Albedo

Where do I start. Quickthorn has now done his homework but if you follow the whole debate right the way thru this thread, its obvious from his orriginal post that he was accepting labels and common practice without question. It seems to me Skyhuck that your'e not up to speed with this thread and would have to get this end of the thread in context by reading the whole thing thru, including the links

Sounds pretty unquestioning to me mate:001_tt2:

Hi Nomad. Glad you're ejoying the glyphosate debate and thanks again for your contributions earlier. Just a quickie in defense of the guy who posted the BASIS stuff. Its on record in this thread that I too was incensed by the content of that post. But I prefaced my angry rant with ' don't want to shoot the messenger' as the tone of that post is actually along the lines of - just trying to be helpful. Although I'd like to make it quite clear once again that I don't agree with a word of the BASIS ... illegal to discuss it content of that post.

Quickthorn, youv'e been busy checking out the references on the link articles. I intended to do the same but didn't have time as I've been back at work loppin and toppin and am too cold and knackered. Your'e now more informed than me on the matter as I haven't done the homework. My take is that anyone who's made that kind of effort to look at the available information on the matter is entitled to their opinion. Doesn't matter if your'e for, against or undecided. Youv'e earned the right to say your piece. Science ain't perfect. Theres questions as to who pays for the research (vested interests), interpretation etc as Quickthorn says. I never said anyone was 'ignorant' by the way. Its a fundamental core belief of mine that everyone out there in tree work is capable of an effort to be as informed as everyone else. I said 'infantile' for believing stuff without reading up on it. Half the effort Mr quckthorn has put in would do the trick.

Nice one SMc, here comes the cavalry, welcome to the fray. You've got them reading the science, even though it took a while.... Whilst the side debate based on peoples experiences are interesting, they are not verifiable, published, referenced, peer reviewable science. They keep missing the points that youv'e now spelled out for them. The original thread poster asked for some science, to back up his worries. And this was provided by nomad. This thread was never about opinion, or what it says on the label, see other link about Monsato, its about evidence that popular opinion, and the following of guidelines/ labels without question may be misguided. By the way I said 'infantile' rather than 'ignorant' as I meant to suggest child like trust in authority, but I admit it sounded a bit rude and will have annoyed some folk. Don't mind sticking my neck out on this one though. Feel free to misquote me again, its all in a good cause !!!

Marcus, I don't want to shoot the messenger, but I just googled BASIS and read thru the sylabus of the qualification you are talking about. Its for people selling agrochems and is a few days at NPTC level to get a basic trade certificate (NPTC level stuff). I hold a 1st class BSc Honours Degree in Environmental Science, which took 4 yrs of my time as a mature student. I did the science using gas chromatography, on organo phosphate pesticides, which include glyphosate/ roundup, so If I'm not qualified to talk about it I don't know who is. Frankly I piss all over your BASIS bullshit qualification. I am furious at any attempt to gag the exchange of information in our industry. I'm tired of people quoting HSE or beurocratic legislation, which you would understand, if you knew anything about the way world works, is there to protect vested interests as much as the end user. Monsanto is capitalism at its worst, trust its labels at your peril You have a very good understanding of glyphosate, but if you'd read the article posted by Nomad earlier in this thread, it would be better, and unneccesary to post it. One of the articles also gives some clues to those innocent people who place a, frankly, infantile faith in the legislative authorities, as to why their trust might be misplaced. Follow the clues, read up on it. I dont mean to be offensive, nothing infantile about you or anyone else. but I'm sick of the trust that people place in the powers that be and this is what I am calling infantile, as I believe (and know for a fact from understanding the science involved in establishing these guidelines) this trust is misplaced. I'm so sick of low level poorly researched, wrong legislation and wrong science that I cannot contain my anger any more than this ... Paul Brash BSc Hons Env Sci Ba humbug by the way, as it is the 25th today

Nut Roast. My old man owns a nut farm, millions of the little buggers running around everywhere. Not strictly a bird, but difficult to catch and nigh on impossible to stuff.

A good bit of science you could do Dave O would be to spray normally, except on say 2 rows, where you control grass etc without chemicals, i.e manually. You could see if the non chemical ones have increased vigour or not. They obviously survive the odd spraying, and also from your experience you can't just do nothing. But would you get more timber more quickly without spraying, thus making the extra labour cost effective.

