Tpo Oak with Gano

[Guest Infinitree]

Thanks Gerrit, It would be interesting to see a cross section of that stem!

[treeseer]

Additionally (esp. for those overseas) as the tree is protected you will be obliged to make a formal application ...

Either you or your appointed consultant will need to make a sufficient case for the trees removal based on the evidence. One thing you might consider is whether felling/dismantling is the only option; another is the current/future amenity value of the tree. ...If you want it felled then you must justify that spec above others. ...

 

This overseas chap is very grateful for your description of rational and systematic assessment. We try but too seldom succeed in this across the pond.

 

The "fell or retain" dichotomy is false. It is entirely illogical and unnatural: to reduce a tree's fate to an either/or decision is nuts. Trees are far more gradua, and open to a range of influences, over time. We would do well to follow their example in our prognoses. We also need to take necessary steps in our diagnoses, starting with ID of associates.

 

Infinitree noted that " There is only half a cm of the Ganoderma bracket left on the tree so I couldn't Id it too well", so we do not even know it is Gano sp, yet we are regaled with a gorgeous image of a cracked tree, which was cracked due to loading from wind and gravity and excessive mass.

 

Yet, we are told that "this is what G. australe did". Perhaps the causality behind this casualty is as confused as the possible associate aka pathogen aka justification to fell. Nuts. Let's hold our water until we know there is a fire. All we have so far is smoke.

 

Got a camera, InfiniTree?

[Fungus]

1. We also need to take necessary steps in our diagnoses, starting with ID of associates.

2. Infinitree noted that " There is only half a cm of the Ganoderma bracket left on the tree so I couldn't Id it too well", so we do not even know it is Gano sp ...

3. yet we are regaled with a gorgeous image of a cracked tree, which was cracked due to loading from wind and gravity and excessive mass.

4. Yet, we are told that "this is what G. australe did". Perhaps the causality behind this casualty is as confused as the possible associate aka pathogen aka justification to fell.

5. Nuts.

 

Guy,

1. You obviously didn't read or fully comprehend my earlier post.

2. ... which is easy to assess, provided you use a microscope instead of a magnifying glass to identify the species with.

3. How did you assess, that the crack was due to "excessive mass" from a picture, that doesn't show the crown ?

4. Correction : "this is what G. australe did to this oak". I uploaded the photo as an example of what might happen if the diagnosis of the pathogen was false, as I have witnessed lots of times before, with the most dramatic example the total collapse of the Anne Frank tree in Amsterdam.

5. You seem to be loosing a rational perspective on reality again.

[treeseer]

Gerrit,

1. You obviously didn't read or fully comprehend my earlier post.

 

I did, and I did. You gave very good advice about looking for details (which InfiniTree would do well to follow), but ended with "standard VTA-procedures are to be followed to determine whether the trees should be felled or conserved, and if so, what measures should be taken to keep the trees safe. "

It was your "fell or conserve" dichotomy I referred to. That's a natural bias to an ecologist, who sees trees as food sources, big "sugar sticks" for microflora and microfauna. However, that is anathema to an arborist, for it denies the potential of arboriculture to manage the tree.

 

2. ... which is easy to assess, provided you use a microscope instead of a magnifying glass to identify the species with.

 

It is iimpossible to assess, based on a second hand account of a scrap of a conk, no matter the microscopy.

 

3. How did you assess, that the crack was due to "excessive mass" from a picture, that doesn't show the crown ?

 

If there was no heavy crown, there would be no crack. Simple! Material fails when load exceeds strength, every time. The science of physics rules over the sciences of ecology and biology alike.

 

4. Correction : "this is what G. australe did to this oak". I uploaded the photo as an example of what might happen if the diagnosis of the pathogen was false, as I have witnessed lots of times before, with the most dramatic example the total collapse of the Anne Frank tree in Amsterdam.

 

Oh but that tree failed because the financial investment in a man-made superstructure was inadequate! (How many trees could have been planted with that money?) But really it failed because load exceeded strength. O yes strength loss due to fungus did contribute, as did load increase due to lack of pruning.

 

5 You seem to be loosing a rational perspective on reality again.

 

Perhaps both our perspectives' grip on reality can be impaired by our biases.

