treeseer

You are not alone in this. That instillation continues beyond childhood too. It must be met head-on, with confidence!

Which is why i have bagged some up to take home to the mcroscope, in 5 days and 700 miles. Although a definite name may be hard to assign, it might be good to narrow the focus. The black hard structures had me thinking Inonotus too, as well as the location in sinuses with buttresses still sounding solid. The maple is 50 feet downslope. The smell was crisp. side view of the fb looked and felt like wood grain. whg

These fb's halfway around a burr oak Q macrocarpa. Lightning just struck it, as if it did not have enough problems. Older fb flat black very hard--woody. Younger fb's rounder and browner with top surface largely dissolved. Undersides show spores dark orange. Any ID IDeas? The last pic is of a nearby maple hich seems to have similar issues.

" Would a reduction kick start it or just kill it? If there are good buds to cut to, that may be warranted. "One main limb will have to come out as there is a recent crack at the base and the target is next doors house. Instead of risking the big wound and the shift in biomechanics by removal, have you considered just cabling the limb? I like the propagating/veteranizing/replacing idea too.

Thanks In, on the HC thread all we heard was "fell or retain", but I did not think that was standard in the UK. Good looking @Wall 4 response. If one pathogen or another is identified, I'm wondering what difference that will make in the actual prognosis.prescription/specification of works. Location of infections in sinuses with included bark seems typical. what should be done about it?

You two are like Abbott and Costello. "So you still think, you can ascertain or exclude whether the oak has a bacterial infection, is suffering from SOD (Phytophthora cf. ramorum), has its living tissues invested with rhizomorphs of a parasitic Armillaria species, or is having symptoms of AOD, from just looking at some pictures and asking what the ooze smells like and you on top of that already know what treatment is needed without a proper and definite diagnosis" 1. That first part of that treatment regimen is diagnostic: sounding with a mallet indicates dead areas, and removing dead material can reveal pathogens or lack thereof. You are correct in that no one can ascertain or exclude anything based on OUR view, which is why I made no such claim. The rest of it is a very general course of treatment for trunk infections, up to the mention of "OR" a fungicide, so let's set that aside. what diagnostic steps would you recommend to the poster? Do you think that sounding with a mallet indicates dead areas, and removing dead material can reveal pathogens or lack thereof? What kind of samples should be extracted from a tree with those signs, to give to an expert for microscopic analysis? i've taken samples from the margins of the lesions on trees that looked like that, and had all kinds of tests run without a good ID, so I'd like to know more. I agree that guessing with guts or any organ or prescribing specific products without adequate evidence is jumping the gun a bit.

I have seen trees get over much worse. It's all in the treatment. Dead material removed from bleeding area (have you sounded with a mallet?), lesions scraped clean and cauterized, then drench general area with phosphite, or a fungicide if that sort of thing is allowed over there. Remove and replace, soil under the infection. Strange location for lesions, being up the trunk but not visible near the base. But Pytophthora CAN go up the trunk, if there is nothing stopping it. Have you smelled the exudeate? If sour, it may be a bacterial infection that can be readily remedied. If intestines try to ID Armillaria from that picture, then perhaps it is time for a high colonic. Is that a fork at the top of that pic? that area seems especially worth inspecting. that tree looks to be a long way from firewooditis. but we have not seen much of it.

" saprophytically (if this is actually a word)." it's an e3xcellent word. "the tree seems to be putting on adequate reactive growth - but HC being HC..." It's a battle; wood strength v branch load. "I dont like to knee jerk to say fell and I'd be rather upset to remove this tree only to find that it was unnesesary on disection (as would the client)." as well they should. its a dificult one to answer, i know, without microscopy and possibly a resistograph but its close to a road and a building..... so whats your opinions Since you asked: 1. how much is the tree leaning on that wall? 2. probe behind fruiting bodies or any open wound with slender. coathanger size maybe instrument like a long icepick...how far does it go in? 3. Look to the crown--how much load can be reduced without hurting the food production and owner's objectives? (how happy would they be with a smaller tree)? 1-3 may give you enough to specify pruning works, and tree-to-tree guying to protect targets. 4. If you still need info on wood strength, core or drill with a thin bit or reisto. A core might tell you if the advance is like it was in tony's tree, or not. Even if it is, guying can potentially prevent failure on targets, and soil "fixing" might help codit. there's opinions; 2 centavo's worth.

