10 Bears

Just a bump on this. I know folk just might not be hiring ATM, but this lad is worth a shot any day of the week. 

If you have any possible contacts in/near Manchester, If you could please pass them on it would be appreciated. Many thanks. 

10B

I can't vouch for working for these folk as I never have... But they cover your preferred areas and are generally on the look out for subbies etc

They had a surveyor post advertised too, but the link is not working. Anyway... 

Subcontracting and Seasonal Work - Arbtech

ARBTECH.CO.UK

---

Find out how you can earn money and gain experience by working...

Hello At folk, 

I've recently had the pleasure of working with a lad who just needs a helping hand to get him on the way into the industry. 

In short, I was working for a family member in Manchester laying a patio at their restaurant getting it ready to open on April 12th. I couldn't do it alone (55m2) so I advertised for help and met this lad called Anthony (23).

He immediately got stuck in, took pride in his work and grafted all day, even on the more monotonous jobs and no complaints. Overall he's a great worker.

After we chatted and I got to know him more, it turns out he's really interested in tree work and climbing but currently has no way of getting involved and doesn't know where to start, so I suggested getting some experience as a groundie and to go from there. 

At the moment he doesn't drive, but is close to getting his licence (covid put his test dates back), so that's why I hoped someone close to the Radcliffe area in Manchester might be interested in talking to him about possible work? He did also say he could travel upto an hour from his home using bike/public transport. 

Anyway, if anyone can help then please get back to me and I'll exchange details. Many thanks. 

10 Bears 

No, I'd missed that, but seen it now cheers. 

I'll add a place or two that I know of shortly. Its definitely a good idea - but I'm sure thats been said already!

Cheers Steve,

Yep, I'm just wandering around the pages ATM looking at all the new features you have put in. You've done a stellar job, and rightly should be proud!

I bet there was some fun and games with some of the old stalwarts not enjoying the change, and I'll bet more than one thread on 'this newfangled site ain't as good as the old one...'

I must look up that thread!

Hello Arbtalk, 

Well, things have changed around here somewhat haven't they? I have been AWOL for some time, as I think my last posts in Feb 2017 said, I have a bit of work to be getting on with... It took some time, but now I've finally finished so I'm afraid I will have the time to be gracing these pages once more. 

I've still got a lot on, and may do a bit more lurking then in the past, but it's going to be interesting catching-up with the happenings on here, catching-up with some of you individually, and getting used to these new pages although it does all look more impressive then the old site!

All the best,

10 Bears

I could be tha Fibonacci sequence applies, the so called golden ratio that appears in nature regularly.

Interesting idea, but personally I think Da Vinci's rule would be more likely to be a factor, but some provisional calculations I did weren't too convincing so I moved on.

Thanks for the comment though.

How about you take all your survey data ever in spreadsheet form, and calculate the average ratio from that? Oddly I would have no bother doing this as I have never cleared out survey data from my handheld, it would take me about 5 minutes to come up with a figure in Excel. Or use your own data more selectively, from surveys that you know were mainly maiden open grown mature trees?

 

It's gopt to be impossible to generalise. The ratio for any tree is partly a manifestation of apical dominance, but there will be factors of maturity, species, variety, competition, exposure.

 

For example during the week I took down a Norway Spruce, in a windy, alluvial coastal situation. 42 years old from the ring count, spread at the base 12 metres, and conical from there, height 12 metres. The week before another Norway, sheltered by other giants in a garden, on clays, 28 years old spread 14 metres most of the way up, height 24 metres.

 

Or is there something in this that might point you in the right direction? https://www.sorbus-intl.co.uk/hi-tech/survey-equipment/traditional-survey-equipment/iml-multi-tool

Many thanks for the advice Jules - always useful.

In fact I have confirmed data on approximately 250 mature trees that are within my data set. The issue is that the wider data set contains ~14,500 trees, so my sub-sample is only representative of ~1.5% of the larger data, which could be a difficult sell.

I will take a look at all my other surveys as you suggest, and focus only on the specific species I am concerned about. Thanks for the idea.

Ah, I see, that does make sense (I think). Could you not take some site/species specific ratios as a benchmark to estimate the remainder?

Well, what I am working with at the moment is based on the combination of a couple of metrics. There are ratios for tree height to dbh, and then for dbh to crown radius. I have combined these in to a 'working' model but there is little information on the most suitable ratio to use aside from specific species - again coming back to the concerns that Kevin had for inter-species differences.

This combined approach appears OK - but I have found some errors in the model following more extensive testing.

It's used a lot in continuous cover forestry in regards to stability etc- try looking for some FC information notes or the continuous cover forestry group for further information.

Thanks for the tip. I have already been through a lot of the available material but there is not a satisfactory ratio that I can find.