[Fungus]

1. It was your "fell or conserve" dichotomy I referred to. That's a natural bias to an ecologist, who sees trees as food sources, big "sugar sticks" for microflora and microfauna.

2. It is impossible to assess, based on a second hand account of a scrap of a conk, no matter the microscopy.

3. If there was no heavy crown, there would be no crack. Simple! Material fails when load exceeds strength, every time. The science of physics rules over the sciences of ecology and biology alike.

4. that tree failed because the financial investment in a man-made superstructure was inadequate! But really it failed because load exceeded strength. strength loss due to fungus did contribute, as did load increase due to lack of pruning.

 

1. I referred to standard VTA practice, which - you being an arborist should know - is quite different from a "fell or conserve" dichotomy. And you seem to know what I think, which is quite an accomplishment from where you are located. In German this is called "hineininterpretieren" without checking what the views and opinions of the other person are.

2. You would be amazed to see what a mycologist with a microscope can do with just a bit of fungal material.

3. Much simpler : the oak was heavily pruined and only had a small crown left. So there you go with your armchair analysis.

4. You were there, were you, and saw the remnants of the tree after it had collapsed and the extent of white rot with selective delignification by G. australe was assessed, which was overlooked by the consulting arborists and should have been a contra-indication for spending so much money on a tree without perspective or future whatever measures taken ?

Edited September 7, 2011 by Fungus

[treeseer]

This is getting way beyond that tree. Briefly,

 

1. I referred to standard VTA practice

 

VTA is practiced different ways by different practitioners. Other arborists express the "fell or conserve" dichotomy, others don't. It may be standard from an ecologist view in Holland, but not in America or Australia based on working with arborists ever since the body language book came out.

 

What we hear from England is

"One thing you might consider is whether felling/dismantling is the only option; another is the current/future amenity value of the tree. It would not be unusual for an application for felling to be refused where the tree could be reduced to mitigate failure especially in high profile cases. If you want it felled then you must justify that spec above others."

 

2. You would be amazed to see what a mycologist with a microscope can do with just a bit of fungal material.

 

No doubt, but there's no bit to look at!

 

3. Much simpler : the oak was heavily pruined and only had a small crown left. So there you go with your armchair analysis.

 

Heavy pruning can weaken trees. Material fails when load exceeds strength, every time, no matter if you use a sofa or another piece of furniture for analysis.

 

4. You were there, were you, and saw the remnants of the tree after it had collapsed and the extent of white rot with selective delignification by G. australe was assessed, which was overlooked by the consulting arborists and should have been a contra-indication for spending so much money on a tree without perspective or future whatever measures taken ?

 

No I just saw a lot of pictures and some tomograms and diagnostic reports. I agree totally with you, it was a colossal waste, and that was not overlooked by all the consulting arborists on that job.

 

But all this is unrelated to reports of one oak with a bit of a conk and another with bark shedding, but no pictures!

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Gerrit,

1. You obviously didn't read or fully comprehend my earlier post.

oh he did:sneaky2:

[Fungus]

1. It may be standard from an ecologist view in Holland, but not in America or Australia based on working with arborists ever since the body language book came out.

2. "You would be amazed to see what a mycologist with a microscope can do with just a bit of fungal material."

No doubt, but there's no bit to look at!

3. "the oak was heavily pruined and only had a small crown left."

Heavy pruning can weaken trees.

4. You were there and saw the remnants of the tree after it had collapsed and the extent of white rot with selective delignification by G. australe was assessed, which was overlooked by the consulting arborists and should have been a contra-indication for spending so much money on a tree without perspective or future whatever measures taken ?"

No I just saw a lot of pictures and some tomograms and diagnostic reports. I agree totally with you, it was a colossal waste, and that was not overlooked by all the consulting arborists on that job.

 

1. In case you didn't notice, the trees concerned are not located in America or Australia, so when I refer to standard VTA-practice, I refer to what is standard practice in European countries such as The Netherlands, Belgium, Luxemburg, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, the U.K. and Ireland.

By the way, standard VTA-practice according to Mattheck is integrated in and an essential part of my Mycological Tree Assessment method including the Tree Species Specific Ecosystem concept.

2. "half of a centimetre of the bracket" together with a scrape (spores) from the bark beneath the bracket is more than enough for a mycologist.

