JonnyVine

Well worth the effort though James, it looks top notch.

We have Blue Tit, Great Tit, Long Tailed Tit, Gold Finch, Siskin, Green Finch, Nuthatch, Great Spotted Woodpecker, Green Woodpecker (tends to pick up the fallen bits off the floor) Bulfinch and Chaffinch. They become quite tame with time and some even come and bang on the window if the feeders become empty.

Thats the spirit

Deffo, I am seeing things like this with increasing regularity and it is so tempting to look for a more exotic problem so then, quite often, the obvious is easily overlooked.

This was my original post, which explains more and reduces all the confusion.

Oh dear Tony, I thought you said you were going to stop all this nonsence? You openly promised here on arbtalk! All of the above mentioned can quite easily colonise as individuals through any type of sapwood damage, pruning wounds etc. You mention "pseudomona" at first I put this down to a spelling error but you repeatedly type it? Are you trying to say pseudomona? If so then yes it is a gram-negative bacterium, however the meaning "gram-negative" refers to the polarity of a bacteria which is identified by the colour it produces under certain staining techniques, so does absolutely nothing to describe it being "non fungal" as you state! If you are determined to glean big words off the internet to impress or sound knowledgeable it would help if you understood the meaning. It is most disappointing because I thought you were quite clued up on fungi? Only yesterday were my partner and I out collecting F. velutipes and P. ostreatus as we like to eat them and they are in abundance! Finaly, we both joined Arbtalk within days of eachother and in that time I have watched you annoy and irritate almost every member on here sometimes to boiling point, however, it is quite clear that you are a humble, compassionate man that would probably be horrified if he knew how bloody annoying his behaviour was, Tony, when someone has studied for many years, (some at university levell) about a particular subject only to be told they are wrong by someone that has gleaned a paucing ammount of information from a book or the net is undescribeable and I repeat, it makes a mockery out of education, it would have no efect if there was some way of avoiding you, but there isn't, you just crash in on a thread and all reason goes out of the window. In a previous thread of unreason, Albedo (Paulsbrash) advises " the only way to avoid Tony Croft is to fix a picture of him to the off button"! That advise is unfortunate, but duly appropriate as you infest this Forum like a pathogenic mycelium. Jonny

Oh dear Tony, I thought you said you were going to stop all this nonsence? You openly promised here on arbtalk! All of the above mentioned can quite easily colonise as individuals through any type of sapwood damage, pruning wounds etc. You mention "pseudomona" at first I put this down to a spelling error but you repeatedly type it? Are you trying to say pseudomona? If so then yes it is a gram-negative bacterium, however the meaning "gram-negative" refers to the polarity of a bacteria which is identified by the colour it produces under certain staining techniques, so does absolutely nothing to describe it being "non fungal" as you state! If you are determined to glean big words off the internet to impress or sound knowledgeable it would help if you understood the meaning. It is most disappointing because I thought you were quite clued up on fungi? Only yesterday were my partner and I out collecting F. velutipes and P. ostreatus as we like to eat them and they are in abundance! Jonny

"loose bark also potentially pseudomona"? As for the other fungal pathogens you mention I suppose anything is possible, however there would be a srong evidence of fruiting bodies of F. velutipes and P. Ostreatus present at this time of year. Regards Jonny

Hi The first photo, just above the paving slabs is what appears to be loose bark? Try to remove it, if it comes away easily then most likely the cambium below it hs been killed, look for any fungus mycelium or bootlace type rhyzomorphs.

F f f f fertilizer? What type exactly? Have you undretaken any soil tests to determine what is lacking? If the answer is no, how do you know what and how much to apply?

Hi Acer Sorry I havent repied sooner, been away for the weekend fasioning a cudgel. Yes I just felt that Jules was recieving unnecessary for behaving no differently from you. I did thoroughly enjoy your replies anyway so no wasted time Happily the bennefits to QTRA are 1. Easy to use 2. Diverts from a modern cotton-wool society by placing an ammount of risk onto Joe public Unhappy issues are 1. Pompous aggressive global marketting strategy 2. Raises concern (personal communication) among consultants that the aggressive desire for controll of the maket will shade the light from already used and accepted methods before crushing them with its Global boot

Acer Sorry for pulling strings, I have been familiar with the QTRA program for a number of years and do use a variation of the theme myself, I even attempted making a copy of the Mikes ready reckoner years ago! Jonny

