treeseer

The schedule is set. From the soil food web, to pollards and pruning, to evolution and adaptation, and back to truffles. http://www.internationaloaksociety.org/s...February_12.pdf

Excellent post--agrees with experience over here, and with a recent study in the AUF journal--mulched trees in both nurseries and orchards outperformed bare ground or mowing. What kind of mulch--can one go wrong by mulching with material similar to the subject tree(s)? "...the tree, which is the part of the ecosystem I'm most interested in. "...the tree, which is the part of the ecosystem I'm most interested in. "..the tree, which is the part of the ecosystem I'm most interested in. Thank you for reminding us of an arborist's #1 priority! Aeration and attention to nutrients may be needed where diminishing soil oxygen and increasing (or decreasing) soil nitrogen levels are a concern.

Just wondering how this would be diagnosed in the UK (if the owner or arborist wanted this done). Here the first step might be to pull away dead material, look, smell, touch, and non invasively probe.

On the buckle, it sure does not look like girdling. Great list, Tony--Ambitious and Admirable! 6 lifetime's worth. "and re evaluate CODIT, spin the demons of D, re investigate Thermo and prove its immense potential contribution. +1 "Turn an industry wide standpoint of reductions as wounding and tree abuse into a respected, viable and VALUED aspect of tree retention/management. Pruning is always going to be wounding, but agreed--it could use more respect! "Bring together all the current research on decay and strategies of fungi into an easily readable and useable format. (how many arbs own books like that?) None, and none may ever! Luley's manual is a good start in this direction. "and establish a basic tool kit for working arbs that will enable assessment of tree health, soil quality (potential to survive is in the soil) Top ten tools for assessment! "Describe the proscess of reduction evaluation and methods in greatest detail (looking for an artist) Check Gilman's site for some of this; a good start. As is Fay's graphic of gradual veteranization via retrenchment. Images of reduction's effects over time are seldom telling (looking for a photographer, and the right trees) "Most importantly make sure it is all acurate as possible, scientificaly so too so that it can be used to educate the educators who to this day are teaching their students that inonotus dryadeus and hispidus are blanket fells, no arguments, (recent example):thumb down: Good luck with that one--I thought/dreamed I did it 10 years ago with reviewing Schwarze's first book, and work since, but fear never dies, as rust never sleeps. But there is progress for you to build on, and that is good.

One could say that. Overmore, from a different perspective, one could also say pruning's largely overdone. If one had to choose, consider that one preserves canopy and the other takes it away. Which meets the objective--The Lady or the Tiger? If the objective is tree benefits and contributions, it's connecting with The Lady, where possible. If the objective is saproxylic additions to the tssecosystem, it's cutting with The Tiger. But either may be best, and most trees appreciate a wee bit o' pruning

Zinc-coated metal like EHS cable resists corrosion--materials! With through-cabling, only that cable is exposed to tannins and other corrosive compounds. I agree that lag bolts seem inferior, to through-cabling, in most cases.

Ha yes guying is what i do, no matter what. 12 month interval, perhaps; depends on tree and site. I've specced intervals from 3 months to 5 years. O, security like vandalism, right. That EHS cable is very hard; maybe 100 strokes with the hacksaw. vandals are typically not that persistent, methinks. i have much to learn about the evaluation, monitoring and careful consideration of the tree. I've only worked on a dozen or so projects on this scale in one role or another, none with factoring fistulina. "It is apparent to me that there is a gulf in quality of arboricultural care and expertise,budget and outlook between my own situation and David's, for example, or indeed yours. The reasons for this are not entirely clear to me but I guess they are geographical, cultural, educational and primarily financial." All these factors may be at play, but outlook may be #1. Willingness to look at all possible solutions, without biases. Expertise is #2, and that is primarily experience. Educational is part of that, #3, ya gotta study what others are doing. Financial, not seeing that. This project would take maybe $500 worth of kit--drill, bits, hacksaw, tensioners; basic stuff. All knowing genius, that's a good one. I often speak with confidence but am hugely aware of my need to learn more. I thought your points and questions were mostly on target. I hope the other trees chosen for anchoring and the design allow that tree to stand, indefinitely.

