Bundle 2

"...f that is the case, I'm not sure if it's good, bad or not relevant in terms of how the tree deals with the fungal decay..." Its a good question Giles and very relevant to tree care....if I have understood you correctly. It also affords me the opportunity to wag my finger in an all knowing gesture towards David!! Kinda just kiddin' with you Dave as Im sure you are well aware of the science behind it. Essentially. trees are able to store energy in the"symplast", usually the parenchyma cells throughout the wood. This is in conjunction with the starch and sugars which it manufactures during photosynthesis...nothing new there. By removing the crown canopy to any degree,you naturally require the tree to fall back on mobilising the energy stored within. Shigo talks about not balance...but an equilibrium. A rhythmic yo-yo-ing of life systems. Without the dynamic element inferred, life systems are run down. Reducing crown area depletes energy. The tree uses its stored energy and so is less able to mobilise the defense processes that protect the thing from fungal attack( etc) in its weakened state this leads to an inability to compartmentalise against decay progression....."simples....! " This is why the phenology (timing) of the trees processes is relevant to aborists. It also explains why some of us get a bit, what...."ansi"! when our colleagues go drilling into codit wall 4 when a tree has been infected, reduced and so on.....out of curiosity. Im not really having a go Dave, as i say, I m sure you are well aware of this basic science!! It does tho' go some way to explaining why and where the various methods of decay detection are available and suitable. When you hear consultant types going on about "holistic" type tree care you gotta wonder whether they just get paid too much and read plenty of Dennis Wheatley. I am of the opinion that an important aspect of health diagnosis is the concept of SIR.....( Havnt expressed that too well ) SIR is Systemic Induced Resistance. Try googling it Giles and see what you turn up.If you want to protect a tree from exploitation by decay and pests etc, you want to "switch on " the trees natural defense systems.... I bet that wasnt what you were wondering atall was it!!? I doubt very much whether the reduction has masked the symptons of "expected decline" It has probably diverted energy to leaf production and stalled compartmentalisation, increasing decay and further compromising the t/r ratio...That said, I guess you then need to restore the t/r ratio by reduction and so on and so on.Technically then the tree is most "fecked" isnt it dave?

"...that may be the case, but those threads are old and there may be new members with something fresh to contribute to a new thread ...." Huh, I thought I posted one about 2-3 weeks ago only......mind you, it didnt turn up in a search so who knows.....?

Mate, Dont mean to be funny but this has several threads already....Try a search. U could try using a chemical called..."Broadsword"- after flowering..... Happy hunting!

That's a superfine Perenniporia you got there sir, if you dont mind me saying!

"......black, crumbly mass............" Sorry, you've lost me. I dont see anything that would go by your description there..... It certainly doesnt look much like Kretzschmaria deusta to me, either the forms you see ( mature/immature) The problem as I see, it is nicely illustrated in the last image. Its been a wee bit warm...oh, you noticed? Well, the fruit bodies dont do well in these conditions.....!

Could be a few things from experience Mike... Some things can be deduced from your post tho' mate. Its likely deuteromycete ie what commonly gets called a mould fungus ( poss berkandera ...?) It is saprotrophic (saprobic...I love it when they find umpteen different words to denote the same thing....! )which means it goes for dead wood. In case you didnt notice...the strip of dead looking sapwood exposed there in your photo is ...well....dead. This is not particularly good news for a beech tree....! The fungus tho' thinks its a party......Hope this helps! ".....beechesknackerdis...." I wouldnt be so sure mate...an old pollard would probably respond with as positive result from any r4duction work you may prescribe as you could reasonably expect for a beech.,,,Lonsdale says " it aint over til the fat lady sings"...or words to that effect!!

Particularly liking the bottom two myself....stunning±

They are perennial DrewB so yes.....It is possible to draw some useful inferences from the body language of those fruit bodies that persist. Mattheck talks about this in quite separate chapters in some of his books. It is worth looking up imo. NZ looks beautiful.....

Energy Conservation Council will pay between 50-60% of loft and cavity wall insulation costs here....dont currently pay for double glazing in any way! CWI can bridge insulation...cavities were introduced to improve heat loss in the first place....(go figure?) They have been a bit apologetic vis a vis solar and photo cells. The technology is not new but grants for alternatives are not currently available......Mmmm!

Fair play to ya Tony........and remember the anatomy of beech wood on a biological level is significant too imo....... Potentially a very interesting thread....keep it going.

Dont wanna send the thread into marginal territory...bats and trees. Courses are well worth the investment. The number of jobs for bat ecologists however seems to belie something of an obsession with them imo. Again , please dont get me wrong....... Legislation is clear about habitat etc....I just wish there was as much money invested in trees as there appears to be in bats....In fact, bats will not really pick a tree for roost as a matter of course....Probably havent expressed that particularly well but...I concur that they are very difficult to spot and not really that common in trees ....a course tho is well worth the insight and will no doubt displace many a misconception.....!

