daltontrees

Species thought extinct was rediscovered in 1940 then in numbers in 46 and I think brought over to Kew shortly afterwards. The oldest ones in Britain can't be more than 60. I read somewhere that the leaves are really branchlets. Also read they are easy to propagate by cuttings, a client has a tree and I took cuttings last month which are struggling but may make it. Lovely soft foliage, like velvet.

Dammit, I have had to dust off Mynors to be able to reply on this! It seems that the courts have taken a view on the trespass matter. The neighbour should always ask the owner to abate the nusiance and similarly (possibly as pasr of the same communication) give notice of intention to do the work in default of the owner doing it. This is more than a common courtesy, as the courts have alluded to some of the reasons why asking/notice are needed. Here's exactly what Mynors says... "In particular the removal of the branches... up to the boundary between two properties may lead to the tree being unstable and thus more likely to fall in the future. In addition, if the work is carried out incompetently, it may lead to decay at the point wherre the branches were removed, thus shortening the life of the tree. It is for these reasons unwise to carry out abatement - other than at a trivial level - without first taking professional advice from an arboriculturalist." Now, Mynors is not prone to leave any point of law flapping in the breeze like that. It suggests to me that the strict liabilities have not been sufficiently defined in court yet and probably can't be without specific legislation. That's what I meant before about 'unresolveable'. Hopefully it is clear that if the tree blew over or died prematurely because of the pruning it could be the neighbour's fault. Much as he may have the right to remove branches he has no right to destroy or cause the self-destruction of another man's property. BS3998 I mentioned only as a test of what the courts might look at as industry best practice. If I was representing the owner I would be beating the neighbour over the head with it metaphorically if not actually. But it has a specific use in this scenario and it relates to trespass/notice/asking. If the owner had been asked or if the neighbour had taken that professional advice he might have learned that the BS at 7.2.4 suggests that the branches selected for removal should not be closely aligned within the tree's vascular system (e.g. in a vertical line). There are several stipulations in the BS that have been breached by this pruning/butchering job, like amount removed in one season, long pruning stubs etc. My first point is that if the neighbour had asked or taken advice someone could have removed the branches properly in a phased manner over several years to minimise the risk of the tree dying or blowing over. That would be reasonable. My second point is that if the tree now dies prematurely or blows over the neighbour is responsible, because it could have been avoided by more reasonable action. Mynors is going back on the shelf. Anyone who acts reasonably need no knowledge of the law and should have no fear of it, but those who act unreasonably cannot expect to hide behind it.

Fascinating post... I have recently done the AA Tech law exam (passed, phew). It didn't requre that level of detail on disputes and encroachments. So I got a copy of Mynors (which, incidentally, up here in Scotland is about as useful as a square pin plug in Europe) and after immersing myself in it I concluded that the law on this type of situation is not only unresolved but is possibly unresolveable and that each case would probably be decided on merits weighing up ecroachment against criminal damage. I have been in the situation too where police have been called, me being threatened with violence, interdicts, clients moving house to get away from 'cocks' forever etc. Foregetting about law for a moment, the average person would say the pruning is ridiculous, but I bet there are two sides to the story. Back to the law, it takes the side of a reasonable person. The issues of branch theft, trespass etc. would only be rocks to throw at each other in an expensive legal fight. To my mind the real offense is not yet proven... there is no doubt that the prunming cannot be defended as within best practice (BS3998 being a good foundation) and therefore the neighbour and/or advisor/contractor) wouldn't be able to satisfya court that the eventual demise of the whole tree was foreseeable. If it falls over or drops a branch on someone in the lane and there is injury or damage in the short term, the owner could well look to the neighbour for liability. In the loger term though, if I was the owner I would take impartial advice on the long term tree health and if it is or probably will become dangerous as a result of the pruning I would (i) take it down and (ii) consider seeking to recoup the cost or a part of it from the neighbour. That's what a reasonable person might do but as I say there is probably a bit of 'history' that could cloud judgement. PS I would have declined that pruning job, even with written proof that I had advised against it, for fear that people would have seen our company doing it. Or at least hire an unmarked transit and wear a Mickey Mouse mask. Maybe use a washing line for safety though, wouldn't want to take any chances.

More on that snake-barked maple. The best I have managed is pinching another leaf on the way back from the pub the other night, I literally have not had a moment to spare in daylight even to get a pic of the bark. So, here is a fully formed leaf, points and all.

Will do, but up till now I was going on nearest match being A.rufinerve.

Correction, I have just looked at the leaf again and it is possible that there is a bit of lost central tip but if so the whole tree had lost its tips as some sort of freakish mass windscorching. I'll have another look tomorow, it occurs to me now that these may be juvenile leaves. Good shout with A. pensylvanicum but I'm no longer sure if the photo is representative.

No, every leaf on the tree looked pretty much like this, definitely NO central lobe! Believe me, I looked...

See if you can identify this tree from just one leaf... I think I have got it pinned down to a 'Section' i.e. a group of species. It is just along the road so I can possibly get a few more pics, but if you have an idea and ask me the right questions you will probably get as far as I did without any more pics. But I am flummoxed about the species and really want to know, as does client. Or maybe I am barking up the wrong tree and have got the Genus completely wrong?

Thanks for the clarification. I don't fully understand the Andricus lifecycle, they need alternate cerris and robur or something like that. Maybe there is enough cerris in x hispanica to allow use a salternate host, but the leaves in the initial picture could just as soon be cerris. It is a big old tree in an avenue so if it's a hybrid it's likely to be a deliberate one rather than a natural one so I suppose it's going to be pure cerris or pure(!) x hispanica. I will look out for gooseberry galls, I have never seen them in Scotland maybe they haven't arrived yet.