Still can't feel comfortable with the idea of that tree over a garden held by guys though." Even 15,000 lb. test x 2? "It may be half a day to install them but what about the ongoing maintenance" The cable material lasts at least 30 years. It needs periodic inspection, and possibly adjustment. "and security?" What security? Like a mall cop or something? "What about the blokes that eventually have to deal with it when it's days are over? Sectional dismantling of a guyed tree, that could be an interesting addition to CS units." It will be another factor, but the whole idea is to prevent its days from being over. "This is modern arboriculture and the processes David is going through are well beyond what I am used to." I'd heard that support is rarely used in the UK, but it is still surprising.

There's a lot I don't understand; just trying to draw out input. Not comfortable with just waiting for emanations from some expert in an ivory tower or smoke-filled room. Maybe that's a yank thing. "stuff I am certain of through years of study and experience, I will prove it later!" Certainty without proof, not sure how far that flies in any culture, unless it's in a church. Nothing wrong with faith, mind!

Another guess is no parasitic activity. There are no signs of honey or Kd, so it seems quite a leap to theorize their presence. A big wound is rotting, that's all.

That's a sad sack of avoidance, a killer copout. Academic quals are gained by reading and writing--you need NO letters after your name to do the job justice. Those guys got to be respected leading experts by their fearless sharing of their work, not their schooling. You have been schooled by the best teachers of all--The Trees. Writing, and a writer, gets respected, and published, by enduring review, which is not as fearful as one may conjure. Anyone can submit. You are young; you still have time. If you start with a paragraph addressing and advancing the most important area that you see, it'll grow. The hardest part for me is toning down the passion for the work long enough to study and communicate the science behind it.

"If a tree leaning as heavily as that failed when guyed what would happen to it? Ok, perhaps it wouldn't fail if guyed, but if it did it would be a hell of a swing." Clearly if one was familiar with the process, and the standard, there would be less confusion about it. BS call for 2 cables 60-90 degrees apart is good guidance. "Is the value(estimated remaining contribution) of the tree high enough to go to that much trouble?" Again, the trouble is not that great--half a day for a 2-man crew would do. That tree could not be pruned to stability, judging by the looks and report on the tension roots. Retaining canopy seems a high goal for arborists, so support is considered along with pruning. Mycologists might favor routine heavy pruning because it invites fungal ingress.

"Blow-outs" typically due to lack of maintenance, poor placement, wrong materials, or wrong installation. Oak is an excellent compartmentalizer, in North America anyway. If a species can wall off big invasive pruning cuts, little drill holes are not a problem.

well coppicing also allows natural re establishment of growth and loadings--why not do a more thorough job of it then? Or grind the stump and chuck in an acorn--that'll do it too! What is a leaning post and dodgy axiom? Support in trees has been done for centuries--millennia--successfully. If you understood the standards you would be a proponent. Proper support makes a lot of pruning and a lot of lost canopy unnecessary. Support's sometimes not possible, but it's often a no-brainer, and a crime to nature to ignore.

So they did that much to start--does that mean it must be theirs to finish, too? Are you paying them for this or what? Cmon Croft, this ain't no tv show, get off ya aspirations and dance!(to paraphrase a cuban gal i was ogling in a bar once) How would you build on that to improve or advance it?

I agree cobra is way tool low. The steel should be checked for wear, corrosion, misalignment---how close are the fasteners on that middle stem? check the tree for cracks, rot, etc. O and don't overdo the thinning--that will make the tree more top-heavy! Sell him on some light reduction as well, to lessen shade and improve structure.

