong, and also, how/why they would not know they've got it wrong ... Your thoughts? Pdfpdf (talk) 11:12, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
It is Pinus halepensis on foliage & cones, just enough detail visible in the pic. But looking at the accompanying plaque, it is (as well as being correctly identified) of different origin to the Pinus brutia Lone Pines (grown from cones from a single standing tree on the battlefield), being from a cone "on one of the branches used by the Turks as overhead cover for their trenches" - obviously, the Turks had gathered their trench cover foliage from P. halepensis cultivated nearby*. I have to confess I'd not read this plaque before, which opens up another angle: it is therefore a tree which has genuine WWI commemorative connections (so not an accidental error nor deliberate fraud), but is also not quite the same origin as the 'Lone Pine' of the standing battlefield tree. It is quite plausible that this tree is the source for many of the 2nd/3rd generation younger P. halepensis trees planted as Lone Pines.
*My experience in Turkey is that P. brutia is a common native tree growing wild, while P. halepensis is frequently planted in towns and villages - but you don't see P. halepensis out wild in the countryside. - MPF (talk) 12:26, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
P.S. I do have other questions, but they hinge on the answer to: Is Pinus brutia a sub-species of Pinus halepensis, or are they distinct species? Pdfpdf (talk) 11:33, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
Fire away! - MPF (talk) 00:30, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
First question: Rather than explicitly stating: "It ain't a Lone Pine" by putting it into a category that implies "somebody is an idiot", classify each tree into "category:Lone Pine - species". This has the political advantage that it does not explicitly deny that the tree is a "Lone Pine", but makes it implicitly obvious that if they aren't brutia, that they aren't "real" Lone Pines. Your thoughts? Pdfpdf (talk) 11:12, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
Interesting idea, but it would create a difficulty for categorising the pics which are not detailed enough for definitive ID. - MPF (talk) 12:26, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
Smoke and mirrors needed - many sites in Australia think they have a tree that has come from the seed of the pine at Gallipoli - their tree has the smell of the pine there - this is like many post first world war myths that have taken books after books to play with the 'facts' - the old soldiers wanted something to heal the hurt of the war - there were many things they didnt let the facts get in the way JarrahTree (talk) 11:38, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
Also - from my time in Istanbul (specially the large hillside cemetery) and one of the nearby islands, and the similarities with a range of similar looking trees to Australian native species ), the specific species ID thing I think can be a trap - to be too particular about the detail can miss the message... I suspect that where trees are not related or not what they say they are - that not too much needs to be made about the fact JarrahTree (talk) 13:22, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
Just to clarify, I have interviewed persons who were refugees from Netherlands East Indies in the second world war, and their memories are offended if you contradict them - as I did with aerial RAF photographs from where they escaped (that wasnt like that) - one thing to be 'encyclopediac smartie pants', another to be sensitive to survivors of war time trauma - the only concession is that there are so few diggers left, we are simply mucking around with variant textual sources rather than survivors feelings ... JarrahTree (talk) 13:21, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
any reason the West Australian isnt in the chart yet? JarrahTree (talk) 13:03, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Accidental oversight? Do please add it and any others! - MPF (talk) 13:10, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
From my perspective: I have no info to add. (Or at least, I haven't identified any. Yet.) Pdfpdf (talk) 13:20, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

List of trees in the categoryEdit



File Plaque? City/
State Species
File:Aussie Memorial at Lone Pine.jpg w:Lone Pine Cemetery Turkey Stone Pine Pinus pinea
File:Balranald Anzac Park Lone Pine 001.JPG Yes w:Balranald NSW Aleppo Pine Pinus halepensis
File:Coolah McMaster Park Lone Pine Tree.JPG Yes [1] w:Coolah NSW Aleppo Pine Pinus halepensis
File:Cootamundra War Memorial Lone Pine & Bench.JPG w:Cootamundra NSW Aleppo Pine Pinus halepensis
File:Crookwell Lone Pine 001.JPG Yes [1] w:Crookwell NSW Aleppo Pine Pinus halepensis
File:Finley Memorial Park Lone Pine.JPG Yes [1] w:Finley, NSW NSW Arizona Cypress Cupressus glabra [2]
File:Lake Rowan War Memorial Lone Pine 001.JPG Yes [1] w:Lake Rowan Vic Chinese Juniper Juniperus chinensis 'Torulosa' [2]
File:Lone Pine ADFA.JPG Yes [3] w:ADFA ACT Aleppo Pine Pinus halepensis
File:Lone Pine at the AWM.jpg Yes [4] w:AWM ACT Aleppo Pine Pinus halepensis
File:Lone Pine cemetery May 2002.jpg w:Lone Pine Cemetery Turkey Stone Pine Pinus pinea
File:Lone Pine leaves 1.jpg
File:Lone Pine leaves 2.jpg
File:Lone Pine leaves and two young cones.jpg
File:Lone Pine leaves.jpg
Yes [4] w:Wagga Wagga NSW Aleppo Pine Pinus halepensis
File:Lone Pine tree at entrance to Oatley Park.JPG Yes (in theory) [3] w:Oatley Park Sydney Turkish Pine Pinus brutia
File:Lone Pine Wattle Park.jpg w:Wattle Park Melbourne Turkish Pine Pinus brutia
File:Lowther War Memorial Lone Pine 001.JPG Lowther NSW Rosemary Rosmarinus officinalis [5]
File:Lowther War Memorial Lone Pine 002.JPG Lowther NSW Aleppo Pine Pinus halepensis
File:Manangatang Lone Pine and Flagpoles.JPG
File:Manangatang Memorial Park.JPG
Yes [4] w:Manangatang Vic Aleppo Pine Pinus halepensis
File:Marungi Lone Pine 001.JPG
File:Marungi Lone Pine 002.JPG
Yes [4] w:Marungi Vic Aleppo Pine Pinus halepensis
File:MundubberaLonePine.JPG w:Mundubbera Qld Aleppo Pine Pinus halepensis
Yes [1] w:Adelaide SA Aleppo Pine Pinus halepensis
File:Rugby Lone Pine 001.JPG w:Rugby, NSW NSW probably Pinus brutia
File:SunsetAnzacEveBlackboyHill2010.jpg Yes[3] w:Blackboy Hill, WA WA Aleppo Pine Pinus halepensis
File:Walla Walla Lone Pine.JPG w:Walla Walla, NSW NSW Seedling, not definitely identifiable yet


  1. a b c d e Plaque (and photo) exists, but plaque doesn't say anything particularly useful ...
  2. a b Not one of the expected "Lone Pine" species.
  3. a b c No photo of the plaque on Commons (yet).
  4. a b c d The text on the plaque states that it is an Aleppo Pine Pinus halepensis.
  5. Probably not intended to be a lone pine.

Next topic ...Edit

Return to "Lone Pine (tree)" page.