Kveldssanger

Hahah I'll do plenty more. As you know, I'm writing a lot about a lot of stuff regarding trees, and I've found a real point of interest in trees and religion (not just modern ones) and am exploring it quite extensively. Just ordered two books, one called 'Plants in the Quran' and the other 'Planted Flags: Trees, Land, And Law In Israel/Palestine', for example. One called 'All the Trees of the Forest: Israel's Woodlands from the Bible to the Present' just arrived, too. In time I'll share what I have researched in one way or another, be it via short facts or a much larger bulk of text.

Taking a break from these for a short while. Reading and writing a lot on trees and religions, and it's taking up much of my spare time right now!

I find it a little odd that you lost marks for not recommending stump removal. It's not like it's a necessity, so why suggest it as the way forward if you consider it not needed? Stumps can be left to support the growth of fungi, for example. I suppose if the tree was right by a main road you'd recommend stump removal just because some idiot can purposely trip over it and claim against the owner (cynic alert). I got a little irked reading your account, actually. As for the woodpecker holes, I suppose that's fair enough. As for not seeing what you got wrong - that's silly. How are you meant to know what to work on for next time, if you try again? The subjectivity of marking is always an issue, and if two tutors said two differet things then I'd raise that with the course provider and ask for a partial refund.

I believe they do.

22/05/16. Fact #205. Here is a link to the second part of this thread, in which there is a link to the first part. Again, jumping right into this post, we shall be. This is the third and final part of this post series. Manitoba In lumbering: “Northern Manitoba is forest-clad as far north as the 60th parallel. The eastern portion shares the forest growth that covers Northwestern Ontario. Birch, spruce, poplar, jack pine, and tamarac flourish in a virgin forest, and supply the sawmills which have been established at many points. In the west and southwest there are timbered areas on the hills and along the river banks.” On sport: “Considerable number of elk, moose, and jumping deer are found in the Province, and in the forests and hills the bear, wolf, lynx, fox, marten, beaver, and other fur-bearing animals have their haunts.” Saskatchewan On the Province as a whole: “North of the rolling prairies are extensive forest tracts, thinning off as the northern boundary of the Province is approached.” / “A little further north [from the southern strip of the Province] are the park lands; and well they deserve their name. Even here there is plenty of open prairie, where the new settler can put in his plough and run a long furrow without having to clear anything away first; but there are also innumerable little ‘bluffs’ or coppices of birch and poplar, which are very useful not only in providing fuel, but also in sheltering the house and live stock, and to some extent the crops, from the wind.” A picturesque spot near Regina, Saskatchewan. On lumbering: “The lumbering district of Saskatchewan lies north of Prince Albert. Spruce, larch, jack-pine, white and black poplar, and white birch are the most common trees. Much of this timber is used for railway sleepers and to meet the demand of the farmers and settlers throughout the Province. In the northern section of Saskatchewan the Dominion Government has set aside a number of large areas as forest reserves, not only with the purpose of conserving the timber supply, but also ‘of keeping up a permanent supply of water at the fountain-head of streams which radiate from various centres in every direction’." On fur trading: “The forests of the north still abound in fur-bearing animals, the principal being bear, otter, beaver, marten, wolf, and mink. Prince Albert