Marcus B-T

No I don't think it's that it has a rough shaggy top a bit like shaggy pholiota and it gets much bigger when ripe and you only get one or two fruiting bodies.

It's not a brilliant photo again high up and small juvinile.

THink I may have fiund a juvinile fruiting body in another tree that is lower down so will try to get a picture.

Have seen a scarlet red-burgundy coloured gilled toadstool about 4-5 inches in diameter sticking out of a rotten part of a beech tree at about 15 meters, couldn't get a good photo unfortunately but has anyone got any ideas what it might be? Cheers Marcus B-T

We have the following training seesions comming up contact me if interested 12th-13th Feb: Devon: Thermal Imaging Basic and Technical levels. 23rd Feb: Cambridgeshire: Statistics, probability and risk. 14th-15th May: Warwickshire: Thermal Imaging, Basic and Technical levels. Regards Marcus

There is data available from all sorts of places you just need the determination to find it and collate it. The real problem though is that it is no good just looking at tree failures. The failures need to be put into context. You need to understand what is waiting in the wings (how stable is the population) what management is doing to manage, reduce or even hide potential failures. How do the local environmental conditions dictate what might happen: retrospectively, currently and in the future. I have a large body of data including some tree failure case studies. There is a need for tree management to reduce risk but the problem is I tend to see a one size fits all approach which isn't necessarily justified

It's an interesting point, what is likely to happen if there was no management. Well it's actually three points realy I suppose, Firstly is there a need for a management policy, secondly is a current management methodology effective, thirdly what happens if you remove it. Is a managment policy necessary? Well based on pure statistics it probably is though it is debatable when there is a very low target incidence. What I mean is if you take the urban tree population as whole there are probably enough failures to justify intervention to reduce risk, when it comes to rural tree populations it is less clear in some circumstances as to whether a management methodology can actualy reduce risk, since the risk is veryow to start with. OK, is a managment methodology effective? This can be looked at as the balance between incedences of failure and number of trees removed or amount of work carried out. A management policy should be cradle to grave as it were. there is an above expected spend on tree work then the policy is probably inefficient and the same goes for if there are above expected failure rates (have to say above expected rather than above average becuase you might be in an expensive part of the country and therefore pay more for work or you might expect more failures in exposed locations). What happens if you remove it? Well if it's ineffective then not much probably, but if it is effective then you will get more failures and you go back to the first question. So to know whether or not you need managment methodology you just need to answer the first question, so I guess the answer in most cases is, yes. Are most management methodologies effective, well I couldn't possibly comment without being bought a beer first!

I couldn't agree more. When we started to look at the way thermal imaging might be used we started off by trying to fit our findings to existing models of how tree morphology and decay relate to a failure. We quickly found two things. Firstly, while we have a moderate understanding of the resopnses of trees to changes in stresses imposed by the environment, we don't have a good understanding of the stress limits at which the response of the tree is inadequte to resist the stresses imposed (the point at which a failure occurs). Secondly we found that the models that were being used to describe morphological strength were very complex. As a result there was either gross approximations of the structural dimensions in the tree or labourious and detailed descripitive processes that had to be followed. The equipment being used to collate the information required was being shoehorned into these methodologies when in fact the methodologies were not suitable for the equipment available, and the equipment available was not suitable to give the information required for the models. The alternaive methodology would have been to use the equipment as part of the 'experience' gathering process but this takes time because you are required to gather and collate details on thousands of trees to understand the realtionship between results from measurements and structural abnormailities you believe to be present and which experience tells you presents a risk. This was the approach we used with thermal imaging. We wanted to know how changes in wood functionality related to changes in structure. By gathering information on a large number of trees you can understand how position and intensity of a loss of functionality relates to how a tree becomes structuraly unstable. Once you understand the process of instability you can examine how applied forces might compromise stability and cause a failure. Then you can look to the structure of the tree and the environment to establish if the forces applied are sufficient to cause a failure. This is what we do with experience but the problem is without the whole picture you either spend a lifetime trying to understand what the limits are or being highly over cautious. What's needed (and what we are creating) is a system where the trees can tell us what the limits are. If a 'feature' is wide spread and common but there are no failures associated with it then it is statistically well within limits of failure. If it is a feature that is uncommon but is highly linked to failure, then statistcally it is well outside of limits of failure and thse few you find are likely to fail. You could use a failure data base and in deed we do use failure information to validate our findings but if you relied on this alone it you take you years and years and years. In my work I talk to a great many people and I am always interested in their experiences and opinions. Often I get conflicting opinions on certain features. In one part of the country a feature is percieved as a problem in another it is deemed to not be a problem. Is one wrong and the other right? Is it down to experience? Or is it that there is a regional difference that determines that it is safe in one part and not in the other? These clues are important to us to develop hypotheses. Our job is to test them and find out.

