Would THIS offend you?

[18 stoner]

Not this time Paul.

 

I have spent days in that tree in the past years, but my climbing days are getting fewer as I get older, greyer and fatter!

[Albedo]

The reason I ask is that although there are some exposed limb walks lower down they are potentially easily dropped into from elsewhere.It probably has some tricky bits but is quite a busy tree.

 

Not that hard to go for some of the downward habit stuff thats there.... other options available.

 

ya fat git:001_smile: whats your first name by the way:001_smile:

[18 stoner]

18!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Haha, Pete really:lol:

[Albedo]

18!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Haha, Pete really:lol:

 

Hi big Pete, good to meet you and I think you are making a good point here.

 

Not sure about the reduction but you are on a mission which I think I can applaud... because I know from previous posts that you are a pro.

 

 

Even though you are from the wrong part of the country and too old to climb but younger than me:001_smile:

[jaime bray]

Yep, thats the spot.

 

I actually did this one gratis, as they are long standing clients and I was willing to save the tree instead of it being felled.

 

With all the "save the tree" type mentality put aside, there is something very satisfying about spiking up a big tree like this and crashing stuff down. Slightly off topic, but it does happen from time to time.

 

18 stoner,

 

My comment ref spiking was in response to your statement about spiking up a big tree and crashing it down. The statement as written gives off the impression of bish bash bosh tree work... yeahhhhhhhhhh..

 

However, if it had been written with the reader in mind, you could have said there is something satisfying about climbing above the point of the final cuts and then spiking up and crashing stuff down.

 

A lot of comments made in writing have no expression attached and therefore get construed in the wrong way.

 

My comment; Wait for it you spiked a tree to be retained, on page 7 of the thread,was a sarcastic comment written in the third person aimed at the no spikey no likey a retained tree brigade, and was designed to pre-empt the reaction from the manner in which your initial post ref spiking was written.

 

If there is one thing additionally good about arbtalk, it is the fact that when posting to fellow professionals, after a while of reading the many discussions explaining posts and their meanings, it prepares you for further educational studying and writing, and makes you realise that although what you think reads well, it may be read different by a fellow professional or a layman. I havent got a degree in Englsh writing and my writing would be torn apart by a professional writer, but hey ho.

 

As for posting on arbtalk and uktc, you never know who, how or in what mood somebody is going to read and respond to your words. You could have gone out last night and had a skin full of ale, had a row with a mate or the wife and woke up with a right bag on, to then read this post and find insult in it. however nothing could be further from the truth, there is no insult contained within this post. But merely an awareness of how things continually get mis-construed without sufficient explanation at the outset.

 

P.s. i acknowledge your post relating to gauging opinion first. Was the spiking comment designed to antagonise/ create discusion or a freudian slip.

 

As said by some, a good post and a good thread. maybe a thread should be started. 'Work you (meaning the genral forum not 18 stoner) did that wasnt for aesthetic value', enabling a more rounded arboricultural practice to be discussed.

Edited October 13, 2012 by jaime bray

[18 stoner]

18 stoner,

 

 

P.s. i acknowledge your post relating to gauging opinion first. Was the spiking comment designed to antagonise/ create discusion or a freudian slip.

 

As said by some, a good post and a good thread. maybe a thread should be started. 'Work you (meaning the genral forum not 18 stoner) did that wasnt for aesthetic value', enabling a more rounded arboricultural practice to be discussed.

 

Jamie, what you quoted was very tongue in cheek when I posted it. Not meant to antagonise, more to create more response, hopefully expanding the thread and provoking people to come forward more with their thoughts.

 

As you say discussing such would hopefully create more awareness, I would give support where I can if you feel like starting a thread on those lines.

 

Many thanks, Pete.

[Buzzsurgeon]

As title. If you saw this, what would your thoughts be?

 

[ATTACH]102139[/ATTACH]

 

[ATTACH]102140[/ATTACH]

 

Ok by me. Common place, take a look in your local church yard chances are you will find plenty old HC that were cut in this fashion around 100 years ago and still regenerating like gooduns!! Big question now is, should these be re-pollarded or maintained as standards in preference to modern arboriculture???

[skyhuck]

Ok by me. Common place, take a look in your local church yard chances are you will find plenty old HC that were cut in this fashion around 100 years ago and still regenerating like gooduns!! Big question now is, should these be re-pollarded or maintained as standards in preference to modern arboriculture???

 

Totally agree, although I'm not sure HC will respond as well today, they really are struggling just now.

[Arctostaphylos uva-ursi]

A provocative post. Shame so many important facts (i.e. TPO, clients wishes, explanation of the potential risks and acceptance by client) took so long to surface. Obviously the responses received would have been different had these facts been given earlier on.

I understand that your intention was to spark some lively debate. Mission accomplished.

I would be interested in hearing the Tree Officers take on the work planned and carried out.

 

Interesting thread.

 

Cheers.

[18 stoner]

A provocative post. Shame so many important facts (i.e. TPO, clients wishes, explanation of the potential risks and acceptance by client) took so long to surface. Obviously the responses received would have been different had these facts been given earlier on.

I understand that your intention was to spark some lively debate. Mission accomplished.

I would be interested in hearing the Tree Officers take on the work planned and carried out.

 

Interesting thread.

 

Cheers.

 

Thanks. I did purposely present the thread to provoke a reaction, I agree. It was not however, to deceive anyone from the arb world into giving a "wrong opinion" based on being given a minimum of facts. It was to give me an idea (and hopefully make other arbs aware) of the type of first reaction the general public would give at seeing such works.

 

I feel that this alone shows that, in general the public know very little about our industry practices, yet see varying tree works evry day. Not sure a thread like this will ever change this, but perhaps it may make some arbs think a little more about forwarding info to the said "public". I live in hope!

 

As for the T.O, we actually worked very closely and ended up going along more with his suggestions. In fact, we possibly didnt hit the tree as hard as he suggested, but this was with a certain opinion from the client to leave limbs a little longer.

 

Ok by me. Common place, take a look in your local church yard chances are you will find plenty old HC that were cut in this fashion around 100 years ago and still regenerating like gooduns!! Big question now is, should these be re-pollarded or maintained as standards in preference to modern arboriculture???

 

Very true Brett, but as Huck says it may be an uphill struggle for H/C at present due to the extent of the disease.

 

As for future management, first thing is to see if it survives!

 

Followoing that, assuming it does it will be monitored regularly with safety being the main priority.