Giles Hill

I liked what you'd done on the Fulham oaks, but was wondering about your reasoning for using FP on this tree. FP seemed to be about stimulating vigorous top growth - is this appropriate? Could you not reduce the sail effect by just raising the canopy? Also it looks like it's in a sheltered position, so is the sail effect going to be as important as trying to work out what kind of structural changes the limb loss will have on the tree and then removing limbs to help balance the weight on the remaining stem? Or even introducing some form of support to take the place of the lost limb.

A big egg - it must have been laid by a chicken of the woods.

Thank you, I haven't seen Rigidoporous before and none of my books list Poplar as a host.

I'm having trouble with this one - growing on a black poplar. The first two pics show a large fresh looking bracket at the base of the tree. The 3rd and 4th show smaller, older looking brackets growing from a cavity. I keep coming back to Rigidoporus ulmarius, or at least the available pictures and descriptions look similar. (pics2-4) to follow.

It looks as amusing / revolting as it sounds - I've never smelled one, but i should think it's part of a fungus spotters rite of passage.

I may be pedantic but I thought... The aqui bit of aquifolium meant eagle and it refers to the likeness between the curved prickles on a holly leaf and an eagles claw. Learning their meaning is a good way to go as has been said before: Horse chestnut... Aesulus hippocastanum. I think hippo is horse and hippopotomas is water horse. I like the way that once you've learnt a few, they start referencing one another (as well as animals etc), which makes it all easier... Aesculus hippocastanum and Castanea sativa - horse and sweet chestnut and the cop out... Platanus acerifolia - Basically the Plane that has foliage like an Acer Acer platanoides - The acer that looks like a plane Acer pseudoplatanus - The false plane To remember them in the first place, I found word association was the best way to go to start with - the more childish the better: Gay trees - Fagus and Quercus Crataegus rhymes with contagious - monogyna sounds a bit like... It probably helps if you were bought up on Beavis & Butthead. Pubescens. (snigger snigger)

Chris, Would you recommend this treatment be carried out at any time of year, or during certain ground conditions? I was wondering about potential problems with root disturbance / desication.

I think it's worth having a few, particularly if you're trying to id bracket fungi because some of them change quite a lot as they develop. 'Mushrooms' by Roger Phillips has lots of pics 'Diagnosis of ill health in trees' has a section, which is quite useful as it's arb specific 'Collins Gem' is a handy little field guide I've managed to id most things I've come across cross referencing the above and also checking against online pics (online pics aren't always verified. but they're still often handy).

The air spade is supposed to be more effective because you loosen the whole soil profile, basically by standing there and blasting away continuously, working from the surface down - whereas the terravent is inserted and tends to blast out horizontally, sometimes lifting the ground up and dropping it without breaking it down... The air spade works on clay, but it takes longer. (He said knowledgeably without having actually used either system)

True... Obviously I'm guessing here, but they'll probably want to refer to what a special tree oak is and how it supports more species than other trees etc. Plus it being the natural history museum oak has a more naturally historic image than sycamore. Actually I don't know.

Nice to hear it's not just theory - do you think it would have helped in this situation?

It should have some value though - it's going to be seen by a lot of people and depending on how it's set up - I imagine it should have some educational benefit / inspire people to take more of an interest in their natural heritage (or something). Wheras where it was it probably went unnotcied. It might seem an extreme way to make a point, but worse happens in the name of property development or health and safety.

It is now.

This is the type of thing that Glyn Percival was recommending for air spading to stimulate root growth. He showed pictures of the ground being loosened with the air spade and organic matter mixed in. I think the idea was that it's a quick way of improving the structure of compacted ground, wheras mulching on it's own might take a little longer to work it's way in. Either way. it's going to be better than trampled grass. Neat Job BTW

Nice, I've added that one to favourites.

Agreed. In my short time on this forum, I've really appreciated the case studies. With the benefit of hindsight, this one looks like one from 'The Body Language of Trees' - i.e. it does now that it's fallen over! BTW was the bleeding happening on the tensioned side?

