Ontario ISA conference

Ha, Ha, I'm scheduled to speak on recovery from ice storm injury later this afternoon. Due to weather and infrastructure stress, my flight to the Midwest was cancelled with no hope of getting there till after my talk. So...the organizers have hooked me up with opportunity to do the talk here from my home office in Portland, ME. We'll see if it all works out!
 
Thanks Mark, well, we did get the computer and voice links up on time. As you know, I count on some interaction with the participants and with this there was very little, so I'm not sure how effective it was. Other folks will need to comment on that...I'll take silence as an indication of a less-than-successful effort. Actually, it was worth a try to do it remotely but it did reinforce the value of taking the show on the road.
 
KTSmith said:
Due to weather and infrastructure stress, my flight to the Midwest was cancelled with no hope of getting there till after my talk. So...the organizers have hooked me up with opportunity to do the talk here from my home office in Portland, ME. We'll see if it all works out!
Click to expand...

I hope it does, Kevin! My flight to MI got cancelled early Tuesday, so I flew into Lansing at 1:30 a.m. this morning, gave 3 talks, and am now getting ready to board the flight home.
Only a 16-hour stay, but great to see MI folks nonetheless!

So will you be Skyping?
 
Thanks Guy, you are a real trooper! although I was flying in to Detroit, the conference itself was for ISA-Ontario, right across the border from Detroit.
No Skype, used Cisco WebEx. That way, they could see my active desktop...and not me. Actually, I suppose I could have used my wife's computer, but Skype (and lots of other useful utilities) are blocked from our corporate agency computers.
 
Hey Kevin, I was in the audience for your presentation, and the engagement was there. Obviously when there were "bumps" people got caught up in their own conversations, but once you were back with us people re-focused fairly quickly.
I only check in here once a week or so, please don't take silence here as any reflection on your presentation. I quite enjoyed it, although obviously it would have been awesome to have you there in person!
Now that I've made the connection that it was you (I'm a bit slow ...) I may be PM'ing you a couple of questions.
And for the rest of the afternoon presenters were wishing they had known the dress code for the event was denim overalls ;)

Mark, I really enjoyed your talks last year as well; I had hoped to see your name on the agenda again this year. Maybe 2016?
 
KTSmith said:
Ha, Ha, I'm scheduled to speak on recovery from ice storm injury later this afternoon. Due to weather and infrastructure stress, my flight to the Midwest was cancelled with no hope of getting there till after my talk. So...the organizers have hooked me up with opportunity to do the talk here from my home office in Portland, ME. We'll see if it all works out!
Click to expand...

Even though you didn't get up here it was a good talk
 
Thanks to everyone that helps with these conferences they're always great.

Red great work with the pictures at the back of the room great idea. Good job for your first time
 
Ryan hung the pics at ISA Intl as well; they got some good attention. Those poster-type presentations are a very underused medium at conferences in general imo.
 
Thanks Katz and KevinS for your kind words. If I had been in Windsor in person, I'd probably have on a button-down collar and silk tie. Sorry, it's a cultural thing. I thought of the photo from my home-office desk at the least minute. At least I had gotten out of my pajamas!
 
