Beech with Meripilus Giganteus

[PRob]

Hi All,

A little advice please. I have a beech which is infected by Meripilus Giganteus. The fruiting bodies have appeared in the last 3 years. We have been in the house 20 years and have reduced the crown 3 times to manage its size. Regretfully it was butchered by a brutal topping by the previous owner about 25 years ago and some rot is set in on the stumps at the top of the tree. However it always comes into full leaf as can be seen by the pictures. We have now been advised to remove it entirely by a tree company as it may prove a danger to people on the path and road. How unstable is the tree likely to be, it seems solid as a rock to me?! I have said I would rather not take it down but reduce the crown by about 40% as i have some concerns of causing heave on the foundations of the house. Is this a valid worry or if I plant something as a replacement - perhaps a hornbeam hedge will this counteract any swelling of the soil (we are on clay). General views and opinions welcome as it would be sad to see the tree go! Thank you in advance!

[raafbeard]

I like this Beech and think it is great in its current location with a high amenity value....

 

Shame if it has to be felled but maybe could be retained with a proper health care plan put in place by someone knowledgeable....

[likeitorlumpit]

I like this Beech and think it is great in its current location with a high amenity value....

 

Shame if it has to be felled but maybe could be retained with a proper health care plan put in place by someone knowledgeable....

 

I wonder if the neighbour likes the amenity value. The tree shades his house probably from lunch time till dusk.

Would it not be better to remove the risk and replant. Can anyone quantify the risk. What would we be happy with- a 10% risk. Surely not. The owner needs to know the tree is safe and I don't think anyone could say that. Certainly without extensive investigation and thats got to be difficult considering the tree roots are under a road and a drive.

I have to say I'm encouraged by a homeowner who wants to retain and accepts the future costs of his decision. Thats financial. Applause:thumbup:

[David Humphries]

I can not comment on the stability of the beech in this thread but beech do coexist with Meripilus whereas some trees succumb to root failure.

 

Pictures below show a (reduced) tree with at least a decade of meripilus association that is significantly exposed to the south west & one that went over with Meripilus whilst in full leaf (but unreduced) during very strong winds last year.

 

 

Seems to me from the majority of comment here that even with an awareness of a developing understanding of a complex relationship, the over riding feeling that still pervades today in our industry, is to fell at the first sight of fruiting bodies.

 

Knee jerk springs to mind.

 

Cost should not be the only hurdle to management options.

 

 

.

[kev7937]

Not sure if this adds anything but these two are still standing after Mondays storm, one obviously has less sail than the other.

 

Both are also in long ditton where most of the beech seem to be infected

 

 

 

.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

Here's yesterdays churchyard failure, not great pics but I was rushing to get back for the roast lamb. Very fortunate this one went inwards not outwards over the road and into the houses. Nothing like the amount of fruiting body as in some of the previous pics which are offered as examples of not necessarily needing removal. Each is an individual case of course, but I wouldn't necessarily see it as an industry wide knee jerk reaction - it's the homeowners choice of course. If I lived there (not wanting to get into the "which came first, the house or the tree" debate) I probably wouldn't want that tree in my small, roadside front garden.

[skyhuck]

Why would any want the risk of keeping a defective tree??

 

Just fell and replant.

[David Humphries]

Why would any want the risk of keeping a defective tree??

 

Just fell and replant.

 

'All' trees are defective in our eyes Dave

 

They are either too decayed, too big, too shady, too messy, too allelopathic, too water demanding, too.........well too tree like

 

Far too much focus still today on negatives associated with trees (predominantly fear based) and not on the benefits they provide us with, like removing and storing carbon, and the filtering out of pollutant particulates like sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides & ammonias

 

Providing oxygen

 

Reducing the urban ambient temperature

 

Preventing soil erosion

 

Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.........

 

 

I truly believe, that the majority of people in our industry don't have a scooby how they effect these things above on a daily basis by unnecessarily taking out trees that can be managed with their defects for the benefit of us all as a society and not just for the benefit of reducing the personal fear of tree owners.

 

 

 

Taking out big canopy trees and replacing with a puny 6 footer ain't gonna cut the mustard.

 

 

 

.

[sloth]

'All' trees are defective in our eyes Dave

 

They are either too decayed, too big, too shady, too messy, too allelopathic, too water demanding, too.........well too tree like

 

Far too much focus still today on negatives associated with trees (predominantly fear based) and not on the benefits they provide us with, like removing and storing carbon, and the filtering out of pollutant particulates like sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides & ammonias

 

Providing oxygen

 

Reducing the urban ambient temperature

 

Preventing soil erosion

 

Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.........

 

 

I truly believe, that the majority of people in our industry don't have a scooby how they effect these things above on a daily basis by unnecessarily taking out trees that can be managed with their defects for the benefit of us all as a society and not just for the benefit of reducing the personal fear of tree owners.

 

 

 

Taking out big canopy trees and replacing with a puny 6 footer ain't gonna cut the mustard.

 

 

 

.

 

Hear hear

[ChrisG]

I'd have to disagree,

I don't think most people in the industry have a knee jerk reaction to fell trees with fruiting bodies at all, but when it comes to Meripilus and Beech, I would take a very cautious approach. The photos you posted seem to show a target area that can be moved (ie the benches, maybe even the path?), In the tree posted on this thread, the combination of house, path, road and Meripilus infected Beech just doesn't scream out retain to me. If the tree was in parkland where target area could be moved, great, but in this instance, if the tree was to fail etc...etc, is that knee jerk or common sense?

[PRob]

Thank you everyone for you input so far. I have learnt a lot in the last few days!

 

I'm still in two minds as to what to do. I hate the though of destroying a tree that is well liked by our family and neighbours.

 

The one question not answered, which I probably need to direct to a surveyor or structural engineer is the risk of heave on the house.

 

The other thought I had is to have a chainsaw artist or wood carver create a piece of art or a totem out of the main trunk if left in situ. Or would this not be possible as it is diseased. Thre is a great carving at Esher cricket ground of a cricketer catching a ball created out of a tree stump on the boundary.

 

Anyway another couple of day of deliberation I think before I decide what to do!