Alright Giles...Mmmmmmm...and that from the man who promotes crazy bracing designs! Ahhh, Meripilus. I say promote the myth!(Lonsdale 2009-just 4 U MonkeyD) Just one comment springs to mind from your quote Giles...It may be a "facultative" soft rotter- no arguments there. It doesnt go far enough imo. It may also be only weakly competitive and function as a recycler . Now think about O2 and compaction (resulting from incremental growth) and the benefits that the fungal life processes may bestow to the rhyzosphere..... Thanx 4 posting. The article is well worth reading in it's entirity!

Oh..& I just remembered...glyphosate evaporates at 26 c and more.

Youll have to excuse me cos' I havent read the thread in its' entirity as yet....I have tho' just read this article.... Wokingham Borough Council warns of possible rogue tree contractor | Log in to Horticulture Week I think the view reported therein discriminates against all but AA contractors....and clearly describes the Council view.....OOpps!

I wonder even now if I got that right..... http://arbtalk.co.uk/forum/tree-health-care/4846-glyphosate-trees.html

"....As an aside, the manufacturers' expert told me that Glyphos (the actual brand I used) has an extremely short life in soil, and used correctly it is possible to spray off a stubble field and then re-seed 6 HOURS later! ..." Listening to the Bartletts experts very recently, they were unequivocal in their suspicions that glyphosate.., how should I put this to best reflect their advice?...may not behave in all cases as the manufacturers claim with regards its inactivity on contact with organic soil matter. In particular I remember being made aware of "accumulation" levels of the stuff in trees....This kind of issue is by its nature quite tricky to prove as it will typically manifest itself much later......

"....."Forestry: Any activity connected with cultivation and management of trees commercially is ineligible." WHY, FFS? If I was a farmer, there'd probably be a lorry reversing down our drive with a skip full of money for me as I type this.... Absolutely shocking.....! ( good luck finding a deal!)

Sounds like a free 4 all Lee...! There is no point in method statements and AIA's and TPA's or much in planning consent, if the rules are blatantly ignored from "ignorance" or there is no way to ensure a fair punt! As it is they rarely go for the pragmatic and costly methods that promote the retention and value of trees. It is the reason why the AIA's are there. Arnt we sailing close enough to the wind already to allow this all too prevalent culture the where with all to take a hold...... Personally I think it has already and keep little real optimism for the fast dwindling amenity trees of this country.I say "smack their bitch up"-make their life so difficult during development that it costs them a fortune.... Oh well...have good w/e

On a public right of way..? Absolutely none imo...I might just think you were a lazy git trying to circumnavigate legislation...! ( oh but thanx 4 the warning...)

So then you end up with holes in liability legislation... Your point is well made Tony....If you look at the wording it seems to imply no further "onus" on the landowner.... Liability must lie somewhere..and usually only where owners are negligent (or wreckless) in the first place....the reason for this thread if Im not mistaken!! Im gonna have to look in Mynors....Could be good!

Andy said..."In short, this would equate to.... .... A system must be in place to ensure that trees are to be surveyed/inspected/managed according to their level of ascertained risk, by persons whose qualifications/competency corresponds to that particular risk level...." I dont want to derail the thread and get onto inspections again...(.the point I am avoiding is made by andy in the above quote).....Essentially tho' i think there is no act that can void liability. 'LPA, as under the Dept for Communities and Local Govt, they are the primary portfolio holder for responsibility of "AMENITY" trees."

"I was just being stroppy - its in the Job description! " Yeah well. why chase after them wasting time and money by dribs and drabs...Instead, hit them where it hurts when they cut corners. I know it not as easy as that but big money spent "smacking" lazy contractors once may be a reasonable trade off if it deters sloppy practice. It is the developers responsibility. If policy dictates we relinquish land for development it also says market forces are key in the value the taxpayer gets for their money(Barker 2004) Its surely not difficult to show on paper that all the "method statements" and "AIA's" you can shake a stick at counts for nothing when the taxpayer gets ripped off. I think maybe Im glad I dont work for an LPA.....!

- How many development sites with trees are there currently being worked on in the district? Dont know...but can see this copper beech going the same way as the three I watched struggling outside the hospital north of the city for want of RPA's.... How many Tree Officers? Dont know-but just applied for a job as one....! "And why are you surprised that you can't get hold of the Officer?" Dont know but as interviews are monday and I dont get no reply- welcome to my world! "Is he/she not allowed time off?"-Of course they are-touchy mate-I wasnt having a go! "Welcome to our world" Apparently not despite the fact that I think I could do a decent job of it!!

Tony said "I personally think its a good model to expand. ....." Certainly looks like it.....

That would work......puts liability squarely back on LPA's tho' doesnt it? That means more trees, more work and more money....... I think we can at least agree that amenity tree stock nationally is poorly funded.Underfunded infact. Compare it to the Forestry commission budget for example?