Bundle 2

This taken from their document... "Reading Borough Council has now embarked on a long-term programme of methodical survey and inspection of all trees for which it is responsible. This will provide spatial evidence of the condition and age of the Council’s tree stock. This action is likely to lead to the treatment and/or felling of a significant number of trees that are now reaching the end of their lives and which have become, or which are likely to become, dangerous." Things must be bad in Reading...What has the Borough Council been doing with their tax payer's dollar...Not managing trees if this is anything to go by.....why else would they be losing so many trees all at once? So my original question...what system did they use? Its not unheard of for large corporate organisations to land contracts for this sort of thing whilst being only related to Arboriculture by association..ie, they have no idea what they are doing.

"Damned if they do and damned if they don't IMO. " Why bother then?

Yeah, they seem to shoot themselves in the foot abit. The "synergy" with Govt policies blah blah...Hey, its a govt agency, you gotta know which side your beads buttered I suppose. BUT , it is apparently a contradiction in terms when you see this... "The UK Forestry Commission (FC) has set out six key ways woodland can mitigate climate change: * protect the forests we already have * reduce deforestation * restore forest cover * use wood for energy * replace other materials with wood * plan to adapt to our changing climate " To some extent I have no issues with the climate change....only that the objectives are in conflict with their other interests..ie MONEY You arent gonna save the world from "warming" by planting trees...Thats my opinion and I can see how the FC may think they are qualified to comment on deforestation as a global issue. It is a bit of a u turn/get out clause: What I totally have failed to grasp is their take on what is of conservation importance...govt or no. And who said their was no money in forestry?

Yes..strategy...my bad.Thank you Tony.

What can you tell us about the trees in Reading mate...? What age are they, species? How much cover is there? Is alot of it old stock? It has been estimated that urban tree lifespans are @30 yrs...It would make no sense to remove established trees unless they were really a problem.....The HW article is vague and generalised and some local knowledge might help to clarify whether it was, as I suspect, a throwaway comment... What's a draft survey anyway? (Or is there a typo and they mean DAFT....)

I am based in norfolk also and have been linked with this area for one reason or another over the years for nigh on a decade now... The preamble of recent history surrounding this site reads more like a gradual "creep" of usage designation. It serves to highlight the fickle and directionless planning...Its also a recent plantation.....What a waste of money to keep chopping and changing.... Its a great part of the world. Bintree's wierd the way it gets disected by the main road!

Private Eye.... Private_Eye.pdf

I am not mate....and I would be very interested in background info for Reading . Are you? Anyone from Reading in?

Now , I have often thought, with regard to the reporting in HortWeek, that it was left wanting in substance and context. I would consider the article with a pinch of salt frankly but this begs the question... I wonder who was responsible for the survey which is said to consider "many of the street trees" as in need of removal..... on safety grounds"? I mean, are they an arboreal surveyor? What system have they used? It stinks of a knee-jerk reaction and over managed safety thresholds that reflects badly on the industry.... HortWeek is useless!! Trees may need to be removed in Reading, according to draft tree strategy | Arboriculture News | Horticulture Week

Staggering..! Especially when you see the two sites that were proposed alongside... I didnt quite get that...Were they saying they would build on top of it with their illgotten gains AFTER it was stuffed full of waste..?

I fought the law and the law won, I fought the law and the law won...

F.C. mission statement..."Our mission is to protect and expand Britain's forests and woodlands and increase their value to society and the environment" Way to go FC.....The justification is cited as "economic" but wait a minute, are they not the beneficiary of Govt funds...? I see, they need the dough so they can meet their ever expanding remit.... Stopping government turning woodland into wasteland | Environment | The Guardian Save Bintree Woods

They dont have too.......

They may have photo evidence of the site @1973..or anytime after...This may come back to give ya bother if LA later claim you removed protected trees. The situation is one in which YOU ( as contractor) will have to prove you DID NOT....It could get a wee daft as you dont have any proof of what was there after 1973.... I would try sweet talk the LA to meet you on site and confirm they have no problems with proposed works....agree it then officially ( 1 App) and bobs your uncle....Right? i believe LA may have been charged with updating emergency orders but there's nowt wrong with orders from 1973...apart from the obvious difficulties! Up and coming updates to the legislation will see this anachronistic difficulty made simpler with any luck...(would need to look up the detail.) In the very least,get confimation of LA's take on it.....

What...Greenlane? No. Personally I am not interested in Enduro's but I am in the minority as far as that goes. Contact your local TRF group for more info... ....they will be sympathetic to your wanting to build a course...if that's what you wanna try and do...? Groups

I guess that's what the slight variation in the designs is all about.....but whats wrong with a "knuckle duster" ?

I still would not be worried for the tree or workshop on the strength of their presence alone...here's some info. Hygrophoropsis aurantiaca, False Chanterelle Hygrophoropsis aurantiaca - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia From what I can glean, they are more closely related (taxonomically) with Boletes. If you didnt know already, boletes are quite often associated with specific tree species....as you will quickly see from their common names.... False Chanterelle is more often associated with conifers....it has a varied habitat.

Hmmm....I reckon (being a cynnical ol' git...)-" just some stuff connected to some other stuff? ":sneaky2:

In what sense...a health issue or stability issue or infection issue? I wouldnt worry too much. They appear in grass and meadow and leaf litter and such I understand.... I am not familiar with it myself so if anyone else knows more/different/better...speak up! (ps- I meant lurid, the one I posted for ref'....!!)

Some Patron11 Treeaccess, a Sirius "Multisaver", a rigging hub & a crab...? Cant quite see whats goin' on with green & white ropes but it looks painful!

Lousy photo...a bit too lurid 4 me but a false chanterelle all the same... Common enough. The-false-Chanterelle-picture-text

Agrobacterium tumefaciens - Homepage

Are there any software packages that work with Linux (Mac 0SX ) Crucially, an application that can be used across both windows and AppleMac platforms...?

Bees Act 1980 (c.12)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-L06PfDF-M&NR=1]YouTube - Durex Condom Commercial (Full with "Bloopers")[/ame]