Chris at eden

Oh I am miles out there then with the wound painting. So what about the other issues then? Codit, fungal strategies, etc. These are the real break throughs in modern arboriculture. Did we know about those in 1980? The 1989 version of 3998 actually said that pollarding was synonymous with topping. That's how far we have come in that amount of time. The 2010 edition is pretty much the opposite.

How is that any different? In 1980 Shigo may have known about codit but no one else did. Hence we as an industry knew nothing about trees. We were still painting wounds with arborex and filling cavities with concrete. When did matheck apply the axiom of uniform stress to trees? Or, when did Schwartze start looking at fungal colonisation strategies or different methods of reaction zone penetration? And when did that start filtering down to arbs? you are talking the last 10 - 15 years for the latter stuff. Mate, I'm not trying to be argumentative, I just think we can do better.

The main reason is the size of the wounds. They will never occlude. Proper pollarding should not introduce decay, topping will without doubt. You are also asking a lot of the tree if you remove all the potential energy within the branches and then ask it to compartmentalise huge wounds. Add to that the fact that there are very few buds for leaf growth and this adds to the problems. Pollarding on the other hand, you still have all the stored energy in the branches, the wounds are small and will occlude within a season or two, and there is a developed framework of branches for new leaves which means lots of energy from photosynthesis. Your instincts on pruning are spot on with is.

I have no problem with a regular pollarding regime. My argument is that the original photo is not pollarding and should not be referred to as such. It gives the wrong impression to clients. They rely on us to give them advice and it should be accurate. If trees have been topped in the 80's when we knew nothing about trees then fine they have to be managed as topped trees. But long term we should be looking at phasing them out with a tree renewal program and they should not be confused with genuine pollarding.

Why do you have to accept it? Its out-dated tree work by about 30 years. Why not change it? Its not even difficult we have 3998 which is basically an instruction book on tree work.

Good comment and you probably right on the cause but you can't top a tree and then manage as a pollard. You still have large wounds that wont occlude and that isn't pollarding. The original question was is it bad practice and the answer is yes it is. Whatever the reason.

I process tpo apps for a LA and it annoys me when I run apps to pollard mature maiden trees. Its not possible. Pollarding does not result in large diameter cuts and does not overly stress the trees. It also has a well developed framework of branches and starts when trees are young. It devalues the industry to call that Pollarding.

I process tpo apps for an LA and it annoys me when I run apps to pollard mature maiden trees. Its not possible. Pollarding does not result in large diameter cuts and does not stress the trees. It also has a well developed framework of branches and starts when trees are young. http://www.kent-treecare.co.uk/wp-content/gallery/pollarding/pollarding.jpg

The removal of the branches would not be exempt if the danger is not imminent. If you think they would be ok for the next 8 weeks then there is no reason you can't submit an app. I wouldn't think the TO would let you completely remove them either due to the size of the wounds, probably just reduce end weight if they are an issue.

Pollarding is fine I agree but that isn't Pollarding. Its topping mature trees and as the original post said bad practice. Where is it? You would hope its to mitigate subsidence risk but you never know. Poor species selection for the location also but I suppose it's historic.

Thanks for the info Paul. I'll drop nick an e-mail just to register my interest.

Cool idea. Are there any plans to look at something similar with the reg consultants? or is it something that may be considered in the future?

Good call. Its a component of asprin as far as i know. i saw Glynn Percival talking about its effect on trees at a seminar a couple of years ago. raving about it he was. another one he was talking about is front line, the flea treatment for dogs and cats. apperntly they both have far wider applications. unfortunatly, the latter is a pesticide and would require approval for different applications such as trees.

Hi Andrew, You do get the moss on Rigidoporus ulmarius but I've not seen this fungus growing on ash. Historically it grew on elm hence the name but in my experience it now usually grows on sycamore. Perreniporia fraxinea is more associated with ash (again hence the name) and still has the moss. That was my thinking. Its a guess to be fair as you can't tell for sure from the photo, or at least I cant. Another one with moss would be Pseudotrametes gibbosa but its not that. You thinking Rigidoporus then? What are your experiences in terms of the associated species of both. Cheers,

Could be. The green tinge may also suggest Perenniporia fraxinea

Good call

You can use anything. Bike spoke, welding rod, wooden cane, etc. A mallet and binoculars is also a good idea.

Joseph, For future ref. Honey fungus is a toadstool, it has a little ring on the stalk just under the cap. The underside of the cap also has elongated gills, slit type structures which release the spores. This is a bracket fungi, a polypore. It grows sideways from the trunk and the underside has pores, tiny little holes for spore dissemination. Another difference is the position. Honey fungus is a root decay fungus so is usually on the ground although not always. Polyporus is a sapwood exposed coloniser found on wounds like this one and usually higher in the tree. Hope this helps

Spot on mate. Dave would have his red pen out for the spelling though.

No its higher. National diploma is level 3 equivalent to A level. L3 is what is referred to as further education. The L4 is level 4 which is the lowest level of higher education equivalent to higher national certificate. L6 is degree level. My personal opinion is that the professional qualifications such as the L2, L4, and L6 are far more relevant to the industry. L4 will prepare you to go into junior consultancy with L6 as a possible progression. In my experience ND will not give you the same consultancy skills as tech cert or its replacement L4. You can do L4 with tree life as distance learning but my advice would be try to make the sessions if you can and do it as day release. It will be about 15 days over a year. The sessions are really interactive with a lot of group discussion. It will get you used to talking with other people at that level which is an important part of the learning and gives you confidence in dealing with other professionals which is vital. Its daunting at the start but well worth it.

Hi Paul, is this going to result in a new competancy badge? Anyone who thinks there is no more then putting trees into a hole clearly should not be doing it. This is a great idea as a competancy.

Hi, Agree with all that AA Techie said. Personally i would go with the L4 which as Paul said is the replacement for tech cert. I did tech cert on the old system in 2005 but i really think this new version of level 6 that i am doing is much better. The learning is more complete. If you submit a piece of work and you dont get 100% of the answer you will get it back asking for further info and providing you with advice. With exam based you only have to get 50% and you would pass. You therefore miss the opportunity to do the extra learing. The teaching at tree life is excellent and remember Dave Dowson wrote the sylabus for the L4 and the L6 so is in a great postion to get you through. The down side is the work load is intense or at least it is at L6. I'm told that L4 is similar. ISA cert arb is a good qualification for practitioners but its level 2 so wouldn't really be a progression. I did mine back in 2002 and while it was useful i allowed it to expire as i felt that tech cert far outweighed it. I do often think of re-certifying though.

You are bang on mate, France is a fantastic place to visit especially as you can drive there. I don't know why it is not that popular with the Brits.

Is your L2 the one that is administered by ABC awards, the new qcf qualification? if so go for the qcf L4 that's again administered by ABC awards. They are designed to flow into one another. I am just about to finish L6 and can't recommend them enough. It teaches you real skills and is not all about sitting exams. I've done academic stuff before and the professional route is much better and more relevant in my view. Some will disagree with this and its each to their own but check out the AA reg consultants list, the majority have dip.arb rfs and tech cert which is the old version of the L4 and L6. Tree life do an online version called treemail. Hope this helps,

There are visible pseudosclerotial plates in the cross section which suggests the presence of Kretzschmaria. In my experience this is more common on beech but you can get it on sycamore.