and Battleford are the leading centres of the fur trade. The annual output is valued at over $1,620,000 (£324,000).” On sport: “Northern Saskatchewan is still largely the haunt of the sportsmen. Lakes, rivers, and forests abound, and the keen hunter finds rare sport in this home of the fur-bearing animals.” Alberta On lumbering: “Building material and fuel in unlimited quantities are procurable in the forests of Northern Alberta, for the timber lands extend hundreds of miles on the north side of the Saskatchewan River. The poplar, birch, pine, white and black spruce, Douglas fir and larch, are among the trees contained in these great forest belts. South of the North Saskatchewan the timber is principally cottonwood and poplar, except in the foothills and river valleys, where considerable spruce is found. Sawmills are located at various points. Over 26,000 square miles of territory have been set aside as forest reserves and Dominion parks.” The Valley of the Ten Peaks, Rocky Mountains, Alberta. On sport: “In the mountain section of the Province large areas have been set apart by the Dominion Government for forest and game preservation and for recreation. Good roads have been built through these reservations and they are carefully guarded against both fire and illicit hunting.” There are many places in Western Canada similar to this, where nature lends attractiveness and offers useful shelter, water and feed. Bird’s eye view of Edmonton, Alberta. (Look at all the trees!) British Columbia On agriculture: “The fruit growers of the Province have won distinction by the size and flavour of their products, and the fame of Southern British Columbia as a fruit country is now world-wide. Apples, grapes, apricots, peaches, and plums are grown to perfection; also strawberries, cherries, and many other small fruits.” Orchards in the Okanagan Valley, British Columbia, one of the most productive fruit-growing districts in the world. On lumbering: “In timber British Columbia has its greatest asset, for, however rich a country may be in mineral wealth, the latter is always a definite quantity and is subject some day to exhaustion, but properly conserved and developed, timber is inexhaustible. The value of the manufactured timber is over $55,365,000 (£11,073,000), and the forests are growing about four times as fast as they are being cut. The present commercial stand of timber exceeds 336,000 billion feet. Where mountain peaks and island-dotted placid lakes form a delightful environment. Throughout the coast region, and in a lesser degree the wet belts of the interior, there are great stands of Douglas fir, hemlock, red and yellow cedar, spruce, larch, and commercial pines. The hardwoods, such as oak, maple, and alder, are inconsiderable and commercially negligible. The coniferous trees grow to unusual size and height. Douglas firs, cedars, and spruce eight to ten feet in diameter are not unusual in the coast regions, while there are individual specimens, 300 feet high, with girth from 50 to 55 feet. Some giant cedars in British Columbia, a province with billions of feet of commercial timber. Sawmills are located all over the Province, both on the coast and in the interior. There is a constant demand for British Columbia timber in the Prairie Provinces, and large quantities are exported to the United Kingdom, the Orient, South America, Africa, and Australia. The cedar cut is mainly manufactured into shingles, which form an important part of the export trade. From the spruce is manufactured pulp and paper, an important industry.” Yukon and Northwest Territory On lumbering: “Much of the Territory is well wooded with fair sized timber. The principal trees are white and black spruce. The timber cut is used for home consumption. There are three large forest zones, and a treeless area along the Arctic slope.” Source: Anon. (1930) Canada: Descriptive Atlas. Canada: Houses of Parliament.