Definitely,, unless it is faith that the rising star Nordic Titan from Denmark with her adaptiveness and quick responses can prevail against the comeback queen African Titan by way of the USA, with her force and her fire. I speak of course of Wozniacki v. Williams, women's semifinal of the US Open, set to start in 90 minutes. My faith is in Caroline by a nose, though Serena can be dominant. May the best woman win!

No question that modern religions have those roots, as their cultures do, but they also have other roots. Those roots you speak of do seem saturated with that inoculum, so theirs was in large part a fungal perspective. But the trees lead the fungus too, so debating which part dominates would be an endless debate about interlocking spheres, round and round. The trial of strength is between two titans. How long can the tree last with maximum benefits, that is the question for this arborist. Here our spheres might pull apart. Especially in this day of e-acquaintancing, it's harder than ever to know who exists anymore! No point in questioning folks from 2 millennia ago.

Well we don't want that now do we! Hence "less off may be more defendable." Unless strength loss is significant, reduction could be limited to <5 cm cuts, <5% of crown. "Guy, No they don't, its the Fly Agaric (Amanita muscaria), the Holy Mushroom, the Cosmic Egg (photo 1), the Holy Grail, The Golden Fleece (photo 2), the Avalon, the Burning Bush, the Chalice, manna or the bread or host, in the old days mainly associated with spruce and birch, that does this " From the fungal perspective, this is true. Trees do have associates that beautifully assist their connection to the earth, and it's up to arborists to increase their function. Here our spheres overlap.

Excellent pictures, especially the last, which shows that the tree has self-corrected the lean. If strength loss is significant, hard reduction is an option, as Tony might be specifying. The options here def. go beyond/between 'fell or retain". Yellow line looks like one option to aim for an 'inner crown" of sorts. less off may be more defendable. Really should be off the house anyway; do they need a permit to prevent building damage?

Sorry; I forgot to respond to the first point: "My comments were aimed at explaining the legislative intricacies of securing work on protected trees and not intended to inform a discussion on tree assessment." If I'm hearing this right, legislative intricacies are where the rubber meets the road to determining which assessment methods are valid, or "standard practice" judged by a legal entity. kind of like case law, or a policy set by executive order. there seems to be a clear difference between: Populations--more like vegetation management--mitigation not worth the time. Significant specimens, or any individuals--mitigation worth considering. "... no intermediates, with the volume of trees involved it just isn't worth sending climbers up." Not to be nosy, but can't/aren't most assessments in the UK to determine reasonable intermediate actions--done from the ground, with binoculars? And how high is the cost of an assessor getting high in the tree? I've read before where this is a deal-breaker on trees in the UK, whereas a basic aerial inspection over here can be under 100 dollars or pounds. An hour and a fraction to ascend and record and descend. Considering the high cost of removal, and the value of the tree, that range of expense seems fiscally responsible, and affordable to most owners and managers. Or do the legislative intricacies of LOLER etc drive that rate even higher? "sometimes you can both be correct (and wrong!)" Many times, actually!

" risk assessment within Ministry of Defence land at Thetford (largely pine plantation). The brief is fell or retain - no intermediates, with the volume of trees involved it just isn't worth sending climbers up." sure that is a population control position, as the original numbering/rating system operated within. not individual trees of value. It all depends on client objectives, and the assignments (that hopefully we have control of writing). "This is arboricultural ontology - the nature of our knowledge." Heady stuff. We also can get to:001_huh: epistemology--how we know what we know. Do sensations lead to perceptions that lead to conceptions, or what other pathways are there? Not so easy on keyboards with differing dialects. "sometimes you mean the same thing and sometimes you can both be correct (and wrong!)." Yes we can!

Well Gerrit I know little of the small corner of the globe that N Europe comprises, so I will leave it to you to respond to Tony's account of proper assessment methodology as it is practiced in the UK. Its requirements to clearly state mitigation alternatives agrees with what I understand of QTRA and other more deliberate and scientific approaches, vs. the "fell or retain" dichotomy, which seems based more on politics or economics--the urge to sell felling services--than biology. As for the Anne Frank tree, I was agreeing (!), so I am not sure what all that was about; probably muddled in translation. No slam perceived or intended, I'm sure. If there are images of the original tree, that might put things in perspective.