3. An illusion of alternatives then ? If it had not been pruined, it would have been split in two and lost, and because it had been pruined, it just had a shear crack and is preserved, still standing and repairing the damage.

4. So you can identify G. australe from pictures too, just as the consulting arborist thought could be done by sending a photo of a bracket to a German "specialist" ? Both "diagnostic" reports I've seen from the consulting arborists were in Dutch, so I can assume you can read Dutch ... goed genoeg om deze zin (en de rest van het bericht) af te kunnen maken in het Nederlands ?

Which arborist on the job did not overlook the "body language" of 22 smaller panic fruiting and big, but receding perennial brackets of the biotrophic parasitic G. australe (nota bene : not the necrotrophic parasitic G. lipsiense, as the German "specialist" had said), of which the mycelium had completely undermined the inside of the tree from the trunk base up to 1.5 metres height, which could have been assessed by simple methods such as increments taken from the trunk or penetrating the wood in between the buttresses with a long spike ?

And which arborists had knowledge of the fact, that tomograms of Aesculus invaded by G. australe hardly ever show any damage done by the mycelium to the central wood of the tree ?

As so many others, you have been fooled by the PR-machine of the guilty party. The press releases from the arborists concerned were all part of a cover up to conceal the mistakes they made and the misleading of the judge, who was led to believe, that the tree could be preserved for many years to come or even outlive a veteran tree specialist from abroad, if adequate measures were taken.

Their only concern was preventing to be taken to court and be sued for damages, so they blamed the welders for not doing a good job on scaffolding a tree, which had no future anyway, because it already was extremely unstable and under attack of G. australe, rhizomorphs of a parasitic Armillaria species, chestnut leave miner and already was "on the short list" for an infection with chestnut bleeding canker.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

1. In case you didn't notice, the trees concerned are not located in America or Australia, so when I refer to standard VTA-practice, I refer to what is standard practice in European countries such as The Netherlands, Belgium, Luxemburg, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, the U.K. and Ireland.

By the way, standard VTA-practice according to Mattheck is integrated in and an essential part of my Mycological Tree Assessment method including the Tree Species Specific Ecosystem concept.

2. "half of a centimetre of the bracket" together with a scrape (spores) from the bark beneath the bracket is more than enough for a mycologist.

3. An illusion of alternatives then ? If it had not been pruined, it would have been split in two and lost, and because it had been pruined, it just had a shear crack and is preserved, still standing and repairing the damage.

4. So you can identify G. australe from pictures too, just as the consulting arborist thought could be done by sending a photo of a bracket to a German "specialist" ? Both "diagnostic" reports I've seen from the consulting arborists were in Dutch, so I can assume you can read Dutch ... goed genoeg om deze zin (en de rest van het bericht) af te kunnen maken in het Nederlands ?

Which arborist on the job did not overlook the "body language" of 22 smaller panic fruiting and big, but receding perennial brackets of the biotrophic parasitic G. australe (nota bene : not the necrotrophic parasitic G. lipsiense, as the German "specialist" had said), of which the mycelium had completely undermined the inside of the tree from the trunk base up to 1.5 metres height, which could have been assessed by simple methods such as increments taken from the trunk or penetrating the wood in between the buttresses with a long spike ?

And which arborists had knowledge of the fact, that tomograms of Aesculus invaded by G. australe hardly ever show any damage done by the mycelium to the central wood of the tree ?

As so many others, you have been fooled by the PR-machine of the guilty party. The press releases from the arborists concerned were all part of a cover up to conceal the mistakes they made and the misleading of the judge, who was led to believe, that the tree could be preserved for many years to come or even outlive a veteran tree specialist from abroad, if adequate measures were taken.

Their only concern was preventing to be taken to court and be sued for damages, so they blamed the welders for not doing a good job on scaffolding a tree, which had no future anyway, because it already was extremely unstable and under attack of G. australe, rhizomorphs of a parasitic Armillaria species, chestnut leave miner and already was "on the short list" for an infection with chestnut bleeding canker.

 

 

SLAM:lol: you know my old staf/english bull cross used to grab cocky dogs by the scruff and slam them on thier backs just like that:laugh1:

[D Mc]

You guys need to grow up!

 

Dave