Bundle 2

MonkeyD said "...Not Id'd them as yet...." Look like a milkcap David... Lactarius spp ( Tawny milkcap Lactarius fulvissimus 4 my $...? ) Some great photos Old Snake...keep it up !!

Sure... T.O worth his salt will have hopefully identified areas within his patch as suitable for planting with trees. I would have tried broker a deal with the film makers for a handsome payment as recompense.....( for trees of course:sneaky2:)

Bristol council officer Jonathan Brown tree-felling ban challenge fails Grove Wood | Bristol News | This is Bristol & http://destructionofgrovewood.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2009-01-01T00%3A00%3A00-08%3A00&updated-max=2010-01-01T00%3A00%3A00-08%3A00&max-results=16

"You are forgetting this is Britain! where we reward irresponsibility!! ..." Eh...We get to vote here tomorrow; speaking of irresponsible.....I promised myself some years ago never to forgo my vote again....but not voting is the only thing I can bring myself to do!

This article peeked my attention....Whats up with that anyway? I am pro tree and find it difficult to get my head around! Keira Knightley and James McAvoy movie Atonement costs London street its trees | Arboriculture News | Horticulture Week

They still got issues as I understand it in that 1 app/conservation doesnt really mix online but so far the fix is "in the pipeline" as far as making online apps goes........anyone else found this?

Use the portal and incomplete apps cannot be uploaded....simples!

"Regarding the comparison of structural soils to existing ground, I was meaning the existing ground on development sites is variable and depends on things like the former land use and recent activities that have taken place." Sure....isnt that why they get used.The compressive strength is good and results in no further "compaction" A very good idea in many ways.Especially as you point out, change of use might point to towards a deficit in adequate topsoil/growing medium.Drainage issues and stability would seem to be well addressed. "Regarding levels for new planting, it's more than likely that the finished ground levels will be different to the existing, therefore to get the soft landscape areas to match, it will often be required to reduce them by a foot or so and therefore you'll remove most of the topsoil...." Doesnt seem like a terribly practical approach. If for no other reason than it requires grading and removal of spoil. I probably dont appreciate the constraints. It could be too high....equally, the other way round though right? I say "limited lifespan" because there is not the same dynamic as a regualar soil. Only a relatively small percent is a growing medium ( 20-25%-I dont know...something like that )

Mmm...structural soils have a fairly limited lifespan. Levels are likely to have a bearing on suitability of "no dig"- presuming there are trees/plants present at the time of development. " likely to provide a better growing medium than what's there to begin with....... " Ph levels are often along way from normal post development... Planners and designers need to specify in order to procure success. It is in the interests of their clients in the long run.

Sorry if this is gettin' off topic folks...... root_collar_disorders.pdf

I accept that a major cause for concern with regards the "planter" style , bottomless bucket would seem to be girdling....This is a major concern for any self respecting nursery grower aswell if Barchams assessment of the situation is anything to go by..... I would still maintain that a suspended structure, what you landscape architects and such call "no dig " ( I hold an NCH -Landscape aswell doncha know!!) actually delivers optimum performance for both aspects of the development.....trees and structure in relative harmony..... I suppose what Im really saying is that the deflectors are useful cos I can see how it works with kurbs maybe-something was said in the above links re: one/two side root obstacles....What is less clear is the overall effect of needing to use a an enclosed barrier; It strikes me that roots will return to the surface where they gain oxygen necessary for life anyway...all you do is make life a convoluted process in the interim? As establishment is quite an issue with losses post planting ( certainly larger, commercial/public/industrial projects ) running at 25-50% typically...I can only assume that there is an underlying method in the madness cos I would prefer to use a no dig in the immediate vicinity. It would surely only need to be very modest in its extent in order to mitigate the pressures on newly built structures IF you accept that roots return to the surface anyway as soon as they are outside the barrier and able to do so?? " PS I liked your brain-eating avatar, where did it come from? " Ah, ripped off the web somewhere along the way..cheers! Edit-Just cos I wa reading around this subject today and it fit nicely into the seminar at Barchams on weds....a link relating to girdling and such... http://www.extension.umn.edu/distribution/naturalresources/DD7501.html

As I understand it the mycellium does indeed "extend " at the tip only via cell division....They can alter tactic from using the energy derived from decaying of woody tissues in the immediate vicinity to using it to "extend" their mycellial network in search of more woody materials-but that this requires more energy for the fungus.. I read somewhere how many metres of mycellium are under your foot at any given time in a woodland...it was "fall off my chair " staggering!!

And in the same regard...here is some research that was done with growing mediums with respect root & landscape conflict . 4 me its about doing it right ( or dont bother...) The jury is still out with respect all possibilities but the best choice ( for now ) seems pretty clear...? Structural Soil.pdf

" ( or is it out in this case ? ) " It would be no more than logical to assume the Armellaria spp was infact the cause of death...(? ) This tho' maybe the honey fungus in saprotrobic mode...Who's to say the tree, whilst apparently growing healthy tissues, actually has its defense systems systemically activated from previous "pathogenisis" resulting in an unaggressive exploitation of dead tissue by honey fungus. Afterall, we know the fungus is a clever git but we also know it can be a benign and beneficial recycler, seen in most all woodland ecosystems.....! It all depends on the history and course of events that lead to its' demise.....

