Ash Included Bark; Should it stay or go

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

True. Removal can also be a detriment to the health and safety of nearby trees and branches, as they are newly exposed. It's a site-dependent decision, which must be informed by first establishing the objective. If human safety is the objective, removing this tree might increase overall risk, so pruning may be a better option.

 

Yes, over-thinning of stands is a widespread practice here in the U.K especially within forestry. My local wood Whippendell has been and continues to be over thinned currently, the number of new shear cracks and failures of shear root balls testament to this.

 

Although this has its upsides for a fungi hunter, the larches have shear cracks and now are fruiting Phaeolus shwienitzii due to the gas intake to the central cores.

[TFABW]

Thanks all for your input. Hama have you seen much success removing co-dominant stems on saplings?

 

I have suggested pollarding with regular repollarding, unfortunatly father in law was not keen having removed some himself years ago. Will have to see how the TO views it now.

[TFABW]

I do not think overthinning is to much of an issue here trees are already pretty exposed.

 

Shame to hear your local woods are being overthinned, has it stopped now as they see the results? Why do you think it was done in the first place?

 

Standards do not seem to suffer when coppicing, is that due to periodic exposure? Or that Oaks, Cherry and large Ash cope better?

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

I do not think overthinning is to much of an issue here trees are already pretty exposed.

 

Shame to hear your local woods are being overthinned, has it stopped now as they see the results? Why do you think it was done in the first place?

 

Standards do not seem to suffer when coppicing, is that due to periodic exposure? Or that Oaks, Cherry and large Ash cope better?

 

I dont think the contractor is the type to even notice the damage, I dont think the local council who own the site have even bothered to inspect the work and the origional site assesment/surveying firm obviously didnt specify any particular approach or considerations for the ecology of the site, which is significant and within SSSI (site of special scientific interest)

 

I was concerned from the outset, the damage on site by machines is horrific, from roots scarred to remaining trees damaged by falling lumber, but to cap it off, last time I went in I found they are also littering the site.

 

 

[TFABW]

Suprised there is so little thought and oversite on an SSSI. Littering is never acceptable.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Suprised there is so little thought and oversite on an SSSI. Littering is never acceptable.

 

This part of the wood is just outside the designation, but its shoddy forestry whatever designation the woodland is.

 

it doesnt matter whether your a forester harvesting lumber (like this case) or a tree surgeon carrying out work on a single garden amenity tree, standards apply to all. I guess the "standard" here is acceptable to all parties concerned, time will tell. Its all being watched, witnessed and documented.

 

This is my favorite woodland, where I go to heal my hurts and to be with nature, so I take this one personaly:post:

[treeseer]

Thanks all for your input. Hama have you seen much success removing co-dominant stems on saplings?

 

I have suggested pollarding with regular repollarding, unfortunatly father in law was not keen having removed some himself years ago. Will have to see how the TO views it now.

 

Thanks for updating; interested in TO opinion.

 

removing codoms is typically done when young; subordinating more common in older stems, ~>3" in ash imo

 

Pollarding seems an extreme solution to an undefined problem from here. but not having seen whole tree and site and not knowing objective cannot say for sure.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Pollarding seems an extreme solution to an undefined problem from here. but not having seen whole tree and site and not knowing objective cannot say for sure.

 

Is there something wrong with pollarding an ash?

[treeseer]

Man that is ugly, what they did in your woodland.

 

Is there something wrong with pollarding an ash?

 

Of course not, if it fits the objective, and the maintenance budget.

 

Lighter pruning = less sprouting = lower maintenance, right?

 

if creating habitat for saproxylic organisms is part of the objective, then bigger cuts and semi-permanently open wounds might be desirable. Not often done in the urban realm here, X,XXX miles away.

 

It's a hard enough sell to get people to keep trees with cavities. Making the kind of cavities with no structural implications, like those from bore cuts into the ends of branches, is about as much wounding for wildlife as we can sell. And that is rare.

 

Heartrot is too common and too much a focal point/bugaboo around here for me to be willing to create more in a living tree that can hit a target, never mind sell that as a service.

Edited January 27, 2013 by treeseer

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Heartrot is too common and too much a focal point/bugaboo around here for me to be willing to create more in a living tree that can hit a target, never mind sell that as a service.

 

dont worry about it Guy, as soon as obama refuses to resign shells arctic mining of oil tickets (after a $5 billion failure) as he was advised by 2 most trusted advisors your americans too will learn the benefits of a pollard culture:thumbup1:

 

The end of the oil age is near

 

sustainable is a word your country is learning fast, by necessity.

 

and dont get me wrong, the U.K is second inline for consumptions

Edited January 27, 2013 by Tony Croft aka hamadryad