daltontrees

Try "There's support in Scotland for Scotland to be independent of the UK AND a member of the EU."

You could just as well be talking about conservatives in Westminster, who only got 40 something %... I am no lover of the SNP givernment, but I'd rather we made an arse of things ourselves up here than have an arse made of it for us down there. We'd grow up quick enough. I think it's a mistake to assume that post-independence SNP would be in charge. Voting for independence is not the same as voting for SNP. On the other hand voting for SNP IS voting for independence. And, if the SNP can take anything from the landslide it's probably that there's Scottish support for an independent Scotland in the EU. SNP would be nuts to assume support for independence outside EU. Persnally I reckon Scotland outside UK would have struggled. Inside UK and outsde EU it definitley will. Outside UK and in EU would be a strong niche opportunity and we'd do OK. What really f****ed me off more than anything else in the run-up to the election was leaflets and Facebook adverts from the torys saying vote for them to block a referendum. A 5 year old could work out that that's because they feared losing a referendum. If they are confident of persuading Scotland to stay in the UK they should allow a referendum. And allow it very soon. No matter what they do now about Brexit, every stumble, downturn and economic casualty of Brexit (or pereived to be) will be resented by a large part of Scotland. It will become a festering sore that will not heal itself. I have spoken to hundreds of fellow Scots from all waks of life inteh last few days, and I am genuinely surprised at the near-universal resentment of people up here. I have a close relative who is an economics lecturer who was dead against independence a few years ago, but now would vote the other way. We debate it on impassionate economic grounds and for him to change his mind based on the behaviour of the tories in Wesminster since the Brexit referendum speaks volumes to me. It's not about FREEDOM, it's about refusing to sign the English economic suicide pact. And to answer the original question, I'd love to see an indicative pan-UK vote on Scottish independence. I bet England would ditch Scotland (and Northern Ireland) on economic grounds.

Here's another one from the RSA Edinburgh gallery. The detail is incredible. OK it's not a painting, but bits of it have been painted. It's called Family Tree by Robert Powell.

The other one's called 'The Cornfield'.

Who's the artist(s)?

Excellent, considering the pish that wins the Turner Prize these days.

And on the Baobab theme, here's 'Baobab Bridge' by Ade Adesina. Apologies for the reflections in the glass.

Starting with this one, a bit grim but beautiful. "The Last Bao" by Ade Adesina and Tomasz Wrobel

I was at a gallery recently with a diverse set of paintings with threes in them. I was going to stick them on to the end of the trees in the british landscape thread, but what all of them have in common is that they are figuratively trees, and they're not really landscape paintings. I thought it might be nice for folk to have somewhere to add any pictures the found that use trees in a non-literal way to say something or other about something or other. I appreciate I may be the only person that uses this thread, but hopefully others will be as intrigued or keen to share.

Someone had to. It's the law.

Terrible picture. But by association I would suggest investigating Daedalopsis confragrosa.

Looks like Goat Willow to me.

This has been discussed many times, especially on UKTC, and the consensus is that there is no proof that it is right, or wrong. If anything, it is believed that as a simple rule of thumb for people working near trees in the USA decades ago the idea was to measure stem diameter in inches, and that gave a RPA radius in feet. It's a bit like the NJUG rule of thumb, girth x 4 = standoff radius. Which works out at 12.5 times diameter. During all the discussion I've read and heard about it, no-one has come up with a more appropriate number. That's not to say it shouldn't be modified, with justification, for shallower or deeper soils, veteran or ancient trees or other relevant circumstances.

There's that misunderstanding I was talking about.