Mmm...After a bit of digging I found this....... It would seem to speak for itself although I maintain that it is far from clear the longterm effects on root growth characteristics....I suppose I mean the "habit " adopted by the root mass from the enforced directional influence...and the effect on a mature tree, physologically..... Somehow I would expect the roots to revert to a "normal" growth pattern once the obstacle has been circumnavigated...meaning the designers must have to be aware of this and the physical benefit of its incorporation into a design scheme, severely limited... Smiley-Roots & windthrow.pdf

Figure there has to be some rooting involved here......freaky or what, I wonder how much oxygen it could pump out.....? Shocked Russian surgeons open up man who thought he had a tumour... to find a FIR TREE inside his lung | Mail Online

Yeah.....thats called resourceful ... ; innit!

Wahey.....taken from"fungal strategies of wood decay in trees " polypores (Fomes )can grow around or enclose obstacles..blah blah....known as "haptomorphosis" I'll get on with me w/e now!!

Why do trees root in the top,Mmmm... lets say 1m of soil for arguments sake? ( more like 600mm imo ) Certainly most small roots occur at the surface? I felt annoyed by the blurb contained in one of the links. Manufacturers endorsement of their own product I suppose. I can see that root barriers have a place in remedial and pre-development design of urban conurbations.....I cant tho see that the "bottomless bucket" is the answer to much. The concept is wrong. The answer is surely to design the hard landscape structures to accommodate trees ( or dont bother) In the past, a lack of understanding has given rise to the problems and conflict that get trees a bad name. Its not all the fault of developers tho. IF rooting was better understood and very POOR choices made about species for location were avoided, a better harmony would result. Urban development with more longevity. I ve seen developments which go wrong. Numerous trees are destroying the tarmacadum laid down for parking. Its not the pits that are wrong. The space allowed for the trees is inadequate ( when isnt it? ) The tree choice is appalling. Small trees are the preferred option. A misconception from the outset imo. Then they get pruned ( butchered actually ) at about 7-12 yrs on....really mutilated. Why? Cos grounds maintenence gets their hands on the trees and they probably learnt all they know about trees from the developers who put them in the ground! They think pruning the feck outta the top will stall the demise of the tarmac. Apart from anything else, the trees will never look like anything other than a sad indictment to...oh, forget it. But do you know what their answer is? Yeah, you guessed it. Dig up all the trees, make good the pits and tarmac and then start again with more trees. UNBELIEVABLE. So this is why I found the self professed genius of " forcing the roots to go where no root has gone before" a bit dull. I think the trees got more sense than the rest of 'em put together!!

".........Its a nice tree tbh " You coulda fooled me. That is ugly. No, fugly; no wait...even frugly! A range of opinion and admittedly I can see only what I see in the image....But it is enough. A Helliwell score would surely suffer.

There is a term used amongst fungos to denote the propensity and ease with which fruit bodies are seemingly unphased by interruptions to their structure, enveloping anything they need to. Exactly like expanding foam which is what my brain is I reckon (expanding foam )...cos I cant for the life of me remember what it is! Damn thats annoying.....Anyone?

" In the third pic is that possibly Ustilina in there? " There are tell tale signs of brown, powdery spores which correlate with Ganoderma spp. It is not otherwise easy to say whether the 3rd shot shows a different fungus....Mmmm....! The top one is.....you guessed it....

A gratifying result all the same. Good effort one an' all....

It seems crazy that money could have been saved if the thermal imaging was used in the first place.... Ah well, hopefully lessons learned the hard way will provide the necessary element in the future. As for those of you who said" bleedin' liberal heart" etc.......I think the same must surely apply. It is pleasing surely to put time and effort into the project with no guarantee of success and be rewarded for your persistence . " Nice one" seems appropriate. I am a liitle vexed tho'.... Why pull a tree that is known to have stability issues? Seems pretty dumb!

As a general rule...there are no hard and fast rues regards fungi! So much depends on an understanding of the fungal host interactions as much as the environmental factors that may or maynot be active....Observation is the key that drives the kind of enquiry that asks and answers its own questions.....I know this seems obvious but its just another way of saying "dont look for black and white, nicely in a box " solutions....! I would have to say that you may see this hannah yes.....It indicates a "poverty" of some kind....sort of "credit crunch " for fungi...... Perhaps the tree wins and compartmentalises the decay or perhaps the fungus hunkers down, regroups and starts a fresh assault...... It is worth saying that our inspection of trees with regards the presence of fungi is very much a here and now event.Think how many are annual for example. You need to be there at the right time to see it as it may not be seen in the canopy as a matter of routine.....? I have known Ganoderms to be sucessfully compartmentalised. The fruit bodies appear to remain inactive.