agg221

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

I have no wish to re-ignite the earlier nature of this thread, but I'm interested in approaches. Hypothetically, if you were going to tackle a tree like the one in the original film without a winch, and assuming the top was securely wedged in a fork so no chance of it rolling out, I appreciate the difficulty in assessing tension/compression in the first cut but once the first cut is made (so it's free at the base) is there any reason not use a cut that looks like a felling cut in reverse (i.e notch the top, then undercut), taking sections of approx. 4ft long, working at waist height? Alec

That's what I was reckoning, but what I'm not sure of is the position over public liability for injury to people or your neighbours' property) when felling your own trees for commercial rather than leisure purposes (don't know because I haven't been in this position). This is what I would suggest checking first. You may also need to extend it if you end up with a portable mill that you start hiring out - you are likely to need to use a saw to crosscut to length, take off branch stubs etc. These are the points where the difference may lie between cover needing proof of competence or not, hence the suggestion to talk to SWOG, who are more likely to know the answer than me Alec

As per Big J. The other thing I would add is, if it's a decent size with no rot and looks worth doing, dismantle it to a stick, as long as you can get and leave six inches or so on each branch stub beyond the clean stick. If at that stage the band of visible sapwood is only an inch or two thick, it should be good. Take photos of the ends and dig it rather than fell it, then paint the ends to seal. That way, if anyone does buy it they'll get the cleanest, longest butt possible, with the best chance of minimising losses through cracking. If the sapwood band is much wider, cut clean to the top of the stick and see how much heart there really is. If it's looking much over a foot, it's probably saleable, but don't expect much more than roadside cord price unless it's a long, clean, wide butt. I'd still photograph it and then get it moved and painted. I wouldn't bother digging the stump unless it's a good proportion of heartwood. I know people differ in view on painting ends, but I've had very good results on a walnut stump I got hold of just after an idiot farmer had chopped it off at 4ft and dug it out. I ultimately want to make a chest of drawers from it, 4ft high and the boards are 4ft0.5in long. I got it the day it was cut, painted the ends immediately and then painted the bottom end cuts once roots etc were off. I have absolutely zero cracks in it, so in this case it was worth it. Ordinary gloss paint works fine. I wouldn't get your hopes up, but it's worth a look. Alec

I know this is an old thread, but something I've wondered. In apples, you often get epicormic buds breaking if you heavily reduce. Sometimes these break on the trunk which you want to keep permanently clear. The shoots break from a single bud, but grow a basal cluster of new, latent buds, so if you cut them off you get these new buds breaking and it gets worse. One old technique for dealing with this is to wait until the wood is hardening (around July) and then run the back of a billhook sharply down the trunk to knock them out rather than cutting them. It rips the whole base of the shoot clear, and although it creates a larger wound than a cut it's still only about a quarter of an inch across and heals quickly. It doesn't rip into the old bark as the shoot is still too small and soft, and weakly attached. By removing the basal cluster of buds, the epicormic growth doesn't readily occur from the same point. I've used this on apples for about 25yrs with good results. I wondered whether anyone had any thoughts on its potential effectiveness on other species, such as limes? Alec

You might find Small Woodland Owners' Group (SWOG) useful. I've specifically linked the courses page as that's what you were asking about: Small Woodland Owners Group Blog Archive Courses for woodland owners There are two important things to learn about chainsaws - the first is basic maintenance and the second is safe operation. They're both important. There are three possible routes to go down. One is formally recognised qualifications (typically CS30 and CS31 which can often be done as a combined course). You're looking at not far short of £1000 for this, but it would be recognised by, for example insurers. The opposite extreme is informal training from your brother in law. If he's fully qualified, and you trust him, and believe he will be good and clear at explaining then this will give you (free?) one-to-one tuition to cover the basics. This could be perfectly satisfactory. The in-between route would be a basic, uncertificated course, maybe from one of the providers on the SWOG site. The advantage of this type of course is that it can often be geared to showing what you need to know - for example the formal qualifications work their way up in diameter for felling, whereas if you own a woodland you're more likely to want to start by harvesting the bigger trees! One major factor that will come into play here is what kind of insurance provision you need to make. Your circumstances will be different from mine, and I don't know the answer I'm afraid, but you can probably get a good answer from the SWOG forum. Alec

Very annoying. I had mine nicked a few years back on the banks of the Wyrley and Essington canal, when I put it down for a second whilst clearing the propeller of weeds. Mine was a Royal Ordnance stamped one for 1918 and I still haven't found a replacement. Best place I've found to keep a lookout for buying a replacement is: Billhooks - Green Tools Alec

I think that's highly probable, but if quotes were being skewed by the nature of the cars on the drive this could be a significant factor. How, as a client, do you know which people will quote you based on your supposed income and which will quote you based on their actual costs? Also, as a potential client, how do you know which companies will be 2-man bands and which will be large companies with high overheads? It's relevant, because coming at it from the client perspective, you want a simple solution to a problem. You don't want to wait around for half a dozen people to turn up (or not) possibly taking time off work to do so. You want a quick and simple solution. Interestingly, it was left entirely at the client's discretion how much they chose to pay, and they paid something (including stump removal) pretty much on the money which, to me at least, suggests that not all potential clients are out to rip off all potential service providers, but as per the origins of this thread, the amount of money to be earned has to be considered realistically. Alec

Hi Hodge, I am not in arb - I am in a totally unrelated field (contract R&D) but I am highly familiar with being undercut, mostly in my field by one man band consultants who typically purport to offer the same service until it all goes wrong because they can't provide the depth and breadth of knowledge to correctly identify alternative approaches. It's a reasonable sized company (700 people) and probably has the highest hourly rate in the field. I run a group of about 20 split over two sites, being responsible for my own group's P&L as a self-sufficient cost centre with centrally dictated overheads. I am responsible for turnover of about £3m annually. I entirely recognise the difference between what I described above and the fully insured professional company which you are operating. However, my point was that the only real additional costs here are depreciation on PPE and depreciation on training costs and the annualised division of insurance. I'm sure a professional company would take a different approach, but it would probably be quicker, which would offset costs. As such, it is very difficult to justify the price difference in this particular job, since even allowing for 50% utilisation you would still be presuming added costs of over £125k annually, which is not realistic. The other point I was making was that if this discrepancy in costs remains so large, jobs will go to the grey market on pure cost grounds - how many people can raise £900 to have a tree removed rather than £350, and how many are going to do so when they have a choice? Also, for the record, none of it ended up dumped roadside due to connections of the people doing the job - all disposed of legitimately, at cost. Alec