Nope! A wood in Hockley / Hawkwell, consisting primarily of sweet chestnut coppice (with some areas of hornbeam) with oak standards (and the odd boundary sweet chestnut standard) that has largely lapsed in management. Went back after lunch and found plenty more, but they're all staying well and truly on their hosts!

Attached are some shots.

Found a nice one growing on another sweet chestnut (266g worth). Perfectly ripe, so I picked it, and cooked it up with 4 eggs in an omlette. Very nice, I must admit.

Nice spot.

It'll have a slight twang of dog piss and insect, amongst the garlic. Begs the question - what to cook it up with. Actual chicken?

If the ones on that sweet chestnut stool are still there in a week, I'll pick them off and eat them (only some of the bracket). Quite fancy trying the fungus, to be honest.

Found a load over the last few days. Split into segments.

Lo and behold, as well as now being quite a well-known local attraction that has made the papers recently, it's also been slightly redesigned. Probably to do with the added revenue the fairies bring in, given the increase in passing traffic. They've now got a washing line, have acquired extra land adjacent to their abode, and have brought in extra people and beasts as well (perhaps for defence against intruders). I'm expecting a bustling metropolis soon enough, if the current rate of expansion is anything to go by.

I do indeed! Up near the book shop they have on the site, behind the liquidambar. Didn't notice they actually had corks around the edge of a wound, however!

