Bundle 2

No but dominance can be an environment thing...so perhaps its an " I cant hope to cut it here like this " thing.....must stop saying thing!!

It doesnt but the variegated parts of the tree grow alot more slowly...as it photosynthesises with less chlorophyll...cutting out the reverted wood is all you can do eliminate the aesthetic...it just goes green on ya otherwise...which i think I said!!!

It is bracing mate...but noy there to mess with adaptive growth processes as it is an inert system...or did yoyu just not get that bit!!? Remember we dont know whether the crack is cause for concern...I get tired of hazard tree experts popping left , right and center...it really doesnt help!!

OK, so what do we know about Ganoderma spp..... It can take its sweet time gettin' established in the host. The appearance of the fruit bodies can be indicative of one thing for sure...that it is feeding on something and its not a toffee crisp! The info on decay characteristics will say that the parasitic infection modifies wood in the lower stem, buttress roots and lower scaffold branches ( ime ) It might be possible to assess the damage as it affects the roots by way of a nylon hammer. Two things are likely possible here......The roots tend to dieback on the undersides as a matter of course in healthy trees but these tests may inform you as to the need to get it picus tested .Importantly maybe, if you are out of your depth you should refer the case to a another arborist...ok, that said. The roots may well vibrate thru the ground as you strike them. This is indicative of decay . There are formulae that can be referred to as a guideline to work to.....It correlates the dbh with root strength Tree Root Failure Thresholds <1/3 Buttress roots lost within DBH x 3 Residual upper wall thickness on buttress roots greater than 0.15 x DBH, in two thirds of buttress roots (Fraedrich & Smiley –Smiley & Coder 2001) When these numbers are there, alarm bells should be goin' off my friend!! There are indeed formulae for residual wall thickness for stems also.....something like.... A tree needs 1" or more for every 6 " of stem dia' Increase these to 1.5" for a stem with horseshoe shape ( opening =20% ) 2" for opening 30% It is not my intention to get you either condemn or condone any tree and as far as it goes, I take no responsibility for any decision you may make from these comments....

Basically 'cos the tissues are present from both( chimera ) and so reversion is common, complete and and inevitable....

Then you have missed the point....

I still think the modern alternatives are superior to chain for a number of reasons and the inclusion of a shock absorption element could be well used in these situations I have seen failure arrested by such systems and they work well but as we know, it is not intended to prevent failure. The last thing you want to happen is for the " dumping " of a load ( force ) creating massive transverse loading in the stem affected and effectively failing twice...a bit like the story of the broomstick that wont stop washing the floor at the behest of the sorcerers apprentice; the solution was to cut it in half but it got up , twice, and continued at 2 x the work rate!! There are other aspects that would make the products superior imo...eg, the fatigue/loading indicator strands. It goes without saying btw that such an installation, whilst not designed to be loaded ( except in the case of failure ) would require to be inspected in the very least in accordance to the manu's specifications. At this point, I want to say that a thorough examination of the " defect " as it has been described needs to be carried out.

Presumably an appropriately rated modern polymer would be perfect , as the mode of contact may be less invasive. It should not prevent the tree from moving in any way as you say Andy in order to allow the tree's adaptive growth processes full expression .

Ha ha..I've just read Dagmar's signature.....

Thenotion of a cacthing chain would be appropiate imo here.....( I am no expert...! )

Okay Ben, then this....... The feelings of the parents are not admissable in court IMO and should not direct your action....thats bullying!! As for bracing, I would not recommend it ASWELL as a reduction......one or the other imo

I would agree actually.....it IS difficult to prescribe a realistic, accountable course of action without a site visit and inspection...it doesnt seem to stop anybody postulating as to a course of action however or for that matter airing their opinions on the matter..... The hook for me is the fact that the tree is in school grounds but this in itself is so far a subjective understanding of the facts. The point being, the first assessment you need to make is that of risk....you may well have a hazard but thus far it is an unknown quantity IMO. I too thought Bob's comment was a bit off to be honest but for the reasons I've just explained, I still dont think they are very constructive but see where he is coming from..... Clearly the quickest, easiest and most effective course of action for all concerned is in fact to remove the targets!

No.......

Apparently the rest of us are boring him.....

Gotta lov the Aussies...billed as the perfect saw 4 one hand sawing....... ( Zenoah looks prety close to 200t weightwise...0.4 kg) Never been sold on the Husqy top handles myself..... If I gotta suffer a low power saw as a back-up its gonna be quite limited as to what it can do for you, even with one in each hand frankly. If its for "pruning" , I can see a poss place for it although handsaws are excellent these days. My point is it needs to be way light to get on my good side....

It would seem so....!

Speaking of critical Peter, if I understood your sysyem correctly, if your high tip failed, you would drop 10m to level with next anchor, then 10m past that to a stop what with slack in the ststem.....I make that 20m before you are arrested by a rope....too much mate. Also, and crucially, the 2 x tip has done nothing to reduce loading on the "suspect" high tip because the two anchors fail to work in tandem ie, share the load.....If I have got this wrong just say....Its cool to see folk trying out ideas , this one with the hitchclimber is great but it is also essential to understand the principles of what you doing?

These are all fair points ...the mechanical requirements for tree stability have been statistically analysed on the other hand and the proportional relationship between DBH and buttress root integrity can be assessed ( without too much drama in most cases I would estimate ) allowing us to make decisions about the risk any tree represents in its situation. ( in relation to the immediate environment whu ) What this doesnt tell us tho' is perhaps of more interest , or more significance maybe...if you take my meaning. This is surely the value of such a scheme ( and it has to be said, investigations that inform the extent and nature of root decay strategies in arboriculture ) such as the demise that the tree dismantled, offers up ?

I keep a record of every time I use a mewp, as per the IPAF recommendations.....Model, type, etc

Not that I can help as such but reading an article in Hortweek by several big wigs in the tree world ( no names,no packdrills ) it really isnt such a big problem.........well now I feel better!

I wanna lnow about the lighter test...only reply if your info is reliable cos I cant find ref to it and I gettin' bored lookin'.....thankyou!

They were always there but we never who they were b4 now....

Well now..thats looks completely different...internet id, why do it? lol ( Jus'thumbing thru' Roger Phillips mushrooms I notice that in earlier editions he called reinaceum pfeifferi )

resinaceum is quite a rare fungus in this part of the world...prized in china for its medicinal value blah blah...I know where youre goin' with this one in some ways as I might expect it to appear on deciduous trees as per the books....but then they dont always read the books.....There are distinguishing features between the Ganodermas, if you have access to the internet, then it would be worth doing a quick search in google or wikipedia. Basically, i would say adspersum I think, denoted by the the obvious white margin rather than a slim, fine margin whu, also the slightly uneven volumous shape the bracket has....lumpy undersides...a bit of a giveaway imo.... Either way, it too will result in a soft white rot which affects the roots and lower stem. The result of which is ductile fracture/ windthrow following root fracture and ductile fracture....