That WAS put very well--by Mr. Fay. (more cultured than my style). the NF referred to his authorship; i just pulled it off their site. So how much further would you go, and in what directions? More involved = more details = more devilry trying to write the dam thing so it makes sense. If you're waiting for someone else to express your ideas, don't hold your breath! Retrenchment pruning NF 2003 Retrenchment pruning is a term coined by Paul Muir (Treework Environmental Practice) to describe the technique that has been developed in the field of environmental arboriculture to imitate the natural process of ageing. Crown retrenchment is used to describe the way in which peripheral dieback occurs as the tree redirects energy and growth to the formation of a consolidated lower region of the crown. Crown retrenchment pruning is used to extend tree viability, both in terms of vitality and stability, whilst retaining habitat features associated with ageing. Retrenchment pruning is a technique that can be used to reduce the potential for a fully mature, late-mature or ancient tree to collapse or ‘fall apart’ under its own weight due to excessive end-loading on long or weakly attached limbs. It is also applicable in trees where incipient decline appears to result from excessive transportation distances from the root system to the crown periphery. While this technique may have a general value, it is especially useful for managing formerly pollarded trees (lapsed pollards) and mature trees showing signs of dieback. Retrenchment pruning gives best results for suitable tree species and growth conditions. The practice of retrenchment pruning follows a detailed inspection, which assesses the viability of the tree in terms of current vitality, the probability of tree loss as a result of expected decline in vitality or from structural collapse. This assessment informs decisions as to whether retrenchment pruning is appropriate. If the tree is prone to imminent mechanical failure that threatens its viability then gradual retrenchment treatment would not be appropriate. In such cases an alternative method is suggested involving significant reduction to selected failure-prone limbs (see Read 2000, pp 42-43). Crown retrenchment pruning on Quercus robur at Hatfield Forest, Sussex Treework Environmental Practice | Arboricultural Management & Training, Tree Surveys, Bs5837 Survey, Conservation & Ecological Consultancy Page 3 of 4  Natural Fracture Pruning Techniques Neville Fay Treework Environmental Practice April 2003 If the tree shows a moderate level of vitality and mechanical stability appears vulnerable in the long term, while being sufficient to support a moderately reduced crown structure in the short term, then retrenchment pruning may be carried out to restructure the framework. The assessment therefore having appraised the viability of the tree, then specifies the first stage of treatment (which may involve as little as 10% reduction); sets an ultimate (target height above the bolling or from ground level), to which the crown will eventually be reduced; sets the return period (cycle) for future reductions (e.g. 3 to 5 years) and the duration of the treatment (i.e. the overall duration for the programme of treatment up to completion– usually between 12 to 30 years). Crown retrenchment pruning on Fagus sylvatica at Epping Forest The method is intended to stimulate internal and lower crown growth (rejuvenation) through reducing apical dominance to redirect hormonal growth regulation (resulting in epicormic and re-iterative stimulation). Eventually retrenchment pruning will create a reduced crown framework over a period of time. For trees with moderate to high vitality, the first stage of retrenchment pruning should avoid overall reduction by more than 20%. For trees with low vitality the first stage of retrenchment pruning is typically less than 10%. Where tree stability is already heavily compromised reduction levels should be sufficient to reduce the lever arm to an acceptable level.

Best Management Practices, a series put out by ISA, practical companions to the ANSI standards, $8 US. Two standards from the US will be referred to: the “large S” Standards, from the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A300 (Part 3)-2006 version, and the “small s” standard, the Best Management Practices (BMPs) done by the International Society of Arboriculture. The BMP standards for tree maintenance are practical translations that help the arborist interpret and implement ANSI Standards. The ISA follows the 5-year updating cycle with its BMPs, which are intended as guides for practicing arborists, tree workers, supervisors and employers. The authors recognize that all trees are unique living organisms and that not all practices will work in all trees. Contracts and specs must be written or reviewed by a knowledgeable arborist. Some flexibility is needed, but carefully consider your objectives and your supporting reasons before letting your work veer too far from industry standards. As for admitting liability by cabling... Many cities and many arborists are concerned about the specter 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.”1 Also, pruning alone can be interpreted by insurance companies as admitting a defect exists. We can’t hide from liability, so there is no use running from it. This article will describe two cases that show that municipal tree risk can be abated by cabling, but first consider the recent experience of Pete Morris, City Arborist for Laurinburg, NC: “In every previous case, after the adjusters look over my notes and the incident, they find that the City provided reasonable care for the tree and thus were not liable. 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 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.”

