When I first started learning to identify trees, I figured an oak is an oak, and I wasn’t that interested in distinguishing among the different species.
I concentrated on learning other kinds of trees, and there was plenty to occupy my attention. But as my observation skills improved, I began to realize that the differences among oak species were larger than I had thought. (See the article Identifying Oaks and Maples.)
Rounded lobes versus pointed lobes, corresponding also to the shape of the buds. Rough bark versus flaky bark. And it wasn’t that hard to remember, since one of my climbing trees as a child was a big white oak next to my house, and I vividly recalled the bark flaking under my hands as I gripped the branches on the way up or down.
Even the acorns of different species vary, some with larger or smaller caps, others with longer or rounder bodies. When I began to study primitive skills, I discovered that acorns can be processed and ground into flour, but some species—particularly chestnut oak—have sweeter and more edible acorns than others. When you begin to make practical use of plants, identification is more than an academic exercise.
Soon I started tapping maple trees, and identification in winter became critical. Maples are subtle, and it took me a while to learn the nubbly texture of sugar maple bark and the patches of whitish lichen it usually wears.
The maples of my childhood were red maples, a youngish one with that weird powdery texture and a big, five-trunked beauty with flaky bark—but the flakes were less scratchy under my hands than those of the white oak. These memories helped the distinctions sink into my learning mind.
Maybe you have or had climbing trees to nudge your memory too.
