daltontrees

Nice one Gary. I'll need to look out for it.

Think ahead. Software is more important than hardware, but choice of software may restrict choice of hardware. Report is likely to have text, a spreadsheet of data and a plan of location and spreads. 2 and 3 can be generated from suitable software. I use Pocket GIS, which allows you to design your survey template then use it as many times as you want to collect tree data. It then lets you upload the data as a spreadsheet, which in run can be imported into a CAD-type mapping programme. I use PT Mapper which is a bit irritating for anything out of the ordinary, but quick and simple. Choice of device is a matter of personal choice, tablets have better screen size but I use Trimble Geo and Juno because they are indestructible and small and with a stylus they are better in the cold and wet.

Almost certainly a cockspur thorn (Crataegus crus-galli). There are popular thornless versions of it which nevertheless occasionally produce vicious thorns almost 2 inches long on suckering shoots.

That's a really useful publication. I sere it clarifies that there is no diseased or dying exemption and tha tthe dangerous exemption should only be used when - " The ash tree is already clearly affected by ash dieback symptoms; and, It is within falling distance (i.e. the total height of the tree) of a highway, service network, built infrastructure,or a space with frequent public use and, The greater part of the crown of the tree is dead; and Crown reduction works necessary to remove any deadwood would, in the opinion of a qualified professional, significantly harm the vitality (or visual amenity) of the tree. Additionally, any ash tree showing basal lesions,either with or without evidence of secondary infection e.g. honey fungus,would also fall within the scope of the dangerous tree exception" That's a nice clear set of rules. As with any risk assessment there has to be likelihood of failure and someone or something there to be harmed or damaged.

I don't know where you are getting the "dying" exemption. I think there is a real need for us all to wait to see if ash (unless dangerous) recover, because if they do they will be the best source of regeneration of ash woodlands locally. So, regardless of there not being a 'dying' exemption, the FC would be right to refuse license applications. Infected does not mean dying in all cases, even if it turns out to be true with the benefit of hindsight. It's not like sanitation felling is going to prevent the spread of Chalara.

You're not going to concede anything, are you, even on a site that I have seen and you and FR haven't? I know what I saw, and I now what I didn't see. I may have faults but not paying attention to detail is not one of them. The trees I saw were dead at the tips, there were indications that this was a result of lack of water and other abiotic factors including salt and constrictions from planting grilles, there were no symptoms of Chalara, it would have been professionally negligent of me to report Chalara, and if I had I would also have notified FR, especially since there isn't another reported square within 50k. And I would also consider it a grave disservice to society to recommend that the trees not be retained on the basis that they might have or will inevitably contract Chalara. These might be the tolerant or resistant populations that we need. Back to the OP. There are shabby looking ash around whose condition is not a result, primarily or at all, of Chalara. Even FR has produced guidance that includes a list and photos of symptoms associated with other disorders of ash.

The symptoms are not everywhere... Then map shows no recorded cases in the area (Ayrshire) I was surveying in last week, or in a couple of the areas I visited yesterday. UK_chalara_outbreak_Map_Web_Version_5July2019.pdf

I crossed this country (Scotland) yesterday, it's not everywhere. I'm not at all convinced that dieback in ash at the very peripheries which could be explained by the drought we had during leafing in late May (and last May too), but with no classic signs of Chalara, is Chalara.

No way is the OP's pic Elder.

Meanwhile, back to the tree. Here's an unusually large Elder leaf from Falkirk yesterday. Note the 50p piece for scale in the first picture.

Quoting directly from "Diagnosis of ill-health in trees' by Strouts (1994) - "Fraxinus excelsior suffers from a condition, not fully explained, called Ash dieback. It has not been clearly characterized but involves the death of scattered twigs, branches or limbs.Even severely affected trees sometimes slowly recover." A pessimism in the industry about Chalara is sweeping the country possibly faster than Chalara itself. But if you stop and look at an ash closely in some areas you may find no wilted leaf, no diamond shaped lesions, no fruiting bodies on last year's fallen petioles, no specific discoloration under the bark, in fact no evidence of Chalara whatsoever. I recommend people stop and actually look instead of assuming from a general impression of tattiness. As Shigo used to say "Touch Trees".

Long before Chalara was known of, Ash Dieback was a thing. Abiotic. General decline for reasons not fully understood. The ash I have been seeing look awful but have no symptoms that can only be Chalara. How, for example, is it possible for Chalara to cause a well-set bud from a previous year on a good sturdy twig to fail to develop at all?

Almost certainly ?

I zoomed right in, there's no sign of axillary buds, and the 'twig' is much too uniform to be anything other than the petiole and midrib of a pinnate leaf. Plus, I can't think of one simple leaf species that has no leaf petiole. I'd say this is definitely a pinnate leaf form. Just don't know what species.

If I could have only one book to keep and know it would be "Trees: Their Natural History" by Peter Thomas.

I hope so. I estimate that lot of books to buy would be around £3,500. If you can even get them.

Aroun Glasgow there is a fair bit of this. Alos I watched pigeons sitting at the top of my neighbourign ash trees as they came into leaf ripping the young leaves off. Plus it was so dry some of the buds didn't even open this year. Public and clients are assuming it's Chalara, but I'm not seeing many symptoms of Chalara, just lots of awful looking ash.

Put "good books" in the search box.

Long shot ... Acer negundo?

Sorry, I have only just seen your post. Yes I have the Pro. I don't pay for the PT Mapper support, on the basis that they're not there to help at 8 at night or 7 in the morning when I'm often doing battle with CAD plans. It means I've had to learn to solve problems miyself (the hard way) and now I have a reallly good understanding of how PTM works. I had an issue with Pear early on when I found 3 fairly major things in the user manual that were wrong and the ordinary functionality couldn't be used without paying for support (which is wrong-in-principle for any product) or figuring it out myself. In this way I have discovered things I can do with PTM that PTM says you can't do or doesn't even metion that you can. I think I have run it to its very limit. There are times I really hate PTM and other times I love it, the best for me is the close integration of the survey writer, Pocket GIS and the mapping system. Things that really annoy me are that if you're using raster mapping you have to convert them to bitmaps (it won't take jpegs, tifs or pngs or pdfs) and if using vector mapping it has to be dxf (it will not take dwgs). I had to buy a programme just to convert dwgs. Ultimately, if I hadn't had previous experience using AutoCAD I would have given up on PTM or would have had to accept regular delays in my workflow while I got Pear to fix the same problems over and over again. Without a dwg to dxf converter, I would not be able to ge tthrough an average week with an average architect/topo surveyor plan. It's a serious limitation. I'd recommend getting QCAD, cheap and versatile, if slow.

Nice one, I never would have got that.

I trust you concluded that 'Recommendations' must be tagged on to the end of the title because that's the name of the Standard? One wouldn't for example call it 'BS 5837:2012 Trees in relation to design and construction - Recommendations' on a job that didn't involve demolition? I hadn't known there was a BS0. I just skimmed through it and it is genuinely interesting. Rather disappointingly, 'recommendation; isn't defined in it. It does explain codes of practice - A code of practice contains recommendations and supporting guidance,where the recommendations relevant to a given user have to be met in order to support a claim of compliance. Users may also justify substitution of any of the recommendations in a code of practice with practices of equivalent or better outcome. Depending on the context and field of application, a code of practice usually reflects current good practice as employed by competent and conscientious practitioners.

Even better, excise the infected parts, ringbark or remove the whole tree right away or it will become a breeder and aid a local outbreak of DED. Or is this an area where there is no attempt made to protect elms?

What country are you in?

What's the situation? Public visibility? Shading issues?