It'd be great for people to experience the bark being harvested, if it is feasible and can be undertaken by someone with experience. Perhaps a chance to bring in some school classes, for a field trip. If we are to improve the way we deal with the natural world and traditional practices then we need to invoke passion in the young generation - the older generation, in all fairness, is largely a lost cause. No doubt the dehesas and montados are landscapes I really want to visit, and hope to be able to in the coming few years. They really are niche ecosystems with so much value, harbouring not only historical knowledge and cultural practices, but also lots of rare and threatened species that will decline as these fragile ecosystems decline. From reading Hartel & Plieninger's book (European wood-pastures in transition), it is increasingly clear that the profitability of the cork oak woodlands is waning, and land abandonment as farmers move away from their familial lands and into the towns and cities is having huge ramifications for biodiversity and the farming culture. Certainly, if I ever buy wine, it'll have a real cork in the top! If only supermarkets provided honey from these dehesas and montados - that'd support part of the economy! Even an amnesty on fake corks and bottle tops would help.

Sweet. Will watch this now! Got a whole book on cork oaks - this one. [ame]https://www.amazon.co.uk/Cork-Oak-Woodlands-Edge-Restoration/dp/1597264784/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1463823348&sr=8-1&keywords=cork+oak+woodland[/ame]

I would however ssay that the bison will probably benefit from the felling, because of the increased biomass available for grazing.

"Last week, another 32 members were dismissed from the state council for nature conservation, an advisory body which had opposed the logging plan and has been accused of “inefficiency”. “We were sacked because the new government needs scientists who will applaud increased logging, to convince public opinion that this insane idea is okay,” said Przemysław Chylarecki, one of the dismissed scientists." "Most of the new council member are foresters, or colleagues of the environment minister, he added." That's absolutely effing atrocious. I see the monotheistic world view of dropping forests for man's gain as God made the forests for man to subdue still hasn't escaped the mindset of many, even if fewer these days are outwardly religious in that regard.

17/05/16. Fact #204. The cedar of Lebanon was well-regarded and certainly well-respected in ancient times, and was therefore used for the most prestigious of developments that would have been fit for royalty. Therefore, when looking at the accounts regarding the construction of the Temple of Solomon (used to worship Yahweh and to hold the Ark of the Covenant, amongst other things) and some surrounding buildings, during a period in between the decline in the power of the Egyptian Empire and the rise of another, it is not at all surprising that the timber of this tree featured so readily. The temple, it is suspected, was erected, near to Jerusalem, during the tenth century before Jesus’s birth (999-900 BCE), under decree of Solomon, who was, after his father David, the king of the kingdoms of Israel and Judah. The period in which father and son reigned was a politically stable one that lacked any marked superpower, and thus the construction of the temple was feasible. Originally, the idea had been his father’s, though as David had been unable to built the temple in his era, Solomon was responsible for overseeing the project. Probably not surprisingly, the temple and outbuildings were to be made generally from stone, as stone is incredibly durable. However, the roof and the cladding works (in the interior and exterior), as well as the doors and columns, and other furniture, needed to be made from wood. Geographically, the area in which Solomon reigned was in possession of a bountiful supply of timber, largely cypress and pine, though the wood of these two species lacked the importance fit for a true king. Therefore, Solomon sought to source the wood of a more fitting tree species, and the cedar of Lebanon ticked all of the necessary boxes. The only problem was that the area didn’t have any cedars of Lebanon, and therefore Solomon turned to his friend, the king of Tyre, for assistance. At the time, the king of Tyre controlled the area of Sidon, where the cedar of Lebanon’s most southern range extended to. Therefore, the timber could be sourced from there (and would be felled by Sidonians), and transported to the construction site of the temple near Jerusalem, by river. Indeed, this was the agreement, though the King of Tyre requested that, in return for this assistance, Solomon provide food for the king’s household. The Forest of the Cedars of God, a forest full of Cedrus libani. The forest has a long history of being used by man for timber. Source: Wikimedia Commons. Solomon also had specific requirements for the dimensons of the timber. Because the temple was to be 90 x 30 x 45 feet, and the vestibule (a hallway between the outer entrance doors and the inner temple doors) 15 x 30 feet, the timber had to be cut to size. This was, it is suspected, done by the men of both the King of Tyre and Solomon. Sizes did of course vary, as planks had to be cut to size to construct the roof beams, though also the interior and exterior walls, largest doors, and the altar within the temple to support the Ark of the Covenant. Outbuildings were also to be furnished with cedar wood, and the aptly named House of the Forest of Lebanon, which was actually larger in size than the temple itself, at 150 x 75 x 45 feet, was to be constructed with the timber (as well as stone). Nearby, another building known as the Hall of Judgement was also clad with cedar wood panels. Beyond these buildings, it is suspected that Solomon obtained the timber of the cedar for other important buildings, such as stables for horses and store houses for chariots. Beyond the wood of the cedar, the temple and outbuildings were also furnished with the timber of other tree species. Timber of the cypress (Cupressus sempervirens) was, for instance, used for the floor boards, though there is also a possibility that the flooring was instead furnished with the wood of the junpier. The wood of the wild olive was also used in the temple, for making the door frames, and also producing two 15 foot high cherubiums within the temple’s inner sanctuary, where the Ark of the Covenant was held. An overview of how the Temple of Solomon and the other buildings would have been dituated. Source: Wikimedia Commons. Unfortunately, the construction of this temple and its outer buildings was very costly, and the investment into the Jerusalem area was to the detriment of the rest of the kingdom. Furthermore, as the cedar wood was all imported from Sidon, there was a risk of the buildings looking less Jewish and more Phoenician (the region in which Tyre was a city). Of course, this didn’t really matter (long-term) as the temple was destroyed a few centuries after, following the fall of the city of Jerusalem in 587 BC. Source: Meiggs, R. (1982) Trees and Timber in the Ancient Mediterranean World. UK: Oxford University Press.