Acer Unfortunately, in most cases of accidents involving trees and motorcars the driver rarely has time to apply the brakes for two reasons, Field Of Vision (FoV) due to the windscreen and roof and the fact that most car drivers are concentrating on the road so braking distances are only relevant if the object is already on the ground. A car travelling at 30mph is covering 13.4112 meters pre second, the car travelling at 60mph is covering 26.8224 meters per second exactly double, so the faster car would be in the contact area for exactly half the time of the slower car. I'm sorry if I fail to explain the value concept, do you have a value order? Differentiating between children and adults is futile, they are both human beings. Simply, in order of priority (hypotheticaly) Human life=1 Buildings=2 Race horses=3 Garages with lambouginis=4 Cows, chickens, goats etc ???? And I dare because this is a debate and all opinions are equal, no? To quote Dr Lonsdale yet again "Philosophical ramblings are not much use to someone trapped underneath a fallen tree". Enjoy your trip to Australia Jonny

Acer We must have both been typing at the same time and crossed over. Perhaps I failed to explain properly as your answer dosen't fit? Lets try again 1/ Does your system have an order of value? For example, I would put a higher value on a diseased Aesculus overshadowing a childrens play area than if the same area was used merely to exersize dogs. 2/ I see the word "probability" as being quantifiable so the motorcar travelling at 60mph would spend half the time in the same place as a car doing 30mph but at 60mph it would be more likely to be fatal. What provisions exist inside the workings of QTRA to quantify this theory? BEst Wishes Jonny

Jules I'm terribly sorry, I just felt that the thread might have benefitted from a charge of humour? There appears to be a stalemate situation regarding Q&A, the Q's are in abundance but sadly the A's have dried up? I am always suspicous when answers are hidden or maybe don't even exist. Perhaps it has got to a point where premature quantification may be better than no quantification at all. Acer Forgive me if the questions I asked have already been dealt with, if so could you direct me to the post. Many thanks Jonny

Perhaps this may be a little on the extreme side for those on here that are not that way inclined Jules

I was told that if you install hydro then you haveto pay a levvy to the water board?

Kretzchmaria deusta

46,000 litres of gas oil amounts to £32,000!? Wow

Rob Blistering report, no stone unturned, I felt the assessor was a little stingy with the percentages? Worth a tad more in my Est as the only thing I picked up on was 2.6, underground roots and services. Acer Sorry I had not looked at the whole thread, only a superficial glance which has got me into trouble before and I found myself arguing my way out! For me human life represents max target value and I always work from this assumption, does QTRA have a value order? Also would QTRA take into consideration that a motorcar travelling at 60 mph would susstain more serious damage in the unfortunate event of a collision with a falling tree or branch than it would at 30 mph, but actual contact for the faster car would be less probable? You are doing an excellent job of defending your product by the way, impressive stuff and I would like to take a closer look at QTRA but can not even find the PN, quite useless realy.

Hi Rob I failed to "quantify" my use of Acer's terminology, I didn't literally intend that you stump up quite a substantial amount of your hard earned, what I should have said was "using the system, or learning its fundamentals and applying them in some way" sorry. I jollywell hope that I have not come accross as being a paid up member because I'm not, all I wanted to do was to point out that it has its place in tree assessment and whatever the cost of the training etc one should not forget that a huge ammount of time and effort has gone into the concept, however like yourself, there are a quite a number of features that I don't personaly agree with, but if one wants to assess trees for their damage potential then a certain ammount of calculation of the risk involved is unavoidable. My own personal preference is to put the risk into broader categories wherever possible keeping things as simple as possible, hence the Lonsdale statement about the "exaggerated objectivity" by using too many numbers, I see nothing wrong with this and it is also a defencible and accepted system. I would however support some form legislation governing tree assessment which could involve buying in to a scheme of some sorts, all too often I read posts on here that can retain a tree and prescribe a management plan just by looking at a photograph! I would love to see some of these so called "arbs" with their sphincters winking while being questioned by that barrister about their stupidity and arrogance.

Go for it!

Hi all Should not any potential tree inspector want to use all and every available method to evaluate risk? Trying to prove something that has not yet happened, or does not have a single "fixed" value rather than a set of possible values is difficult, hence the legal term "acceptable level" of risk. As with any Axiom or subjective randomeness we should not rely too heavily on numerical values, as David Lonsdale put it " Numerical scores should not be allowed to lend an exaggerated air of objectivity to a procedure that is inherently subjective in many respects". I also agree that what Acer has already pointed out, that "buying into a system and following its guidelines brings with it a certain prtection", candidates that have attended the PTI course will be able to recall the "Bolam" case! If there are certain aspects of a particular system that do not appeal to an individual for whatever reason, Then he should at least look to using it as a backup of crossreference, it will broaden the knowledge if nothing else.

It used to be standard procedure years ago and I hear it can help prevent shell buckling in some circumstances.

I hear that in BS 3998/2013 its not going to be an annual scalp, its going to be called a "Lionel Blair". I concur on the animal fodder though, in summer it realy makes their coats shine, something to do with the Stoma in the leaves being fully closed I believe.