Ha! Thanks for the anecdote. We try to document how trees reinforce levees, and also protect homes from storm damage, and you provide a reference for protection from a very different kind of storm. The branch sprouting example referred to tree health from an arborist's point of view. Reduction pruning may provide less interesting habitat to mycologists, true. That is actually the whole idea! It's one area where those two spheres do not overlap.

I got to free-climb some willows today--very easy, since they fell into a river! The sprouts at the node after branch dieback seemed like useful body language to listen to. If there's this amount of regrowth on a declining branch, in the interior of a crown, on a broken trunk, imagine the closure and regrowth at a nodal cut made on a healthy branch like those at Gerrit's park. Awesome bot gdn in hamilton nz, and topnotch arb ed. Possibly the best in the world imo

This is getting way beyond that tree. Briefly, 1. I referred to standard VTA practice VTA is practiced different ways by different practitioners. Other arborists express the "fell or conserve" dichotomy, others don't. It may be standard from an ecologist view in Holland, but not in America or Australia based on working with arborists ever since the body language book came out. What we hear from England is "One thing you might consider is whether felling/dismantling is the only option; another is the current/future amenity value of the tree. It would not be unusual for an application for felling to be refused where the tree could be reduced to mitigate failure especially in high profile cases. If you want it felled then you must justify that spec above others." 2. You would be amazed to see what a mycologist with a microscope can do with just a bit of fungal material. No doubt, but there's no bit to look at! 3. Much simpler : the oak was heavily pruined and only had a small crown left. So there you go with your armchair analysis. Heavy pruning can weaken trees. Material fails when load exceeds strength, every time, no matter if you use a sofa or another piece of furniture for analysis. 4. You were there, were you, and saw the remnants of the tree after it had collapsed and the extent of white rot with selective delignification by G. australe was assessed, which was overlooked by the consulting arborists and should have been a contra-indication for spending so much money on a tree without perspective or future whatever measures taken ? No I just saw a lot of pictures and some tomograms and diagnostic reports. I agree totally with you, it was a colossal waste, and that was not overlooked by all the consulting arborists on that job. But all this is unrelated to reports of one oak with a bit of a conk and another with bark shedding, but no pictures!

Gerrit, 1. You obviously didn't read or fully comprehend my earlier post. I did, and I did. You gave very good advice about looking for details (which InfiniTree would do well to follow), but ended with "standard VTA-procedures are to be followed to determine whether the trees should be felled or conserved, and if so, what measures should be taken to keep the trees safe. " It was your "fell or conserve" dichotomy I referred to. That's a natural bias to an ecologist, who sees trees as food sources, big "sugar sticks" for microflora and microfauna. However, that is anathema to an arborist, for it denies the potential of arboriculture to manage the tree. 2. ... which is easy to assess, provided you use a microscope instead of a magnifying glass to identify the species with. It is iimpossible to assess, based on a second hand account of a scrap of a conk, no matter the microscopy. 3. How did you assess, that the crack was due to "excessive mass" from a picture, that doesn't show the crown ? If there was no heavy crown, there would be no crack. Simple! Material fails when load exceeds strength, every time. The science of physics rules over the sciences of ecology and biology alike. 4. Correction : "this is what G. australe did to this oak". I uploaded the photo as an example of what might happen if the diagnosis of the pathogen was false, as I have witnessed lots of times before, with the most dramatic example the total collapse of the Anne Frank tree in Amsterdam. Oh but that tree failed because the financial investment in a man-made superstructure was inadequate! (How many trees could have been planted with that money?) But really it failed because load exceeded strength. O yes strength loss due to fungus did contribute, as did load increase due to lack of pruning. 5 You seem to be loosing a rational perspective on reality again. Perhaps both our perspectives' grip on reality can be impaired by our biases.

That is why it was part of the longer, dumber answer. It seems you agree with this short answer: An arborist might find it more apropo' for the tree to close those niches rather than leave them open. There is a difference--our spheres do overlap in many areas but not this one. That's okay though; many other areas for arborists to agree with mycologists, without maximizing infection courts.

