woodyguy
-
Posts
1,021 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Classifieds
Tip Site Directory
Blogs
Articles
News
Arborist Reviews
Arbtalk Knot Guide
Gallery
Store
Calendar
Freelancers directory
Everything posted by woodyguy
-
There is no rule of thumb. It will say on the deeds. That is the only thing you can rely on.
-
"this is the best type of lock cant be got at", certainly the surround is well made. I inherited one on my shed when I moved in. Takes me nearly a minute to pick as they are not well made. Disc detainer locks are the only really secure locks but still prone to an angle grinder.
-
You tube video of one of these being picked. You may be surprised that the total video is only just over a minute long but he only actually needs about 24 secs to pick it. Not terribly secure. [ame] [/ame]
-
Just a few other things that the IARC rate as equally dangerous for producing cancer as roundup - working as a barber or hairdresser - being a shift worker - frying food - opening your stove door when burning wood to top up. Not suggesting that glyphosate is totally safe, just trying to put it into context. Cooking and eating barbecue food is considerably more dangerous however.
-
As you say "an insight to the scientific evidential position" - While increased AChE activity was found in all fields after 2 weeks of exposure, bees close to conventional maize crops showed values higher than those in both organic maize fields and non-cultivated areas. In caged bees, AChE activity increased in response to neonicotinoids, and a slight decrease was observed by glyphosate. ---Did you actually read it???
-
Sorry Darrin, the 350 is 14mm and the 362 15mm, my mistake (but both uncropable). But as other posters say, nothing withstands cutting gear.
-
Yes worrying. That is why I use the 362 with a 16mm (not a 10mm) shackle, so 156% thicker and not cropable by hand.
-
I used to secure my lock up with a round Abus discus lock which is well regarded. The Kasp is similar. Sadly I found that I could pick the lock in under 30 secs so its now changed for a proper disc detainer Abloy. Yes I know that few people pick locks and prefer to cut them but why take the chance?
-
Certainly agree that the revolving door in USA and here stinks. But you haven't posted a link for a revolving door into Scientific American who published the article that looked rationally at the evidence.
-
Abloy 362 for £50 on ebay. They don't get harder to pick/cut than that
-
A rather more rational and evidence based discussion of the report. Widely Used Herbicide Linked to Cancer - Scientific American
-
Hard work to move but possible. The real test of whether they'll survive is whether you can generously water them within your woodland over the next two summers until they are fully established. No point moving them then letting them die.
-
Take out an annual policy then cancel it when finished. Much cheaper.
-
How about redwoods being one of the few conifers that regenerate/coppice when cut down. The first monkey puzzle tree seeds were bought to this country having been secretely pocketed when served at a meal in Chile.
-
PLB (Personal Locator Beacons) Good or Bad?!?
woodyguy replied to Katie at FoxMedics's topic in General chat
Carry one sometimes when backpacking in remote areas far from roads and habitation. Feel useful when there is no mobile system. Not had any use for them when working though. -
This sort of writing is really skilfull to get just right. As you say it can come over didactic and boring. I often find splitting it into some factual text to supply the interested adult and a text box with an exciting little story/fact in it for the child/short attention span adult, works well. I write this sort of thing for my wood and seldom get it just right. Pictures help. Good idea to plagiarise!!
-
Trouble is you see a tree in a field with stagheads and you say they've been ploughing too close. It might not be that simple. Each year a tree has to grow a new layer over its entire surface area. So it can only get bigger. That's fine to a point but when it gets near the limits of its environment then retrenching is the only way to go, unless it just dies. So after drought years many oaks developed stagheads and then regrew. That is natural.
-
Which? did a trial of feeding trees when first planted vs nothing. The fertilised trees did a lot worse. But mulching and watering are a good idea. Remember that most trees need fungi to get their nutrients and grow properly. High fertiliser levels kill off the fungi.
-
No, it wouldn't be any fun if you got a picture of a tree and its bark. Too easy. Any why has nobody said Hornbeam yet???
-
Possibly field maple (but the leaves should be nearly out by now). Impossible to give any useful opinion without a picture of the tree, the bark and an in focus picture of the twigs/buds.
-
testy is an adjective. So a testy what.....
-
Greenhouse gas measurements go back 800 000 years through the Greenland ice cores http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/images/indicator_downloads/ghg-concentrations-download1-2014.png But even if you don't think that man's squandering of the fossil fuel bounty is damaging the climate, how do you think our grand children will look back on us when thousands of species have been driven to extinction and we've used up most of the riches stores over millions of years? As to those who ignore the evidence. Lets rephrase the question? What would have to happen before you were convinced that man made change to the planet's climate is both real and currently happening? Denial is easy but what would make you change your mind?
-
The problem TVI is that there is plenty of fossil fuels, its just that burning them will cause even more damage to the overheating environment than we have so far. We have probably passed the tipping point already (as you know) but we have to start leaving the stuff in the ground. You do wonder how many weather records we have to break (eg hottest years since records began in past decade) before people are convinced that we are damaging the planet??? Sadly the science is pretty clear with almost total consensus from those not directly paid by the fossil fuel lobby but when we don't like the consequences of leaving that oil in the ground, some will clutch at straws.
-
What's scary is that a significant proportion of Americans actually believe that there is nothing changing and if it is its not caused by man. As to the original question, the Independent piece at least carries the quote from the EA. If their pension scheme is the worst thing about them then I'm not too worried. quote below An Environment Agency spokesperson said it "does not hold shares in any listed companies. Like many pension funds, The Environment Agency Pension Fund invests in a wide range of companies and these assets are completely separate from the Environment Agency. The day-to-day management of the fund and selection of companies is delegated to external fund managers who have no access to information regarding the EA’s regulatory activities. The fund operates transparently and is recognised as a global leader in responsible and sustainable investment."
-
Two issues here. To combat global warming we need to leave most of the fossil fuels that currently exist in the ground and not exploit them.Fraking is a big part of the problem as it allows exploitation of previously unusable fossil fuels. The second bit though is pathetic. The Environment agency has thousands of employees. So they have a pension scheme. This scheme will have trustees who are duty bound to get a decent yield on those investments in order to pay the pensions for the well earned retirement of their employees. So of course some of their investments will be in the oil industry. Also probably in water, arms, light engineering, financial services and a broad range of sectors. Quoting ill thought through scurrilous smear pieces doesn't contribute much to the argument. I do however agree about the revolving door for ex-ministers straight into the industries they regulated. That stinks.