Thanks Guy and Kevin for the feedback.
My tv is off and I have a lot to say. Thanks treebuzz giving me the opportunity post this long conference reaction.
I'm all pumped up from being with pros who share my passion. For three intense days.
Thanks ISAO and the speakers for a great show. For our American friends, it's in Ottawa next year and I see this ISAO content and quality as being in the same ballpark as the international, of which I've only been to the last two. I want to make it to a chapter conference in the north east part of the USA. ISA Milwaukee show was great. Best conference night out ever at that old hall with the guys from the Wisconsin Arborist Association.
I might start a new thread on my topic as i really left a lot of theories unexplained and likely misunderstood. If your not into progressive, sensitive reduction, and your more of the one heavy application type, then you might not find this thread helpful. I understand the concepts of heavy app reduction, I just disagree, sometimes, depending on context. And I don't expect everyone to agree with me either. On a scale, I'm usually at the far end of light weight application and usually at the more frequent end of dose frequency! Relative to others. Remember dose is measured by not only application weight but Just as importantly by DOSE FREQUENCY. I also know that some of us are oak men and some euc men. I am not saying euc men are hackers. I'm sometimes a hacker with cuts under 1/2 inch (as in willow context). There, I said it. And Mother Nature looks like a hacker with twelve inch cuts while 99% of us do not.
Any way I'm steeling a thread again, so more on another thread later.
I really found Linda Chalker-Scott, from Seattle, had the bravery to point out a well needed question. Questioning the level of benefit from the use and practice of some PHC products. Not that I'm saying PHC products are all bad. But imagine this crazy idea.
Which PHC products are actually good and which are actually bad. Oops....neither. Let me bring this back to logic. Which PHC products are better and which are worse. The grey scale again. Some are excellent, some are helpful, some are useless and some are possibly harmful, even if only sometimes. Like unwatered high nitrogen fertilizer doses, which is fact. Not like the idea of organic tea apps being unviable, which is hard to prove fact or myth. I remain skeptic. Is it an expensive way to water? Or a helpful way to create soil biology at least temporarily, if nothing else, to put the advantage on a tree during a period of establishment or stress.
She pointed out that some views that discredit PHC practices are flawed. Nitrogen, thought to be harmful to new plantings might be beneficial with a light dose, whereas phosphorus, which may help new plantings has significant environmental side effects, as there is often a high amount of it. Also, glyphosate was said to cause all kinds of diseases in people, but these studies are not totally solid.
If you are using any PHC products should you trust that they are viable as you were told? Or were you sold? I suggest researching findings that prove and findings that disprove the benefit of products you use. Just like there is many theories and concepts that disprove what I preach. Concepts can only be argued, sometimes people think they are proven and sometimes they are but be careful in trusting test results which may be biased. We can only disagree and try our best to be civilized, as It's only natural that we will never agree on things that aren't clearly factual. But we should debate our differences. What fun would it be anyway if we all agreed. What fun without hot controversy. Just try keeping it fun guys. I know I often let it get to me too much.
Linda also made a good point about 'causal vs collaborative'. I think I'm saying that wrong. Basically, was it the tea or the water in the tea that helped? Was it the tea or would the tree have been growing great just from the sun and the rain? Did the Tylenol kill the headache or did it just go away? For the last question the answer might be 'sometimes'. But I do believe there might be some PHC products which are useless most of the time. I've often questioned if mychorysae products sitting in a closed container is beneficial. I missed exactly what she said but Linda also questioned those products again. I'm wondering, and wandering, but a biologically active, breathing scoop of soil from a forest picked up fresh, on the way to the planting site is maybe a better option? Just a thought? Don't go excavating a forest, just a scoop to introduce some of that life that none of us understand fully, myself not at all. It is more than just mychorysae. Ideally, the soil should be corrected before planting, but this is often unpractical. How can we mitigate to improve poor soil issues? Radial trenching? Repetitive doses of correctly mixed and quickly, aerated delivered Tea as a tool of establishment or temporary stress relief? Compost top dressing with coarse wood chips?
Linda pointed out how coarse wood chips are superior in their breathability and I second that, as I've seen that fine cedar stuff that's like cotton candy to act like a roof over soil mounds, wicking water away from the trunk and or just absorbing the lighter rains without filtering the water through.
For new plantings she also pointed out the importance of installing the temporary guy straps slightly loosely to give the flare the feeling of motion so it can react accordingly. I'm thinking it's like training wheels. It's leaving play but giving support when needed. I related in my talk as the same sometimes goes for supports in trees, especially the temporary supports which are not correcting a serious flaw, a flaw which may have have shown movement already. Temporary strap or rope supports are usually installed loosely. Cobra may be slightly loose, but not 'smiling' too much. Steel cable, the most static app, should be taught but not tight or maybe very slightly loose. Depending on the context for static and dynamic support apps.
So I would think that most of you think I'm crazy to put seatbelt in trees. I've though about it....I'm crazy, but not for that. Think of it this way. There is nothing, or there is seatbelt or heavier strap, and then there is steel cable. Strap is temporary and lowers risk. Steel Cable is permanent and lowers risk more. Cobra is somewhere between in terms of permanence. Think in the context of an Oak living 50-100 years after the install. I still use cobra and like the initial quality, particularly the dynamic and non invasive aspect. But is even a through hardware app that invasive? I've never seen it a problem. Better than the invasive damage of a six inch cut. The cobra might be best used in short to medium lifespan species. I'm going to assume it might still be pretty strong 40 years later?
I missed Linda's talk on the second day and those were only a few points I found interesting. I may write more thoughts later on other talks. Lots of good talks, half of them one on one over coffee breaks, lunch or a rye and coke, known as whiskey for our American friends.
Not to exclude others but I see KTSmith is on treebuzz. I liked your talk and I know a lot of others people enjoyed it as well. Ice damage can defoliate complete trees. In a forest this is natural, helpful to some natural aspects, compromises timber quality and tree structure, but rarely kills trees outright. Not that that sums it up, just liked those points,
Adrenalin's running out, midnight, goodnight.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Well Ryan that's quite a review! You point out a lot of areas that boil down to "It depends..." and the need for us all to leave 'rules of thumb' behind before they get rigidified into myths. Shigo talked about this a lot.

