rbtree

This is a useful chart Timber and Lumber Calculators at WOODWEB Keep in mind that all woods vary in weight, relative to their water content at a given time of year, and species. The largest variation I've found is in coast redwood. I've weighed young redwood at over 70 lb per cubic foot!!! As well, typically, the more dense lower trunk wood weighs more. I'm quite sure, for instance, that Douglas-fir lower trunk wood can weigh as much as 60 lb per cubic foot. Aalso, anyone considering crane work should know the load chart for a given crane. I don't have the site's handy on this computer, but charts for many cranes can be found, though they do take a considerable comprehension level to decipher.

Exactly. I've repeated this over and over for ages. Bidding by the linear inch is a sure way to get burned. However, there's more variables, notably, the required depth specified, and how much mounded area of roots and buttress roots there is that must be ground.

As topping of conifers should be a last resort, I'd examine the intact lead for any weakness....especially since it now stands alone. I'd first consider a 50% thin (end weight reuce if appropriate) of its upper area, or a careful height reduction, but not as low as the broken out lead.

20 months ago, I had just started gaffing up a cedar removal. Lifeline attached to side of belt, not yet installed overhead. Chipper too close to tree, rope in bag near it, my back to chipper. When it was drawn in, I was pulled upside down and backwards, with my left foot solidly gaffed in. Twisted my knee, damaged the MCL a bit, tibial plateau fractures....etc. Had two MRI's, and finally had minor surgery just 10 weeks ago. I knew I had to brace myself against my steel core flipline, and wait for the Blaze rope to come really tight, so that it would break off...which it did, but not before I was violently wrenched, as described above. It was very careless of my groundies, but myself as well, for putting the rope bag where I did.

While I don't like pruning maples/birches/dogwood, or any species that bleeds, during that season, research has shown that there's no detrimental affect to the tree. That said, pruning shouldn't be done during bud break and leaf formation. And, here in the Pacific Northwest, we prefer not to do crown reductions, especially on birches. Preferably, a good thinning, and end weight reduction if its called for is best. If the yard size calls for reduction pruning, at least try to be subtle, and start early in the tree's life so the effect is minimal. No big cuts with birch..they're poor compartmentalizers.

Fine..but I want two..... ....at once AND a Wraptorrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

Bump this old thread for some eye candy!! Paul finally got his promo video up for this slick new powered ascender. While I had already decided to purchase one...had there been any doubt, that would have quickly evaporated upon viewing this vertical dance!! The tall blonde is his wife....... [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_k1lAf_V5Uk&feature=player_embedded]YouTube - Strap on a Wraptor - with the Wraptor Girls[/ame]

Here's a way too long slide show from a trip to Oregon last weekend. waterfowl, lichen covered Oregon white oaks, and a waterfall. I shot 500 images in a coupla hours each day... I was in Eugene for the excellent Steve Sillet/Robert Van Pelt lecture...they're old growth canopy researchers, for those of you who don't know of them...... Enjoy: Oregon Scenes

Never heard of L:iros....prolly not locatable in the US. Noone has mentioned Fling-It....it's smoother than ZI by quite a bit..and doesn't tangle quite as easily. Most TCC competitors seem to prefer it over Dynaglide....and few use ZI....FI is much smoother, and thus returns to earth better.

Thanks. You guys can yak all you want, but take it to another thread, please. I said no comments on the subject. Respect your elders.

Remember, martyn, I said no comments...That is one issue that I am not able to set a proper example.......never have, and never will. I can train people otherwise, however....and, in all other aspects of my work, there is much to be learned, no doubt. Sorry about the lack of humility, but, after 35 years in the industry, I've paid my dues, but will always give back as much as I can. Keep in mind, that Dave and I have 64 years of experience between us,,,,and the rest of the crew on that job, about 35...... You name it, I've done it.....including some things that many of you young'uns will never do....

Here's the proper first image, from the post I'm quoting, number 33

Eric of Go Green Design is salivating over getting to use the wood from this tree, once it's cured for a year or more. Check out his site. His slab art furniture is top notch! I finally gave the camera away, and picked up a saw... The job was so easy, that three groundies was plenty, so I was able to shoot nearly 16 gigs worth of photos and video, which is HD. I have to build a new computer in order to edit it, even view it properly...and my puter isn't all that bad...

The tree was really quite easy. Cowboy Dave had it brushed out in two hours!! No comments on the one handing. Neither he nor I will ever stop doing it. We have no time or patience to comply with nonsense regulations. But we shoulda scoured up a helmet for the Q13 cameraman....and warned him to watch out for kickback. He'd ask Brian to do an upcut, and blow chips toward the lens.

