Bundle 2

Mmmm....dont know alot about the crepidotus spp. I thought they were all qute small mushrooms (fb's) in that genus....? Its all good. Check this out. Crepidotus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia crepidotus - Google Search cheers

Strikes me like it might be better to start by surveying the site...With so many trees/sections as you say, the owners/trustees/authority/guardian ( sorry, whoever they are ) would seem to have little or no idea what management is required, possible or desirable at this stage because of the lack of sense of scale. It is quite possible too that funds are redirected or priorities change over time or with the introduction of new/change of staff/personnel, whatever.) I mean the owners/whoever) The danger is you are committed thru a contract to works that becomes expensive and unrewarding for both parties...Not trying to put too much of a downer on it !! A survey would enable both you and the owners to better quantify the task ahead and prioritise a work strategy.....Gives them options that can be tailored to suit timescales and budgets etc. Just my thoughts matey , hope it helps!!

"`Providing the tree reduction is not too drastic, say 25% maximum, if you prune a tree to keep it at a certain size, the roots will generally be kept in check." B2- I think you can perhaps say this.Without going over that which has already been stated, or attempting to deconstruct the stages through which both the tree and pruning must have to progress, you just need to know that there will be a balance to which the plant aspires...min waste of energy for max effect so to speak...ie Root to shoot ratio. Smaller shoot mass = related smaller root mass... Cheers 4 the link btw

Its not Armillaria or Pholiota.....and on a black poplar I would urge that you seek appropriate level of professional opinion b4 condeming the tree...if indeed thats the way this thread/tree is going? Cheers.

"this is the reson there is a problem with 'approved' splicing, some have stuff cheaked by the factory soem do not and until there is a definative testing protocol this debate will go round and round." Oh, and if a manufacturer wishes to place PPE in the marketplace complete with CE markings....in the very least they will need to pass what are termed"periodic" assessments of a quality standard ( designed around proposed end use requirements )...... There is no excuse for failing to do this. Im new to this splicing malarky but isnt it in part because of quality issues with factory mass produced splices that moves were made to try and establish a safer level of understanding and production??

I have only just started to look thru this text but already.....It seems to come pretty close to making the requirements known here I think....? 3.1.2.2. Prevention of falls from a height PPE designed to prevent falls from a height or their effects must incorporate a body harness and an attachment system which can be connected to a reliable anchorage point. It must be designed so that under the foreseeable conditions of use the vertical drop of the user is minimised to prevent collision with obstacles and the braking force does not, however, attain the threshold value at which physical injury or the tearing or rupture of any PPE component which might cause the user to fall can be expected to occur. <<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>> - the proper way of putting on the body harness and of connecting the attachment system to the reliable anchorage point. The text, indeed, the document, is generic in format. It says little more than "fit 4 purpose" as far as i can tell so far?

ISO 3100 ISO - News - New ISO standard for effective management of risk

It certainly wasnt a waste of time. I would guess that folks will all have got something different from the meeting. The venue was cool, food was laid on etc...Not too pricey a seminar and local for me so no complaints thanx mate! I was slightly disappointed with the risk assessment presentation. The poor bloke was not asked to step into the breach til the eleventh hour ( or later I understand) the night before. Subsequently, it was put together in some haste I guess. It wasnt very "arb" orientated.....Given the overarching aspect of the discussion...I was surprised not to see or hear mention of the ISO 3100..... There was the usual murmuring by folks who knew it all and didnt know why they were there....but that's their business . The AA leaflet on MEWP recommendations got an airing. There was some resistance to this aswell. Overall, I think alot of the discourse was centred around getting people onboard with regards the meaning and interpretations of the wording. As arborists, we are all aware of the restrictions and limitations of using a mewp....anyone would think that we were being asked to put down our saddles and saws cos the HS$E is a bit worried....Mmmmm Industry Standards

"if need bracing it needs removing ,your just prolonging its faite' You gonna turn your toes up one day too mate....you want me to come over there an put you outta our misery now or....? Drew...i reckon Nod does the gefa system @ treeworker etc@ blah . geddit.... links all over the place here abouts!

Ha ha ...sorry Arbogrunt...you posted whilst I was writing.. Something which made me smile recently. The estimated risk of harm to tree surgeons is greater than that posed by the trees. Answer. Stay in bed and do nothing...we are all better off.

Hello mate..... "Has anyone got some recent stats on chainsaw injuries etc?" The same question was put to a rep from the HS$E at the W@H seminar in Suffolk on weds....It seems there is very little data collected. As the industry is relatively small when compared to construction for example...or agriculture, the numbers come back so as to make statistical analysis less "robust".