Those round burls bottom left are intriguing--wonder what's under there? ANSI: Guys attached to the top half of the tree; if permanent, invasive (dead-end or through hardware) is a SHALL. Depending on how you define "damage", this seems contrary to the BS. The ISA BMP has good info and: "Permanent guy cables should not be wrapped around the tree". that needs updating imo. What options do you have to attach the guys? If a strap is used i fancy the spiral to help sap flow. The BS " a system should usually include two anchor points with a 60º to 90º radial separation." seems worth including; i'll suggest that to the ANSI folks (their standard currently under revision.) The BS calling for an engineer--glad that is not a Shall. I have had little success getting them to deal with the dynamism in trees. Ansi; ground anchors go >2/3 the distance from ground to highest attachment, adjusted for slope and site. If anchoring to a tree, aim for the lower half. Cross-loading of course is avoided. The BMP is a good buy imo.

Support IS a structural modification, by my understanding. If your structural modifications involve a lot of pruning wounds, which causes dysfunction and drying, why would they be the first resort? I like to prune trees, but hate to see the benefits of tree canopy lost unnecessarily.

Several studies show no harm from fresh mulch; up to 12", at LSU and Chicago parks. It's at the ISA site (which can be entered by any type of wo/man) How would you like to see this updated? I'd definitely add a word about support systems sparing the less stable trees needless crown loss. Retrenchment pruning NF Retrenchment pruning is term coined by Paul Muir of Treework Environmental Practice to describe the technique that has been developed in the field of environmental arboriculture to imitate the natural process of ageing. Crown retrenchment is used to describe the way in which peripheral dieback occurs as the tree redirects energy and growth to the formation of a consolidated lower region of the crown. Crown retrenchment pruning is used to extend tree viability, both in terms of vitality and stability, whilst retaining habitat features associated with ageing. Retrenchment pruning is a technique that can be used to reduce the potential for a fully mature, late-mature or ancient tree to collapse or ‘fall apart’ under its own weight due to excessive end weight on long or weakly attached limbs. It is also applicable in trees where incipient decline appears to result from excessive transportation distances from the root system to the crown periphery. While this technique may have a general value, it is especially useful for managing formerly pollarded trees (lapsed pollards) and mature trees showing signs of dieback. Retrenchment pruning gives best results for suitable tree species and growth conditions. The practice of retrenchment pruning involves the reduction of the tree height and the extent of crown growth over a protracted period of time. This usually involves at least three return treatments allowing re-growth to occur in the interim. This process is intended to promote early crown stabilisation and reduce the risk of traumatic structural failure by reducing the lever arm while at the same time increasing light penetration to the inner crown framework. The process is intended to promote internal and lower crown rejuvenation through reducing apical dominance. This provides the means to redirect hormonal growth regulation (resulting in epicormic and re-iterative stimulation). Eventually retrenchment pruning will create a reduced crown framework over a period of time. For trees with moderate to high vitality, the first stage of retrenchment pruning should avoid overall reduction by more than 20%. For trees with low vitality the first stage of retrenchment pruning is typically less than 10%. Where tree stability is already heavily compromised reduction levels should be sufficient to reduce the lever arm to an acceptable level.

Did they chew the bark to treat hangovers? "if you cant verify the qoutes whats the point?" Just nudging the poster is all.

