Root Collar Examination video, the gradual way

Thanks Dave for pulling out 8-year old text--I totally stand by it still! btw those quotes were original--Polly gots a cracker!

Sorry you can't afford to buy new editions to stay current; hope biz picks up for you. btw not 2 bills but ~$80--it would be entertaining to count all the flagrant exaggerations in your posts, but who's got the time? Lack of currency means your arguing is restricted to those with the same limited database from the mid-80s.

It's like a talking to a neanderthal rubbing sticks together about a... blowtorch--no comprehension, no communication.

In the mid-80s Shigo said girdling roots on mature trees should be left alone.
 
wrong...blow torch breath...he said very large mature girdling roots on mature trees should MAYBE be left alone, son.

And it was endlessly amusing to me that in 2008 (on TW) you grand standed bout buying the whole Shigo collection when any other responsible arb already had them for 15 years and 99.9 percent of that accurately researched data stands as law.

Where is the SCIENTIFICALLY RESEARCHED data on your wienie roastin trees?

Little guy (pun intended) with little man's complex. Boo hoooo hoooo :-)
 
I'm glad to see Guy leading the way with his blow torch therapy. Maybe something will come of it, maybe not, good to see it being field tested. His love of trees oozes from every pore.
 
First why are we talking of cankers and frothy flux? Two different things, maybe they are not comparable.

If a blowtorch can be used to sterilize the area it suggests that you must heat enough to kill the organisms causing the fermenting. This then suggests that you must reach near boiling to kill the organism. If you kill the organisms you are likely also killing the cambium layer.

Since frothy flux is located between wood and the replicating areas why not consider injections of streptomycin or another antibacterial to start?

Of course if the frothy flux is caused by a yeast then you may need something other than a bacteriacide to kill it.

Also how was it determined that the flux was frothy not slime? Bubbles alone? COuld there not be primary and secondary organisms?

Since prescription without diagnosis is malpratice, I am sure that tests have been run on the tree to determine the microbial cause of the flux?
 
Atleast Guy has the stones to post vids of his therapy and put it up for discussion TV.

It indicates just who it is suffering from little man syndrome!

Guy gets published, quite deservedly, painting you a livid green as you molt in the shadows of obscurity, as he grows in the limelight.

Good job Guy!

jomoco
 
Wow you are quite something Jomoco. It would be nice if you ever said anything useful. Perhaps you can enlighten us on treatment of yeast vs. bacteria, perhaps you could talk about microbial ecological and microbial succession.
 
Or better yet, speak on trees adaptations to fire over millennia, and whether a symbiosis between the two is or is not an established and well documented fact?

I believe in science, and fire's usefulness in the natural forest.

Frothy flux gets boiled quite naturally with or without Guy and his torch.

jomoco
 
"First why are we talking of cankers and frothy flux? Two different things, maybe they are not comparable.

Canker = dead area, frothy flux kills tree tissue and makes cankers

"If a blowtorch can be used to sterilize the area it suggests that you must heat enough to kill the organisms causing the fermenting. This then suggests that you must reach near boiling to kill the organism. If you kill the organisms you are likely also killing the cambium layer.

I don't apply heat to healthy cambium.
How likely? what temperature will q stellata tolerate?

"Since frothy flux is located between wood and the replicating areas why not consider injections of streptomycin or another antibacterial to start?

Good idea.

"Of course if the frothy flux is caused by a yeast then you may need something other than a bacteriacide to kill it.

Maybe, maybe not. Most of the foreign material is removed manually and rinsed away first.

"Also how was it determined that the flux was frothy not slime? Bubbles alone? COuld there not be primary and secondary organisms?

and tertiary and...aside from bubbles, frothy flux is differentiated by location on the tree, host, and smell. but this is more a syndrome, not a disease with one singular pathogen at work.

"Since prescription without diagnosis is malpratice, I am sure that tests have been run on the tree to determine the microbial cause of the flux?

Sinclair et al ran tests and found a "cocktail" of organisms. Here, ruptured, dead tissue is observed and diagnosed as caused by organisms multiplying. Removal of dead tissue and drying out the area is the treatment.

