daltontrees

Here's what the bark looks like.

That's the place! The trees are on the edge of the meadows to the east of the pond.

From that Oxford arboretum. Hornbeam on the left, Hop Hornbeam on the right. Also a picture of Hop Hornbeam 'hops'.

Down near Oxford there's an arboretum I went to, can't remmeber the name. Theres a Hornmbeam and Hop Hornbeam right beside one another and just going by thre leaves I tell you it's not easy to distinguish them. If you have one of each leaf side by side you can see the difference but if tested on it 2 minutes later you'd easily get it wrong. I'll see if I can find pictures.

It'd be better if it said there should eventually be nothing to worry about after the verdict.

Yaaaay! Finally a real hornbeam. Where are all the jokers now? I'd say not Ostrya, definitely Carpinus, very likely C. betulus

Picture of that big Beech in the middle that has fallen inwards.

Yeah but insurance won't cover gross negligence, insurers will duck it if the inspector acted outwith his qualifications and experience and/or without the reasonable skills required of a competent inspector. My insurers wanted to see sample reports and instructions before covering me. So don't call it anything other than a contractor's report and don't pretend you know about stuff it you don't.

I've got a Timberwolf 75 and I use it almost every week. It's fabulous and only 800mm wide and I have had it through garden gates, up steps, through (yes, through) houses, up alleyways, round tight corners etc. It would be alomost impossible to touch the moving blades, I don't think even Ussain Bolt could reach them. Taking the flywheel cover off disables the electrics. Really safe. Just got to wear visor and ear muffs, the noise form sticks rattling around in and banging on the hopper will make your ears whistle after a while. I would imagine that maintaining its manufactoirer's safety features an operating it in accordance with manufacturer's instructions will go a long way towards satisfying PUWER. I think that's where the leagal implications come from, not from any obscure rules about what is OK and what isn't for gravity fed chippers.

Holy shamoley, Mobile Elevated Death Trap! Compliant with the 'Poohing Yourself At Height Regulations 1880'.

So here's a question akin to how much wold you charge to cut it. The sign beside it says it takes X men Y weeks to cut it once every 10 years, using mewps. Assuming the guys get the weekend off, how many man-days does that mean it takes i.e. X x Y = ? Sensible guesses only. Or not.

It's the only place you can stop and see it from.

A survey appointment took me past the Meikleour hedge during the week. I thought it would be in wonderful autumnul colours but it was barely turning. And it's well into its spell since its last 10 year trim. Anyway, if anyone ever wondered what it looks like on the other side, here it is. Poor pic because there is so little light in there it was a hand-held 1/20 of a second exposure. Note a big Beech has snapped atthe base and fallen inwards.

In the same vein but not as good, here's one frm a cherry I took down yesterday. Looked better before it went orange like too much spray-on-tan.

PS The usual problem with uptake of BSs is likely to apply here, the cost is prohibitive for occasional use or reference use only for the likes of us arbs. I do wish there was a way that a few of us could share the cost of a copy, I'd be up for that. It kind of irks me that I spent about 15 hours commenting on the draft (it was all over the place, it took a long time to figure out what was right and what was wrong) for no reward and I have to pay to see how it has turned out. Some of my comments have made their way though to the micro-guide, and a lot of other people commented, so I can only hope the BS is substantially improved from the draft. But I aint paying £220 to find out. The draft included a sectionthat would directly affect how BS5837 surveys are done, so at least anyone like me doing these has to find out what it now says.

If anyone's interested, the Bat Conservcation Trust has just published a related 'method statement' for the non-specialist use of endoscopes for investigating potential roost features. It's available on the BCT website. It is stated as being for 'arborists', whatever they are. It dosn't appear to be a method statement, rather it is a method or methodology. Considerable adatation would be required to turn it into a method statement. As a measn of helping me remember what it is for, here's my understanding. a. If a tree has a known bat roost, a non-specialist (an arborist) shouldn't use an endoscope. b. If a tree has a feature that can be confirmed from the ground as suitable for bats, the method shouldn't be used. c. If examination can be doene by mirror and torch, don't use an endoscope. d. If a tree doesn't have a known bat roost but a scoping survey from the ground has noted medium or high potential for roosting, a non-specialist (an arborist) could use an endoscope to see if the potential can be downgraded to 'low'. e. If the endoscope examination is inconclusive, a licensed bat worker must take over. f. If a roost is found, stop. So I'd say arborists shouldn't be rushing out to buy endoscopes based on lots of new work coming up. The circumstances are so tightly constrained that endoscopic examination by a non-specialist will be rare. Funny thing is, this 'method statement' was published a few weeks before the new BS, but doesn't refer to it. The Micro Guide refers to the method statement. I haven't seen the BS.

F. excelsior 'Monophylla'?

Tha't not a fact, that's a magnum opus!

I suppose so, but they are all bound by the same primary legislation and there shouldn't be that much local variation.

Thanks, I assumed yoyu were genuine and I pitched in on the draft.

Is that a question? If so, it's screaming Ganoderma. Give it a few weeks and things might be clearer. Meantime the presence of the fruiting body won't make much difference to the situation.

Another tip. The words adnate and adnexed are annoyingly similar. But adnate gills meet the stem like a T. AdnaTe. A have a ridiculous mnemonic for this, Based on the word Fasad. Free first, adnexed is next... sinuate, adnate, decurrent. This covers the types that can readily be seen and described in the field, progressively greater attachment to the stem.. Occasionally useful, as with Armillaria. The following is probably better to print off than the Kia ora crow profiles.

With those cones? Sawara is C. pisifera, which translates to 'bearing peas', the cones are pea sized and round. Can't tell from your pics how big the cones are.

Yeah but you sponsored the raffle and probably got shooed to the top after a handful of erudite posts. Probably an MBE when you hit 1000 posts.

That's what I thought, it has to be installed by a 'competent person' which includes members of some institutions like HETAS. Or am I imagining all this?