Treecreeper1961

Barrel knot and insulating tape!

I can't believe how relevant this thread is. It is a new years resolution for of mine. After two weeks off at Christmas I seized up and had a bad back. Two weeks of climbing and my back is as good as new. Discipline is required to keep up a regular regime but that is probably one of the benefits too. The value of routine alone can be much underestimated I reckon.

I think I am relieved about that. Does this mean we have something else in common?

Yeah well, I try hard.

That is a truly impressive fish. Superb. It's not my territory though, salt water species are my target, similar sort of weight though:blushing: four to five pounds:lol:

I'm not sure I know how to take "a bit of cowboy in me".

Unfortunately I was preoccupied trying to deduce how long it would take to clear the rhodi. that I didn't pay enough attention to the ecology. There was only one, perhaps that goes some way to ruling out the Clitocybe. Not sure about the Lepista, can't find a liking for one. If we win the rhodi job I will have a better look round.

For me there are three, my family(my wife and three children), fishing(that's fishing not catching) and Spurs, hence the 1961.

Too true. It's all in the mind. I'll let you know when I get there.

Cheers. We can all talk though. It is a bit hypocritical to praise the thing whilst less than covering my self in glory at times. I wan't to be good. Sadly, I don't always or often specify the work I do, should fight to educate those that do but don't always as it doesn't go down very well with some people. Even when I do specify work and, for example, talk clients round to a phased reduction on an old oak near their house I find myself changing my prescription whilst doing the job, due to fears for mechanical integrity, resulting in an internal conflict, as well as the shortening of some large branches to points that did not meet the standard at all. The more I learn the harder it is to satisfy myself I am doing the right thing. There is a class system in arboriculture, the unclean, the uneducated, the educated a long time ago and can't accept what they once knew is now old hat,those who want to be clean and those who's gleaming, shiny foreheads stand out.

Ok, thanks Fungus I'll check those two out now. I didn't want to disturb the shroom, it was the only one to be seen.

Fair enough, damn it! It is a totally different tree in a totally different wood but the uneven lumpy surface looks the same. How about the Mild Milkcap?

The standard is a lengthy and technical document. If we attempt to follow it in practice it is going to mean some big changes in the way we do things and probably make our working lives more difficult.(Sorry, by we I am generalising I know). The thing that is difficult to admit is that most of what we do to trees in the name of arboriculture does nothing to help the tree at all, in fact every pruning cut we make is an injury to the tree and the bigger the cut the more serious the implications to energy, vitality and physiological integrity of the tree as well as later mechanical integrity. We cut trees to suit our ourselves not our trees. Ok, sorry, I don't mean to sound patronising, most of us know this is the case and my own work generally ends up as tree raping to be honest. The point is that the new standard brings our management objectives and doing least damage to the tree closer together. There is so much scientific knowledge and understanding of tree biology and physiology now and in the BS3998:2010 we have been given a manual of how to achieve what people want without unwittingly bringing a very premature end to the life of a tree. There is no doubt that there are circumstances where the recommendations are impracticable and impossible to implement. Not all trees lend themselves to precise radial reductions, sometimes the outer edge of the canopy has formed and divided far out on branches and there are no suitable laterals to prune back to at the specified distance. Other trees will be so thin and fragile out at the specified distance that it will be dangerous for man and tree to get out there. There will be many "management objectives" that cannot be met by adhering to the document. Providing value to the customer that want's more light by giving a tree a 12% radial reduction might be impossible.Perhaps it may result in more removals. Educating the customer will be a challenge if we attempt to make such a change to the way tree work is done and perceived. One of the key things about tightening up on specifying reductions accurately is ensuring that the tree is not robbed of so much photosynthetic material that it's reserves of carbohydrate are used up to replenish them. There is a huge difference in leaf area removed by a 12 and 30% radial reduction, perhaps as much as 30% down to 90%. The long term implications for the tree might not be obvious but trees rely on energy reserves for many functions . The recommendations for total cross sectional area of pruning cuts not to exceed one third of total cross section of the stem at 1.5m is at first straight forward enough. When I considered the examples given in table 1, 7.2.4, page22, I struggled to believe the maths but it does all add up, now that I know how to work out the area of a circle. It is all too easy to exceed these figures, especially when crown lifting. This is a good practical guide. The recommendation for stages or phases in tree work reduce the stress and physiological dysfunction within the tree makes sense to me but I'm not sure it will to the customers. If they want what's best for the tree and we can communicate these recommendations to them, then it will work. However, it will mean an ongoing commitment from them, which will be good for business. Giving greater consideration to the condition of the rooting environment makes total sense. Recommending mulching could add to revenue and be good for the tree but are there potential pit falls here? How much do we/I know about the correct and best way to mulch? Damage to the roots and rhizosphere during tree work is something I never used to consider, but it should be given careful thought. Two days of trampling around under a tree and dropping missiles into the soil is bound to do some harm. What can we do about that whilst remaining competitive? Mulch to the drip line before starting work? Anyway, I'm boring myself now. It is the future, it is about educating ourselves and the client but it is going to take a long time to make it the general standard of tree work in my opinion. It is a really good document, even if it causes a few inconvenient difficulties in the conscience.

I found a few fungi this morning in a wet valley bottom with some big oaks. I think I have identified them but any corrections or suggestions feel free to fire away: 1 and 2.Lactarius subdulcis 3 and 4.Peltigera canina and Xylaria hypoxylon 5, 6 and 7.Hymenochaete rubiginosa 8. Fuliga septica var. flava ??

That didn't take long, demand will kick off now I expect. When I saw the Body Language of Trees thread I had now idea there were other books available until I thought 'come on this thread is old, it can't be the only book after all this time'. It is not that easy to find unless you notice a current post. It needs a bit of publicity, having said that though demand could easily exceed supply. Pm your address Sean, I will send it on.

Any one know of any prosecutions or such like for using one on the deck?

Looking forward to it. The Body Language of Trees is great, the style of writing combined with the diagrams, fantastic. I am constantly going back to it. Only just caught on to this club.

If the book is available I'd like a loan. Will PM you my address Sloth.

Nice find, there are some trees in Herefordshire, amazing landscape. Sadly, the further west you go the less special old trees there are. I am hoping to draw up a list of sites to go fungi finding next season, good start this week.

We should not deny what we are. I am pleased to be wrong then, Daedalea quercina is a better class of fungi! You ever visited any ancient woods west of Cardiff?

1. It had a less degraded bracket too and it was on fractured birch stem. 2.Not totally sure, it seems likely though. 3.I had an inkling but after my effort on the Pseudo trametes gibbosa I didn't want you to think I was obsessed!

1. Piptoporus betulinus-birch. 2. Hymenochaete rubiginosa-oak 3. Don't know- oak(Quercus robur)