treeseer

The heartwood process is viewed with horror by some engineer wannabees who treat the tree like a pipe (tho it is not), and drill it to see how hollow, and practice numerology to see how scary it is. The calmer view is; heartrot is Nature's weight-loss regimen. It increases flexibility and durability, sustainability and survival. Buttrot's a similar but slightly sadder story.

Dom, unfortunate that the spec was not written clearly enough for the arborist to follow. If the wording was clear about "lift to 5m" then no cuts would be made above that point...unless there was other wording somewhere heeded about removal cuts being better than reduction cuts, go to the collar when you can, etc etc perhaps? That tripe leaks into boilerplate templates here too--codswallop. Beech are intolerant of any work.[/i]" is indeed a reckless phrase--incorrect, flawed, shoddy, and all that. But let's look at the cultural context this attitude comes from. "Tree management intervention" is viewed with suspicion, somewhat scorned, something to be avoided. "Maiden" trees are revered like Santa Maria, their imaginary hymens guarded by the Gawains and Galahads of the arb consultant world. Shiny-pants consultants stand strong against the slings and arrows and saws brandished by the great unwashed, heathen tree cutters. Add to that the hypothetical gyrations that are spun into the defensibility of proactive felling in the face of a weak and treatable parasite, DAFT though that may be. On a par with the smoke and mirrors, and banana peels and marbles cast before experts as they march toward desperate lawyers/barristers. They know their case is weak, hence the proactive attempt to fell the expert by contorting their record and their report. With that context, it's no surprise that your client is now annoyed and believes the application won't be accepted. depends on the juice that exaggerating arb's got, the finesse of the other side, the known and unknown facts of the case, and the whistling winds of politics. It's a madhouse out there! But The Arborist formerly known as hamadryad brought in some sanity--excellent post!

"Sycamore-reduction ?? not what i would recommend. Why not? " How will you measure the amount of pull and how many people will pull the tree? No numerical measurement--2 people should be enough. "or do you just increase the number of people pulling/shaking shaking would be silly--no coconuts up there. :001_rolleyes: " the tree as part of the test and if you run out of staff do you ask the client to get on the end of the rope?, that way if the tree fails you can blame the client. What if it fails the pull test and a branch lands on your head or worse still the client or his property? EVEN WORSE- lets say it does not completely fail but it makes the unnerving ' CREEK' followed by a' CRACK' and stays there. Do you then just suggest he gets someone else to look at it, or do you send a member of staff up the tree to dismantle and rig it down or do you climb it and rig it down?" Well then you pull the rope through--you did not pull a knot up there did you? I did not think that needed explanation--both ends on the ground of course... That's not a dig; that is 6 digs, based on a very sketchy scenario. Unless your staff is all gorillas they could not break those ribs of woundwood. Fella named Detter from Germany showed me this basic pull test; no dynamometers involved. Climbing up there and checking the area out is best of course; simples. "Good management of trees is not just about seeing how long you can leave a tree standing just because it pleases the client,or that you love trees more than your wife, Hm where do you get your information? "you should also take into account the safety of a climber and not leave it to the last minute of a trees life at the point when failure is immanent. By what objective factor does this assessment come from? Behind on payments to make on your chipper? "Rigging down a stem decayed tree where the climber has to work above the area of decay requires a great deal of skill. Pruning that stem would be done from tying in to the adjacent stem. If no other stem is available (hypothetically) then pole tools are an option, attached. Very low risk operation. "Not all sites can accommodate a cherry picker. Ah those are bigger payments; understood. "The safety of a climber comes first with me, then the client, then his property, then me last. I always climb and rig down the dodgy trees as its a big ask which i don't like to put on my staff. Just my opinion and i'm not having a dig treeseer. Oh no of course not. You're just exaggerating risk to justify removal, that's okay, we all gotta eat. Dodgy indeed. Good management of trees is not based on arborphobia--or is it called dendrophobia over there? PolePruning_2008_06-1.pdf