"...I dont like the way some of the most valuable trees are being "experimented" on, sound arboricultural practice would be more suitable in retention of these trees, *the habitat is not going to suffer because of standard and recognised working practices.* I think that we SHOULD be using standard pruning operations to maintain structures, and focusing time,money and energy on advancing the real health issues to the longevity of these ancients via better rhizosphere managements, for that is where most of the issues are in these sites IMO, not least of which is the compaction, and loss of mycorrhizal association via both compaction and by nitrification or acidification." Tally ho! * * What looks like butchering vets in the name of experimentation for more wee beasties is a bit hard to take. "I would like to see Neville Fay publish an updated standpoint on his retrenchment paper, for one thing, for that is core to all tree managements." Last June he had one in Arborist News, but likely a more general look than what you (or I) would like to see. The topic's under exploration on at least 3 continents; the upcoming Arbor Age will contain one more stumbling step on that path, to follow up on the previous attempt.

Kd is not always confined to the butt, so you may be right. The black lines are called "spalting" by woodturners, who lay maple logs on the ground for a season, hoping for such coloration.

"Guy, keep an eye out for an article/review by Helen Read in a forth coming Arboricultural Journal (the international journal of urban forestry)." It will discuss (among other things) the findings of a study between traditional axe cutting techniques in the pollards of the Basque region, versus the effects of restoration whilst using a chainsaw." David, I will hope to see a copy of that somehow. I subscribe to other international journals and publications of urban forestry--the AJ while well respected is not THE singular one, and i dare to suggest that some well-reviewed and worthwhile looks at this type of work may be found elsewhere. I found the Arbor Age piece interesting, but confess to some bias there, which is my pRerogative (before/in lieu of asking, literally). I've read an earlier account of that work in the ISAUK&I magazine, and found it interesting from an historical re-creation perspective, sort of like watching 21st century bear-baiting. As far as useful scientific conclusions, I have to agree with Tony that the findings of such a study have to account for all the variables. Comparing 30 cm chainsaw cuts to big rips shows that beeches are good at forming adventitious buds than oaks etc. If the study looks at decay and saproxylics as a goal, I have to wonder what kind of urban forest this will be practiced in. For the record I've read Helen's vet tree mgt work all 9(?) chapters, and i do have some questions about it--maybe the same as Tony's, maybe not. I wonder how far on or off the mark you find the below from an earlier issue of Arbor Age: Damaging trees for habitat is extremely controversial. Its application in urban areas is limited to areas where exposure to people and property – targets – is low, and the value of specified wildlife is high. In Sweden and England hardwood branches are sometimes ripped and blasted, and sliced and diced with branch ends shaped like little crowns. One justification for this “coronet cutting” was the hypothesis that more exposed cambium would result in more sprouting. Subsequent observations at Burnham Beeches and elsewhere, however, have indicated otherwise. This mutilation might be favoured, or at least or tolerated in those two countries, because crowned royalty are still part of the political environment. Another aspect to intentional wounding is the ecological environment created for highly specialised beetles and fungi that rot the wood. It has been hypothesised that these organisms not only coexist with trees, but that their coevolution implies trees’ codependence, on the very organisms that decay them! This concept may be counterintuitive or it may be logical, but a review of the literature shows the jury is still out. Likewise, surveys documenting the rarity and value of these organisms are neither comprehensive nor conclusive. Critters are critters, no matter how small, as Dr. Seuss’s Horton the Elephant might say, but accounting for all those beasties must be a daunting task! In England, “The government's recent proposals to sell the forest estate cast a harsh spotlight on the serious protection loopholes” reports the Woodland Trust. If trees are managed for fungus and insects, that could bring mycologists, entomologists, ecologists and other natural allies more actively into the battle for tree preservation. It may be a coincidence, but politics has been said to cause strange bedfellows. When tree health and safety are not the primary objectives, arboriculture gives way to vegetation management. Trees are indeed a part of larger ecosystems, but favouring other species over trees seems very different from arboriculture that facilitates the coexistence of trees with people.