Amelanchier

I just don't get this concept that rescues are only needed for people who've stuck an 066 in their heart and are howling unearthly gutteral sounds while raining blood all over the worksite like a cheap B-Movie. It seems like its the only option that's ever considered?!? The more serious the accident the lower the frequency of its occurance. Smaller, less serious (indeed those that are harmless but inconvient) incidents are more common. It's the little things that can lead to serious situations - its funny to leave a numpty hanging in dead space beacuse he twisted his ropes up, but there's a lot of paperwork if he catches hypothermia. IMO given some of the swings I've seen people take in the name of cool, the chances of a KO are higher than a self autopsy with a 200T. All the confidence about self rescue and macho willpower in the world are in the bin the second you're hanging upside down unconcious, dribbling with your tounge hanging out.

Not all rescues are life or death. I've gone up top to deal with cut/ jammed ropes, fatigue and broken MEWPs.

Was it a contractual stipulation that you could stick your camera in his face at any time? A good start to a career.

I feel morally obliged to comment if summoned by name.

Its a passing interest for me Tony. A kind of wander-through-the-woods-and-what-the-hell-is-that type of thing. More anatomy and taxonomy than specific interactions with particular decay types. Earwigs have wings don'tcha know. Truth be told, decay isn't really my bag - I'm a planning and development guy. Think planting spec rather than fruiting body. Risk policy rather than coronet cut.

I plan to close this thread in the morning - it is cancer. By the way, I get a grand everytime someone complains about what they consider to be censorship. I get another £150 if they bother to spell it right.

What will really get the Tony S's firing up the George Foreman is any unsupportable certainties. If you are making an educated guess or inferring from your experience - its fine to say so. Don't set yoursefl up for a fall. Similarly if you don't know something, don't feel you have to justify yourself; the person asking the question didn't know either. Oh and leave the ideology at home or gauge your audience extremely well. A presentation shouldn't be a sermon.

Sigh.

Is it too expensive? Yes. Should it be free? No. This document took a lot of time and effort to put together. A lot.

You have a pest problem, not a tree problem. Pruning is displacement at best. True! And the hopes of hundreds of righteous old boys and the bow saws come crashing down... I'd suggest negotiation as your first move. Anything else is likely to get complicated! Certainly, if you were prosecuted for unauthorised works, the magistrate is unlikely to agree with your flexible interpretation of that exemption!

I am sure I recall a chap on treebuzz that adapted a heavy duty cordless drill to fit the GRCS...

Hmmm. Not only do we appear to be all out of retrospectively bladed implements but we are running dangerously low on mild violence and threats of tedium. From this point on, all posting members will be contractually committed to donating £50 to our chosen charity. By the way, I am shockingly serious. We will collect and I refuse to close this thread on principle.

Emotive stuff huh? Anyway, attack the arguement and not the person please. Not only is it logically unsound, it undermines the sanctity of the principles which both sides hold dear. I would also like to suggest also that you give your fellow members the benefit of the doubt where possible; forums are not perfect communication mediums and meanings can be misconstrued.

Sorry gang. Due to the inbuilt directionality of time in our universe we are unable to redraw an ancient competion despite popular appeal. However, as we don't want to let you guys down we can offer the chance to win a clip round the ear from our heftiest Mod (Andy ) and a dull lecture on observational skills from our most pedantic and obtuse Mod (Me). Feel free to enter.

After reading through this thread I think we have a simple misunderstanding over the principle. I don't think anyone expects people to work for nothing - there is a reward being offered for the labour; i.e., an increased likelihood of being offered a job. To the unemployed, this has as much value as a days wage. Money is just another means of transferring reward. When I volunteered (while being unemployed) at the beginning of my career I got paid. Not in cash, but in knowledge and experience.

Various settings really, some have been isolated elements in a urban landscape (i.e., the only green thing in a 5 mile radius), with an eye on securing future replanting and some have been included as part of a wider Order picking up everything in a garden. But those are just moves in "planning chess", the ones that are probably most relevant to the OPs query have been open grown individuals planted along property frontages. Well formed, healthy, visually impressive in terms of scale and mass, good future contribution... box after box ticked for TPO. Green is king. Well, as above really. A good example would be three large mature healthy trees at risk on a development site (as a result of a planning application to replace them with a inappropriately large dwelling IIRC) - see the attached picture below. They were a key component of the major views up and down the public highway and framed the entrance to the existing property. It shouldn't matter that they are the much maligned but misused Leyland Cypress - my love is all embracing and I welcome all species under my banner of protection. Anyway the duty imposed on LPA's to protect trees under section 197 of the TCPA doesn't recognise stigma! Have you seen the specimens at Bedgebury Pinetum? Phenomenal hybrid vigour and they're still growing... http://arbtalk.co.uk/forum/picture-forum/6464-bedgebury-pinetum.html#post117677 Oh those old things. I don't know what I was thinking - horrible trees.

