The VTA Method, lets talk

[BatiArb]

Firstly, why would I on a one off tree survey for example NOT just pull out a core to confirm rather than say oh I will need to go and hire a picus and charge you 500 quid for the survey?

 

 

Yes, but how do you know where to 'pull out the core'?

 

Yes you will be informed by your VTA but how many core samples do you need to take before you get a complete picture of what is going on?

 

What about root issues?

 

What happens if you turn the tree into a pin cushion looking for the decay and then all you find is a small pocket that means you need to nothing more?

 

 

 

 

charge to come back in 6 months?

 

 

 

6 months is a few days in the life of a tree.

 

 

 

or take a core and settle the score?

 

 

Does it really.......?

 

I am NOT convinced and would not go around drilling holes in trees before fully exploiting non-invasive methods.

 

.

[arb culture]

Firstly, why would I on a one off tree survey for example NOT just pull out a core to confirm rather than say oh I will need to go and hire a picus and charge you 500 quid for the survey?

 

Because it damages the tree and you should usually be able to make a decision just using your eyes, and sometimes with the help of a mallet and a non invasive probe.

 

In over 15 years of working in arboriculture I've only ever taken four core samples, and these were as a last resort on trees which the owners refused to pay for more expensive analysis.

 

Using your eyes, training and experience should be enough for almost all trees you look at.

 

[BatiArb]

Because it damages the tree and you should usually be able to make a decision just using your eyes, and sometimes with the help of a mallet and a non invasive probe.

:

 

 

 

I have extracted the following from the thermal imaging thread:

 

 

When it comes to the cascade of assessments methods we have for trees I would suggest that the following order should be considered:

 

• Visual Tree Assessment by an Arborist

• Acoustic hammer (Elison style)

• Thermal Imaging to observe functional heat flow

• PICUS / TreeTronic / Radar

• Resistograph / DDD / core sampling

 

The above list is ordered with a view to:

 

• Surveyor expertise

• Speed of application (therefore cost)

• Requirement for visual evidence

• Invasiveness of equipment

.

 

 

I have shown this list now to a number of arborists from different backgrounds and have had no reason to change it.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Yes, but how do you know where to 'pull out the core'?

 

Yes you will be informed by your VTA but how many core samples do you need to take before you get a complete picture of what is going on?

 

What about root issues?

 

What happens if you turn the tree into a pin cushion looking for the decay and then all you find is a small pocket that means you need to nothing more?

 

6 months is a few days in the life of a tree.

 

Does it really.......?

 

I am NOT convinced and would not go around drilling holes in trees before fully exploiting non-invasive methods.

 

.

 

a second fee will often be a bridge too far for many customers, maybe not YOUR clients but for the vast majority of ordinary folk, living ordinary lives in ordinary houses.

 

I wasnt suggesting drilling more than one maybe two cores!

 

you know as well as I do, that it is fairly easy to tell where the rot will be, and knowing fung intimatley is a massive part of this equation, drill it once, with thought and care, muck it up, one last try, not revealing? then it may be that the tree is sound and the symptoms are not yet structuraly significant, gut still not happy then its time for thermo, if and thats a big if that the client will pay the extra fee rather than just fell it for the same price and be done with it.

 

But all this is still on the basis that we are wounding the tree in a significant way, one five mill core? maybe two?

 

show me the evidence AGAINST it, for ive read a heap that indicates this is no issue whatsoever.

 

im not attacking nor being dismissive, i want to know, I am always open to new thoeries, evidence and advice, so far it all has convinced me one or two cores is nowt to be so anal about!

[BatiArb]

a second fee will often be a bridge too far for many customers, maybe not YOUR clients but for the vast majority of ordinary folk, living ordinary lives in ordinary houses.

 

 

 

It all comes down to how much we VALUE trees.......

 

But as you say we are also dealing with an IDEAL world and the REAL world so yes I do agree that for a good many situations a guided core can be useful. I say that with a healthy respect for your fungal knowledge being the guide. However, there are many arborists who will not have such a great understanding and will need to take more samples.

 

Comes back to the experience, knowledge and understanding of the arborists using the tool.

 

.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

I know this a thread about VTA, but in the discussion there are a number of comments about tree pulling tests.

 

A word of warning about tree pulling tests - see if you can find a convincing explanation in the work of the pro-pullers regarding the ways in which shear stresses affect hollow trees, or how heavy limbs affect the hollow stems they are attached to - I can't.

 

As regards the T/R ratio - I don't think Claus is suggesting that just because a tree is more than 70% hollow it is necessarily dangerous, only that if a tree is less than 70% hollow it should be considered no more dangerous than a solid tree (assuming no other factors of course). His published research data clearly shows many trees more than 70%hollow which haven't fallen over.

 

Please dont feel this is not for the thread, it VERY much is, and the point in me starting this thread as this pulling BS is driving me nuts, enough for me to now be giving it the full and indived atention, time i could be spending on more interesting stuff!

 

I for the record, have more than reservations on its validity or merit, it rubs all my gut instincts and inteligence the wrong way. i am however not going to right it off withought having read till im blue in the face and lost the will to live and done the training i hope via TEP.

 

I am suprised that TEP have invested so much into it, and have spoken to neville about this before, and my only reason for giving it the time of day is Mr fays interest in it so out of respect for neville i am going to give it some time and make up my own mind based on a fair review.

 

so, if youve got somthing to Say on SIA statics intergrated assesment, please please do spit it out, i am well and truly all ears!

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Its taken me a while to find a good PDF on the SIA method and heres one, worth putting in here for all who have an interest in furthering thier assesment knowledge, myself included!

 

http://www.treeworks.co.uk/downloads/2%20-%20JK_Static%20Integrated%20031203.pdf

 

and a piece worthy to read with it

 

http://www.treeworks.co.uk/downloads/1%20-%20DL%20tree%20Statics%20Final%20Version%20031203.pdf

Edited July 22, 2010 by Tony Croft aka hamadryad

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

FOUNDATIONS OF TREE RISK ANALYSIS:

Use of the t/R ratio to Evaluate Trunk Failure Potential

By Jerry Bond

 

bond_tR.pdf

[arb culture]

Its taken me a while to find a good PDF on the SIA method and heres one, worth putting in here for all who have an interest in furthering thier assesment knowledge, myself included!

 

http://www.treeworks.co.uk/downloads/2%20-%20JK_Static%20Integrated%20031203.pdf

 

and a piece worthy to read with it

 

http://www.treeworks.co.uk/downloads/1%20-%20DL%20tree%20Statics%20Final%20Version%20031203.pdf

 

I've got a few more stashed away in the library somewhere, but like I say - see if you can find a convincing argument from them desribing how they deal with shear forces and heavy limbs on hollow trees.

[arb culture]

I for the record, have more than reservations on its validity or merit, it rubs all my gut instincts and inteligence the wrong way. i am however not going to right it off withought having read till im blue in the face and lost the will to live and done the training i hope via TEP.

 

Why are you planning on spending time and money on training on a system that you don't even know whether you agree with?

 

 

The general rule of science (and common sense) is that if someone has a theory or an idea, the onus is on them to prove it works, not on everyone else to prove that it doesn't.

 

For (an extreme) example, I certainly wouldn't pay to go and do training in crystal healing just to decide whether it works or not - life is too short and there are just too many wrong ideas out there.