"Frothy flux gets boiled quite naturally with or without the torch"

Sometimes, yes. The infections can be cleaned and dried by phosphite, 10% bleach, flame, fresh air and wind, or a combination. The torch is one tool in the box, historically used on fruit trees. like any tool, care is required to avoid harm.
 
Forgive me for highlighting the fact that fire is natural to both natural forests and residential suburban areas dependent on fire depts.

Why even mention that fact?

Because all you CA's giving the thumbs up on using and promoting synthetic cabling systems like Cobra in your clients trees are gonna get burned sooner or later.

Cabling with flammable synthetics is unwise in both natural and suburban forests.

Has ANSI even acknowledged that synthetic material, particularly polypropylene, is highly flammable?

Not to derail guy's topic, but rather expound on the subject of fire's natural relation with trees, and consequences both good and bad?

jomoco
 
Guy- interesting treatment, i.e. blowtorch. If you took the total surface area of the tree, what percentage do you think you affected? To me, it would seem so small as to be insignificant.
 
'Has ANSI even acknowledged that synthetic material, particularly polypropylene, is highly flammable?

Dunno--check and see! If it's not, you can send that suggestion to someone on the Part 3 subgroup.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Guy went right in the face of Bartlett with their tomograph and outdated, Western formulae and has probably persuaded the town to keep this viable, landmark tree alive.

[/ QUOTE ]

Haha. Have yet to see anything from Meilleur that even remotely seems like a Hazard Tree Evaluation done by a high school student. Beside the point tho as I take exception to his use of such a non precise tool as a blow torch to excise infection. Sometimes I think he got his certs out of a Cracker Jack box or back in the beginning when they were giving Certs out without even testing.
 
The last 2 posts look like Arboristsite, on a bad day.

Actually the adjustable flame on the blow torch makes it quite precise. Try it sometime, if you want. Or just argue with your keyboard, yeah, that's easier.

What do you do with bleeding lesions Dave? cmon i showed you mine!

"Have yet to see anything from Meilleur that even remotely seems like a Hazard Tree Evaluation done by a high school student."

And you won't, either. Tree Risk Assessments are what I do. Hazard Tree Evaluations are so 20th-century. It's there in your library, Dave van Winkle; time to dust it off.
 
Re Guy

Well since the common consensus from sources is that this affliction of yours is stress induced and primarily water stress, and suggested improved cultural practices involve prevention it can also include recovery...I would suggest letting the tree after improved cultural practices attempt to fight this infection off itself like they do all the time.

If you absolutely must do something to collect a pay check or whatever my inclination would be to bark trace, with a hammer and sharp chisel... out the stain (dead tissue) to the farthest extents in ea. direction like I would do with Fireblight and such. Then I would give a systemic injection of this.

http://www.mauget.com/index.cfm?PageID=18&ID=4&productid=13

Still waiting for part 2 of your hazard tree eval or risk assessment, semantics noted ("that's what I do") showcased on the top of your vid as I have the credential and know you ain't done nuttin' yet. If they are taking that feeble wooden mallet knockin exhibition over Tomography...you got a town full of dunces there. Take em for all ya can $$$ :-)
 
[ QUOTE ]

This tree was condemned by a well known tree company and scheduled for removal by another well known tree company. Toasting already dead cambium with a smal torch doesn't do a hell of a lot of damage... focusing on it as a problem diverts attention from the real value of this video which is... Look for yourself, use your experience and education, make a judgement... and most of all, TRY to keep the tree alive.

Guy went right in the face of a highly regarded tree company with their tomograph and outdated, Western formulae and has probably persuaded the town to keep this viable, landmark tree alive.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree to a large extent, what I do not understand is how does tapping with a mallet provide better (more accurate, precise and quantifiable) data than a tomograph and restiograph that provides not only an image but distances can be measured? How can tapping and visual examination used in a tree risk assesment be better than numbers that can be shown?

Interpretation of the data is a step after collection and analysis and as such the quality of the data and the examiner comes into play.

I do appreciate saving this tree but I think the process is very interesting (and questionable).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom