daltontrees

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?

That's exactly it. The good thing about scientific names is that they are composed in a language that no-one uses for anything else. Thus it's international, doesn't evolve or mutate, leaves no room for ambiguity. Expecting everyone to use English is a peculiarly English thing. And of course the problem that the biggest group of English speakers (USA) don't speak the same English as the English. Not only do they call sycamores planes, they call planes sycamores. Limes are basswoods, poplars are cottonwoods and so on. And to get back to the original post, you can use the latinised naming to find meaning that can help you remember. So , based on leaf shape sycamore is Acer pseudoplatanus (= false + plane), Norway maple is Acer platanoides (= plane-like), and London plane is Platanus x acerifolia (= maple + leaves). If you're trying to memorise them I think it's always worth looking up the meaning. It might (might) give you something memorable to work with. Also, say them out loud, it helps make them stick. No-one speaks latin anymore so there's no right or wrong way to pronounce them. You can corrupt the pronunciation any way you want that helps you remember them. But if you use rude mnemonics, try not to use them later in meetings or with customers. There comes a point when you just have to know them as new words. Acer, fagus, quercus, fraxinus and other common native genus are the original latin names, they have no other meaning.

There's a country park near me that is quite boggy in places, and in the middle there are loads of willows that defy identification. At one end the'yre definitely caprea, and the other end I'd be comfortable confirming cinerea. But in the middle there's all sorts of mad combos and at least one other species in the mix, aurita I think. I found this explanation today about Grey Willow, which I thought was helpful. Grey Willow and Goat Willow collectively are known as 'Pussy Willow' because of their silky hairy buds in early spring. Easily mistaken for Goat Willow (Salix caprea) (which also has 2 sub-species as does Grey Willow), the differences being: If the bark is peeled off 2-year-old twigs, then the exposed surface is ridged on Grey Willow (but smooth on Goat Willow) The bark of Grey Willow grows darker and has shallower ridges than that of Goat Willow The leaves of Grey Willow are usually much smaller and between 2 to 3 times as long as broad and broadest beyond halfway to the tip Grey Willow (the much more common ssp. oliifolia sub-species - which is sometimes known as Rusty Willow) has fine felty hairs on the underside of the leaves and rusty-looking hairs along the veins on the underside of the leaf (whereas Goat Willow does not) The flowers on Grey Willow also start later than those of Goat Willow The softly-furry 'pussies' are slightly larger on Goat Willow Grey Willow is much less often found away from damp areas than is Goat Willow But, the hybrid of Grey Willow with Goat Willow is common. It is native and a shrub or small tree growing to 6m high (15m max), thus usually smaller than the similar Goat Willow which is 10m high, 19m maximum. Grey Willow exists as two sub-species: Salix cinerea ssp. cinerea (which is much less abundant and mainly occupies fens in a triangle between Burton on Trent at the centre, with Hull at the northern limit and Gravesend at the southern limit. Although in the last 10-15 years it seems to have departed from most of Norfolk and since the turn of the Century from most of Northern Ireland, it has however been spreading very slowly in apparently random isolated spots randomly throughout the UK since 2010). This species is usually persistently hairy. The leaves are dull and hairy (or not) on the upper surface and densely hairy on the underside. Leaf shape is mostly oblong or obovate. At low altitudes this species is found on marshes and fens. Salix cinerea ssp. oleifolia which is much the most widespread throughout the UK. The twigs become glabrous (hairless) as they grow. The leaves are mostly narrow-obovate or oblong and less glossy than those of ssp. cinerea and nearly glabrous on the upper surface. On the underside the leaves have grey hairs and some stiffer rust-coloured hairs along the veins. This sub-species is sometimes known as Rusty Willow for that reason. It is found in wet places, woods, both lowlands and uplands. It is the commonest species of Willow in the lowlands. Hybridizes with : Goat Willow (Salix caprea) to produce Salix × reichardtii Goat Willow (Salix caprea) + Creeping Willow (Salix repens) to produce Salix × permixta Eared Willow (Salix aurita) to produce Salix × multinervis Eared Willow (Salix aurita) + Dock-leaved Willow (Salix myrsinifolia) to produce Salix × forbesiana Dock-leaved Willow (Salix myrsinifolia) to produce Salix × strepida Dock-leaved Willow (Salix myrsinifolia) + Dock-leaved Willow (Salix myrsinifolia) to produce Salix × phylicifolia Creeping Willow (Salix repens) to produce Salix × subsericea There are also 13 triple hybrids, namely: Salix aurita × cinerea × phylicifolia Salix caprea × myrsinifolia × phylicifolia (Salix × phylicioides nom. nud.) Salix cinerea × myrsinifolia × phylicifolia Salix herbacea × myrsinifolia × phylicifolia Salix myrsinifolia × phylicifolia × repens Salix viminalis × cinerea × repens (Salix × angusensis) Salix myrsinifolia × phylicifolia × myrsinites (Salix × blyttiana) Salix caprea × cinerea × viminalis (Salix × calodendron) Salix cinerea × aurita × myrsinifolia (Salix × forbesiana) Salix cinerea × purpurea × viminalis Salix aurita × myrsinifolia × phylicifolia (Salix × saxetana) Salix purpurea × aurita × phylicifolia (Salix × sesquitertia) Salix aurita × caprea × viminalis with four of them being hybrids of Dark-leaved Willow (Salix myrsinifolia) and Tea-leaved Willow (Salix phylicifolia) with another Willow. These hybrids are not shown properly on the hybrid chart above, being partially over-lapped by normal hybrids with just two parents. There is also a one quadruple hybrid: Salix × taylorii (Salix purpurea × viminalis × caprea × cinerea) There are also five triple hybrids, namely: Salix cinerea × myrsinifolia × phylicifolia Salix herbacea × myrsinifolia × phylicifolia Salix repens × myrsinifolia × phylicifolia Salix caprea × myrsinifolia × phylicifolia Salix aurita × cinerea × phylicifolia with four of them being hybrids of Dark-leaved Willow (S. myrsinifolia) and Tea-leaved Willow (S. phylicifolia) with another Willow.

That's a Goat WIllow Salix caprea. The Grey S. cinerea has much narrower and smaller leaves.

If they died of Dutch Elm Disease the last thing you want to do is take them off site or even move the stuff around within the site.