Treecreeper1961

A few desicated fruits I have found were not the best samples. I know the first, fairly sure of the second but not of the third:

I have had a good week at work doing some 'Tree Safety' at a wood which has the finest collection of trees with basal decay I have ever seen, amazing really. I just wish I had been there in October! There are few desicated pieces left around but I can only imagine the gems that were there.

How about Inonotus dryadeus for the bottom one? Not on a branch though I guess.

Sorry Fungus, misunderstood you there, I wasn't suggesting that as the reason for the name, it would have been fitting though. The compounds laid down in heartwood to protect it from the decay organisms I know as phenols,terpines and tylosis, I didn't really think of them as poly aromatic hydrocarbons, I haven't gone into the chemistry in that much depth as yet. What do you reckon Fungus? Does Sulphur Tuft show up as a decayer of damaged roots? I guess the point is it will colonise a range of dead wood? Fair enough Hamadryad, I'm sure you and ranger are right, loss of and damage to roots is an obvious cause of decline in many species for sure, especially mature trees and some species being more susceptible undoubtedly. So many symptoms of tree ill health are due to issues in the rooting environment, disturbance, waterlogging, compaction, suffocation, pollution and more. The thing that struck me from the photos was that the fungi present are saprotrophic and not parasitic and therefore they are not in any way adding to or responsible for the decline of the tree. The fact that there are two other sources of dead wood on the surface of the site, right where the fungi are growing, could mean they are not even feeding on the sycamore's dead and severed roots, if there are any. If there were fruiting bodies from Armillaria, Ganoderma or Pholliota species then there would be a much stronger link between symptoms and cause. I didn't mean to bring the original diagnosis, of a spiral of decline due to root damage into question, just to explore the possibilities that may be presented. The title of the thread is fungi help, which suggests a concern that these are fungi are invading the tree and hastening it's decline, and I don't think they are.

Just wondering, is there any reason you can't run your line through a micro pulley as your friction saver. I have done it before and it works a treat, girth hitched to the stem with a prussick loop or dyneema sling. Do you guys reckon it's safe?

It's amazing that anything decomposes railway sleepers but the state of some reclaimed ones shows something obviously does. That's interesting. You gotta be able to withstand some pollution if your name is sulphur tuft.

I think I might have seen my first Inonotus hispidus in it's natural habitat today. A black, vaguely bracket shaped thing perched on the end of a broken, upright branch about forty feet up a really old ash, seriously hollow at the base.

Having read my/the previous post I realise it wasn't very helpful, apologies about that. It is a difficult position you are in, possibly an arb nightmare! As Bundle says, if you are going to take on the job you have to make the arboricultural implications of the proposed actions known. State the potential and likely physiological problems that may ensue, referencing modern literature on the subject. Your caveat. Prepare a method statement to the best possible standards for what is required, but state the recognised industry wisdom of what will be the likely outcome, recommending a stringent monitoring program for physiological health and mechanical stability of the tree. Have you considered discussing your concerns with the Tree Officer? Perhaps they have similar concerns. A question that I would ask is, 'Do you really want to be involved in this project, or need to be?' Having said that, if you simply state what you believe to be right and then provide a best possible method statement, I don't see that it could compromise you.

Despite having done a few basic BS5837 reports over the last three years and having learned a bit about the standard and it's application studying the tech cert recently, there is still a lot I don't quite get about it's standing in the planning system and the weight it's findings carries. I have asked this question before and not really got an answer I felt was clear: Does a tree included on a survey as one suitable for retention have legal protection? The answer I felt I was given was Yes, but only until the Tree Officer agrees it can be cut down or interfered with, through a process of consultation. Since then, I have spoken to Tree Officers who lament the fact that they are undermined and over ruled by the planning departments, or committees at least, that they serve. The system sucks if your a tree. If the over riding public interest is to approve development then even TPO's are irrelevant it would seem. If a tree like this falls foul of the system and ends up uprooted, or plagued by a succession of decay organisms as a result of the development, then the LPA should be prosecuted under the terms of their own TPO.

Now that has been pure entertainment!

Thanks for your replies folks.

Sorry Fungus, trying to stay in the habit of using the scientific names, I meant H. fasciculare. Thanks for the correction:thumbup1:

I don't know but it's a good bit of photography. I saw a large ash root plate from a distance that looked similar ish. There was a county council officer there so I didn't stop and get the camera out. How about Kretzmaria deusta? It;'s my favourite.

I was fairly sure it was Scolytus sp. but didn't think about S. multistriatus. Is there a signature in the galleries?

I have held a sample of I. hispidus but never seen it in it's habitat. Is it rare in the west?

Here we have a couple of fungi I really wanted to snap. Unfortunately, they were protected by a very slimy, smelly bog. Sadly, I am a sucker for fungi and attempted to get close. Didn't quite make it! Anyway, I am going for Bjerkandera adusta or Trametes versicolor up top and a weak guess at Hypholoma capnoides?? Just glad no one saw me stuck in the prime evil ooze:lol:

Didn't quite focus but Daedaleopsis confragosa on willow.

Identifying degraded fungi is a totally different ball game. For every fungi you learn there are another two sides to them, the young and the old.

And this tree is telling some serious stories, but is it speaking with a forked tongue?

I came across a tree exhibiting some interesting tell tale signs today, a beech again, but not a compression fork. Any ideas what is going on here?

Cheers for that. Good outcome and great to see a veteran tree retained. I love it, I do, but... Not wanting to be negative, just making observations: Cabling should be able to restrain a failed section in such an event. Don't think that the angle here would restrain much before it hit the floor. There is a trend over here to use non invasive, flexible systems. Is that the case with you guys? From the picture I would have said retrenchment pruning or more severe reduction than has been prescribed would have been a better option. Reducing the weight and lever arm effect. It is obvious that tree is in a vulnerable state and not going to last forever. No tree lasts for ever, it is true. Trying to retain such a mature tree in such a public space is admirable but is it advisable. I wish I had the guts to go with it. Defensive advice may be wrong but it is not a clear cut, black and white scenario we are often presented with. Getting the balance right is not easy, the more cases I come across the better my judgement will become, I hope.

It occurred to me today that the species of fungi, especially the sulphur tuft, could well be feeding on the oaksleepers themselves. Oak sleepers are quite rare round here, sleepers usually being old railway sleepers steeped in in organic chemical. Are they treated? Just a thought.

Your right Rob, it's not good to jump to conclusions from photos. The major landscaping mentioned together with the photo suggests excavation. In my experience root severance during ground work can lead to die back in the crown. Presence of saprotrophic fungi does not necessarily indicate physiological dysfunction. Symptom to cause. It's like being a detective. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I am right or you are wrong, but problem diagnosis is good fun:thumbup1: We have to guess a bit on here or we would be staying mum. I was looking at some oaks showing serious decline around a field edge the other day, about 10 or more, varying topography and positions and different boundaries. Across the road similar trees were fine. It's interesting trying to guess the possible causes and why the stark difference between trees close together.

It seems to me, estimating, damage to and loss of roots from excavation would be more than enough to cause decline in the crown alone, due to loss of water and mineral uptake. The first two fungi present are not parasitic and would not be contributing. The third, to be identified! Definitely needs monitoring and further investigation.

There seems to be a lot of mulch on the ground. Could they be feeding on the woodchip?