And when they do, they cite "obvious defects", which are too often not looked at sufficiently to determine whether or how much they affect risk. aka snap judgments. James, the term is bothersome because it is too often used in this manner. 6 years ago I wrote the attached, but have seen risk assessment remain a defect = hazard = removal game all too often. The ISA Risk BMP is only $15--is it sold in the UK at all? It's still too defect-driven for my tastes, but recognizes adaptive growth, mitigation, and other essential considerations. hama, I hope I'm not one of those 1% blighters. I try to avoid snide comments; it's easy to hear something bad if you are listening for it, you know? As far as detract from the threads, I hope to add to them, often missing the mark perhaps but no harm in trying. In this thread you might note I am agreeing with you most strongly! As far as "wind up", not sure you mean finish, or start a clock, or wind YOU up, which seems like coals to newcastle, as they said. it's easy to hear something bad if you are listening for it, you know? Mitigation or Death.pdf ISA CEU Basic Tree Risk Assessment complete.pdf

"A reduction will not resolve the problem ,extensive die back will occur next year," How certain a prediction is this? "that is IF it even comes back into leaf again , it is widespread and common with Cherry." I thought the question is about this tree, not how widespread or common the suspected pest is. Recovery relies a bit on stored resources--how plump are the twigs? Could do a quick starch test. If the owner is keen on keeping it, why not try? Clip just the worst of the dying and weak branches--reduction overall might be too hard on it. And for heavens sake get the owner to let you improve the rooting environment--with all those other plants, that would be money well spent even if the cherry does not make it. Starting by lifting those pavers and amending the soil, then relaying them--that would make a big difference in an hour or so. P syringae common here too but seldom fatal in 3 years. All I am saying, is give the tree a chance!

Along with ID, extent of spread is good to know. Perhaps remove more dead bark, so to find the margins of the infection? The tree's response at the margin, or lack of same, informs management, along with the name of the pathogen. Sounding with a mallet should get you to the margins quickly. Turf culture to trunk seems the causal issue--a shovel might be handy.

Not in the UK; who said that? Why so jumpy today? Chill, mon, chill. Germany I believe. Seen pics of 2 different treees (one showing consecutive years of tomographs), in peer-reviewed presentations by published tree risk managers. Don't shoot me; I was only the piano player--er, audience member. It's like the oak i showed ringed by Big old inonotus conks--target rating very low--only the grass cutting personnel go under it with any regularity, amenity high (sunny side of office bldg) so risk is tolerated. What else?

I can't see that at all. Those ribs of adaptive growth/woundwood could probably hold up the lot of us! That is a small amount of strength loss, even if the branch were hollow. It is on the edge of the crown, so exposure and length of lever arm are risk factors. Both can be quite readily managed, mitigated by reduction, based on the pics. Yes the tree has poor structure--so prune the *(()*())*&^*'n thing! The Arborist formerly known as hama goes on sabbatical, and the place goes to the dogs. Seriously, the best way to assess the risk might be to get a rope up there and pull on it; see how it moves.

Thanks James; no accusations; my issue is with the term, which is so vague I find it useless at best and often misleading. The doc you linked does clarify a little bit, once one gets through the other stuff, to actual information. Right you are, Steven--one can only get edified by ascending with the higher minds over at the consultant's site, away from these scruffy arbo types.

Don't forget the bottom half of the tree--root stress from competition and paving need to be mitigated. Canker can be treated by sanitation.

Perhaps height and location determine frequency, more than anything. How often do Tilia emerge from the canopy? Species susceptibility has been documented in the US, but the data are gained through inventory of old and inadequate samples. The methodology is weak and can mislead imo. The change in mineral composition in and around the tree may be a factor though; no denying that.

It does make trees fall over, but several have been ringed with conks for many years with minimal crown effects, sort of like the case studies I have seen of European beech ringed with Merip that get managed indefinitely.