I think you meant "causal vs. correlative", the need to avoid jumping to conclusions based on what might be coincidence.

Your pruning frequency approach comes in large part from working with poplars and maples vs. slower growing species. Still it aligns with work done with Q robur in N Europe. Your theories and your math will get refined as you learn from and interact with others who are on the same path.

PHC products and teas are all about freshness imo; good point that Nobody understands the nitty-gritty in microbiology. Linda, and some researchers, spend waaayyy too much time dissing compost tea imo.

Re putting seatbelts, or in my case old climbing ropes, as support material---it's a whole lot better than doing nothing, or heavy reductions. There's a strong anti-cabling bias in the UK and elsewhere that results in huge crown losses to improve stability. Yes with steel it's taut vs. tight--the FL champ live oak and the OH champ red oak have both recently had Catastrophic limb loss that was correlated with, and probably caused by, excessive and rigid steel systems.

Anyway keep on truckin! You're right that ON puts on a great show; hope to see you there again, soon!
 
Redtree said:
Thanks Guy and Kevin for the feedback.
My tv is off and I have a lot to say. Thanks treebuzz giving me the opportunity post this long conference reaction.
I'm all pumped up from being with pros who share my passion. For three intense days.
Thanks ISAO and the speakers for a great show. For our American friends, it's in Ottawa next year and I see this ISAO content and quality as being in the same ballpark as the international, of which I've only been to the last two. I want to make it to a chapter conference in the north east part of the USA. ISA Milwaukee show was great. Best conference night out ever at that old hall with the guys from the Wisconsin Arborist Association.
I might start a new thread on my topic as i really left a lot of theories unexplained and likely misunderstood. If your not into progressive, sensitive reduction, and your more of the one heavy application type, then you might not find this thread helpful. I understand the concepts of heavy app reduction, I just disagree, sometimes, depending on context. And I don't expect everyone to agree with me either. On a scale, I'm usually at the far end of light weight application and usually at the more frequent end of dose frequency! Relative to others. Remember dose is measured by not only application weight but Just as importantly by DOSE FREQUENCY. I also know that some of us are oak men and some euc men. I am not saying euc men are hackers. I'm sometimes a hacker with cuts under 1/2 inch (as in willow context). There, I said it. And Mother Nature looks like a hacker with twelve inch cuts while 99% of us do not.
Any way I'm steeling a thread again, so more on another thread later.
I really found Linda Chalker-Scott, from Seattle, had the bravery to point out a well needed question. Questioning the level of benefit from the use and practice of some PHC products. Not that I'm saying PHC products are all bad. But imagine this crazy idea.
Which PHC products are actually good and which are actually bad. Oops....neither. Let me bring this back to logic. Which PHC products are better and which are worse. The grey scale again. Some are excellent, some are helpful, some are useless and some are possibly harmful, even if only sometimes. Like unwatered high nitrogen fertilizer doses, which is fact. Not like the idea of organic tea apps being unviable, which is hard to prove fact or myth. I remain skeptic. Is it an expensive way to water? Or a helpful way to create soil biology at least temporarily, if nothing else, to put the advantage on a tree during a period of establishment or stress.
She pointed out that some views that discredit PHC practices are flawed. Nitrogen, thought to be harmful to new plantings might be beneficial with a light dose, whereas phosphorus, which may help new plantings has significant environmental side effects, as there is often a high amount of it. Also, glyphosate was said to cause all kinds of diseases in people, but these studies are not totally solid.
If you are using any PHC products should you trust that they are viable as you were told? Or were you sold? I suggest researching findings that prove and findings that disprove the benefit of products you use. Just like there is many theories and concepts that disprove what I preach. Concepts can only be argued, sometimes people think they are proven and sometimes they are but be careful in trusting test results which may be biased. We can only disagree and try our best to be civilized, as It's only natural that we will never agree on things that aren't clearly factual. But we should debate our differences. What fun would it be anyway if we all agreed. What fun without hot controversy. Just try keeping it fun guys. I know I often let it get to me too much.