Some info on planting...cos its interesting but also, you can weed out the non starters when choosing a contractor when they dont seem to know what they are talking about!! Trees Are Good - Tree Care Information Perhaps you can find a contractor from this list...local to the site? Approved Contractors 2009

Cheers David. As no-one has said it yet....bottle butt is one of the tell-tale signs we look for when surveying/inspecting trees. It is indicative of a white rot which may have implications for the tree's stability...... check out these for more info.... white rot wood decay - Google Search

So much of the success of new plantings...and even more so in the situation you describe because it represents a demanding environment for establishment, relies upon correct method and preparation of the planting itself. Aswell as aftercare. Pick only plants that are in good condition from the nursery. Look to root ball condition and size etc. Include soil amelioration. Consider mulch and or weed control. Water regime for summer months. Even consider using some nursery plants if the site is that harsh. ( these are plants used to "raise" neighbouring stock...an old forestry trick) Heres some info on the benefits of mulching. I like the choices you cite as tree species. ( On a purely personal note....I like the native species choices especially!) There are a couple good books for those planting.... Roy Lancaster- Which Plant Where. ( a bit less tree oriented perhaps) Barcham Tree-"Its time for trees" Clay is a very good soil...it just doesnt drain and roots have difficulty penetrating the dense nature of its structure! Alter this structure to improve drainage. Remember , you need to know what the site is like in as much detail as you can. Hope this helps. Bonne chance matey! Using Organic Mulch .pdf

I dont want to derail the thread......I have to agree that it may indeed be a meristematic disruption whilst at the same time saying it looks typical of the ol' bottle butt. The reason for my post? I reckon that planes are predisposed to exhibit stem taper that is not typical. ( ie...they more often than not have generous proportions at the base) Sorry David...purely anecdotal you understand.

Did they also put trees under the saw needlessly....to keep the money rolling?

Deffo mate...no doubt about it...!>>???

Pleurotus spp ?

Mmm..re-reading my posts of old sometimes makes me wish the ground would open before me and swallow me up...! Tony said " Basically you haven't recieved a clear answer because there isn't one. " This made me crack a smile when I re-read it and I think it is as true as it ever was . Anyone else here attend the AA conference on BS standards in Tree work? It seems BS8516 is destined to resurface in revised format. NTSG are also licking their wounds after some unhelpful media coverage. To be honest, I was was bemused (and a little unconvinced) by a show of solidarity by the differing groups (bs8516 & NTSG ) but cannot say I know what went on behind the scenes... I understood from the meeting that NTSG are hoping to produce more of a "strategic" guidance in relation to tree safety (than that which a new BS might prescribe.) This I tend to ( intuitively) welcome whilst I remain non-plussed by a new bs..... All this talk about raising the bar for arboriculture. Great. But should BS lead arb or Arb lead bs? Seems a pointless distinction now that I put it on paper so to speak,however, If bs leads arb, it has to take arb with it....! Im not sure how concerned we should be that British Standards are hijacked to raise standards in industry practice ? ftr The timetable at present for those interested in the work of NTSG looks like this: Final draft..jan 2010 Consultation..spring 2010 Revision..summer2010 Guidance (proper)..summer/Autumn 2010 Anyone got any thoughts about the meeting or indeed the revised bs proffered a the meeting? I havent seen the revised paper from wednesday.

Remarkable tree Gibbon...good to see it! I cant imagine this example in the uk for any number of reasons, not least its size. I bet most surgeons would recommend a reduction to mitigate the possibilty of failure! Then there's its position. On a street square. Jeez, only note the extent of the hard landscaping features that surround it and its vitality is memorable in itself.....Mindboggling.

Lee...You will find the following book very useful....As has been said, alot of the records for this area have been collated by the agriculturalists but is nonetheless good to go so to speak.....! You may be able to obtain a copy from Jo Ryan @ Treesource Treesource "Plant Nutrient Disorders-5 " ( Ornamental Plants & Shrubs ) by G.C Cresswell & R.G.Weir ( Inkata press ISBN 0-909605-93-9 ) Cheers....

I remember Mr Ed posting a very interesting link about the use of fungi as recyclers of elements/substances we regard as toxic...indeed there may be a future in this for developed world waste sgrategies ( oops...bit pi**ed!) Stands to reason they might give off a bit of a glow!!? Keep your camera handy David.....-)

Cladoptosis....... cladoptosis - Google Search

No experience Im afraid although I am surprised it has not caused problems related to the built structure already being both so close (10 ft ?) and a Euclypt. They are known to have an invasive root morphology, at least those species which do well and so are typically planted here in the UK. There is one point I would make though mate. After removing the tree, you are would be dealing with "heave" as opposed to subsidence. I would be asking what soil type you are dealing with on site? The elastic soils are a problem ( so clays) But there are a raft of issues that would determine the liklihood of damage...let me refer you this thread as it may help you even if it doesnt answer your question directly.... Is a tree owner liable for heave? cheers Tim.

"The NTSGs - Guidence for Tree Owners, will be out Summer 2010 " There is an article in the autumn publication from the AA ( Newsletter) re NTSG BS consultation seminar scheduled in Leicester ... Wednesday 11th November 2009 Leicester Racecourse Conference Centre, LE2 4AL BS 3998, 5837, 8516 and 4043....I will try and upload the detail and booking info. 2009 Mids Branch British Standards In Arboriculture.doc