1. Humble arborists do if they are to assess and manage the stability and the risk of falling of a tree. &Good point--I stand corrected. I should have said "spread to living tissue is a far greater concern than loss of structurally significant but inactive wood. This is especially true since the disease typically moves from the outside in, so destabilization due to Armillaria occurs a long long time after the initial infection." Is that closer to true? 2. Most of the European researchers qualified on the subject of excessive nitrification do not (consider soil works or associated plantings of potential usefulness)and otherwise would have found a "cure" for or a method of mitigating the effects of nitrification. &What is the scientific basis for this opinion? If no experiments have taken place, maybe they should. If this is another case of "believe me/us, based on who we are", then with all due respect there is cause for skepticism. Unless "qualified" means "omniscient". 2. which by the way is not restricted to the soil. & Yes, I'm aware it's in the air, hence the derriere/dairy air reference. (Why don't I hear laughter? ) And you must be aware that associated plants and mulch can capture and hold N that is in the air. 2. And there is no harm in experimenting if it is done by properly trained experts using scientifically valid methods. & There is no harm in experimenting, if the alternative is a removal program--by the way, has this removal program been scientifically verified through experimentation? Or is a best guess, based on the questionable hypothesis that fungus plays the leading part in tsse? 3. If it was that simple, we would not have a massive Armillaria problem. & Maybe the problem seems massive because the range of proposed solutions is mistakenly constrained. If no experiments have taken place, maybe they should.

Rob, yes, very similar, thanks. Your pic shows it spreading callus from a collar, but it often takes off from a point not near an apparent node. Note *past tense*, hama. So you are off the hook. Inosculation has "blend" in its definition so close but no cigar. I prefer "shield"; connotes armoring and protection, and flatness. I. dryadeus looks similar uk or us--one thing we have in common at least!

& 1. No one's guaranteeing forever--a short-term benefit is still a benefit, and may allow other therapies, such as soil work to mitigate acidification and nitrification, take hold. For trunks and buttresses, decay fungi can and should be resisted. 1. Excessive nitrification enhances wood degrading fungi to speed up the decay of dead wood which can not be mitigated by soil work. & 1.a. Who cares about dead wood being decayed? It's the decay of living tree tissue that is of concern, and it can be mitigated by sanitization and exposure. &1.b. Yes excess N can go to the bad guys; no news there. Does anyone doubt that excessive nitrification can be mitigated by soil work, or growing beneficial associated plants that buffer these effects and take up a lot of N? Tautological. Is there any harm in experimenting? &2. Soil type influenced disease development and the proportion of trees infected was higher in an acidic sand soil than in an alkaline clay soil." 2. No wonder, as the hyphae of Armillaria are protected against acids, bacteria and other fungi by the melanin layers shielding them off (plaques) or covering and surrounding them (rhizomorphs). &2.a. That is why Armillaria should be removed from trees of value. This is not a complex concept. &2.b. Nitrification humor--If too much manure is spread, you can smell the derriere, dairy air, hahaha. Other points can be addressed to (or by) the authors of the research. I am not a mycologist or ecologist but a humble arborist, caring for trees the best way I can see. I just posted the research in response to your request. See you on the next thread!

