A Field Guide to Eastern Trees (Peterson Field Guides)

The text itself is very detailed, but the "how to use this book" chapter doesn't show pictures to describe what is meant by the specific terms it uses. So even though I know quite a bit about trees, I found myself having to go back to botany books to look up 'bundled leaf scar' [and other terms] so I could try to determine from text only the difference between one specific tree from a similar one, only one of which is poisonous to my horses.

As a result, I am confused, and we have to wait until the tree completely leafs out in a month or two before we can make the determination whether to cut it down or not.

Additionally, only a fraction of the trees it contains has habitat or range maps, so I can't even tell whether I need to be concerned about a specific tree being native in my area. And in one case, the Osage Orange which grows like weeds here and has for at least a hundred years, shows a range limited to TX and S.W. AR ... 300 miles away. I've seen better tree-ident books in the book stores when I needed to look up one specific item. I wish I could remember the names of them.

On the plus side, the text descriptions are very detailed, and contain lots of interesting tidbits that you wouldn't find elsewhere. I'd suggest that you use other books unless you're actually a forest ranger or a PhD in trees.


A good guide to a difficult subject   April 15, 2000
Shawn Moses (Baltimore, MD)
67 out of 69 found this review helpful

Peterson's has about the best pocket-sized tree guide out there (I much prefer it to the Audubon guide, which I also own), but I won't kid with you - identifying trees is hard. It takes time, patience, and a keen eye. Just looking at leaves is usually not enough to make a positive identification. Depending on the species and the time of year, you may also have to examine bark, the twigs, flowers, buds, or fruits. The best part of the Peterson guide is that it has summer and winter keys in the back - don't ignore them just because the keys have no pictures! They are invaluable. Without them, you might find yourself lost among the many pages of illustrations. Perhaps the best resource to supplement this guide would be contact with an expert on the flora of your area - perhaps a naturalist at a local park or a forestry professor at a nearby university.


Not the flashiest, but the clearest   June 22, 1999
33 out of 36 found this review helpful

I use other field guides for browsing, but this is the guide I use when I go out into the field and I really want to identify things. It uses a very clear key to subdivide trees into specific groups (like needleleaf/broadleaf or opposit-leaved/alternate-leaved), narrowing down the choices and making identification much easier. The drawings are very clear, and as a bonus, you get a tiny map for each species identifying its exact geographical range. Highly recommended.


alot of information for the size and cost   December 31, 1998
mhiner@juno.com (USA)
18 out of 18 found this review helpful

Eastern Trees is very concise. It contains alot of photographs and drawings. It truly is a field guide not an encyclopedia. Although, there were times when I desired more information to identify trees first hand, I can't imagine how it could be fit into this pocket size volume. The only complaint I would have would be the photograph size since, they are about 2x3 inches they don't always show enough for identifying purposes. However, the book would have to be much bigger if the photographs were larger, size and cost would definitely increase.


Good book but difficult to reference in the field   September 20, 2005
L. Storey (Jeffersonville, IN USA)
13 out of 13 found this review helpful

I thought that the "Peterson Field Guide to Eastern Trees" was a very good book to read while at home, but it was difficult to use while I was actually "in the woods." I was looking for something with more illustrations and photos, and larger print wouldn't have hurt either. It would have also been simpler to use if the authors would have included all of the details, about a particular species, together in the book, rather than devoting one section to leaves of all species, another to silhouettes of all species, etc.