Regarding costs, to get started its only £750 to get trained (two day course)and you can hire cameras for around £100-£150 a day. There are some ongoing training costs but we cover these on pay as you go basis at around £10 a tree. We are now running courses around the UK to remove the travel and overnight costs people had if they came to us.

I have seen th gamma ray technology demonstrated it is highly accurate and very impressive but the large radiation symbol put most people off

Just a few points to clarify. You can use thermal imaging to measure residual wall thickness but the problem is if you do this you are going down the route of complex models based on complex visualisations and analysis of residual wall dimensions and these are prone to big errors. Also cross-sectional wall thickness does not explain the majority of failures. It is better to look at cross-sectional functional wood and positional relative dysfunction. Firstly it easier to get a robust statistical model of the relationship between these and the rate of element failure (ie root plate, stem, limb etc). Secondly trees do not fail because of decay. The process is generaly slower than growth in healthy trees, therefore trees fail because of inherent poor structural integrity that promotes an accelerated decay process, inherent structure that renders trees prone to failure or a tree that is stressed and cannot combat the decay process. In addition to this it is wind and gravity that ultimately cause the tree to fail so position of the tree in the environment and structure are important. This is why I got into thermal imaging in the first place, because it ultimately allows an analysis of the balace of health and decay. PS it is not as expensive as people seem to think

Just seen this is escalating into the usual debate about decay detection equipment. The big problem is training and information about how things work and limitations in what they detect. Hopefully the person using the equipment is trained to use it properly, even if it is a hammer. That is why as a company we have invested so much time and effort (6 years and well over 20,00 trees) into understanding the limitations of thermal imaging and providing full training and aftersales support. We even offer training to potential clients of thermal imaging so that they can also understand the process and raise concerns directly with us if they feel the technology has been missused. But the bottom line is no one should fell a tree without making a full internal inspection beforehand that confirms findings. It is madness not to do so even if you use a hammer. It only takes about 10-20mins with an increment borer and if you are going to fell it anyway the argument about damaging the tree goes out of the window. There are a number of processes such as wood drying prior to infection that people are blissfully unaware of. They fell the tree and think there is nothing wrong with it when it could have a very serious area of decay at a point remote from where the tree was cut. The biggest problem is that most people when things go wrong say 'oops, oh dear never mind' and walk away putting it down to experience rather than trying to understand why it was not as it seemed. Having looked at over 20,000 trees I know things are not always as they seem to the human eye. You need to think carefully about the processes going on in the tree before felling it so that when it comes down the owner knows what to expect. SO, the biggest limitation to all pieces of decay detection equipment (including hammers) is? They are all used by humans!

Not so easy to tap above 7ft or the rootplate below soil level. Takes quite a bit of time to do carefully even Mike 'the tree tapper' Ellison spotted that advantage

Thanks for the overwhelming support for the National Meripilus Network so far. The setting up of the website has been slightly delayed due to contractual negotiations with sponsors but I am assured these are now resolved and we should be getting the web site posted next week all being well. I am also in the process of arranging a discussion meeting for all those who want to get actively involved in the research side of things some time in Feb/March, it will be free to attend but unfortunately will probably be held somewhere in the South East but will at least try to get it North of London. If anayone can donate a venue though in say the Northampton-Leicester area would be happy to move the venue to there Will make another posting when the web site is up and running. Regards Marcus B-T