Linda also made a good point about 'causal vs collaborative'. I think I'm saying that wrong. Basically, was it the tea or the water in the tea that helped? Was it the tea or would the tree have been growing great just from the sun and the rain? Did the Tylenol kill the headache or did it just go away? For the last question the answer might be 'sometimes'. But I do believe there might be some PHC products which are useless most of the time. I've often questioned if mychorysae products sitting in a closed container is beneficial. I missed exactly what she said but Linda also questioned those products again. I'm wondering, and wandering, but a biologically active, breathing scoop of soil from a forest picked up fresh, on the way to the planting site is maybe a better option? Just a thought? Don't go excavating a forest, just a scoop to introduce some of that life that none of us understand fully, myself not at all. It is more than just mychorysae. Ideally, the soil should be corrected before planting, but this is often unpractical. How can we mitigate to improve poor soil issues? Radial trenching? Repetitive doses of correctly mixed and quickly, aerated delivered Tea as a tool of establishment or temporary stress relief? Compost top dressing with coarse wood chips?
Linda pointed out how coarse wood chips are superior in their breathability and I second that, as I've seen that fine cedar stuff that's like cotton candy to act like a roof over soil mounds, wicking water away from the trunk and or just absorbing the lighter rains without filtering the water through.
For new plantings she also pointed out the importance of installing the temporary guy straps slightly loosely to give the flare the feeling of motion so it can react accordingly. I'm thinking it's like training wheels. It's leaving play but giving support when needed. I related in my talk as the same sometimes goes for supports in trees, especially the temporary supports which are not correcting a serious flaw, a flaw which may have have shown movement already. Temporary strap or rope supports are usually installed loosely. Cobra may be slightly loose, but not 'smiling' too much. Steel cable, the most static app, should be taught but not tight or maybe very slightly loose. Depending on the context for static and dynamic support apps.
So I would think that most of you think I'm crazy to put seatbelt in trees. I've though about it....I'm crazy, but not for that. Think of it this way. There is nothing, or there is seatbelt or heavier strap, and then there is steel cable. Strap is temporary and lowers risk. Steel Cable is permanent and lowers risk more. Cobra is somewhere between in terms of permanence. Think in the context of an Oak living 50-100 years after the install. I still use cobra and like the initial quality, particularly the dynamic and non invasive aspect. But is even a through hardware app that invasive? I've never seen it a problem. Better than the invasive damage of a six inch cut. The cobra might be best used in short to medium lifespan species. I'm going to assume it might still be pretty strong 40 years later?
I missed Linda's talk on the second day and those were only a few points I found interesting. I may write more thoughts later on other talks. Lots of good talks, half of them one on one over coffee breaks, lunch or a rye and coke, known as whiskey for our American friends.
Not to exclude others but I see KTSmith is on treebuzz. I liked your talk and I know a lot of others people enjoyed it as well. Ice damage can defoliate complete trees. In a forest this is natural, helpful to some natural aspects, compromises timber quality and tree structure, but rarely kills trees outright. Not that that sums it up, just liked those points,
Adrenalin's running out, midnight, goodnight.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Nice wrap up. Sounds like the conference did exactly what it was supposed to do for you. Kudos to all involved for that!
 
Thanks Guy and Mark
Yes Guy, the phrase Linda used was causal vs correlative. And we need to search for general answers less and figure out the scales and proportions that exist in tree care more. Such as, the more decay present, the heavier the reduction app. The smaller the natural wounds are, then the smaller the pruning cuts should be. The better the structure, the smaller the cuts should be.
Guy I hugely agree that taking cable out of the toolbox is a mistake. Cities and municipalities here are also moving that way. I see the argument regarding liabilities, kind of, but at least sometimes a cable is nearly guaranteed . Fine, if the tree has very progressive decay, remove it. But a two stem linden, cable it and arguably without reduction as those two stem lindens are very upright and triangular in shape and tapered well. Those two examples are black and white, there's a huge grey area between of structural and decay variabilities.
Yes, most of the reduction I do is in the soft hardwoods. They are the most prevalent successful urban trees here and need the most attention. They can be made structurally superior with small cuts (1-3 inch) to prevent large failure. If your going to inflict a 5-8 inch cut in a tree that has minor structural flaws and no decay, you should seriously consider the trade off of creating opportunity for decay long term for short term structural improvement. Cuts are damage. Cuts are injuries.
Time to go make snow forts:) I think I have more fun than the kids do! And it's amazing how strong the snow Fort is even when we dig it out and it's hollow:)



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom