daltontrees

Carbon is stored mainly as cellulose, lignin and less permanently as starch. So, dried wood density is a rough measure of carbon storage. Density is a product of growing conditions and species. It might not be a simple as carbon is proportional to cross sectional area. There might be an adjustment to be made from overbark DBH to overwood diameter. It sounds like yield figures might be more useful too, becasue they will indicate biomass. Forced dense forestry produces tall poles with little side growth, and these may have the same DBH as an open grown tree of half the height and less biomass.

Possibly straightforward enough. 5 cube a quarter is 40 cube in 2 years. A CA notification that hasn't resulted in a TPO has 2 years' duration. So perhaps this is a situation where there is so much timber being removed in the notification that it can't possibly be removed within 2 years without a felling license. So maybe the Council does not want to leave you with the impression that CA notification exempts you. Thereafter it depends on what country you are in. Don't people put their location in their Arbtalk profile any more?

I'll check the wording, as I've only ever used it for individual open grown trees. For forestry trees there is a massive database at Forestry Scotland for just about every species of forestry tree in every possible permutation of soil types and climate. I wsa gobsmacked when I found it. It even has a sort of calculator where you put in species, location, slope, soil type etc and it gives you stand yield info which with a bit of jiggery pokery can give average individual tree sizes.

Isn't it the ethanol content that degrades rubberised components such as diaphragms and pipes?

That's a new one on me thanks for mentioning it. I will investigate distribution in Scotland.

Have a look for the Forestry Commission publication by John Whyte, it gives annual growth increments for several species in a variety of growing conditions. It gets complicated as trees get older, but initially it's just a simple multiplication. If you can't find it let me know.

The second picture shows the surface root of a Holly that has grown across the butress and is now conflicting with the Sycamore (and winning) and there is a single shelf-like bracket on the bottom side of the impaction.

Thanks. Could be. Association suggests gibbosa but I always thought it had oval or elongate pores, this one has round pores. I can't think what else it can be though.

Can anyone help ID this, found at the base of a Sycamore which in all other respects loked fine.

Too fuzzy to ID

I was commenting on all 3 of your posts, just saying rock and tree climbing are on different bases. Fall factors are a rating for ropes, not anchors or climbers. I suppose another key difference is that in tree work the rope length can never be more than twice the height above last anchor, whereas in rock climbing you can be way way above last anchor. So far sometimes tha teh amout of rope out i a good deal more than the distance to the groundI remember a climb in Skye where I was a full 50 metres out, my last runner had pulled out as I passed it and I was 40 metres above my last runner. I was having kittens. Just made the belay ledge.

From what I can gather of this case, it was a judicial review or challenge of the Council's decision that the honeydew was not a statutory nuisance. More specifically, the nuisance claimed was that the honeydew and resulting sooty mould was prejudicial to the health of the occupants of the thatched cottage (the thatch supposedly harbouring the sooty mould spores that caused respiratory problems). I agree people seize too readily on cases as proving generalities, whereas it is the other way around, the law looks to apply generalities to specific situations and if we are lucky clarifies the generalities of the law. And so some of the useful principles of tree-related law come from places like Donoghue v Stevenson (about ginger beer) and Rylands v Fletcher (flooded mines). All that the Test Valley case did was clarify that a statutory nuisance based on 'prejudicial to health' has to be prejudicial to the average person. This is consistent with the principle that actions and inactions towards others expect us only to anticipate normal situations. Statutory nuisance has specific classes, and none of them involve dirtying cars with sooty moulds. There seems to be no prospect of a case succeeding based on sooty moulds causing inconvenience or damage. There was a case in 1985 (Wivenhoe Port), concerned with statutory nuisance interference with personal comfort, where the judge stated that "dust falling on motor cars may cause inconvenience to their owners; it may even diminish the value of their motor car, but this would not be a statutory nuisance." Common law nuisance, now that's a slightly different matter, bound only by broad principles of deprivaion of right to enjoy property.

I imagine the effect on your intetrnal organs of a straight vertical drop and sudden stop in a harness would be something like being in a car crash at 30mph wearing a seatbelt. i.e survivable but not good for you and with little margin for error. And as with car crashes, falls and sudden stops could cause disastrous skeletal damage, and then there's ligaments, tendons, cartilage... brain damage. It's nothing like jumping off a sofa. Paratroopers can arrest falls on landing becasue they're ready for it and trained to absorb the energy in ways that doesn't cause damage to them. Not the same as taking it all through your pelvis and base of spine in a fraction of a second, unprepared, sideways. The limit of 500mm might seem silly, but it's probably only half of what would certainly **************** you right up, and there can't be many people around who would vouch for it being silly, after having experienced it.

4kN to 5kN force on an anchor point is the same as hanging a 400-500kg weight off it. When selecting an anchor one should maybe try and imagine if you could hoist 1/2 a tonne up on it slowly.

You can't compare rock climbing to tree work. Rock climnbing ropes are for fall arrest, tree work ropes are for work positioning. The former have to elongate to absorb the fall, the latter have to be almost non-elastic so that you can climb the rope and then be stationary while cutting etc.

Can't be arsed with this thread since woodnicer couln't be arsed even to say what country he/she is in.

OK I get it a bit more. A dry meter only needs to be an analogue to digital converter but a wet meter needs to have a calculator in it too. FR_BEC_Wood_as_Fuel_2012.pdf FR_BEC_Wood_as_Fuel_Technical_Supplement_2010.pdf

Is there a wee mistake in the presentation of the formula, i.e. should it not be Mwet = (100 * Mdry) / ( 100 + Mdry)?

Just when I thought I had it... I will need to dig out an old publication I have somewhere about moisture content. My recolledtion was that green wood was 65% water, and hearth-dry was closer to 20%. Call it 66% or 2/3rds. If so, 1/3 weight reduction on drying brings wet % to 50%?

Thanks for explanations everybody, Head-spinning stuff. I agree the new rules seem to be on a 'wet' basis. The 'wet' basis is the most intuitive one I think as it doesn't re;ly on knowing the hypothetical oven dry weight, the important bit being how much drier is it than the green weight. Or in words, the wet basis is now much of the log is water. The dry basis is how much heavier is it because of water content. Dry basis could be a useful indication of re-humidification. Ther's no doubt that wet basis is most obvious measure of how much the wood has been dried from green. PAUSE FOR THOUGHT The electrical resistasnce of bone dry wood is high. Compared to wet it is very high. I think that effectively conductivity is very nearly proportional to free moisture content. I don't know how meters can automatically calibrate to measure dry weight %, whereas wet weight % would require no calibration. basically a resistance meter.

It's a bit of a trek up there even from Glasgow, but I might give the guy a call tomorrow if he's stuck.

I have just read the whole thread and am none the wiser. No-one has explained what the difference is between wet and dry basis. Can someone spell it out please?

Meters don't meassure moisture content, they measure electrical conmductivity, and the display convertts this to a moisture content. Conductivity increases with moisture content and temperature. So strictly speaking all moisture statements should be followed by "(measured at X degrees)" or should be normalised to some standard temperature.. My old Protimeter had a chart for adjusting values for temperature.

Informative, thanks. Uptake if this service would be for me based on cost. It's a hard thing to specify but how much does iot cost to survey and report on a tree?