agg221

I have a very annoying and clever rat in one of my sheds. I've been setting a Fenn trap for it, baited with Nutella. It's cocked and set right on the edge of the catch - I reckon if I walk up and down too hard I'll trigger it, but somehow it keeps being licked clean, yet the trap doesn't go off. I couldn't do it, so I have no idea how the rat is! I'd rather trap it as I have barn owls around. Alec

Yes, particularly on the subject of who they will go after. The programme is actually very good at explaining this (including the legal terms), but the point is that the court can decide to go after the employer for damages, even if they are not guilty of anything. A tort is a civil law. Malfeasance is doing something deliberately wrong (in a civil sense), so malfeasance is deliberately committing a civil wrong, like cutting down a tree with a TPO on it. The tort malfeasor is the person/body who deliberately commits the wrong. If a company owner instructs an employee to do it, the 'company' will have committed the malfeasance and can be sued for breaking the law. If an employee decides to do it, even if they know they shouldn't, without their employer telling them to do so, they are the tort malfeasor and have committed the civil offence. However, they (the employee) probably don't have a lot of money, so for someone choosing who to pursue for damages, they're better off going after the employer, whilst fully acknowledging that the company is not guilty of breaking the law. This situation surprised me, but examples cited on the programme include a (successful) damages claim against a night club where the bouncer got hacked off with someone, went home, came back and attacked them. Note, the night club was explicitly not guilty of breaking any law, but was pursued for 'vicarious liability' and lost. As to whether someone is technically an employee, I suspect would be argued based on whether that secured more chance of extracting damages. Don't forget, damages don't have to just be the cost of something, they can be punitive or exemplary, i.e. designed to send a message to others not to do the same thing. Hope that clarifies a bit! Alec

Cheers Clive! Alec

Suspect it wasn't your machine - it was a few years ago now (Mark 1 rather than Mark 2) and came from somewhere on the South Coast, absolutely covered in sawdust even after a trip up on a pallet. If yours was a Mark 1 I'd be interested in the blades - I only have one set running at the moment and prefer to run them in pairs so I can have one set off being sharpened. I know someone with a 30" planer down in Milford, so I batch up my wider boards and take them down there. Alec

Glad to hear it went as hoped. Your question was reasonable and it's good that it was taken that way. If the trees are to come down at some point in the future, at least it will be done properly, and I would imagine you have gained some respect in the process. Alec

I do know of someone with a portable mill that would do a 950mm, but he's a grumpy git and doesn't like talking to people so it wouldn't get you very far I'm afraid. It's a Forestor, so it might be worth contacting their agents and seeing if they know of anyone with one available. In similar vein, there's now a wide mill Trekkasaw, which is portable. Might be worth contacting Log Logic? LOGLOGIC // Product Range // Trekkasaw Sawmill Alec

Yes - you're looking at the either the tort of malfeasance or the situation of a tort feasor under the doctrine of vicarious liability. The program linked below is worth listening to on the subject, very clear and well explained although distinctly worrying if you're an employer. BBC Radio 4 - Unreliable Evidence, Who's to Blame? Alec

I am seriously envious of your 24" thicknesser. I have a 12.5" DeWalt DW733, which is nominally portable if your arms are up to it. It's a fantastic machine for its price - really built to last and I've thrown a huge amount of stuff through it (I bought it secondhand on ebay and since then have fully worn out two full sets of knives) but I could do with something wider. For doing the job by hand, one tool I would recommend looking out for is a scrub plane. It's purely manual, but like side axes or adzes, it's one of those hand tools which actually does a better, faster job than any power tool I've come across. You can either leave the surface it creates 'as is' or quickly dress it off with a jointer plane (hand or electric) before sanding. Alec

Thanks Andrew - interesting image. The technique was popular on small logs in the mid to late 17th century, making veneer-type discs known as oysters. These were typically 3mm thick, then laid onto a very stable oak base. I have a huge pile of these I inherited from a cabinetmaker, with no idea what do to with them! Not seen it done on a big scale like that. Alec

If anyone fancies it, there's a pretty tall elm near me (Haverhill, Suffolk) - must be 100ft I would have thought. I can see whether permission can be obtained if anybody is interested. Alec

