tommer9

The bark wont burn, and once dry the wood will burn very fast.

So what can be done? Fell, or airspade (i am fairly sure that this woldnt be an option), and would airspade aeration be sufficient. There is a fair bit of epicormic young growth, although even that isnt as good looking as it could be, and i am unsure whether this is the tree fighting back or a last ditch attempt at life!

BTW this is not in cornwall, its in shropshire.

No signs of armillaria at all, and there was no lawn anyway.

Can anybody give me any pointers as to why this yew tree is dying? It is close to 2 driveways, it has been very dry and hot for ages, and as you can see there are bricks around the roots. My thoughts are root compaction, or just dehydration? Any more ideas please. It has got considerably worse since i saw it a month ago, and is now pretty much dead.

Running Bowline it looks like.

(Y)Ew very nice mate! (excuse the pun)

Smear heavy engine grease along the top foot of the fence?

Good stuff mate. Big logs! Is that a norwood lumbermate bandsaw you have?

Given the required amount of determination and patience, and a spirit level, i am sure anyone could do it.

Haha... thanks.

In ten years i havent felt the need to mess with the mixture screws on my 088.

I am a call girl in my spare time.

Haha nice one Mike:biggrin: I dont think he wanted to scratch the paintjob on the 3pl arms:lol:

And this is what it boils down to- damage limitation, both on the road (prevention/ avoidance of accidents AND how to react to getting stopped/ not being stopped in the first instance) and also in the unfortunate and less than desirable instance of 'after the event'. So how is that pertinent to the OP's question? well it think that the above posts serve to display why the AA are not hypocritical in approving Arbs who do overload. The point is that we are all in a balancing act: trying to stay within the law FOR THE RIGHT REASONS (and let us not forget that these laws are for the greater good, NOT for the government to exercise some sort of perceived right of determination of our lives) and trying to earn our living as best we can.

I Do basically agree with your statement Paul. However i also feel that the reasons that are put forward by those that enforce the H&S line are somewhat lost in a mist of a mixture of 'nanny state', legal costs and job creation/ maintainance. What i mean by 'nanny state' is the desire of the powers-that-be to obviate all danger to anyone. They seem hell bent on achieving this state of nirvana, which as long as there is human error/ judgement/ involvement and vehicles travelling at speed, there is gross inherent danger, and is unrealistic to suppose otherwise- this cannot be legislated away. The relevance of the 'legal costs' bit is partly the driving cause of this- as we have entered more and more into the awful american style 'culture of blame', where everyone seems to need to find someone to blame and seek recourse to compensation, the HSE are getting stronger. I.e. the culture of blame has allowed, nay forced us to create (consiously or otherwise) the breeding ground for the ever increasing power of the HSE, and the increasingly 'black and white' attitude, with little or no room for sway. For example, perhaps someone who is overloaded yet driving in a manner that may suit this- extra slowly and cautiously to simplify it- could be seen in a different light to someone overloaded yet not accounting for this in their driving style, hence rendering them a true danger to other people, yet at the moment there is no room for that judgement or even desire for that judgement to be made. Which brings me to the 'job creation/ maintainance' bit of my post. In order to justify the huge numbers of people who are employed in the HSE they have to get results. So they HAVE to be absolutely black and white. It would be very interesting to see whether or not, in real terms, the rate of accidents caused by overloading has increased or decreased compared to the huge increase in HSE involvement in our daily working life, particularly when applied to RTAs involving overloading, and also whether the incidence of overloading has fallen or remained the same too. On a personal note, I find it insulting, to say the least , the supposition that I am BOUND to cause an accident when loaded up to the gills, because (and I am sure that i speak for many others here too) I make big adjustments to my driving style when loaded, whether i think I am legal or over the weight (which i can only assume i am at certain times as i run a 110 defender), such as slower speeds, better preparation before starting to descend hills, cadence braking from the start of a descent etc, larger stopping distances than normwal etc etc.

I have had both and in my experience a hilux is a mickey mouse toy compared to a defender. My present landrover has done 176000 miles and drives as well as a new one, and is as reliable as anything jap and ten times stronger built. yes its only rated to tow 3.5 tonnes, but that is plenty enough. Agreed, the lardcruiser will tow ahouse but is full of seats though.

What would VOSA say...

Sorry to hear that mate.

Had a bad day Ben?

:lol:

You can walk into most pubs down here and ask for a pint of 'wife beater' and they will serve you stella with a wry grin:blushing:

Thats one big croc!!!!

the police recently busted a major fence in the midlands, who had a load of the national trust stuff that was stolen from down here months back.