treeseer

yes, canker being defined as a "dead sunken area"; is that your definition as well? i'll look into hispidus/dryophilus/dryadeus, but to know with some confidence that it is Inonotus does help my report thanks. With a 5' hollow in a ~6' diameter base, every detail helps.

This might explain why the lower trunk is so devoid of heartwood! But is this pattern of decay described in the abstract any different at all from I dryadeus?

I was hoping for a morphological difference; guess i gotta poke around west of the pond. yes, luley's manual. these little cuties were coming up near the trenching damage. early autumn pic.

Or page 24 here 2011 June Arborist News

that batch was not so descriptive: here the first is a subdominant leader with canker, next the dominant leader without. Third shows dead bark shedding in sinus that is pinched by the parallel buttress roots. Bark not removed--doing more in protection than would be gained by cleaning. 4th N view of crown.

duh

This poor guy got trenched 12' N of trunk 2 years ago. Climbed first time yesterday to crown clean and check for dieback and prune accordingly. Branch cankers all over--no pattern noted. A few branches <2" were girdled and died. no fb seen. if dissected, i'm wondering what where to look for ID clues.

Your full-tree pic shows the location is similar--in a central leader that is being squeezed in. A thousand words at least. I never sorted out I dryophilus; what differences in the conk to look for.

Well that surely leaves little doubt, thanks. The upper surface of this one was curling upward, which did not look like I.d. at all, but now i see it was dessication that makes it look like that. There are no structural implications i can see with this chap at the mid-stem location, as there is little mass left above it. No conk has been seen further down the trunk, and this is a high-vis location so it would have been noticed. So beyond the reduction and the removal of anaerobic mulch i do not knwo what else to do for it. town refuses to consider root work--they stopped my guy from aerating n/c while i was pruning.

Innonotus sp Guy? Looks like dryadeus. Not like any I've seen before. what kind of closeup would help ID? "Do you have many sp within the complex on the east seaboard?" yes 6 or so but dryadeus is the only common urban one ime. Any decay detection up around the conk? just sounding with the mallet. wood is extremely durable, hence common name of "post oak" the dead chunk i cut out was Solid still, no rot. The lower trunk was heavily assessed in a "drill and kill" style job. condemned according to tomography at 20" above grade, and drilling of buttress roots. :cursing: .

Also the tree has a cavity 5' wide at the base (85%?), opening at the east side, facing the wires. Someone shot video with a borescope and the sight of the buttress decay freaked out the Town arborist, who pressed for more taken off than i'd specified. we compromised.

Central leader declining due to root loss and being squeezed by codominants. Small area below conk has canker maybe 1' x 1.5' with woundwood margins.

Those features can be quite ornamental to some eyes; not really deformities are they? Just different-formities?

"From your reports perspective I would say the removal appears excessive. The perspective was as objective as I could make it. "I would imagine a tree like this with the type of history you describe would/could be retained with similar (or slightly greater) reduction where I work. How much greater? "Of course that would be coupled with annual inspection of the condition. 9 months works biologically and politically; gets it viewed in all seasons, and communicates a higher concern. "How high up on their tree strategy is the ecology of this urban park? Ecosystem services aka air and water values that can get a $ sign can be raised with some success here. Saproxylics aka bugs and crud, not so much. I'll ask some of the wildlife chaps at the U but I would expect the same blank stares I am met with when I raise that value elsewhere. Bear in mind the park is within 3 blocks of city hall, county courthouse, and state capitol. When lawyers stride beneath, "target rating" goes off the charts. "Do you happen to know (apart from the extension) what the weather conditions were at time of failure? Good question; I'll try to find out. The other Q phellos had 4--4!! separate limb tearouts, and still the light bulb did not go on. Like wow man maybe we could prune those limbs before any more crash down; wuddya say dood?? Branch reduction is anathema; we are frozen by twisted Shigovian anti-topping dogma imo. "Why the cable at the base? For the lights installed up the trunk and out the scaffolds. Purpose unclear; perhaps the homeless vagrants petitioned for night lights.

Very good question. Answer may lie (arar) in the 2 buttress roots to the left of that fold. They indicate sustainability ime. Nice body language yes and deffo clothesline as they are known here.

