daltontrees

This is a bit of an anoraky question. Recetly while reading up on root decaying fungi, I came across a reference in Fungal Strategies of Wood Decay in Trees "Where fruit bodies appear, the stem radius should be determined, and the statically effective root-plate radius should be deduced from this...". Well two/three questions really. Is the term "Statically effective root plate radius" a recognised one, does anyone use it and is there a precise definition anywhere? The supplementary question is then how to determine it as a function of the stem radius. A wee formula like RPA? If anyone can tell me or point me in the right direction I would be pleased to hear.

Tree Roots in the Built Environment

It's a pleasure as always to get the benefit of your patient long-term observations and management approaches, beamed straight to my 'puter. Thanks, long may this thread run.

This book has yielded nothing specific. hve tried 'Fungal Strategies...' too but again nothing altough it does mention that Meripilus can infect a tree through a dead tap root. All this is saying though is that M.g shos a sapwood exposed strategy. I spotted also that some attempts to infect healthy wood had failed (Lonsdale 1994).

I shall have a bedtime browse of Roberts Jackson & Smith. If I unearth (pun not intended) anything I'll share it here.

I expect pellets have a very high surface area to volumen ration compared to logs, allowing rapid drying and possibly escape of moisture during burning before it has to be boiled off. All good for calorific value.

David, do you know whether this process is giverned by any tropisms or is the curtailment of underside growth largely (or wholly) because of the steady increase in loading on the underside as the tree grows and sways, crushing or inhibiting the cambium?

Yeah, what he said!

Not quite. The higher the moisture content the lower the calorific value. The higher the holding temperature, the higher the calorific value. The two things are related insofar as driving off misture takes up energy that would otherwise be given off as dry heat. The colder and wetter you start, the more energy is wasted.

Could be Pleurotus dryinus.

Third looks to have gills, so not Dryad's Saddle, possibly Pleurotus ostreatus

Any chance of a picture next time you see it? I have never seen it on Sycamore and whereas I don't doubt you I would like to know what it looks like.

Ahh, another nail in the coffin of my Asterid theory, Willow is a Rosid.

It is also possible very reliably to link the calorific value to the moisture content. The amount of energy required per unit to take water in the wood from room temperature to 100 deg C and then vapourise it is fixed, see latent heat capacities. Oddly, it means that the calorific value of wood changes with the temperature it is held at.

Here's what I use, and I am certain that I derived it from a reliable source. Newly planted Not fully established and capable of being transplanted or easily replaced Young Establishing, usually with good vigour Early mature Established, usually vigorous and increasing in height Mature Fully established around half their species’ life expectancy, generally good vigour and achieving full height potential but crown still spreading Late mature Moderate vigour, no additional height expected and growth rate slowing Over-mature Fully mature, in last quarter of life expectancy, vigour decreasing But I would suggest you don't just copy it or anyone elses' definitions. Life stage is linked to vigour, potential for further upward growth, further outward growth, the onset of fruiting, the annual number of leaf flushes, degrees of susceptible ripewood or heartwood, step change in annual increments, ability to withstyand and recover from pruning etc. so whatever you choose as definitions I would suggest should be useful to inform the decisions that you arte about to make to serve the purpose of the survey. Or you can just do what everyone else does, mostly involving box-ticking for BS5837 surveys. Knowing is useful, but understanding is by far the greatest prize. Hows about you let us know how you get on in the assessment?

Seriously, my touchpad has reset itself recently so that if you brush it with your palm while typing, it can highlight a whole page of text and delete it irrecoverably in about 1 millisecond. Laptop nearly took flying lessons today... Ahhh the joys of Windows 8 an all the fleas that live in its hair.

I'll try to pin down the defnitive source for this tomorrow. It has always bothered me this very question but I formulated a reliable answer last year. If I can only find where I put it...

I just typed a long and knowledgeable reply, but my computer decided to delete it and I can't be bothered looking everything up again

Yes it seems to be not quite a loophole but a valid soft alternative to deal with a TPO application by making it a felling application. When the new Scottish Regulations were being drafted about 4 years ago, wisely or unwisely I pointed it out to Parliament but as with most things that sound to them like criticism they just ignored it. So, we have the same soft option up here. I expect if it became a serious problem and was being abused something would be done about it. In the OP's case, I think forced replanting of self-seeders would be ludicrous.

This was what I meant by there being no general answer. Large self-seeders in a Group TPO could be lawfully covered by CA status, and probably are if a safe persumption is needed.

.... and after basically getting on with what we have all been doing for years.

I am puzzled too, because it all seems to be coverd already by HSE guidance. Maybe not pulled together in a single tree work docoment, but it's all already there.

Much as I felt after the first reading, I am struggling (and I mean struggling internally between not wanting people to get hurt and wanting to get on with getting the job done) to see who will be grabbed by the document.

As long as you know that asking nicely will greatly help your chances of good quality answers. If you want to develop a meaningful online personality on Arbtalk, politesse is effective. But then, I am over 30 and politesse these days seems to count for nothing except engaging the attention of old-timers like me. I have just spent about 5 minute giving your question my undivided attention. An answer that covers most situations you describe is fairly easy, but an answer that covers every situation you describe is complex beyond stating here. So I am gong to suggest some general principles, but don't hold me to them being valid to every situation. Firstly, there is a general exemption for felling small trees about 3 inches diameter. 4 inches if it is beng done to thin and improve growth. Secondly, if you have a TPO in Conservation Area the amenity importance of the trees has already been decided. In most senses you can ignore the CA status and concentrate on the TPO status. Thirdly, group TPos include self-seeders. I recall that Area TPOs and indiviual tree TPOs are there to deal with the amenity provided by trees rather than the collective amenity of woodlands or groups of trees where the individuality of each constituent trees is not crucial. Personally I'd be taking the initial view that thinning or removal of small self-seeders within a groupTPO is exempt from regulation, but it always helps to tell the Council that before you rev up... the Council wil get the calls and will be on your side if they know the context

First posting, eh?