I take the same approach as Chris. I did notice the software originally mentioned seems to do shaddows quite nicely. The max height and spread would sometimes be a tough one to estimate, because of the environmental variables. You could have reasonable stab at it, if there where existing mature trees of the same species nearby, but I'd have a job providing much more than a guess, if it was the only tree of it's kind. That said, I'd bring the subject up if it was a particularly worthy tree that wasn't fully mature - it's something that I'd do on occasion rather than for every tree. The other 'non-BS' thing I tend to do, is just measure the spread where it's relevant rather than in all 4 points of the compass - eg if the tree is one of a group that's going to be retained, I don't measure the sides that are growing into neighbouring trees, just the sides that are overhanging the site. Firstly it's sometimes impossible to tell where one tree canopy starts and another finishes, so making up a measurement to fill a blank space on a form is pointless and secondly I think allows a better graphic representation - i.e. the group becomes an entity rather than a collection of oddly shaped trees. (If that makes sense). Likewise I don't usually measure parts of the canopy that are overhanging neighbouring land - unless there's a reason to do so.

Good luck B2, As has been said, it's not much fun when it happens, but it might also be a good oppurtunity - particularly if you've been employed for a while and thinking about doing your own thing. The really hard thing for most people thinking about self employmnt, is giving up a regular wage and having a go.

Tree nurseries are another good place to brush up on plant id, because all the plants have convenient labels on them.

I'm not sure if they're TPO'd actually, but I think the way the new building is arranged will hopefully minimise any conflict. Trying to avoid future conflict is (ideally) part of the process - it's no good making sure that a tree's roots are protected during site work, if it ends up overhanging the building in 5 years time or overshadowing the whole back garden, so that the new house owner ends up pestering the Local Authority until the tree is topped or felled – TPO’s can be overcome. The largest green tree on the drawing is a multi stem - it's broad rather than tall, it’s in the front garden and the nearest bit of building to it is the garage, so I’m confident it’ll be ok. The blue coloured oak between the houses is perhaps a different matter… Any way, it’d be nice to have some software that drew the odd shaped canopies on AutoCAD rather than doing them manually.

I'm always ready to reason things out if I'm asked. I'm using autocad, so TBH it normally starts off as circles. I tend to use the BS as a basis for the calculation - but err on the side of caution, particularly if dealing with very mature trees. Here's one I did earlier... Red line = fence Cross hatch = ground protection Purple = RPA I used a preliminary drawing as the basis for asking the architect to shift the house back from the oak on the frontage - I would have had a job agreeing this without the BS to refer to. It's a bit of a squeeze as seems to be the norm nowadays, but I think it's the best fit and the trees shouldn't be compromised.

If it's applied to anything other than an open ground tree, it does become rather open to debate, but I think it still does enough - if you're doing something similar to what's shown on the image above - i.e. radiate out from the tree until you meet a barrier, then accommodate the additional area by radiating further where there are no barriers... The thing that gets me sometimes, is when you find trees that appear to have barriers all around them, and the only way to accommodate the BS would be to extend the area to places where roots aren't going to be.

The RPA is based on a calculation of 12 x stem dia. So the bigger the stem dia, the bigger the RPA. I'm not sure how they came about the calculation, but it seems to do the job and provide an adequately sized undisturbed area around trees - if applied appropiately. If anything it usually amounts to a larger area than is strictly necessary, but it's best to be safe and all that. It does the job and the only alternative formula for calculating the area is: Random Opinion + Cost of Land + Developer Pressure + Ignorance = Inadequate Protection

The above image is taken from the mapmaker site - it alters the shape of the RPA quite nicely, by extending the arc away from the barrier, whilst maintaining the overall area. Notwithstanding the cliff comment, it's uncanny how regularly the RPA is similar to the canopy spread - as in the old rule of thumb for positioning protective fencing.