"the use of root invigoration in combination with Trichoderma may provide a useful cultural/bio-control combination for long term A. mellea control." (How, when, where and by whom is this monitored and tested ?) ... & You'll have to ask the authors about that one. We won't argue about how long "long" is. As in other Tree health care typically, it is part of a suite of treatments, not standalone. "Results of our experiments should also be interpreted with some degree of caution when adapting research from grapes and strawberries to large trees with respect to structural aspects." & This is standard cya language; trees are large objects... The amount of soil removed is highly unlikely to destabilize a mature oak--is this a serious question? 2. How can several studies in the forestry, phytopathology and ecology literature demonstrate the effectiveness of these treatments if "the potential of Trichoderma against A. mellea remains unknown" & It's the combination of treatments they were testing, and they were judging by the results. In the references are actual tests and the "results of our experiments should also be interpreted with some degree of caution when adapting research from grapes and strawberries to large trees with respect to structural aspects" ? & Again grasping at the straw of the structural non-issue? Besides, old wine in new bottles considering the extensive research on the effects of Trichoderma (and Phlebiopsis gigantea) on Heterobasidion annosum and the lack of proof for the long term effectiveness of the treatment. & No one's guaranteeing forever--a short-term benefit is still a benefit, and may allow other therapies, such as soil work to mitigate acidification and nitrification, take hold. For trunks and buttresses, decay fungi can and should be resisted. Trees can wall off some wood-destroying fungi, inexorably and indefinitely, indicating immortality. 3. Again jumping to conclusions on an unproven assumption ? & Condemning mature urban oaks based on nearby rhizomorphs sounds more like jumping to conclusions on an unproven assumption! Apart from the above, the following remarks and questions arise : - What about the effects of acidification and nitrification causing the massive outbreak of Armillaria and can these effects be overcome or neutralised by root invigoration and the introduction of Trianum ? & Acidification is global and gradual. Cow crap has been spread on fields since the dawn of civilization. The problems you cite are (somewhat) reversible, at least proven treatable. The authors note at the end that these two therapies are part of a program of care. - What about the effects of tree root invigoration on root protecting and defending mycorrhizae ? & Other studies show improvement in tree health and growth. An inventory over time would be interesting to see, true. The populations might shift, and while this might upset the tssm/tsse applecart in one view, populations of microbes can adjust, influenced by the dominant organism, the tree. - Strawberries and grapes are endomycorrhizal, a lot of the affected tree species are ectomycorrhizal. & True, and the forestry references deal with trees: Redfern notes that "Infection by A. mellea in Britain occurs by means of rhizomorphs; *the transfer of mycelium at root contacts is probably not important as a means of spread. ... Quercus robur and Fagus sylvatica were more resistant* than all the conifers except A. grandis. Soil type influenced disease development and the proportion of trees infected was higher in an acidic sand soil than in an alkaline clay soil." So yes reducing acidification and nitrification should be part of the work--and soil replacement and modificiation does that. & Baumgartner confirms that spread was not significant in that study. If other observations indicate spread between oaks may be faster, is this based on a controlled experiment in which some trees got this proven treatment, and a control group did not? Or was it by passive observation, like the link previously put up about foresters in Arkansas inventorying species of fungi--outside the context of treatment, and this forum's title, "Tree health care". - Why introduce Trianum into the soil food webs of trees if "Trichoderma is a genus of fungi that is present in all soils" and also in trees in combination with plaques of Armillaria ostoyae that does not seem to "suffer" from the presence of Trichoderma at all? & That looks like an issue of timing and quantity. In tree health care, efforts are made to decrease the potential of pathogens. If Armillaria-infected tissue and soil is removed before inoculation, an introduced inoculant can more likely gain the upper hand. The picture shows Armillaria going full force, and a few specks of Trichoderma on top, which is the completely opposite scenario. Earlier, when i described this treatment anecdotally, you did not speak kindly of it, and asked for supporting research. I just ran across it, so there it is. Can you prove it wrong? Talk to the tree health care experts in Reading. All we are saying, is give trees a chance. Before trees of value are condemned, these treatments, in concert with other care such as soil modification, should in all good conscience be considered. It's good chatting with you, as always.

Thanks James for reading between the images; David, you must have mis-scrolled there. That is the UK perspective, as related in the US. That mag has good stuff now and then, aside from my rubbish. The UK lab's research is much more interesting than their US counterpart's; the selection of topics reflects a much higher awareness. Not only more open minds, but more full minds! They do seem to understand how trees work, and seek to put pathogens in their place. Whatever that trident does, I don't want it done to me!

http://www.tcia.org/Digital_Magazine/PDFs/lowres/TCI_Mag_May10LR.pdf Page 22: Trees infected with Armillaria fungus can be treated by exposure and by inoculation with beneficial antagonists to that pathogen. This research, conducted in the United Kingdom and with the lead author from the United Kingdom, proves the effectiveness of exposing the infected area and treating with beneficial microorganisms. In addition, several studies in the forestry, phytopathology and ecology literature demonstrate the effectiveness of these treatments. Therefore, it seems that condemning trees in urban areas based on rhizomorphs without considering these simple therapeutic treatments may be needlessly costing those communities irreplaceable arboreal resources.

