crown reductions on beech with merrip, whats peoples thoughts

[John Shutler]

disscuss

[David Humphries]

Yep.........................................................

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Think you my thoughts John

.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

deleted as repeated

Edited September 16, 2010 by Tony Croft aka hamadryad

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Wimp!

 

grow some knackers!

 

yes my thoughts are its good, PROVIDING its backed up by a thorough investigation of the trees vitality and adaptions to the colonisation, that it is confirmed to be re iterating roots ( see last post meripilus thread) etc etc, theres a good piece on this in Shwarzes BIG book, talking about crown structure and vitality as an indicator to the severity of root plate degradation as prelimenary assesment before going further. a worthwhile contribution to this debate, puts into words what some of us feel.

 

Does really depend on how loved the tree is, what the targets are, what the budget is to be certain, each tree will be different, each case will have its own characteristics, it is just not realistic to say "yes all merip cases to be reduced, just cant work that way, some will be fells, maybe as many as 50%, but that other 50% need to be retained, because its just not cricket to fell to be sure any more.

[arb culture]

What about if you are working as a consultant for a developer and the beech with merrip is where they want to build a house?

[gibbon]

What about if you are working as a consultant for a developer and the beech with merrip is where they want to build a house?

 

Depends on whether you want repeat work from the developer

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

What about if you are working as a consultant for a developer and the beech with merrip is where they want to build a house?

 

If you was a consultant, doing your BS survey/Arboricultural implications survey then the tree would be flagged up as unworthy of retention in 99.95% of the situations would it not?

 

A very different affair, wouldnt you say Culture?

 

the location, site usage both future present count for so much.

 

Each tree is a unique individual, with unique placements and consequences, theres nowt wrong with felling a tree with meripilus, if its got fair justifications. What really gets my goat is when fletchers come into my wood and fell a tree in the middle of a wood just cos its got meripilus fruit bodies, and completley knacker an oak in the proscess.

 

and all the while under the supposed watchfull banner of natural england who "administer" the objectives under the SSSI scheme!

 

and then have the nerve to be a stakeholder in the NTSG document telling us that in the future we will all have to take a less "risk" orientated approach!

 

[Bundle 2]

Im not in agreement with your comment about a less risk oriented approach...NTSG is in no way suggesting we ignore risk. Rather, it seeks to address what in it's view, has become an over estimated risk......For this, there needs to have been some "quantification" but given recently aired views about thick arborists who dont know 6 is 9 , just the other way up....I will withdraw hastily!

[Dean Lofthouse]

Why prolong the agony ?

 

The tree is going to come down whether on its own or with your help, if it's in a public place remove the risk, if its in a woodland let it be, people who walk through woodland should know there's a risk of being hit by deadwood anyway, only this would be a big lump

[David Humphries]

Risk -

 

die from a tree failing = one Uk person every couple of months

die from a car accident = eight Uk people a day.

 

 

Merip Beech with healthy, vital crown = assess, investigate, reduce & monitor

 

 

http://arbtalk.co.uk/forum/tree-health-care/4246-last-beech-standing.html

 

post 76

.

Edited September 16, 2010 by Monkey-D