Jump to content

Log in or register to remove this advert

Kretzschmaria - infected tree management ?


johnanderton
 Share

Recommended Posts

Log in or register to remove this advert

  • Replies 30
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Next to a road the reports I work under always state fell even when fungus is in its infancy as tree has no future.

 

 

That's the thing this tree is very big at base & in my eyes the reduction doesn't give good value for money & is causing more work reducing then in a short space the whole thing might have to come out , ye if it was free from targets but there's a building & main rd nxt to it !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the thing this tree is very big at base & in my eyes the reduction doesn't give good value for money & is causing more work reducing then in a short space the whole thing might have to come out , ye if it was free from targets but there's a building & main rd nxt to it !!

 

Take it down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was asked to look at a very large sycamore nxt to a main rd today which had a report on it , the tree had a hole at the base ( fairly small) & was infected with Kretzschmaria , az stated in report , then they go on to recommend a 30% reduction on whole crown , just wondered people opinions on this ??

 

Did the owner particularly want to retain the tree and hence the reduction recommendation rather than removal perhaps?

 

Difficult to say with being in possession of all the facts, and it would still be inappropriate for me to comment anyway, BUT I would expect a report to be generated by a suitably qualified and competent person AND to give a range of options with 'pros n cons' etc.

 

IME, but mainly U/KD on street tree Limes, removal is inevitable...partic in a high target area...and hopefully 'planned' rather than...unplanned. :confused1:

 

Cheers..

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Firstly why is the consultant recommending reduction as a percentage? There is a good chance the LPA will refuse to validate this spec!!!

 

That said Frank Rinn did some research into the efficacy of reduction on reducing loading. From memory what he said was 20% height reduction reduces loading at the base by 50%. I have this second hand from a Reg consultant so don't rely on it from me but if that's correct the works may be a short term fix.

 

I would not make this recommendation though without testing the t/R with a resi drill. And even then I would be dubious and strongly recommend the test is carried out annually. My preference would still be fell though.

 

I did one recently in Birmingham, large beech next to the road. Load of KD at the base. Recommended fell with no further investigation. Picus wont work and a drill would breach the heavily suberized barrier zone that beech relies on so would be counter productive. That was my justification.

 

This all comes with the usual caveats. This is just speculation as I have not seen the tree, none of this info is to be relied upon for determining works. Appropriate assessment is required if in any doubt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kd on Acer is not good, but i reduced a big A rubrum with it last year. It may be a long term fix, if the crown regenerates, and the roots compartmentalise. But I'm not betting on that...

 

I did spec 30%, which i think was useful, AFTER saying cuts <10 cm, lengths <5m, and location (top and S and E sides).

 

Chris you are right in relating Frank's data, it agrees with Goodfellow's, and others.

 

re the beech, "I would not make this recommendation though without testing the t/R with a resi drill. And even then I would be dubious"

What is dubious is this reliance on t/r, which has been shown to be rather sketchy 'science', with no data applying to dbh >75 cm. :blushing:

 

Even if the picus would not work, a mallet works every time! O and how can a report be submitted with no images? I thought they were required to aid the owner's decisions.

Goodfellow Branch Failure.pdf

015.jpg.9a976b1f03d5e4b809a191d9967a6bb4.jpg

013.jpg.6d470eb516c188f67c27be24d625697e.jpg

Edited by treeseer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


  •  

  • Featured Adverts

About

Arbtalk.co.uk is a hub for the arboriculture industry in the UK.  
If you're just starting out and you need business, equipment, tech or training support you're in the right place.  If you've done it, made it, got a van load of oily t-shirts and have decided to give something back by sharing your knowledge or wisdom,  then you're welcome too.
If you would like to contribute to making this industry more effective and safe then welcome.
Just like a living tree, it'll always be a work in progress.
Please have a look around, sign up, share and contribute the best you have.

See you inside.

The Arbtalk Team

Follow us

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.