I'd agree with alder, certainly over willow, but if you want a bit of variety you could try mixing in a few native softwoods - Scots Pine in particular, maybe larch, and work the alder as a coppice, letting the pine/larch grow through a few rotations so they're a good size. Not sure if this will work, but would break up the visual appearance a bit. Alec

Sweet chestnut is quite decent. It's a bit bland - no particular grain or figure even when quarter sawn and it looks a bit like ash but goes a nice golden colour when oxidised. Its big advantage over ash for me is that it has a much closer grain, so you don't get those dirty grain marks which seem to appear so quickly on ash. I just don't like ash very much (hence it wasn't on my list ) Sweet chestnut is also very good for construction/exposed use. It's very durable, equivalent to oak, just not quite as strong. It makes good posts/shingles/cladding boards. In very large trees, check carefully for star cracking or ring shake before bothering to mill. If it hasn't got these defects then definitely worth considering. Alec

Because the OP asked for hardwoods. Alec

In my opinion, you're asking a perfectly fair question - "is there a TPO on these trees"? You could ask this question of several different people - TO, visit the council offices etc. but, however difficult it may be, I would ask it outright of your boss on Monday morning. I would do this because firstly it is the right person to start with in the line of responsibility, and secondly because it sends a message that you work by the rules, which is a good thing to do for the future. Think about it - if you go to the TO and establish there are no TPOs on these trees, do you tell your boss, which makes it look like you went behind his back, or do you keep quiet. If you keep quiet, what do you do next time you are asked, and the time after? If you establish that there are TPOs on these trees, how do you tell him without it looking like you went behind his back? Asking up front addresses the question much more effectively. It might go something like this: "The yew trees you want me to fell, do you know whether they have TPOs on them?" If he says "Yes", you can quite reasonably say "well the trees can't be felled then until we've spoken to the TO. Shall I call them?" If he says "No", you can quite reasonably say "OK, when did you check, as they get updated so we need to be sure one hasn't been put on lately?" - if it's reasonably recent, proceed, if not, suggest a quick check. If as you anticipate he says "I don't know", or "I haven't checked" you can quite reasonably say "OK, I'll give the TO a quick call and make sure before we start, shouldn't take long, I'll meet you up there". All the above will progress, depending on the nature of the man. However, they all give you the initiative, and are fair, not challenging or accusatory, and polite. FWIW, you appear to be being careful to avoid being disloyal to your boss or get him into trouble, but have established he doesn't always check things and want to avoid this causing trouble for yourself. I would be pleased to have someone like that working for me (only I don't work in arb!) Alec

Really need an answer to Burrell's question, but for the pleasure of opening up a new surface and seeing it freshly milled and wet, I would go with: Walnut Oak (particularly brown) Elm Cherry Laburnum Alec

We skidded some 20ft oak butts about 2'6" centre dia. out using a 5t dumper. Effortless, but chews the ground up, particularly when things get caught under the front end and it starts ploughing. That's where I think the log arch really scores, which is why I will end up making one. My dumper is a 1957 2wd Benford, which does bog down rather easily. It's on a single cylinder Petter, but at least it hand starts effortlessly (half a turn on a good day) Just taken my 3yr old out for her first driving lesson on it! Unlike some of the pictures of logging arches, the best way to use them is to roll them over the log/lashed together pile of bits, with the handle level. You then lift the handle upwards as far as it goes and strap the log(s) on tight.When you pull then handle back down it acts as a lever, lifting the log(s) clear of the ground. Alec

Not sure what you mean by a log dolly (term gets applied to various devices). The things I'm thinking of are these: Logrite - Logging Arch - Log Arch - Orion Heating, Essex - Wood Burning Stoves & Cookers TCF also make them. Alec

Have you considered a log arch? Will take one big stick, or a a bunch of smaller stuff. Alec

Yes, you should only use heartwood. Oak sapwood has really poor durability, particularly when damp. In fact, I have sometimes left oak logs lying around on the ground to rot the sapwood off in order to make sure it's all gone. It goes white and spongy (I'm sure some of the fung experts would have a more technical term!) Oak unfortunately tends to have a very wide band of sapwood - sometimes several inches, although if the tree has been shaded out or otherwise stressed it could drop to only an inch or so. Might as well have a look if the tree is coming out anyway, but I wouldn't get my hopes up. Sorry Alec p.s. if it was sweet chestnut you'd only have about 2-3mm of sapwood even on a vigourous tree. Much more useful.

