10 Bears

Not to be picky Paul - oh sod it. Being picky Paul - what you highlighted above was a sentence.

I attended a QGIS training course run by Lutra. Quite straightforward really. Not this course, but run by the same people: QGIS Training Courses - Lutra Consulting

I have my opinion and you are entitled to yours - that is the nature of opinions, they don't always agree as they are based on the sum total of individual experiences, interpretation of significance, individual bias and personal expectations. To answer Steve, yes, my comments may not be entirely fair as, of course, the OP may turn out to be highly skilled and knowledgeable in 10 years time with a lot of work by the employer put in - *BUT* I am always weary of comments that say, 'get some tickets and crack on! you will be fine...' (paraphrase of Dutchy) as both in both my opinion and experience, that this type of worker within the industry causes more problems then they are worth. Hence my comment to seek training to the degree they are happy with ie get some knowledge and skills until you are happy to go out and do the job. Therefore not becoming just another cut and run jockey. I also don't believe that it is wholly the role of the employer to shape you to become anything - it is down to your own efforts and interest in your work that shapes you into who or what type of worker you are. For 11's view - I agree on the whole with what you are saying and that is my point actually i.e. get knowledge and skills together, over just doing a few tickets and bashing on. There is the scope that the employer can train you as you go - but as said above, it is not all up to the employer to give you the knowledge - you have to engage yourself for best impact. 11 also says customer is king, and that is true in one sense, but I have walked away from many jobs as it was just not the right thing to do in my opinion - despite the customers insistence. I don't do topping. I will not just dump the JKN over the fence or down the bottom of the lane. If TM is needed to protect my workforce, it will be put in and used - not just a couple of cones out and the trucks parked in a fend-off position etc. At that point I walk away from the customer and let the cut and run jockeys come in to make their few quid on the job. As said, these are my opinions...

Oh- meant to add, any questions or comments just get back to me either on here, or if it is a question that is better answered in my confidential surgery - PM me.

Here is the car/van costing sheet. There are no active macro's or trojans hidden in this! Car Costing.xls

Ah - see I did forget! At least someone decided to remind me. Give me a few minutes...

No, not at all Eggs, that was exactly my point earlier point about supporting the home countries. I absolutely agree!

Sorry but IMO if you follow Dutchy's advice about just getting a few tickets, you will end up as just another chopper who may be able to climb but cant ID one stick from another or understand remediation options and has no real solutions to daily problems. Get yourself trained to the degree you are happy with - then go out and make an impact on the landscape. Hopefully, making informed decisions rather than just, 'fell it and run'

I may know someone - will make enquiries

Never mind, England have just won 35-11 after a good physical encounter. I am sure that deep down you are pleased. After all, when Scotland get knocked out in the pool after getting trounced by Africa, and Wales go out to Australia - you will feel both honour and duty bound to support England to the finals. Atilla - that's a most insightful piece of advice offered to the addlepate horde..., oops sorry, the 'football' types.

Shame on you Sirs - you should support the any and all of the home countries when they are playing all those bloody foreigners, what! When it gets down to the later stages and the home countries playing each other - then the nationalism should kick in. So, Up the Empire! Er, I mean C'mon England!

Although could be applied in succession - both actions are reasonable in the circumstances!

David - PM sent.

Give the NFU a call. I always found them very good, and as I recall, they once gave me 6 years NCB for free!

How can it be? I'm not there anymore! Yes, I heard that they had a few difficulties in recent years, primarily due to being shafted by the University (formerly UClan) in regards to funding and enrolment - so they got taken over by UofC, and there was a second similar battle until the Askham Bryan buy in and subsequent relocation to Ambleside. I know the head of school and a few other members of staff, and in short, although there has been a tumultuous few years, everything seems to be going much better now at the new site. So, best of luck to the school and its students. It would have been easy to pack it all in and move on, but from what I know the staff have worked really hard to keep the School of Forestry going so they can share their wisdom with the future foresters of the world. All praise to them.

Not good news. Here an ITV Borders report identifies that C. fraxinea has made it in to ten sites in the Lake District: Ashes to ashes: deadly tree disease reaches Cumbria - ITV News Just for info, the Scottish chap in the video is my good friend Ted Wilson who is a genuinely, expert Silviculturist who runs Silviculture Research International (SILVICULTURE RESEARCH International | Inspiring advances in the science and practice of sustainable forestry). If anyone ever needs (commercial) assistance in tree related research/forest research/forest conservation/CCF etc., without doubt, he should be your go to guy.