Host Q phellos in SE USA is ringed 360 with it; 1 old and new in first pic 2 squirrel on burling stub, showing limb loss; has been dying back for a decade 3 nice rib of adaptive growth 4 a "shield" growth at the top of a sinus. often i see these at stressed points like this, but sometimes unrelated to rot or movement. is there a name for these in Europe, or a thread here about these flat, liquid-looking burls(?)?

Host Q phellos in SE USA is ringed 360 with it; 1 old and new in first pic 2 squirrel on burling stub, showing limb loss; has been dying back for a decade 3 nice rib of adaptive growth 4 a "shield" growth at the top of a sinus. often i see these at stressed points like this, but sometimes unrelated to rot or movement. is there a name for these in Europe, or a thread here about these flat, liquid-looking burls(?)?

"I'd suggest that before an arb can 'look for ways to mitigate/lessen that risk to a tolerable level' they need to first know both what the level of risk is" yes and this includes both the risk of failure, and the risk of damage due to failure. "...obvious defects? Well, I guess what I meant was arboricultural features which would be recognised by many arbs as being a potential indicator that the tree/s in question may have an elevated level of risk of failure... or something along those lines :)" well there in that one sentence you have 3 qualifiers, so your meaning is now even less clear, from here. since tony is enjoying a fag (very different meaning in the US:001_tt2:) i'll suggest that it is this very type of ambiguity that leads to quick and erroneous condemnations, and that was the prompt for this thread. or maybe i too need to lay down in a dark room...no fags thanks

hama will no doubt speak too but generally the owner/manager decides how much "threat" they can handle (risk tolerance), and the arborist looks for ways to mitigate/lessen that risk to a tolerable level. Felling is at the end of the list of options. BTW, what do you mean by "obvious defects"? All trees might pose a threat to people and/or property, and I've seen a lot of trees condemned for no good reason, is why I ask..

page 34, http://www.tcia.org/PDFs/TCI_Mag_Jan_09.pdf DEFENSIVE REPORTING vs. SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT A branch fell from a nearby live oak onto the walkway leading to city hall, so the city paid for a risk assessment from an ISA Certified Arborist on that tree and the Thoburn Oak. In a one-page letter dated July 18, the arborist proposed removing both trees. He said that they posed a danger to the motorists and pedestrians who pass under them each day, but gave few details. Tree risk formulas typically rate the severity of the defect, the size of the defective part, and the “target rating”, or use of the area under the tree. Next, management options to lessen or “abate” the risk are considered, before recommendations are made. "Development of abatement options should be as systematic as development of the ratings...cable/bracing and/or reduction of end weight may be required...", according to A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees. This arborist later said that “Target rating is the most important factor for me. If there’s a lot of use under the tree it’s dangerous, no matter what you do.” The city's Tree Advisory Board rejected this defensive report, and decided to get a second opinion ... The city was satisfied, and decided to go ahead with the cabling of the municipal tree. Given this experience, it is clear that municipalities can and will accept tree cabling. According to Matheny and Clark, “Almost by definition, arborists have a responsibility to care for trees”, and that duty is not breached if we act in a reasonable manner. Offering opinions about trees’ dignity or decrepitude without analyzing the facts is not part of a professional risk assessment. Members of the American Society of Consulting Arborists (ASCA) follow their Standards of Professional Practice, Item 4.2 G. : " Members shall not take advantage of their positions as Experts by assigning or implying greater significance to an interpretation than it warrants. The degree of certainty of an opinion is as important as the opinion itself and Members shall do nothing, actively or passively, to misstate the degree of certainty." Instead of reporting defensively by injecting opinions or exaggerations, we should be systematically assessing standard treatment options to abate risk. If the treatments follow the standards and the ISA BMP’s, there is no reason to fear liability from working on trees that some would dismiss as “decrepit”.

Why? I can see the majority of effort going there, but would not put all the eggs in that or any treatment basket. How will more mycrrhizae affect the decay that is advancing into the stem? Sooner than drying out the infections?

An excellent description--I wish American college students had English that good! I've always found it quite hard to differentiate those black lines; arbogenic or mycogenic?