I agree with all the comments about the branch moving more than the main stem, but I've milled a fair number of heavy oak branches for crooks for boat frames and although they move it isn't excessive (maybe half an inch, usually twist, in six foot?) More suited to outdoor stuff than fine cabinetmaking, but the Alaskan doesn't exactly lend itself to making thin boards for the latter anyway. If it were me, I'd take up Jonathan's offer first, then go and have a go at the branch. I'd cut the straight, thick section, roll it so the bit that used to be the top was upwards and mill as close to the heart centre (middle of the growth rings) as possible first, then take boards off each half. The curved bit I would only mill the two slabs closest to the heart (one off each side) if I wanted to use it. I'd roll it to present the flattest face possible upwards and hence get the maximum curve. Take a look at this thread for ideas what can be done with such pieces: http://arbtalk.co.uk/forum/milling-forum/48742-bench-help.html I used a 36" mill on a 36" bar, which by the time you've allowed for the clamp position inboard of the roller nose on one end and the dogs on the saw at the other only gives you 27-28". If you take the dogs off you can squeeze another bit, so an absolute maximum of 30" or so. I've run this through at full width and it was OK if slow. In theory this makes the 30" mill a better fit, but in practice you might as well get the 36" as you can then run it on a bigger saw if you ever get one. Alec

Looks a good bit to have a first go at. Mill first, then season. Firstly you'd be waiting ages (decades) to season something that big in the round; secondly, milling seasoned oak is very hard work. Before you start, you need to decide where you're going to season it and get the area laid out - somewhere out of direct sunlight with good air flow through. You will also ideally want to stop rain running directly onto it, although with careful stacking you can make sure that it runs off the boards and put the remaining slab on the top, upside down, for protection. You will also need plenty of sticks to place between the boards, every couple of feet, vertically above one another. Old bits of pallet are what I find most convenient. This lets the air flow through. The other thing you need to decide before milling is what you want to make. This decides the lengths and thicknesses you need to mill to. If you're making something where dimension matters, allow for significant (20%) shrinkage, and some cupping, when you cut the boards, so make them plenty over-thickness. If it's outdoor furniture, this doesn't matter usually. This is a good time of year to mill - you'll get the worst of the water out while it's still not too hot and dry, so the surface won't dry faster than the middle. With air drying only, I prefer to mill between September and March given the choice. 2ft diameter can be handled with an 066 - it's what I used to use. Make sure you get a ripping chain, and I would strongly advise getting the electric grinder from Rob D too. In milling, it's not just about the sharpness of the teeth but also about the absolute uniformity which is far harder to achieve (probably impossible?) purely by hand. Try timing the first cut, then time subsequent cuts. An 066 doesn't give you a lot of spare power and you'll really feel the slowing down. Touch up the teeth by hand and it will get better. Touch up the teeth with an indexing grinder and you'll find you're back to original speed. With the bend part - if you want to make something from it, like a curved seat top, then the Alaskan will comfortably do this. If you don't, it's worth seeing if it's a useful shape to anyone. Alec

There's quite a good list on this page (if you save the image you can magnify it to read the text): English billhooks - A Load of Old Billhooks I've never seen any consistency in the codes used by different makers so presume they're just manufacturers' reference numbers, except the blade length which is often stamped in near the back end. Personally, I like the Kent pattern as I find the sharp hook on the end useful. I like a longer hook (10") for reaching deeper into places without getting my hands so close in (more avoiding snakes than thorns), and having now tried both I have found it easier to keep the handle tight on a tanged hook than a socketed one. Alec

They no longer have a choice. Age discrimination legislation (Equality Act 2010) means amongst other things that you are no longer allowed to not put people forward for training/refreshment training based on age. You are also no longer allowed to presume the age at which they will leave (except under certain very precise circumstances). There is also a certain logic here - if you consider that you will be a pretty safe bet for them recouping their investment for at least a fixed period, and you may stay on. Give someone in their early 20s the same training and it will make them far more immediately re-employable so they are actually more likely to lose out (not that they are allowed to take this into account). Alec

Another site I keep an eye on is timelesstools.co.uk Not cheap, but a whole page of Yorkshire billhooks to choose from, some of which look pretty decent: yorkshires Alec

Thanks for that and yes I do appreciate it sets up its own problems. Alec