Personally I find the ride in Rangers to be a bit too bouncy. Yes you can replace/stiffen the shocks, but off the shelf Rangers feel like a roller coaster. You are right about Hilux being more expensive for no other reason then they were on Top Gear as the most indestructible truck. I have had a 3 different L200s, 2 Hilux and a Ranger, and I prefer the L200 out of them all. They were much sturdier/solid on the road, pulled hard when needed and do everything offroad that I asked of it. The only downside to the L200 is I think the clearance is marginally lower - but again, you can remedy that if you want to do it.

Sure, no problem. Telling me you answered from your phone (as I am now), probably tells me all I need to know! Still, not having done the PTI, I would still like to hear your thoughts.

I've never done the PTI course Gary, but I'm interested to read your opinion in this regard. Dont take my comments the wrong way, I will take it that your comments are from the perspective of what you have been told on the PTI course, I am just somewhat surprised by the PTI logic. To my view, suggesting that this tree will need to be felled due to this relatively minor damage as you cannot guarantee that it won't fail within the re-inspection period is ridiculous. No-one can guarantee the non-failure of trees within re-inspection periods as simply there is a safety factor within all mechanical structures, which if exceeded will lead to catastrophic failure of the structure. Personally I don't have a crystal ball so cannot guarantee that safety factor won't be exceeded within a re-inspection period of a year, hence by that reasoning I can't give a guarantee. Do you follow the reasoning? This would then mean that any tree with any kind of fault would need to be felled as soon as it gets inspected! Obviously I am taking this to the extreme here, but the PTI reasoning you suggest must surely be incorrect, or at least mis-applied in this case. You also say there is a target - OK a path is there yes, but doesn't target type, target population and occupancy of target area all contribute to an estimation of risk exposure for the potential target area? Again, is this not an oversimplification of the PTI method to say yes there is a target so there is immediately a problem that must be remedied? From my view, there is a hierarchy of targets based on the aforementioned variables. Yes all trees have the potential to fall over, and by that logic there is always a target - but as I'm sure you would agree some targets are significantly more worthy of protection than others. I hope your review was just a quick comment and not a true reflection of the PTI approach, but we will see. Just have to wait for the other 5 arbs to enter this room and see how the opinions differ!

Good points Paul - but I believe the main event here is that this an internal rib formation. Jacquemontii's comments that this appears to be a longitudinal crack that is attempting to occlude match the rib idea well. Simply put, its not a death nell for the tree and yes it does confirm that there is an internal partial failure there is most likely going to be enough sound wood to support the tree - even with the damage, for a long time to come (unusual wind/storm events excepted). Hopefully the occlusion will continue to the point that the rib becomes 'blunt-nosed' and the associated strength loss from the crack is remediated by the occlusion. If still a 'sharp-nosed' rib - the crack still extends to the outside so may re-open in certain circumstances - again unusual winds etc. I don't believe it is common for Beech to fail with these types of injuries ie not without other complications. Otherwise, remedial action as described above - crown reduction and bracing is the best course of action. Jacquemontii - good post by the way. Please pose more questions like this to help with your course prep. I'm sure there will be several offers of help.

Hmm - could also be some residual vibration transference at the same frequency of the soundwave, hence the cheekbone effect when shooting. I would assume the same occurs when using vibration strong equipment - chainsaws obviously, but other kit too such as Kangols or similar.

Very good point. I never presumed that I got the sum of the two totals, but anecdotally, everything is simply quieter when you double up as you would expect. 5-10dB additional reduction would make sense as a ball park figure IMO. I did presume however that as the eardrum functions by changes in pressure caused by sound waves travelling though the air and ultimately striking the eardrum, that having two layers of ear defence would serve to dampen the strength of the soundwave twice meaning that the effect of the sound wave pressure on your eardrum would be suitably more dampened then if there was only one layer of protection. Just my thoughts mind...

At 90dB and above there is the risk of permanent hearing damage, so as long as your ears are protected and the net dB falls below 90 then you will be fine. As mentioned above, I also wear a combined ear defenders/ear plugs if I was doing something particularly loud or for a long period of time e.g. peeling and pointing posts on a PTO. Came across this interesting table after a very quick search: Decibel (Loudness) Comparison Chart Info like the hand drill makes you realise how low 90dB is and you are putting yourself at risk of going mutton...

I would hazard a guess at a dessicated Boletus - but would not go further to say edulis without having looked in detail. Or of course I could be totally wrong!

TreeTiger - I agree with all you said above, I just have a problem with the idea of 'significant'. This is not a criticism though, just an observation... Its such a subjective measure that your idea of significant is different to mine and visa-versa. I also believe from the comments that the OP's threshold for significant is a lot lower then mine (although admittedly I'm not standing next to the tree like the OP is!). Perhaps you could explain your thoughts on significant in this instance for the OP so that they can gain a better insight?