sloth

Certainly an option the beeches as well?

I don't use a wrench but have followed this thread and think I 'get it', would like one myself! Could it be said branch pushed the rw down against the hitch, if you catch my drift?

Great job as far as heavy birch reduction goes. Timing with sap could have been better, be surprised if it died. Plenty of rot pockets in the severed stems and repeat work :sly:

Some turners may want some. Or instrument makers, I think it was/is used for piano sound boards. Finding a buyer would be the hard part, does dry quick when split, good firewood!

Couldn't be less arb related! My wife and I are have a little boy due June, and we are so stuck for a name! Must have looked at thousands :eek: Anyway I don't want to bore you all, but wanted opinions on Tybias. Would you pronounce it the same as Tobias, ie T'bye'us, not Toe'bye'us? And what if anything would you shorten it to? Toby? Any other suggestions welcomed, as a guide we like very old names, generally... Daughter named Temperance. Other names we are liking, but not necessarily both of us! Ishmael, reuben, eben(ezer), galahad, ezekiel, Otto, ludovic, Emmanuel, zebediah, Abraham, malachi

Good wage for someone Better than the 17-21,000 often on offer

See part 3, 14-1(vii), page 7 of the doc in this thread http://arbtalk.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?p=638894

What a monster

So to clarify, what species are they?

Sycamore, as I know it in the UK, is Acer pseudoplatanus. Acer = maples Pseudo = false Platanus = plane

Received, with many thanks :thumbup:

In this spring 2012 issue of the arb magazine (which I found to-be the best in a while) was a letter by P Holloway, AA vice chairman regarding wider use of the AA logo. For those not aware logo use is currently restricted to approved contractors and registered consultants. The letter explained how there is an ongoing consultation as to whether or not to allow wider use of the logo, ie for non registered/approved members to be allowed to use it. As I understand it, the registered consultants are against allowing its wider use, and feedback from approved contractors not complete. I do not know if non registered/approved members will be consulted about their views, and I presume (always an iffy thing to do!) non members will not be consulted at all. For those who are cynical, you may think the motive behind the consideration of extending logo use is financial. Personally I think wider use of the logo in its most basic form to simply show membership is a good thing, and would like to think the reasons for allowing it being to increase awareness of the AA and its 'cares for trees' ethics. Therefore I would like to think its use would come with membership, free of additional charge. I understand the worry of just anyone displaying the logo and abusing the customers trust in a professional body which they know little if anything about. This reinforces my view that anything to gain wider knowledge of the AA and its role within the industry is a good thing, enabling the general public (who are responsible for a massive amount of trees) to make more informed decisions on the care their trees recieve, and from which companies. Registered consultants and approved contractors we must, however, acknowledge as having proved themselves to be worthy of their status, as they will have worked hard to achieve it! This is where specific additions to the basic logo, and a wider public understanding of the AA would again be beneficial. Finally, I ask AA members and non-members alike, what the arbtalkers views are. Should AA members be allowed to display the logo?

So there is, like many natural systems, no nutshell! Is it something which, in some situations, you would promote? Or do you feel it changes the rooting environment too much too quickly? And when faced with a mature tree in decline would you explore other options, after exploring the root cause of the decline of course? Would be a good long term project for someone with the funds, time and trees to study further. I suppose the trouble with obtaining reliable and useful data would be the massive amount of difficult or impossible to control variables. Would need variation of tree species, variations of mulch - fresh/rotted, local/mixed, with leaves/without, time of year applied, depth applied. Monitoring of increase in Armillaria rhizomorphs, and their ability to invade the more/less stressed tree, which the mulch may help or worsen. Recording volume of roots and mycorhizea present before/after mulch. Recording which mycos species are present before/after mulch. Maybe recording the chlorophyl levels in the leaves at different times of year for mulched/non mulched, before during after. Taking account of other stresses such as drought. I'm sure there are other issues with such a project, hmm, the more I think about it the more massive a task it would be! :eek:

Fungus, in a nutshell, mulching a veteran field grown tree - good or bad? Mulching to combat compaction - good or bad? Be very interested in your views please...

I didn't realise change was imminent. I can't look at the attachment at the mo because I'm on my phone, what is it? Are they regs to go with the existing tcp act regs, or do they replace something? Thanks

Also, would mulching, terraventing etc require application for tpo trees?

Nothing wrong with that, one to be proud of!

Are there any papers/studies on long(er) term success of fresh vs old woodchip mulch that anyone knows of, particularly on vet trees, or trees where compaction isn't necessarily the problem, eg ground that was grazed/mown but is now long grass? Also I wonder if applying mulch to a field/pasture grown tree could adversely affect the mycorhizea already present? Eg. are some mycos happy in grass land situations, and some in woodland/mulched environments? If this is the case could upsetting the present balance cause (short term?) problems, as new myco associations have to compete with one another until a new balance is reached? Or is it the case that a mature root system can benefit from having multiple myco sp associating with it? Maybe woodland mycos on roots under mulch to the drip-line and field mycos further out?

Anybody else eagerly awaiting an update on this thread?

Bit of an odd one for those with kids, who has seen this program? Does anyone know anything about where it is filmed? Had a quick look on their website and it says its filmed in a protected woodland. I wondered what kind of protection, as it looks like all ground flora has been stripped and turfed/grass seeded. Some soil level changes also a possibility. Odd thing is it looks very 'sterilized' yet no matter how hard I look I can see no pruning cuts? Anyone?....

Agreed, probably rubbing branches by the sound of it. Have a good look and listen, if you can't spot the rubbing branch get someone in to find the cause of the noise. Best safe if kids play under it.

Interesting, how problematic would you say it is on larix?

How common is it on conifers? Don't recall seeing any gano on conifers...

But have they? Surely any problems associated with failing to follow recommendations would land in the tree manager/owners lap. What length should the surveyor go to to ensure the recommendations are followed?

It's on the list of 101 courses/workshops I'd like to do! With regards record keeping: I imagine in the event of tree related litigation, it would be up to the owner of the tree to have kept any reports and be able to produce them, surely? Unless written in contract that the surveyor has the responsibility to keep up to date with reviews, monitoring and record keeping.