March 17, 2013 Nash Square Park in Raleigh, NC. A willow oak has a removal notice. At the main fork 25’ up is a tear-out wound where a branch was pulled out all the way to the core. The entire branch tore off at the trunk due to overextension. It was the branch growing to the south and to the open. There is also minor damage lower on the trunk from the branch falling. Otherwise the trunk shows exceptional structure with burls forming at points of stress. It has a lower center of gravity and more interior growth than many old willow oaks. The press release said that “While we did not see the termites noted in the Moore Square tree, we observed that the broken or removed limbs in both trees exposed internal decay. It seems apparent that pruning or reducing the crown of these trees would not mitigate the failure potential the trees present, and the cost and appearance of such pruning efforts would be negative aesthetically and economically. The resistograph readings confirm the weakened structural condition of these trees.”pruning the tree enough to make the risk acceptable would not be economically or aesthetically acceptable. (However, it appears that 2 climbers could have it done in a short day, and the tree would look quite attractive.) There was no link to the report and no other technical detail was given aside from the fact that they used a resistograph. There is a substantial amount of living wood at the border of the tearout wound. Squirrels have taken up residence, if they weren't there before. The tearout is at the major junction, so the question becomes what part of the tree is most subject to failure and what risk will remain after pruning or other mitigation. The top of the tree is dominant, slightly taller than the adjacent Willow Oaks, one to the south west and the other to the northeast. The leverage on the wound coming from the tree’s height may be the highest risk factor. Reduce height and spread and density of crown, removing 6-8’ branches with cuts less than 2” cuts, <25% of present crown volume. At the same level as the wound are two other limbs. The one growing to the east is overextend and presses against the willow oak to the northeast. It has long horizontal branches that could be reduced, and the upward growing portion could come back 8 feet with a less than 2 inch cut. The lowest horizontal branch could be removed all the way. The northern horizontal branch that over tops the northeast willow oak could be reduced 50%, pruning to upright laterals. The second limb coming off that main junction is a double land that forks out at 4 feet. The upper of these two branches goes out 6 feet and then puts out two laterals, then goes another 6 feet and sends out a substantial 4 inch lateral that grows straight to the south. This limb could be reduced at that point, because after that it crowds the branch below. The lower limb is larger than the upper, 16 inches compared to 12. The lower limb goes out 10 feet from the union, then forks. The Western branch has braided reaction would a twisted pattern of xylem formation, and a sign of strength. It also has four very strong uprights, so that cut can be beyond the fourth, at a narrowing of diameter 2 feet before a major fork. This limb is over extended beyond this point, and interferes with a maple below it. This suppression is forcing the maple to grow crooked. The branch that goes to the North has an upright form. The lowest branch goes horizontally into the adjacent Willow oak to the northeast. Right at that union is a very large upright. This is a natural pruning target. The rest of the limb is the tallest thing around, and could be reduced by 6 foot sections perhaps 10 to 20% of buds. Of the two lowest branches, one is growing to the south. It could be reduced by 10 feet, back to a lateral that grows to the Northeast. The other lowest branch that grows to the north interferes with the same maple, so it should come back to a strong lateral that is a 4" cut, taking off a 20 foot piece. This is all the pruning needed for now. Prognosis is reasonable stability for at least 5 years. Recommend inspection after major storms and every 9 months. Anticipated re-pruning cycle is every 5 years. Buttress roots look normal; the flare is continuous. The trunk is 2 feet from the sidewalk but no sign of damage or decay at the base. These three consecutive willow oaks that have interlocking crowns and are the tallest things around. The proposed removal of the middle tree would turn the adjacent trees into “edge trees”, greatly increasing their exposure to storms and their risk of failure. This effect should be seriously considered before deciding on removal. The oak to the southwest is much larger in diameter and spread. It has a codominant form, splitting off 12 feet from the ground. The change in the movement in the tree during a storm would be substantial. The tree has two cables high in the crown. One supports that major co-dominant, and the other also supports a sprawling side branch. Though that fork does not look too narrow or codominant, the side branch is overextended. It would be newly exposed to winds from the north and east, which is the direction that many of our hurricanes and ice storms have come from. The long side branches would move more and so would the major limbs that are held up now by the cables. The root system overlaps the sidewalk and its entire area is constricted by Davie Street. The Willow Oak to the northeast would be subjected to the full brunt of the wind coming from the south or west. Its long limbs would move a great deal more. The tree has good angles in its forks, but it is in the center of the park and would be the tallest thing remaining It has had three large branches from the westward trunk removed recently. Scar tissue is developing symmetrically, despite a rip on one. They are all within a 12 foot stretch of the same sap stream, a major stressor as resources are needed to fight on three fronts at once.