I've TPO'd Leyland Cypress in the past.

Alex Laver will gladly take months of your life away demonstrating SRT at the Cutters and Climbers if you only ask him! You'd be better off (i.e., less likely to die) if you backed each line up seperatley on drt with a kong twin ascender. If one cam disengages then the wrap around the handle/lines (or even above the cams) won't hold you. Try it from the ground - just click one cam in, wrap it up, attach to harness and sit down... make sure there's something comfy there first though!

CUTTERS AND CLIMBERS COMPETITION - NORWICH SHOWGROUND 16TH & 17TH APRIL 2011 In its sixth year, the annual Cutters and Climbers Competition is being held once again at the East of England Game Fair. As those who regularly attend will know, we pride ourselves on making the event bigger and better every time around. The competition is open to all qualified climbers and chainsaw operators regardless of age and gender. It consists of three individual climbing, spiking and chainsaw events with separate and combined prizes for each. The vast majority of competitors compete in all three, with the chance to win the much coveted ‘Most Employable Person’ title, based on scores from all three events. Climbing event, a solo simulated work scenario tests climbers with a variety of targets and aerial challenges such as our hair trigger bungee limb walk which challenges competitors to get as far out on an artificial branch as they can without setting off an alarm. Also our NEW vertical sprint - ascend the free hanging rope to reach the bell however you like as fast as you can(using appropriately safe methods of course) with the proviso that you start two metres away from it... Chainsaw event competitors are expected to fell a standing stem, de-limb and cross cut an artificial tree with points will be awarded for the precision of cuts and the time taken to achieve them. Pole climb pits two competitors head to head up the largest poles we can transport down the road. Although these fall short of the 80ft monsters that you might find at the UK championship, they more than make up for it in speed and splinters. Team relay events (Spiking/Felling/Snedding/Axe Crosscut) Whilst we do take entry on the day, those that pre-register get free entry to the game fair (which you need to get into the comp!) download the application form.

Interesting project (well more interesting than mine but I guess the grass is always greener). Are you predicting the failure mode to be fibre breaking or pullout (I guess you might get lucky and get both)? Either way, I suspect that any strength gains will plateau past a given point...

Thanks for posting that! I'm using my phone at the moment so I'll edit the format in a repost when I get a chance.

Maybe it would. How about those 6 points?

Do you split your wood in a CT scanner? A very transparent deflection Tim and if I may say, unworthy of your considerable talents. You haven't refuted any of the above problems with Shigo's model and I'll keep bringing you back to that despite your tempting and well aimed sideline into epistemology. I suspect you're bored and this is sport .

Would you like to explain why it's stupid or are you just happy with heckling? Perhaps once you have systematically refuted that point you might try the other five...?

Indeed he does. In fact in his paper in the AA Journal (Vol. 33 No. 2 September 2010) which he part presented to the AA Conference, he outlines six seperate reasons... I'll do my best to summarise them (with my typical gross vagueness and idiosyncratically deficient delivery): The basis of Shigos Model (SM) was destructive observation of limited sample group taken during the growing season supplemented by decay pattern assessments. This fails to support annual occulsion (insofar as it looks backwards without confirming any predictions about future events) and ignore the tissue preference of decay organisms. There is no supporting evidence that the cambium is capable of producing the overlapping 'tails' that SM shows. The production of such tails would require extreme contortions of the sheetlike vascular cambium. Shigo discounts the possibilty of a vascular connection between the branch and the tissue above on the stem because contempory experiments showed a lack of dye conduction. He then infers that this lack of conductivity precludes a structural connection - which is not accurate. Post hoc ergo hoc! In excluding vascular connectivity above the branch SM requires that all connectivity must occur through structural tissue which are know to restrict and impede vascular flow. Hardly an elegant efficient result. When does a union become a fork? The SM makes no explanation for the mechanics of forks (such as Hama's nice example above). If branches and forks are simply our definitions within a continuum of morphology, then SM requires that forks of equal diameter must logically create overlapping tails with each other (which they don't)?!? Or that we need another completely separate model for forks, presupposing that trees have evolved two seperate strategies for supporting branches and forks... Finally, and as if number 5 wasn't compelling enough - if branches are only attached with with a collar of last years tissue then first seasons twigs must either be unattached to the tree or the collar must form before the branch... I'm not sure whether it matters how long someones been studying something; being wrong for 100 years is still being wrong. I find his arguements entirely convincing. Interestingly enough, not only does the Kuhnian model of scientific 'progress' (that's in quotation marks for all the PoMo fanboys) require step changes like this but it also outlines a phase in the development of a science where rival schools of thought accumulate around the work of individual scientists like the late tree toucher...