ScottF

It's funny , Gerrit, but the bulk of the trees I end up Picussing tend to be presenting with K. deusta; I don't tend to see a great deal of Ganoderma. This probably has a great deal to do with the fact that many of the site we're looking at are schools, parks, development sites etc where trees are routinely damaged by the installation of new infrastructure, paths and the like. Hence the Kretzschmaria. Of course, given that most of the action's taking place below grade, it's uses are limited. Looking quickly back through records, the trees which I've examined with G. australe have been sycamore, beech and eucalyptus. The Euc (see pics) was interesting in that the reading suggested that there was cracking co-related to the likely pattern of decay (and the positions of small sporophores near the ground). I thought that the decay might be causing local dessication which produced the cracking? That's not to say that the cracks shown might not have been interpreted by the software as decay (as it occasionally does, but not often). I recommended this one be lightly reduced, as it already had a really favourable form (low and wide). Naturally, the client got some clown to "reduce" it for them (cheap and cheerful local butcher), and he pollarded it to a stem. When it finally dies, I'll dissect it and see...

We've had ours for about 18 months now, and it gets used most weeks. I find it extremely useful, and on balance I'd say it's allowed me to be more risk-tolerant as I can reasonably quantify the extent of decay- that's not necessarily to say the severity. That said, this tool will always be one of many, and the not dominant one. Where practical, we just bring it out with us if we're doing condition assessment work and use it to undertake further examinations of trees which have already been flagged by traditional VTA techniques. What I would say is that I think, as with anything, you get better at interpreting the results with use. I've learned when what appears on screen as an area of decay is more likely to be an inclusion or crack, or when the pattern of density loss is telling (i.e. undifferentiated blotches of decay with no obvious wall formation in larches with honey fungus). In terms of its limitations, it does struggle with K. deusta (this has been documented in research elsewhere); not so much in identifying extent but severity. I've found following the Resistograph to verify wall thickness around the pattern of decay very useful. If I didn't have one and was buying it in on a day rate, for instance, I guess the tree would have to have aroused strong suspicions first of all, and then would have to be of value, either to the client, or in landscape or ecological terms to justify it. I've heard of whole avenues of trees getting Picussed and it just seems like a waste of resources. You get a quick and clear output, but they are fiddly to set up and it does take time. Used well, they're a really helpful complement to traditional techniques, and can provide a visually easy to understand image for the client (versus a Resistograoh trace, for example.)

Without doubt highly hazardous trees- well spotted. You should never feel bad about calling in a dangerous tree when you know what you're talking about. Don't want to sound melodramatic, but you might save a life.

The images actually appeared the wrong way round. The first one, from my front garden, is Daphniphyllum macropodum , a small and increasingly popular tree. I bought this one from Crug Farm gardens near me, and is of Japanese mountain provenance (they grow their trees from self-collected seed. Rob's guess for of Toona sinenis for the second one was a good one, but it's actually Ailanthus altissima. These trees have a fairly common leaf polymorphism which excludes the terminal leaflet (don't ask me why), as shown in the pic. The terminal leaflet was present on most of the other leaves, and the irregular, asymmetric teeth, along with the distinctive bark confirmed the ID. Fun and games.

Here's a couple- one from a building site in Manchester and one from my front garden:

I knew that one because there's a massive one in Calderstones park in Liverpool...

Dunno, looks like Parrotia persica to me

Polylepis australis

That's a Carya sp. right there

I'd only ever use an increment borer as a final resort in a tree which I knew had serious issues (poor hammer soundings, picus readings, very poor crown condition, extensive fungal brackets etc) to determine, for instance, remaining wall thickness in a stem. These tools are generally used in a forestry setting to determine relative growth rates. What are you trying to find out with this test? In terms of your question, I would say that a TO may have a view on you injuring a protected tree with a tool like this, depending on the validity of why you were doing it in the first place.

The trouble is keeping the lads on this sort of planting work to get good at it- there seems to be a really high turnover of guys doing this sort of work, at least up our way. There's one local firm and whenever I see his guys doing roadside planting, I never see the same faces twice.

I'd say at least 350 a day, Phil. Planted a few million of the blighters in my youth... Provided you're not on horrific soil or a v steep slope.

I'm local to you, BobG so can sympathise. I wouldn't suggest this everywhere, but in addition to the species you listed as growing well near you (perhaps not the sycamore) I'd include blackthorn. It's not easy to prune, but is very resistant to salty wind, as well as shallow acid soils and our other various Welsh delights. Make sure your hedge isn't too dense- it has to be wind-porous to work, otherwise it just creates equally-destructive turbulence. The sloe gin will just be a bonus.

Perhaps look to chronic soil waterlogging/poor drainage and treat that if applicable? Try to achieve relatively dry local conditions either by intercepting water draining to the tree (if it's in a depression), or hollow-tine aerate and fill with sharp sand. Given the genus, combine with a low pH mulch (leaf mould, not too deep. Wait and see...

A book called "Up by Roots". sold by the ISA is very current and talks very broadly about the cultivation, care and management of urban trees. Best book I've bought for years.

Looks like A. nikoense Is the petiole wooly or smooth?

Just as few there was a hatch in the people carrier one, eh?

Would anyone be able to give me a price for a day's stump grinding on Anglesey, please? Four large (900mm+) stumps to be ground out, ideally using a low ground pressure machine as they sit in a heavily landscaped lawn. I was thinking a big Predator or similar, with operator. Please PM me or email through the website. Many thanks, Scott

More often than not it's more disfiguring than fatal, and tends to only cause failure where the cankers have entirely girdled a limb, for instance. Not sure if there's a specific vector for it, but I see it loads down here on Anglesey where ash are exposed to strong, salty winds.

Pseudomonas syringae ssp. savastonoi pv fraxini A bacterium

class act

Alder makes superlative charcoal

I'd say a soil level alteration (up) will have been a factor here

Like Phil said above, you should be able to exclude the building footprint from the RPA, but remember that you'll need to make the rooting area up elsewhere )i.e. you're assuming an offset of the radial RPA. The danger, as Phil points out, is the demolition phase. Also, it's unlikely that the new building will use the existing foundations exclusively, so study the as existing and proposed and look for the changes. Obviously, don't assume the services are all in and not to be changed since sewerage may need to be upgraded, broadband cable etc may be required. Just look at the site plan and think of where you're going to put your tree protection fencing, too. Is there enough room to implement the development?