Well done nomad. Thanks for the links, loads of really good referenced info. It'll keep me quiet for a while seeing if I can find some of the papers that are referenced. If you have any more links on the subject, squirelled away please feel free to post them. This is where arbtalk comes into its own with often priceless info on all aspects of treework, that you just wouldn't have found on your own. Its also helped me a lot in setting up my business, in all sorts of ways.

quote 18 stoner -It is safe to use under tree canopies for weed treatment, I would dispute this, for reason mentioned above, but admit I don't have the evidence. Might be an idea to try to nail this one as its used for vegetation control around trees, we've all done it. The question would be, do mychorrizae have a mechanism for ingesting glyphosate? Does the foliar acting bit mean, via stomata thru evapotranspiration mechanisms, and if so what mechanism do mycho's have to do the same

I posted in another thread that it kills of mychorrizae and that you'd get reduced growth as a result, and promised phenom that I'd find the reference where I'd read about it. Looked high and low in my papers and on the net and can't find any articles on it. With regard to it being foliar acting, there is dispute over whether it should work as a stumpicide. Logicaly, if applied to the leaves it would travel thru the tree to the roots using the trees vascular system. So any method of introducing it into the vascular system should work. As Stoner says it was Monsanto that originally patented it, when the patent expired they developed GM roundup resistant crops, in order to keep a handle on the market for the product in agriculture. I've read that there are soil residues but, can't find references. Will probably have another look now.

Right I've figured it out now. This is a thread from January when this pic forum was new so were in it now. welcome to the matrix:scared1:

your not the only one mister T, I'm making my second visit to this thread to try to figure out why I don't understand wots goin on. There must be a new place to put pics somewhere I assume, in order to avoid confusion. I shall now go confusedly in search of it.

Did a big beech take down 2 weeks ago over 3 phase on one side, single phase under 2nd side, phone line under 3rd side, targets everywhere below. Survived with no breakages and no medium rare climber (me). Client just phoned and said he had something for me, so popped round and he gave me eight 50g packets of Golden Vag. Most sorted. He probably thought I would need it for my nerves!!!

In my experience marc and rich have the answer and all those who say rest it. I had it when I was subbing in uk, if you mean something a bit ripped in elbow. In NZ for a year it was all MEWPS, traffic control and chipper feeding, and even watching others work as there were often 4 - 6 of us on site. This supplied enough rest for it to heal. Since back in UK, I'm a one man band - climber groundie and everything on me tod, except occasional freelancers helping, and it hasn't come back yet. My conclusion is that climbing caused it on a john hancock shuffle (john's fault in fact) up an impossible to climb ash tree, and not climbing (much) for months fixed it. No doctor consulted as I'm a hard northener and only southerners go to the doctor.

Very obscure reference to cowboys in little red van who nicked a small job off me. I mentioned it in monkeyd's thread about fussy neighbours complaining. I live in a world of me own sometimes:001_smile:

A quick way of demonstrating the above explanations to original question is. You can pull your own weight up on the climbing system because its halved. Unhitch yer prussik and give the other end of the rope to the groundie (you in harness) Unless he's much heavier than you he won't be able to pull you up the tree as he has all your weight.

I should imagine it could be quite tricky, if not dangerous making large limbs rip out. You couldn't really strop on anywhere with absolute confidence .

You'll c***m ya pants over this article M'd if you haven't already seen it. The Tree Surgeon’s Contribution To Forest Health Or 'How I Unlearned Everything I Was Taught' on AIE Don't know how to do a link. Thought a lot of people would find it interesting so posted a thread rather than pm ya. If the author of the article is on arbtalk then thanks for an interesting read. http://www.aie.org.uk/index.html .

That'll do, Thats what I'm gonna call it from now on.

Hours later, that explains that then! Cheers peter. Vaguely on topic. When logging up a felled tree, you know how you end up with a big heavy bit, from where the main stem splits into 2 or 3. We always leave it till last because its big and heavy and may blunt the saw with dirt that can be in there. Is there a name for this bit? I've always thought it deserved a name, and if it doesn't have one could we take this opportunity to give it one.

Why has Mr Ed got peter's avatar, or is it just my puter playing up again? I hope your nose and inner eyeball get better soon Ed, thats the worst poke in the eye I've ever heard of.

Theres some interesting stuff on Arb Info Exch about sycamores. There appears to be no evidence for when they were introduced, and are now considered to be 'naturalised' or some such thing. Follow the thread on 'eradicate or exterminate' which leads to an interesting article on the subject. If you have mature specimens they are in my and many others view, magnificnt trees and it seems a shame to base them because of a rigorous sticking to the native's thing. Understand the self seeding and regen issues but just a thought for the pot.

Thats the guy in the little red van!!!

oops!!! (smiley)