Many moons ago in a former life I used to develop products for a large agrochemical company and I would like to just point a few things out. You will probably think I am an old kill joy but there are important legal reasons for some of these. Firstly it is actually illegal to give advice (paid or unpaid) about the use of pesticides in the public domain without a BASIS qualification, so think carefully about what you say to people. Secondly I think some of the uses that I hear Glyphosate and other chemicals used for are not actually autorised uses so make sure it is a labled or a specific off lable use, otherwise it's illegal. Thirdly the risk assessment requirements for pesticide use require an IMP stratergy to demonstrate the need for the appropriate use of a chemical control. This is important if there is an accedent or an environmental incedent. It also helps to reduce incedences of pesticide tollerance/resistance. Re glyposate, I seem to remember it works on EPSP sythnase, an important plant enzyme in growth. So although you apply it to leaves it acts at growing points in plants, so it is translocated around the plant from leaves to growing areas where it kills off the tissues. Some of these will of course be in the canopy but is not strickly speaking a folir acting herbicide like the Paraquate/Diquate family for example. You apply it to leaves because they are relatively permiable tissues, so a good point of entery. New root growth would be another point of entry but usually the Glyphosate binds to organic matter and is relatively quickly degraded by micriobiological activity. There are two points here though, one: is if you don't have a organic matter present it has nothing to bind to, and two: if there low microbiological activity it will not be quickly degraded. Low organic matter and microb activity sounds like many urban soils to me. It also depends on how much you are applying. This is all on the product lables though, and if the chemical has been advised by someone with BASIS they should be pointing this out. The last thing I would like to say is although the LD 50 for glyphosate is relatively high i.e. you need to take in a great deal before it will kill you. It is still a biologically active chemical and should be treated with respect. Merry Christmas to you all Marcus B-T

We have 23 members so far (not bad for a days work) and we are already looking at a site in Wales that could be used as a seminar/demonstration site next year.

Tea and cake, hadn't thought of that one. My mum is a good cook but she's getting on a bit. Don't see the point in a Ganoderma Network though, since most people accept that Ganoderma is not that bad in the scheme of things.

Welcome to the National Meripilus Network. The remit of the network is: to promote research into the occurrence and affects of Meripilus; to collate information about research into Meripilus; to provide protocols and training for methodologies for the collection and evaluation of data; and to promote the dissemination of information. The NM Network website http://www.meripilus.net will be the hub of the organisation and will be used to update you of available events, activities and information. The web site will be going live at some point during the week of the 8th December. We have had constructive discussions with relevant information sites on the web and we will be informing you in the coming months of how these will also be used to gather and disseminate information. We will be organising a number of demonstration and information events in the New Year and we hope that these will be run around the UK to allow everyone in the industry to be involved in the activities of The NM Network. In addition there will be an annual Meripilus Seminar where individuals and organisations can share their findings and experiences. Everyone is welcome to use the web site, purchase proceedings and publications and attend events, but we are offering you the opportunity receive substantial benefits by becoming a member of the network. The cost is only £23 including VAT for an annual membership. Member benefits include: a 50% discount on all NM Network events; a free copy of all information summaries or proceedings of events; and advance notice on all events. We are negotiating membership discounts with some leading arboricultural organisations and as the organisation running the network Trees Project Limited is offering a 15% discount on all products and TPL events for NM Network members. For more information contact [email protected]

I thought I would post an update. Firstly I'd like to thank all those who turned up last week to support the Network and I hope learn a thing or two about Meripilus. My apologies we did not have time to go through the data we collected on Bleeding Canker but I have circulated a first draft of a pdf about the study for people to comment on today so hopefully you got that and will let me know if there are any typos etc. The web site for the network is under construction and should be with us second week Dec. I will post something to let people know when it is up, please don't expect too much at first, but the more people who visit the site the more we can get sponsorship and keep the momentum up, this will ultimately mean we can charge less for event etc. I hope we will have a protocol for invetigations on the web site so that people can get involved and some method for uploading some information where and what people have done so far even if it is just an e-mail address you send info to. One of the tree mapping companies has suggested they might let us have a free licence of their software to log data on which would be great. Following the seminar and the initial donation we have about 75% of the funding we need for the next year so we are nearly there but if anyone wold be interested in a slot on the web site for a logo please contact me [email protected] I have some other ideas for sponsorship that I will probably run past you as an sounding board at some point over the weekend I have looked at the debate on this link and all good stuff, there are a few points that need to be picked up on though and I will try to get to these at some point just to keep the arguments balanced. I do hope they continue though Regards To All Marcus B-T

If you wanted to come and hear Myself, David Lonsdale, Julian Forbes-Laird, Brain Grieg and Andrew Cowan talk about Meripilus this coming Thursday (20th) then Monday (17th) is tha last chance to book a place. E-mail [email protected] tel 07870 280235

Although there are various reports of tree failures with this fungus present, they are so rare that it is unlikley that you could ever prove that there is a causal link between the apperance of the fungus and a tree failing. Also it is often present on trees affected by other decay organisms, also it is a composter so may be purely saprophytic and not pathogenic in the slightest. Having said that it may be regarded as an indicator of the activity of other fungal organisms, i.e. time to have a good look at the tree but not necessarily time to worry about the tree. Also I have noted that it is a god year for seeing them and often you will see them at heights over 2 meters. Forget that bit about it being just roots or basal.