Really good indeed. Understood most of it, though now it's processing it as well!

16/05/16. Fact #203. Case law relating to poisonous trees. It is recognised that particular issues may stem from where trees with poisonous fruit and / or foliage is allowed to overhang onto neighbouring property, where animals can graze upon this poisonous matter both removed from and attached to the tree. Without question, the accepted precedent with regards to overhanging branches apply, and principally under the ruling from the Rylands v Fletcher [1868] case (not to do with trees, but instead the escape of water from the defendant’s reservoir), which stated: “it seems but reasonable and just that the neighbour who has brought something on his own property (which was not naturally there), harmless to others so long as it is confined to his own property, but which he knows will be mischievous if it gets on his neighbour’s, should be obliged to make good the damage which ensues if he does not succeed in confining it to his own property.” In this sense, as long as a poisonous tree is confined to the bounds of the grower’s property (duty of care), there is no issue to arise. Since this ruling, all related cases were confined to the late 1800s and early 1900s, and relate to yew trees specifically. In Wilson v Newbury [1871], horses owned by the claimant (Wilson) died as a result of consuming foliage from a yew tree on Newbury’s land. However, it was found that the consumed foliage had been clipped from the tree, and as it was uncertain who had clipped the foliage from the tree, nor an indication that Newbury was aware that foliage had been clipped from the tree, the claim was rejected. A few years later, Erskine v Adeane [1873] also resulted in a failed claim, though this was due to the death of the defendant before the trial began. The issue here stemmed from Adeane’s gardener throwing clippings over the boundary and onto Erskine’s property (which was ‘rented’ from Adeane – Erskine was the tenant), which were then consumed by sheep. These sheep later died. As the case failed purely because of the death of the defendant, it is an anomalous case that perhaps bears little magnitude. In difference circumstances, the case may well have been successful. The case does however highlight that clippings cannot be placed, or allowed to fall, onto neighbouring land where any kept livestock (or other animals – including pets) may consume the clippings – assuming, as per Wilson v Newbury [1871], that the origin and cause of the clippings to be there is identifiable (in this case, Adeane’s gardener was the culprit). Erskine v Adeane [1873] is also interesting because the claim also involved the death of cattle owned by Erskine. Such cattle died as a result of grazing upon foliage of a yew tree whose branches were overhanging onto the land under the control of Erskine, though not before they had also entered Adeane’s land (through a gap in the boundary fence) to graze upon both branches and clippings of the yew. In this matter too, the claim failed, because the judge determined that Erskine should have, prior to ‘entering’ Adeane’s land from who he was renting, identified the presence and subsequent hazardous nature of the yew trees for his livestock. Furthermore, Adeane was, in light of the contractual agreement between both parties, not mandated to fence off his land, and therefore Erskine should have safeguarded his cattle in this sense as well. By a similar token, the claimant’s case in the instance of Cheater v Cater [1914], which saw overhanging yew branches being grazed upon by livestock, also failed. This was because, much like the contractual agreement between the aforementioned case, the claimant should have identified the yew trees at the time of entering the land and using it for his own purposes. As succinctly put by the judge, “in a case of this kind the tenant takes the land demised as it is, and therefore if the tenant here took the land with the yew trees growing over it so that his cattle could eat of the branches and they did eat, he cannot complain.” However, during a near identical incident during the same time period (in relation to the fencing of land, as set out in Erskine v Adeane [1873]) in Lawrence v Jenkins [1873], as Jenkins was under duty to fence his land, even in spite of it being broken by a third party, damages were awarded to the claimant. From this, one can ascertain that whoever is responsible for looking after a boundary (in terms of fencing, where livestock are present) where poisonous trees reside will, if there is an accident, be held liable for the injury or death of livestock that have consumed such poisonous materials originating from the trees. Arguably the most significant case applying to poisonous trees is that of Crowhurst v Amersham Burial Ground [1878]. The defendants planted a yew tree on their own land and about four feet from the boundary fence. In the throes of time, as the tree grew, some of the branches grew towards and then over the boundary fence. Parts of the tree consequently became accessible to the claimant’s horse, which was grazing in the adjoining field (including upon these overhanging branches). As a result of this, the horse died, and the claimant brought an action for damages against the burial ground. It was held that, because the defendants had allowed the tree to grow over the boundary that they were consequently responsible, particularly given the fact they should have known that horses will frequently browse on yew foliage within their reach. This ruling in fact followed on from the precedent established in Rylands v Fletcher [1866], which was that if a person brings on to his or her land something which is dangerous or harmful and he allows it to escape, he will be held liable for any injury which may result. However, the case’s judge did state that, if the tree had not been poisonous, then the claimant would have not necessarily had a case, and would instead have had to abate the nuisance (overhang) his or herself. Following on from Crowhurst v Amersham Burial Ground [1878], the case of Ponting v Noakes [1894] arose. In this scenario, a horse owned by Ponting died as a result of consuming foliage of a yew tree, though there was uncertainty over exactly from which yew the horse had grazed – scope existed for the horse to have eaten from yew trees owned either by Ponting (a yew bush), Noakes, or a third party (known as H). However, because a veterinary surgeon had suggested that, in their professional opinion, the yew tree owned by Noakes was most likely to be the cause, it was held that Noakes’ tree did indeed cause the death of the horse (including at appeal). However, because the land between the two land owners was separated by a ditch, and also a fence on Noakes’ side of the ditch, when compiled with the fact that the yew branches were not actually encroaching onto Ponting’s land, his horse must have been trespassing onto Noakes’ land in order to consume the yew foliage. Therefore, Noakes was not actually found liable (including at appeal). If I have missed anything, please add it below in a comment.

Grounds level, pretty much. One was from 38cm up and another around 70cm up. The chestnut hadn't compartmentalised the decay whatsoever. Fascinating pictures. The cherry with Gano was good, as well. Had a few kids take a real interest, so me and Paul were teaching them about wood decay and trees a little. The next generation of arbs, there!

I'll bloody well find it! Hahah.

Pretty. Some ones I got of K. deusta on that red horse chestnut we ARBOTOM'd and resi'd: The world is flat and you're about to meet the Great Southern Circumference: A map of Kretzland: Islands off of the coast of Kretzland: A flower; the national symbol of Kretzland: ...now where did I put my medication...???

Oh was it! Nearby to anywhere I can get my positioning from?