Newcastle under Lyme Borough Council in Staffordshire is currently investigating the illegal pruning of a number of mature trees. A number of factors must be considered when pruning mature trees. These include the site; time of year; and the species, size, growth habit, vitality, and maturity of the tree when applying for consent from the Local Planning Authority. The amount of live tissue that should be removed depends on the tree size, species, and age, as well as the pruning objectives. Younger trees tolerate the removal of a higher percentage of living tissue than mature trees. As a general rule, mature trees are less tolerant of severe pruning than juvenile trees. Also, smaller cuts close faster and are more easily compartmentalized than large cuts. Large, mature trees should require little routine pruning. A widely accepted rule of thumb is never to remove more than 25% of a tree’s leaf-bearing canopy. In a mature tree, pruning even that much could have negative effects if removed in one season. Removing even a single, large-diameter limb can create a wound that the tree may not be able to close. The older and larger a tree becomes, the less energy it has in reserve to close wounds and defend against decay or insect attack. True, but now Council leaps from describing proper pruning of mature trees to proper structural/formative pruning of young trees.. However, there is no transition to clue the reader of the topic switch. The below is NOT agreeable info for mature trees: The correct pruning procedure is to select and establish scaffold branches. These branches should be selected for good attachment, appropriate size, and spacing in relation to other branches. Scaffold branches should be well spaced, both vertically and radially on the trunk. Vertical spacing should be at least 18 inches for large-growing trees, and about 12 inches for smaller trees. Pruning cuts should be correctly undertaken at the branch collar or shoulder and all work must comply with BS3998. TPO consent should be obtained from the council prior to the work being undertaken. "Pruning cuts should be correctly undertaken at the branch collar or shoulder" This sentence is inaccurate for mature trees, or even for young trees, which often benefit form having branches reduced and retained for a time as temporary elements in a young tree's structure. Whether describing young trees or old, pruning cuts can also be correctly undertaken at any node where sufficient resources such as phenols, and anatomical structures such as compacted xylem, can compartmentalize the pruning wound. This includes reducing to small laterals or even to buds that stay behind when a branch is shed. "Removal cuts are always better than reduction cuts" is a Goebbelsian lie that needs to die. If pruning is deemed "illegal" based on this sentence alone, that will not hold up in court. If counsel is competent, that law will be exposed as an ass. It's unfortunate that that final paragraph was added. Different standards should be written for different stages of a tree's development, and also for different architectural forms of trees. Just one opinion. Others?

This overseas chap is very grateful for your description of rational and systematic assessment. We try but too seldom succeed in this across the pond. The "fell or retain" dichotomy is false. It is entirely illogical and unnatural: to reduce a tree's fate to an either/or decision is nuts. Trees are far more gradua, and open to a range of influences, over time. We would do well to follow their example in our prognoses. We also need to take necessary steps in our diagnoses, starting with ID of associates. Infinitree noted that " There is only half a cm of the Ganoderma bracket left on the tree so I couldn't Id it too well", so we do not even know it is Gano sp, yet we are regaled with a gorgeous image of a cracked tree, which was cracked due to loading from wind and gravity and excessive mass. Yet, we are told that "this is what G. australe did". Perhaps the causality behind this casualty is as confused as the possible associate aka pathogen aka justification to fell. Nuts. Let's hold our water until we know there is a fire. All we have so far is smoke. Got a camera, InfiniTree?

The short answer: An arborist might find it more apropo' for the tree to close those niches rather than leave them open. There is a difference--our spheres do overlap in many areas but not this one. The longer dumber answer: The count was for infection courts aka niches, and the total # of those created by pollarding back to the trunk is 1. The # created by reduction pruning cuts that an arborist might find apropo' to create is much higher. Doesn't creating more potential niches in a plethora of places produce more potential for biodiversity? Mycologists and ecologists might find these niches fascinating to study, but they might need binoculars. Are the only niches apropo' to study those that can be observed with the naked eye, from the earth?

What is your assignment? Once that is clear, so are the tasks. Excellent advice here First it's black discoloration, now callused and shedding bark by itself indicates honey fungus? Even if it is present, it can be walled off by the tree, if the tree gets proper care. What's your assignment? What diagnostic steps have you taken to justify drilling? Finding one mushroom does not seem sufficient by itself. Got some pictures?

So then your strategies on cutting that Dutch Salix would be all the more timely today, what with all those spores flying about. What would be a better time for your original approach on what sort of infection courts--er, potential niches for biodiversity --an arborist might find apropo' to create? The mushroom hunts over there go on 24/7 for weeks? How many nocturnal species only fruit at night?