Thanks Jim The essential question here are how long (order of magnitude 1-10-100-1000 years) could the wood have been death before it was bend. That would say something about the time between the treeline passing south and the glacial over run. If trees are left dead 100 years the wood would be rather stiff and more brittle. It would not bend easily without breaking.
I have questioned the current condition of the wood. It's damp (the creek) and firm but seemed in good condition. The appearance was it to be not that old at all, which seems confirmed by the picture. This hints on perfect conservation deep in the till before the creek washed the soil away.
The bends are definitely flexible and over there they don't doubt that it was bend when *alive*, J77, old Picea wood is not that flexible at all even when soaking wet.
If the bending took place under great pressure, Matt, like your chalk example, then you would expect the wood cellular structure to be destroyed, that seems not to be the case.
So the scenario seems that there was a normal spruce parcel that got overrun by a glacier when the wood was still fresh. I would not have a problem with that if we were talking mountain glaciers, advancing some meter per day to a week, which would not melt in the valley anymore due to the extreme ice age cold.
But there are no mountains in Ohio and in the horizontal plane there are many hundreds of miles of treeless tundra between the northermmost piceas and the souternmost permanent snow areas.
So that's why I still think something doesn't add up and this publication doesn't make that better:
Heuser et al 2002 Late Wisconsin periglacial environments of the southern margin of the Laurentide Ice Sheet reconstructed from pollen analyses, JOURNAL OF QUATERNARY SCIENCE (2002) 17(8) 773–780
Assuming that the pollen spectra represent regional vegetation of the southern margin of the Miami lobe of the Laurentide Ice Sheet, we conclude the following:
1 ...;
2 at the same time, Picea was present on the southern margin of the Miami lobe of the Laurentide Ice Sheet, even though pollen percentage values do not reach levels that indicate the local presence of spruce before ca. 17 500 14C yr BP; (Andre: ~20600 calendar years ago)
3 ...
4 climatic amelioration inferred from the development of spruce parkland with oak ca. 15 000(A: ~18.500 Calendar years ago) was terminated by the ca. 14 500 14C yr BP ice advance. (A: ~17,500 calendar years ago)
(Date calibration mine (INTCAL04) Very aggravating that carbon date calibration still isn't mandatory nowadays)
Apparantly it was rather common that ice and spruce were much closer together (horizontally) than today. So I repeat, what is wrong with this picture?