This cool old maple, 21 feet around, was big when my clients moved in 56 years ago. Sadly, they were recently taken to the cleaners by some unscrupulous hacks who cut off some of the dead wood, took four pickup loads to the dump, and charged them nearly $1400. We removed it, as it is declining and presented some hazard, but only for $2200, as it's quite easy, versus another bid of $3800. We will salvage the lower wood for my craftsmen, and can get that craned for no charge. We'll leave the bottom 6 feet or so in memory. Old declining Haller Lake Maple - a set on Flickr We also made TV news. The 2 minute clip isn't on the website. I hope I can get it from the station. This link is to two stories....the first was a major snafu, done by a friend of mine, who should have known better Search - KCPQ

Another of that grand (but young) platanus Wide angle lens are a must for the cool perspective they offer, especially when shooting up into a tree. This was with my 17-40 f/4 L. Eventually, I'll get a 14 mm that has some fisheye effect...but costs about $1400......(That awesome macro lens was $1000...nearly double the non IS old model...ouch....) Crocus

Quack Cheep (shot with the old 1D---it's better for long shots) Woof:

Pastoral at Pine Lake (which is fir lined, but has few pines--I've seen none....) Earlier in the day, some fast melting ice...that only briefly had formed overnight

A never butchered platanus Just across the street...ugghhh....there's little reason for euro style whacking/pollarding in the PNW, where most yards are reasonably sizable. A spacey Needle.....? "The" Mountain !!

This was shot with my 24-70 f/2.8 L Then, just last Saturday, I bought my first ever full macro lens, the recently released Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro IS. It provides up to 4 stops of image stabilization, a first for a macro lens, and is reportedly the sharpest Canon lens, which is saying a lot! I'm in heaven! I think this is the same blob of mosses, as the first image, but shot from the other side. (The tree is a crabapple in my front yard. Spring is 4-6 weeks early here. This is a rare Japanese maple, that is leafing out, weeks ahead of most all other maples. All the shots I've done so far with the macro, which is capable of shooting lifesize images, or 1-1, or a minimum of 36x24mm...... are handheld. Had I used a tripod, the image sharpness would be even better. I surely will, but I do like the ability to easily move around, that shooting free gives. This set is dedicated to the 5D and the macro lens, and will keep updating as I add images to it. I shot some great ones Thursday that aren't there yet. 100Macro IS images - a set on Flickr

These, from the second day the camera was in my excited hands. Feather floating on murky H2O. Mt Baker, from Edmonds Harbor

So, I've recently gotten a new camera, and another is in the works within a coupla months. Though I'm still shooting with the workhorse Canon 1D Mk ll, which represented a near quantum leap in digital photographic technology when it was introduced. (Most working pro sports shooters bought two) The 1D cameras are heavy and expensive, but they spare no expense in offering near photographic perfection--at least as of their release date. However, the latest mid line cameras from Canon and Nikon are every bit as good in many ways, are lighter, and cost 1/4 to 1/2 as much. So, my new camera is the 5D Mkll, which has a full frame 21 megapixel sensor, and was the first SLR to offer full 1080P HD video. Full frame means no crop factor, so my wide angle lenses can be used to their full effect, something I haven't been able to enjoy since my old pro film EOS 1N was stolen. The IQ, or image quality, of the 5D is nearly identical (better in some ways) to the 1D Mklll S, which was listed at $7200 when the $2700 5D was introduced about 18 months ago (or 30, I'd have to look that up) As as result of the 5D's success, Canon had to lower the full pro camera's list price by about $1000. My next camera, will be the 18 megapixel 7D, which lists at about $1700. It has a smaller sensor with a crop factor of 1.6, which means lens like my 300 f/2.8 now take photos like a 480 mm lens, on that body. It's auto focus system is new and improved, and is amazingly good, I'm told. (OF course the brand new 1D MklV, at $5000, is even better.) The 7D also shoots at 8 frames per second, so it's perfect for sports-----or zip lining big wood. HA! Both cameras are being used by many pro photographers. And both of them will set me back several hundred dollars less than would the 1D Mk lV.

Lots opf good camera suggestions have been made. For anyone on a budget, SLR's are out. Better photographic results can be achieved with a good mini camera. Best deals can be found on ebay, by looking for an older camera, such as the A 710 or 720 Canon, or one of the older Lumix. If low light performance is important, look for one with a max lens opening of f/2 to f/2.8. For wide angle effect, then look for one with at least 28, and preferably 24 mm min focal length (that's the 35 mm camera equivalent. IMO, Panasonic Lumix line is number one, followed closely by Canon. And that's saying a lot, coming from a guy who has had 5 small cameras. Beside the point is my newest camera, but look out for images from it, as I find the time to post them Here's a teaser......cherry blossom at near life size. Canon 5D Mk ll, 100mm Macro f/2.8 L IS

I just found this thread......excellent be it! Thanks for sharing!

I posted this at the TreeHouse some time ago....: This cool old maple, 21 feet around, was big when my clients moved in 56 years ago. Sadly, they were recently taken to the cleaners by some unscrupulous hacks who cut off some of the dead wood, took four pickup loads to the dump, and charged them $1700. We will probably remove it, as it is declining and presents some hazard, but only for $2200, as it's quite easy, versus another bid of $3800. We will salvage the lower wood for my craftsmen, and can get that craned for no charge. We'll leave the bottom 6 feet or so in memory. Our old friend OX will do the arb report, now required to remove an exceptional tree, under Seattle's new tree ordinance. It will rate an 11 or 12 on the 12 point scale...... A brief slide show: Old declining Haller Lake Maple