Were the clients getting old?

Simple enough; if 200mm = <8", that is reasonable for a maple with an exposed/eroded rootzone. As for bracing being a concern due to "admitting defect" that reasoning is worth examination: Many cities and many arborists in both the United States and Australia are concerned about the spectre of liability associated with installing support systems in trees. Their fear is that, by admitting that a defect exists, owners and workers can be blamed for anything that happens to a tree. However, according to the USDA’s Urban Tree Risk Management Guide, “Choosing not to install a cabling and bracing system because of a fear of liability is not a good decision.” We can’t hide from liability, so there is no use running from it. It may surprise you to learn that pruning alone can be interpreted by insurance companies as admitting liability because a defect exists! Consider the recent experience of Pete Morris, City Arborist for Laurinburg, NC, US, who tells us: "This past summer, a large limb fell from an older oak, damaging a house and a vehicle. The owner watched from his wheelchair as I assessed the situation. There was no decay, so it seemed to be a case of sudden summer limb drop. The insurance company decided that the need for previous pruning alone should have put us on alert the tree was hazardous and should have been removed or at least given special attention. I guess what has us concerned is most of our older trees have been pruned and cut on for all kinds of reasons...storm damage, disease, decay, etc. We’ll have to see how things go from here.” So in this adjuster’s opinion, the mere act of pruning a tree admits liability, and every urban tree is hazardous!

Yes, exudate can also be related to these and others, therefore exudate does not strongly indicate any of the above organisms. In any case, assessing the tissue is the first job. By sounding the wood you can see if cambium is dead. By scraping off (and removing!) exudate and probing dead areas you can learn the extent of the damage, and get a better idea of the cause. At the very least you'll be able to rule out vandalism!

How much easier would/should it be? If climbers are not comfortable getting out where small cuts need to be made, maybe some practice at alternate techniques are in order. Silverback or bantamweight, there are ways to access the outer crown without undue time taken. Looking awful for a long time is a factor, and the risk of snapping out through increased exposure and decay is a bigger factor.

And multiple tie-ins, and pole tool usage. I wouldn't want to lean my 170# out too far on that one. David, I note a few cuts seem to have been made back to nodes with no laterals; how common is that?

No, it's not another one of my boring stories. This one's by a colleague in another corner of the US. Howard Gaffin did a bang-up job on managing this tree, and a fine job of reporting the story. Note his spec--cut locations "based on the size of the cut (the smaller, the better), evidence of existing decay, and the presence of live growth or nodal areas." Howard imposed no artificial guidelines like distance from the fork. Instead, he let the tree call the cuts, and he listened well. Page 32 TCI Magazine March 2013

A couple inches is a lot if it's healthy. That rib in your pic looked pretty strong. Have you considered cabling to prevent splitting apart? What pruning history?

Experience in the US concurs with this. I find the invasive concern overblown and a tad hypocritical as a trade-wide concern, given all the invasion of heartwood from big pruning cuts. I spec steel cable for ~90% of cable jobs but here the extra movement seems desirable. But a 1/4" steel cable would be quite invisible, if winter visibility is that great a concern. Bracing = rod bracing, in the dictionary. "Cable bracing" = cabling. We are also limited by biology. 1 Flexing branches to act as cables can strain and kill them. Scoring/slicing to increase flex just increases that risk. What works on young apple branches may not in stiff old ash trees. Not bad to try, on an expendable branch. If done, the bark should be scraped off where contact is made. 2. Adding soil onto tissues that are hardened may not spur new root growth, if all the tissue is lignified and differentiated. Not bad to try perhaps but would not bet on it. Fraxinus may respond better than most genera, given F pennsylvanca's ability to grow adventitious roots into fill on the outside.

they surely did tear up those buttress roots--lawn mowers? horses?