Just read DH post, sounds good to me but maybe on x hispanica rather than cerris.

Somebody please figure this one out, it's doing my head in. Half an hour on I have eliminated lots of things but still don't have any ideas.

Tree looks like it has strongly opposite branch pairs. Rules out all the pterocarya/juglans stuff. Having taken down a A altissima I would say it aint one of them because beyond leaf shape the superficial similarity with Ash ends. To me it looks like a few of the mature F excelsior round here but there is a huge variety of bark textures and colours even in the same bit of woodland.

Up here in Scotland the climate may be that bit harsher but I would still suggest this. If it's a north/south hedger cut one side (the west side) one year and the other (east side) the next year. If it's a east/west hedge do both in same year. Even then I would think about taking 1 1/2 feet off each side in year 1 and another 1 1/2 feeet off each side in year 2. Maybe do in midsummer to allow for reflushing and the wounds to harden and prevent fungal infection in autumn. Beech has only been in leaf up here for 3 weeks. Scarily late.

A super little field guide is the Arb Assoc one, you can get it through their website publications section. Small but perfectly formed for the main tree killers. Als I think Lonsdale's Principles of Tree Hazard Assessment and Management is so well written that it articulates the biology and biomechanics of decay in the context of management in a way that no other publication I have seen does. You need to speak the lingo though...

Eucalyptus is an Angiosperm, i.e. a flowering plant and not a conifer. True to the general rule it produces tension wood to react to stem bending and inclination. For formal experimental proof on Cider Gums see http://www.sid.ir/en/vewssid/j_pdf/80420060102.pdf The original question related to branch strengthening. You only have to try and get a Silky through the top of a branch union to guess that the wood there is denser, and apparently that's due to extra cellulose, which is basically what tension wood is. I haven't noticed eccentric rings on Eucalyptus branches but will look the next time. All the Eucalyptus around here have died in the last few cold winters so it might be a while before I get to work on a big one again.

Looks like Sorbus aria all right. The thibetica leaves can be nearly 9 inches across and almost circular, aria's are only about 4 or 5. It looks too bushy for Lutescens, which is usually quite upright.

Personally I never contact any company that's just initials, I always feel if they won't put their name to their work then they can't be that proud of it and they might do me a rubbish job and then disappear into anonimity. I disagree that people just go with the cheapest every time, we have loads of clients that use us over and over again on negotiated prices, htey ar ejust happy to have someone honest, reliable and knowledgeable to work on their trees. Use your name or a memorable name, build a reputation on it and guard it with your life.

Thanks, you are dead right/put your finger on it etc. har har. I had heard of it but never seen it, but will never get it wrong again. Internet says sapropic as I thought, nothing to do with the poor Rowan being hollow. Cheers!

Has anyone ever seen one of these before? A firm black nodule about 4 cm long found on the edge of an open cavity on the base of a hollowed out Rowan, I popped it open and took these pics while it was fresh. I don't think it had anything to do with the demise of the Rowan, which has subsequently been taken down, but I am curious about it anyway. There was only one such lump. Attached by the knob at the end. Is it something really obvious liek teh first year of a Daldinia concentrica? That black fringe was glistening like jet when I first opened the thing.

Good point about the veins going to the tips, but they seem to do that on C betulus too. Collins guide says N obliqua soon has harshly curling plates on bark but C betulus has smooth grey bark with dull silver or orange snake marks. The tight twigginess of one of the photos is definitely reminiscent of N antarctica but I was recently down at Kew at Castle Howard where they have masses of Southern Beeches I was amazed at how different the other species like obliqua and nervosa look from that. I wish I had paid more attention to the buds.... I'm still for Cb. The bark is persuasive and there's no denying those leaf tips.

My first thought was Hornbeam. Several of the photos show the sudden narrowing and elongation of the leaf tip, although in some they are a bit shrivelled. You just don't get that in any of the Nothofagus but it is characteristic C betulus. The buds are a bit squat for C betulus but not out of the question for a tree that is surrounded in tarmac, frazzled and has set buds in such dry and hot conditions. The spacing of the leaves suggests low vigour too.

Thanks everyone, I can taste those mushy peas already. I will settle for the P. balsamifera trichocarpa which I think is a synonym for TT 32

The leaf floated very serenely to the ground, not a hint of spiralling. The pic I have of the whole tree is rubbish but I will try and insert it here. No, that didn't work... Anyway, the tree is about 10 metres high, very sraight upright trunk (DBH about 400mm), scaffolds coming off at right angles and they all slowly and gracefully curve upwards. Bark is fairly smooth with a few black diamonds but no significant roughening or furrowing (reminiscent of P. alba). The tree is in west end of Glasgow, playing havoc with wall (heaving and breaking its foundation I think) and with a large surface root. A cross between Cottonwood and Balsam would explain it perfectly. Descriptions in Hilliers, sketchy as they are, support this general view. I don't have Mitchell's but will notify Santa straight away of my interest. My Phillips is on loan so I can't look it up, I pebet there is a killer photo in it that put it beyond doubt. Any conclusions from the falling leaf test? And would anyone be worried about total removal close to buildings in terms of heave, it's a mighty light garage between tree and house and I expect it is wet enough that clays are perpetually swollen but any comments would be appreciated. It has to go but if it is a sensitive issue I could take it away over 3 sessions.

I am off immediately to drop a leaf and see what happens. When taking the sample I tried to snap it off, it wouldn't give at all and I ended up biting it off. It tasted minging (for those of you south of the biorder that means bitter).