No neck winding needed.

The position of the tree would be a factor in the real world, but when dealing with a model, or ratio like this, then some assumptions are always made such as having idealised maiden tree growth.

Well, Sloth, I am working on some research (hence not being on here too regularly ATM as I cant spare the distraction) where I am modelling tree locations from an observed (measured) position, and where my model would predict them to be as another dataset. Understanding the probable crown size, given a certain height, would help me use the predicted crown size as a filter, hopefully leading to a good match between the measured data and the predicted data.

I'm sure that paragraph doesn't make a lot of sense, but in a nutshell, that's what this ratio is for!

Hello Kevin,

Yes, there would be inter-species differences, but as I recall there was a general ratio that could be applied to broadleaf as a general rule of thumb - I just can't find the citation...

I should have clarified earlier, it is a broadleaf ratio I was looking for.

Its been a while since I have been on here due to a significant workload ATM, but I'm here asking for help from my fellow AT'ers.

I've had no luck finding a suitable reference for a tree height to crown diameter ratio. I know this exists as I recall reading it in the distant past, but I just cannot track it down.

Even a rule of thumb example can be worked with, something like:

Given the measured height of (h), crown diameter (cd) will be n or h:cd = n

Does anyone in AT land recall such a ratio, and could be a great help and direct me to a citation/paper/book?

Many thanks.

Arbornaught - really, its not difficult.

Click this link

Then repeat...

Although you may not believe it, this Guardian article however poor it may be, is founded on some clearly defined research that has influenced the NICE recommendations:

Magnetic biomonitoring of roadside tree leaves: identification of spatial and temporal variations invehicle-derived particulates

Spatial variation in vehicle-derived metal pollution identified by magnetic and elemental analysis of roadside tree leaves

If you don't want to read all of the papers, just read the abstract. They are fairly convincing findings...

The top picture looks like an Inkcap. Did it have a moist black edge on the outer circumference of the cap? This would drip on your fingers like ink if touched. Not on the oak itself I should add, its a field fungi.

I'll come back to you on the second one...

No. Im pretty certain there is a "Don't be a terrorist" clause in life insurance, or at least there is in mine, but perhaps I just look the type?

Sent via the arbtalk app, hence the brevity...

I just had the thought that you folk buying and selling saws and parts, are just buying and selling from other AT members!

Perhaps as a rule, ATers should try to post saws, kit etc. on Arbtrader first or side by side to an eBay auction? Preferential rates to ATers of course.

With eBay, I've only had one big and one small purchases go wrong out of approximately 500. I think if you are fair and honest in your descriptions when selling, and have your head screwed on when buying, you wont go too wrong - or at least, not too often...

I was once in the woods with a fairly modern peeler/pointer that was PTO direct drive, so the only way to stop it was to turn off the tractor engine.

Upon lifting a strainer on to the peeler bed, a peg got caught on my sleeve and in an instant my left arm was being pulled into the peeler with the strainer. My pal on the other side (he was pointing after the strainers went through the peeler) had no chance to react and turn off the tractor. At the very last fraction of a second before my hand/wrist was going in, my sleeve ripped up to the shoulder and I managed to drop to the floor as some of my sleeve got peeled. It was not a nice experience.

Seeing this sawbench reminded me very much of that incident - never again!

I agree. Urban forestry by numbers will only lead to a decline in the population distribution of the tree stock. Or in other words, fell anything over 20m and 40dbh and replant with lollipop trees.

It may seem like the council is taking a proactive approach to management, but I think that ultimately its the thin end of the wedge that will lead to a negative change on the amenity values around the city.

Shame really...

With an Arb like Andrew Baguley on the panel, it would have been useful to actually identify the fungus species and the impact to the tree. Or is it a case of Fungus=dangerous=fell?

Yep, probably!

Actually, the report said to retain that tree for as long as possible, then fell later if there is further issues, or that's how I read it.

Again, a sensible recommendation just not followed by the council/Amey.

I should be clear. Not your weak argument Gary - as potential justification from the council.

Pavement/highway issues, in the main

I thought that was a weak argument TBH. As the report said, all bar 2 could be potentially resolved by engineering works/redesigning pavements.

Having just read the tree reports, as Gary says, the panel only advised, but said that 6 of the 8 should be retained, and 2 removed for fairly sensible reasons, ie dieback/fungal colonisation/wrong place, and heavy lean in to road/vehicle strikes.

The video above, albeit a little one sided, gives an interesting account on the nature of the situation, ie that Amey and the council are tied in to a contract, and ultimately, the trees are down because Amey has to honour its contract and the council have to justify the massive investment they have put in.

IMO, it is just a tree management tick box exercise so the council is seen to be spending its money wisely.

I wonder what it could have been?