Meanwhile, the answer is no. The only situation that miht involve the tree owner recovering costs from the trencher is if the tree had to be taken down in an emergency because of its condition adn the cost of take-down was greater than it would be in a less urgent situation. In that case I could see that part of the cost (the diference between non-urgent and urgent take-down costs) might form a valid part of a claim. That's notteh same as saying the trencher has no liability. In this case I have suggested the circumstances for liability for harm or damage. In England the law is more towards strict liability, but in Scotland it's a bit more civilised. England's slowly catching up. And if there's a moral, it is that even though there may be no liability for take-down costs there may well be liability in negligence and that no-one should blunder in and render a neighbour's tree dangerous, eexpecting to rely on an infantile misunderstanding of (say) Lemmon v Webb. Consider the consequences of your actions before acting, then act reasonably, and the law will be on your side.

If the grass area is turning into a mud pit, a lot of damage will already have been done. Don't scrape anything, level it off with clean sharp sand, then apply Terram + Cellweb as per manufacturer's spec. Overfill with chuckies. Cheaper than most other driveway solutions.

No, but if the tree owner was not warned of the potential risk from the tree because of trenching damage, and it fails soon and causes harm or damage on either side of the boundary, the digger of the trench could be held liable .

Interesting indeed Edward. No--one but the applicant or his agent can appeal, but anyone can apply, and then they can appeal. If the appeal succeeded and gave subsidence as the reason for felling, the plot would be thickened considerably. If I was the owner I would probably have appealed anyway just to exhaust the process because further down the line the insurer could get very difficult or it could go to a compensation claim against the Council.

Damage is needed, but the common death of a tap root may be enough. From what I know it takes a few years of establishment of infection before surface fruiting occurs. Grinding may not have been your cause. It doesn't reinfect every year, the fruiting is seasonal on established decay sites. I would guess the spores persist in soil for years though. A healthy replacemente shouldn't get infected but you might want to steer clear of Fagaceae and Tiliaceae and Ulmaceae. I would have thought Acereacea or Rosaceae would be suitable replacements.

It's not your tree, ignore all the reckless advice about going ahead and felling it. If it is dangerous, it would be for the owner to show that it can be felled under exemption in a Conservation Area. If you fell it not only can you be sued by the owner but you could be fined for felling in a Conservation Area. The loan co. that repossessed the house will no doubt want its money back asap and may well put it on the market soon. At that point you can contact them through the estate agent, give notice of your risk concerns and request that they fell it or give permission for you to fell or reduce it. If it improves marketability then they might agree and if it doesn't they won't. I'd take it from there. How long has the tree stood up? 50 years? Unless something has changed recently there's probably no urgency. Also, few tree slam down suddenly, the ones I have pulled off buildings have inched down and stopped on the building or have done less damage than their size suggests. It's incredibly rare for occupants to be harmed inside buildings. Make sure your mother has building insurance. You could start a LGMPA process but it will probably get you nowhere.

Love it! Hilarious.

That was something else! Proper song, proper singer, phenomenal talent all round. Several light years away from today's popular 'stars'. I've a feeling I'll be watching that a few more times.

I just got this in an email from Sorbus. Doesn't affect me but others may wish to know. There's a full safety notice available form Sorbus IMPORTANT SAFETY NOTICE Stop using Braided Safety Blue® with slaice®, Arbor Elite with slaice® and pottsblitz with slaice®, CEclimb 12 with slaice®. On September 17th, TEUFELBERGER was informed of an incident where one slaice on a Braided Safety Blue opened while the rope was in use. Nobody was harmed. As a measure of precaution we decided to immediately inform our customers to stop using Braided Safety Blue® with slaice®, Arbor Elite with slaice®, pottsblitz with slaice® and CEclimb 12 with slaice®. The following products are affected: Brand: TEUFELBERGER Product name: Braided Safety Blue® with slaice® (Hi-Vee with slaice®, Ultra-Vee with slaice®, T-Vee with slaice®), Arbor Elite with slaice® and pottsblitz with slaice®, CEclimb 12 with slaice® Colour: any Date of production: January 2014 – September 2019 Serial number: 2014-xxxxxx to 19/09-yyy Reason: Potential malfunction of the rope termination

Definitely

Thanks, that's what I meant.