Treecreeper1961

Fabulous tree, what a mindless act. No doubt the perpetrators have no idea what they have done. What was the management plan for this tree in terms of re-establishing the pollard and will the plan now change? That is assuming it is on your patch, but an interesting question anyway. Will the damage from the fire have reduced the energy available to the tree to respond to re pollarding or reduction? Can you tell us what the physiological consequences of fire damage are likely to be? There is the obvious damage to bark and cambium and breach of barrier zones but is there anything else? Is there a loss of stored energy reserves? I guess there must be??

I claimed for this last year. I was pleased to find that you are allowed about £100 a year for washing clothing bearing a company name or logo. It is possible to backdate it for a number of years too. The boss really doesn't like us turning up in dirty clothes anymore.

I have seen it on a fire damaged Aesculus.

As far as I understand, as the tree is laying down wood to seal the longitudinal split and restore mechanical integrity the area of reaction wood along the edge, or the rib, has a blunt or flat profile if it is succeeding. If the tree is unable to add enough material to the area to close off the split the rib generally has a raised nose or more pointy profile. I am guessing that the inward roll in the picture is more like the reaction wood to an open wound than a split, or just the original growth pattern of the tree.????

O.K. Andrew I'll have a go. The photo could be showing a separation shear crack. If it is the tree has done a remarkable job of stopping it and has got inward rolling reaction wood. I thought that the rib produced by reaction to longitudinal splits is usually outward and pointed(if unsuccessful/struggling) or outward and blunt (if succeeding). So, I am going to guess that the characteristic is more a genetic thing that has been present all along than a fault that has developed. Not sure why though? What do you reckon Hama?

I have attended two courses led by Richard Crompton, Protected Species and Bats and Arboriculture. He is a fantastic educator, really good bloke.

There was talk of an increased emphasis (or even insisting upon) on the need to undertake a tree survey/report before any designs are submitted. Is there anything like that to be seen? Scott, I get the feeling some parts of Wales haven't even heard of BS5837:2005 let alone the revised one. Sometimes I wonder whether I have made more allowance of trees and their needs than the councils landscape officer may even have done. Not good for business it would seem.

Surely your arm gets enough exercise at the bar. Try alternating the glass from left to right hand.

The Stihl ones are good but I have found they are not as good as those made but a sister company of Oregon. I can't remember the name now I'm afraid but they are a bit longer and really eat the bramble. I absolutely loved the chain heads on bramble and was disappointed when they were withdrawn. Then I found the masher blade, oh boy, they really mash. I would say three to four times more efficient than a tri star blade, maybe more.

Laeti degrades the cellulose leaving behind the lignin. It just appears as though the two have collided, with A.mellea(shouldn't assume it is mellea I suppose) completely outdoing L.sulphureus. Sorry,yes I see what you mean, being heavily lignified would not slow a cellulose degrader. It does though, doesn't it? If, as it does, the Laeti resides in the heartwood and the extent of brown rot is not that great then this is unlikely to have caused the decline or weakness that led to the Armillaria. I don't know, I thought perhaps the two together told a story. Maybe there was a mechanical injury that activated the Laeti and eventually allowed the Armillaria in. Just trying to pick your brains about how these things interact, in a clumsy kinda way.

I agree, good post and advice. Unfortunately, there are always going to be situations where, despite the best intentions, bats will be encroached upon by unsuspecting tree workers. They can make use of many varied features after all. The other issue, which has been discussed in relation to pruning standards but is equally true in tree work and bats, is that often the arb in the tree is better trained and educated and more conscious of the issues than the other individuals in implicated positions of responsibility(the bosses or clients) but the guy in the tree has been put in a difficult position because those who should know better don't. It should not be up to the tree worker to, having seen the tree for the first time, be the only person to give a damn whether there is a roost present. Admittedly, the climber is best equipped to check features and they should as course of habit. However, how many climbers have been sent to do work on a tree that has obvious roost potential from the ground which has been ignored by others, or with the instruction of 'check for bats before cutting'? Not good enough in my opinion.

There was far more wood that had been white rotted than brown rotted, with the remaining lignin confined to a column in more central heart wood areas. Presumably, the A. mellea and L. sulpureus are in direct competition with each other but is it possible that the A. mellea has began colonising from the cambium and outer rings whilst the L. sulphureus has established in the central butt/root plate and was degrading the cellulose from the inside out? Is it a fair assumption that the A.mellea was the first to begin it's work as there is more white rot(?) or perhaps not as hawthorn heart is dense and fairly well lignified offering a good, long satisfying meal that takes time to digest?

Interesting that the texture of both the white rot and brown seems exactly the same. Any idea why?

There are quite a few trees around me fallen foul of the strong northerly recently. Most of them have been hawthorns and alders suffering from root, stem or butt rot. Just a few pictures of matter from a fallen hawthorn. I have my (incomplete) idea about what they show, perhaps Fungus, David or Hama can elucidate? The distinct difference in colour of the degraded wood suggests two different types of decay perhaps, but both areas fell the same to touch, soft and spongy.

Depends on your budget but if you are going to use a brush cutter get a masher blade for it, far more efficient than a standard blade. Once you have mashed them up, dig out the roots. Don't forget though, there is good value in brambles as soft mass production is vital for small mammals and birds and insects love the flowers. Control rather than eradication. Eventually, the canopy will shade them out if it is contiguous.

Would you use a swing cheek pulley or only one with the fixed plate? Also, similarly, how about using a swing cheek micro pulley as a friction saving device?

TC, your right. Sorry, I was, it seems, thinking of the Arbosonic, where bark is removed. My info on the Picus does say they hammer nails through the bark to the wood. This would be less invasive than removing bark I reckon, and certainly less invasive than drilling, making it the preferred decay detection technique, other than thermal imagery and Tree Radar, which may be more expensive I would imagine.

I don't have any practical experience of the Picus, from what I understand plugs of bark have to be removed to position the sensors directly next to the wood.? Do you think this is more or less invasive than the Resistograph or similar? Would be interested to hear opinions on that.

Sorry Hama, my myco detective hat wasn't quite on. I agree with your theory on the Pip mutation. The possibility of some kind of alteration caused by another fungi parasitic on P. betulinus crossed my mind too. Wonder if that's a possibility?

Would be great to go back regularly this week and watch it develop.

Hmmm, tres interesting. Have you been experiencing some security problems with your arbtalk account, it appears you may have been hacked by a time travelling fungi enthusiast. 1. Fair enough, pretty dessicated, could be something else. 2. 3.Looks like a new variety of liquorice allsort to me, tasty. 4. (Presumptuously) Definitely P. betulinus but what could have caused the strange form? The stand out bracket of many in the wood.

Cheers Paul, I was fairly pleased with them but the focusing seems a bit wrong ever since my sisters dog slimmed on the lens, got to give it another clean.

I was hoping you would tell me:lol: 1. B. adusta 2. G. applanatum or possibly G. pfeifferi. (on oak I think it was) 3. Not sure, have seen it a couple of times recently, probably a slime mould. Could it be Fuligo candida or Reticularia lycoperdon? 4. P. betulinus. What do you say David?

Finally finding some time to do normal things again, like seeing fungi.