Update: The National Trust has allowed us to use a bigger room so we have some places still available, but be quick. We are now opening the seminar to students at a discount rate. We have cancelled the event on the 6th Nov since all those who expressed an interest also wanted to come to the Meripilus event. The Meripilus seminar has a good list of presenters and hope to add one or two to this. In addition most of the larger UK organisations (that have trees) will have senior representation at the event. Trees Project Limited will be hosting a seminar on recent research findings and the implications of Meripilus giganteus for the stability of trees. Speakers include Marcus Bellett-Travers, Trees Project Limited; David Lonsdale; Brain Greig, Arboricultural Advisory and Information Service; Andrew Cowan, Arborecology and Julian Forbes-Laird. The seminar is being held at Wimpole Hall, Cambridgeshire. Thursday 20th November 2008 10:00- 16:00. The seminar is aimed at updating the knowledge of practitioners and professionals within the arboricultural industry. Trees Project Limited will be presenting the most recent findings from our trial sites of 700 Mature-Ancient Beech Trees in Somerset - we have primary evidence of the relationship between occurances of Meripilus and tree failures. Additional data from almost 100 case studies. There will also be an update on the recent research findings from Trees Project Limited on cankers including Horsechestnut Bleeding Canker. The provisional programme is as follows. 10:00 -10:20 Marcus Bellett-Travers, Trees Project Limited. Introduction, The National Meripilus Network 10:20 – 10:45 David Lonsdale. Occurrences of Meripilus giganteus fruiting bodies in the context of tree failures. 10:45 – 11:05 Julian Forbes Laird. Is there more than one form of Meripilus gigantues? 11:05 – 11:25 Andrew Cowan. Beneficial aspects of wood decay in tree form and function. 11:25 – 11:35 Coffee 11:35 – 12:00 Brian Grieg, Arboricultural Advisory and Information Service. Update on Meripilus giganteus research by AAIS. 12:00 – 12:30 Marcus Bellett-Travers, Trees Project Limited. Update on Meripilus giganteus research by Trees Project Limited. 12:30 – 13:30 Lunch. 13:30 – 14:30 Summary of the morning session, open forum. Protocols for future investigation. 14:30 – 15:00 Tea 15:00 – 16:00 Research Update. Protocol for the assessment of vascular damage by canker diseases. 16:00 Close To reserve a place e-mail [email protected] or telephone 07870 280235 and return the booking form below to TREES PROJECT LIMITED, PO Box 607, Waterbeach, Cambridge, CB25 9WN. The cost of each seminar is £141 inc VAT but discounts are available to those who hold Trees Project Limited credit notes, existing TTMS Licensees, existing customers of Trees Project Limited and students. Booking Form I wish to book............. places on the seminar titled................................................................................ I enclose a cheque for £.......... My Address is:.......................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................. My telephone number is:........................................................................................................................ My E-mail address is:................................................................................................................................ Please note we cannot give a refund once we receive payment.

We have been given funding to set up a 'national meripilus network' to gather information on the occurances of the fungus, the ways in which it causes decay in trees and its occurance in tree failures. The purpose of the network is to gather scientific information on if, how and why it is a serious consideration in tree failures, or not as the case may be. There are oportunities to be invloved in the network at all levels and information will be freely available on a new web site that should be up and running by December. We will be launching the network at the Thermal Imaging afternoon on Thursday 6th Nov at Wimpole Hall and at the Decay Research Update day on 20th Nov, again at Wimpole Hall. Further information from [email protected]

We are running a number of seminars at Wimpole Hall Cambridgeshire, in Nov-Dec. We are offering the opportunity to advertise your company/services at these events and on e-mail fliers going out to around 2000 recipients around the UK including local authorities, national trust, arb consultants etc. Proceeds will be used to reduce the cost of attendence/offer discounts to students etc. Packages start at £50 for distribution of fliers at a single event. If you are interested contact me by e-mail [email protected] Thanks to Steve and Arbtalk for their support. Marcus B-T

That is a very fair comment, and should have done so. Sincere Apologies Marcus