daltontrees

Yes but my analogy wold involve 20 airports in Britain and 19 planes leaving from each one and trying to fly directly to each of the other airports. That is a total of 361 flights, which is quite a lot of data. The mechanisms of sonic tomography measure only time differences between send and receive. The computer does the rest. It doesn't meausre sensity or modulus of elasticity, it infers it as a relative value form the timings of each transit. And each signal received by a transducer won't just be a straight blip, it wil be a fuzz of smaller blips representing a whole range of time values. Obviously the path that goes most directly through the densest wood will give the first blip. But the smaller blips after that will be used by the software to give a picture of the alternative routes that has been taken by the input. I'll be the algorithms aren't too mysterious, what I think is impressive is the amount of data that has to be processed. Cracks sem to be a nightmare for the system. Radial cracks leave no direct route for the input to get to the transducers opposite. A whole different set of algorithms are probably used for this.

My new avatar should be

I think this will not help the headache, but I believe the system works by recording the time taken for a wave to go round an area of decay rather than through it. The extra time taken for the detour indicates the shortest path through normal wood. So say you wanted to fly a small plane from York to Liverpool, and the direct route would go straght over Leeds. But once you get in the air you see storm over Leeds so you immediately aim for the edge of the storm to go round it, taking you over Sheffield and once round it you adjust your course to go straight from there to Liverpool. If your plane always flies at the same speed, you could work out afterwards how long the journey took compared to the direct journey expected time. And it would then be possible to work out the width of the storm. And say someone in the same kind of plane sets off at the same time as you but goes straight through the storm, and gets slowed down by the poor conditions and even though taking a more direct route than you, arrives after you. This tells you something about the conditions that is proportional to the conditions. A third plane of the same kind goes from York to Darlington and encounters no bad weather and makes no detour. This tells you the normal airspeed for the type of plane. This method would work whether you were in a Cessna or a Tornado. As with wood, it is relative time that matters, not absolute time. But you have to know your normal airspeed. There, I bet that makes no sense whatsoever.

Just chop down a few unwanted Hawthorn stems and shove them in butt first to the hilt into your existing hedge. They will be a hideous deterrent.

Prunus lusitanica

It's got gills, not pores. Can't be Meripilus.

Leylandii plus a 'dead hedge' of Hawthorn and if you stick a few cuttings of live hawthorn in in the spring they will probably take and replace the dead hedge with bristling thorns in no time. Pyracantha's fairly vicious and quick to run riot too. Longer term better quality is Yew, grows reasonably quickly to start withtne settles in for the next 1000 years of slow growth. Poisonous to animals though, so keep it on the outside face.

Just beene mailed through from AA today, draft of the Industry Code of Practice for consultation. I imagine AA Tech Paul would have posted it up anyway, but the call for expression of interests about it a while ago was hidden away in the AA section so I am just thumping it on the pub table here. It's a chance for all the SRT afficionados to have their say, for example (yes SRT is mentioned as valid, but with some limitations). Don't contact me about it, I'm just flagging it up. The AA site has a feedback survey thing online. I'm generally intersted to see what folk think. It can only be a good thing, but only if it has the buy-in of the average saw-monkey and brash-rat. ICoP for Arboriculture Draft for Consultation now available - - Arboricultural Association

I would like to bin my suggestion of H. annosum, as it is not annual and certailny your section looks annual. The stringiness of the flesh is reminiscent of Meripilus.

Asterids is a taxonomic level below phylum but above order, but not as clear-cut as a class. But if Sycamore fasciculates, and it's not an Asterid, then my theory lasted about 20 minutes before you killed it [boo hoo]. I want to see photographic evidence though... Dandelions are asterids!

I haven't seen it on Forsythia, but I will henceforth be on the lookout. If enough speceis susceptible to it are recorded some conclusion might e reached. so far all 3 genus mentioned are 'Asterids'. Too early for a conclusion. Any fasiating non-asterids?

Hurting my head too so I flipped the pictures

For anyone interested in fasciation, her eis an example on Ilex aquifolium from my garden. A few leaves have been taken off for ease of seeing.

I think it could be a relatively rare instance of Heterobasidion annosum on Platanus. I wouldn't rule it out until someone who properly knows what it looks like on broadleaf trees comes along.

Steve, glad to see the recent posts suggesting violence as a solution being removed from the thread. Let's keep it a civilised Forum and not a wild west saloon.

If you advise and the advice is acted upon or relied upon, you could be liable in negligence, whether you charge for the advice or not. There's probably 2 main things that could go wrong and result in you getting sued (i) you overlook or misjudge a hazard that presents an unacceptable risk, and someone or something suffers if the tree fails (ii) you specify the wrong work for the species, situation, time of year etc and the tree dies because of the mistreatment. CS40 shows you are competent to do the work, not to specify it. If you perform it incompetently, you could also be liable but under this slightly different principle. You are allowed to give free advice, that's not illegal. But if you get it wrong you will be liable and if you are found to be lacking in qualifications and relevant experience there will be nowhere to hide in the courtroom. So to reiterate, split your potential actions into those 3 elements, risk assessment, tree health/aesthetics specification and competent work. If you are uncomfortable with any one aspect, decline to do that aspect and get someone else in. I do reports for contractors, I never meet the client and they present a quote with my report attached, in the name of the contractor. The client cannot rely on the report unless they use that contractor. The client sees a seamless professional package forn the contractor that's backed by this consultant's insurance and qualifications, and 9 times out of 10 the contractor gets the job. I hope this helps clarify. Don't pretend to be contractor and consultant unless the downside risks are trivial (usually small trees) and you are prepared to take it on the chin if you get it wrong and importantly unless you feel that it is within your general experience and good working knowledge of trees.

Unfortunately this is not the case, if you give negligent advice that a customer or potential customer relies on and something goes wrong, in law it doesn't matter that you didn't charge for it, you may be liable. It seems unfair, but that's the way it is. Put it another way, if you give free advice it may just be to get the job or to enhance reputation, both with the ultimate aim of making money. Not charging for specific advice is not a get-out.

Rhodotus palmatus?

Correct!

you got the second one right.

How 'bout these?

Dammit, so obvious.

I have had some limited involvement with this and I would suggest that if you are serious about it you have to get a patent agent, it is an immensely complex subject, not so much applying for patent but as others have said seeing off the chancers, nutters and misguided. And if you get a patent it is probably because you have something that is worthwhile and some **** in China will copy it for a quarter of the price and you will bankrupt yourself trying to stop them doing it. A business plan is the fundamental. How much does it cost to make, what is the demand and the retail price and for how long before it is obsolete and the mark up. Basically is it worth patenting so that the time and money you put into your R&D and inventiveness gives you a financial return free from copyists.

OK, I have spent 20 minutes on it and I give up. I could gobe you a long list of things it is no, but that doesn't really answer the question.

Inonotus dryaeus?