Turkey oak reducion

[scotty-w]

Little job we did the other day it was a great tree, lovely to climb. Spec was 30% reduction due to Ganoderma lipsiense.. ( I think)

 

I'm sure I will be put right if its not...

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

if its lipsiense happy days, however, crown symptoms and bark death along with massive fras from boring insects lead me down an alternative suggestion, and the opinion that the 30% reduction carried out was not sufficient to reduce loads. cerris is not good at dealing or adapting to decay agents, especialy G australe, meripilus etc

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

Scotty, sorry to ask ('numpty' Teccie) but are the shots 'before and after' or 'after and after' from two differnt perspectives?

 

If it's the former then, in line with BS3998 (2010), it would appear to be at best a 30% volume reduction, approx. equiv. to a 12% linear reduction, of maybe it's a straight forward 30% linear reduction....WHAT???!!!

 

There is a key difference whihc, on accepting BS3998 (2010) as our industry standard, we need to embrace, be clear on, and specify accordingly.

 

SORRY, I've rather 'hi-jacked' your post.

 

Cheers..

Paul

 

In terms of whether it's enough...others, far more knowledgeable and better placed than I will/have advised.

[scotty-w]

Hi Paul it was a before after shot. It was a volume reduction just wanted to take a lot of the weight out of the tree.

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

Hi Paul it was a before after shot. It was a volume reduction just wanted to take a lot of the weight out of the tree.

 

Hi Scotty, thanks for clarifying that.

 

In terms of 'taking weight out of the tree', I wonder if crown reduction actually does so to any significant degree and whether it's just the reduction in 'sail area', which is significant, that we interpret as such...hmmm.

 

Cheers..

Paul

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Hi Scotty, thanks for clarifying that.

 

In terms of 'taking weight out of the tree', I wonder if crown reduction actually does so to any significant degree and whether it's just the reduction in 'sail area', which is significant, that we interpret as such...hmmm.

 

Cheers..

Paul

 

weight is an important issue in advanced decays, the buckling effect of its own weight bearing down on a smaller surface area (T/R ratio) causing shell buckling.

 

reducing the sail always helps a lot but when were talking saving compromised trees in late biological life stages, such as this case weight is major player in failure, buckling and shearing under thier own weight as apposed to rare or infrequent weather events, weight is something the tree must bare 24-7 and any imblance in the crown or limb structure (lean is obvious) will result in creeping failures.