Typical US Risk Report

No, it isn't the right approach.

No, is remotely similar

Observations need to be more descriptive, quantitative, accuracy of measures and identifications of insects and pathogens need work.

Hazard mitigation and cultural recomendations are far less than adequate.

All to often the easy anwer/easy money is remove.
We need more arborists that are willing to do the leg work to save trees and just as important to show our profession/vocation is scientifically and technologically advanced as Doctors, Lawyers, Carpenter, Engineers etc.

This report doesn't do it.
Advocating for tree preservation is our vocation.
 
This is a very typical TRA. Could it be improved, of course, but could it be improved with the money paid for the consultation?

This is a typical descriptive report that would benefit from measurments rather than observations alone. Perhaps taking a standardized approach would help. Ranking location, target etc. may be one simple method. Defining nebulus descriptors such as significant etc. would also be useful.

What could be done next? Resistograph for extent of decay? Tomography? SIA & SIM?

How do you quantify significant fungal decay? Compare to what standard? How do we know that Inonoyus dryadeus has moved from decay without compromising stability to tree susceptible to wind throw?

Many of the questions of TRA rely on assessor experience, knowledge and midset. This report clearly is an example of a TRA that is about the amount paid, assessor's ability and time, and likely equipment available.

I think is likely meets the VDOT needs, but not the needs and desires of us navel-gazers.
 
I know I have a paper somewhere from an Australian researcher that shows TRA results vary more with assessor than any other factor. Sorry can't find it at the moment but it is fascinating to see the results and ponder what TRA is.
 
[ QUOTE ]

Advocating for tree preservation is our vocation.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree... Protecting people should be the number one goal in this situation. Those monster trees growing right next to a busy roadway are an extraordinary threat to human life. This isn't a tree over a house or swimming pool etc.. these trees have the serious potential to kill, and must be treated with extreme prejudice, leaving NO CHANCE for failure.

There was a link to the "full report"... It wasn't much of a report. I've seen BIG white oak failure with 90% decay in the trunk, so though the amount of decay in the trunk did not seem too bad, the roots would certainly be of greater concern.

White oaks are gorgeous trees. A real shame to lose them, but not so bad considering the down side of the risk.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Advocating for tree preservation is our vocation.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree... Protecting people should be the number one goal in this situation. Those monster trees growing right next to a busy roadway are an extraordinary threat to human life. This isn't a tree over a house or swimming pool etc.. these trees have the serious potential to kill, and must be treated with extreme prejudice, leaving NO CHANCE for failure.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unfortunately this belief system then requires every tree to be removed within the road allowance and likely beyond.

Where do we stop with removal? WHat is a reasonable level of risk?

Right now north-eastern North America is seeing beautiful fall colours. Should I not be able to drive through tree-lined streets and backroads because we should have trees with no chance for failure?
 
Protecting people is stating the obvious.
The report is obviously defecient and written in a way to
meet the wants of the VDOT.

I have property with 90+ yr old Oaks in the way of a parking lot.
I have extended their lives for 5 yrs but they refuse to
water and mulch root zones. You win, you lose!

This year the recommendation is removal.
More money and friends to be made with an honest attempt to preserve at the consulting stage.

We can put men on the moon and rocketship to Mars yet condemn a significant tree to the axe.

Its Madness. This is how It feel Monday to Friday as a arbclimber and Saturday as a consultant

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9gRzmCf1EI
 
I can't quite believe how seemingly oblivious some of you experts are to the fact that these two trees have been positively diagnosed with basal fungal infections, specifically Inonotus dryadeus.

This particular basal fungus is known to elevate the risk of wind throw in large mature white oaks by real experts who know what the heck they're talking about.

http://www.fs.fed.us/psw/publications/documents/psw_gtr197/psw_gtr197.pdf

http://extension.psu.edu/plant-disease-factsheets/all-fact-sheets/oak-diseases

You claim to support scientifically verifiable evidence to reach your recommendations, then ignore it in this TRA like a bunch of green rookies!

A lady lost her life here for goodness sakes.

This recommendation is spot on accurate in its conclusion.

jomoco
 
Blah Blah Blah more ravings of a mentally challanged tree hack.

When you learn something of TRA then comment. You clearly are a reactionary idiot without a single bit of useful experience or knowledge.

Let me guess the fire department is scared these tree may catch fire and fall on their heads.
 
At least I back my opinions with scientifically verifiable facts.

Whereas yours are as lame as your ability to spell properly.

jomoco
 
Wacko Jomo shows the problem with TRA. He cannot understand that fungal infection and decay does not mean instability from the day of infection. As decay progresses trees may become instable but as yet the ability to measure tree (root plate) stability is not possible other than with an engineered pull test.

So the question remains how do we determine when fungal decay in roots or trunks is at a point that the tree is susceptible to stem breakage or toppling.

The simple answer (such as Wacko Jomo advocates) is to always cut a tree, but if you are asked for a tree risk assessment you are being asked to do something the tree owner (VDOT road manager in this case) cannot do. Anybody can say cut a tree, it takes to knowledge to say its not time yet.
 
From my second link.

Inonotus root rot A root and butt rot develops. Trees may topple before any obvious symptoms are noted. Infected trees often have branch dieback and fewer than normal leaves that are yellowed. Although the root rot begins well out on the root system, the fungus eventually reaches the butt of the tree where it forms large, tough, irregularly shaped, light- to dark-brown shelves at or just above the soil line. With age, these become very rough and dark brown to black. Cutting the shelf reveals a reddish-brown center. The underside of the shelf is brown with tiny pores in which the spores are formed. A sure sign of severe damage to the tree is the presence of the fruiting structures. Inonotus dryadeus (formerly Polyporus dryadeus) Infected trees should be removed immediately.

http://plantpath.psu.edu/directory/g1m

jomoco
 
Clearly you have no idea.

"Inonotus dryadeus (formerly Polyporus dryadeus) Infected trees should be removed immediately."

This is simple idea that has no reality. Read Luley, Schwarze et. al. to get a more complete idea of this fungus, trees, and arborists.

I am sure what is so hard to understand. If your beloved Morton Bay Fig in San Diego showed Inonotus on one root would you condemn it? A good arborist, with the time and pay, likely would investigate further and compare findings to some sort of standard.
 
Once again Wacko Jomo has destoyed a thread with his lack of knowledge and casting the widest possible net approach. It is too bad that somebody cannot tell us when root and root-crown decay reaches the point of "danger".
 
How does my proving you to be a rank amateur arborist through scientifically verifiable facts, equate to my ruining this thread?

jomoco
 
You 2 please take it outside to pm's; it sounds like you both have pms!

Jon, an extension bulletin writer's opinion is not necessarily scientifically verifiable facts. Some untenured university employees think they must safeguard the finances of the state by avoiding lawsuits , which puts their risk tolerance somewhere south of Antarctica.

re the report, some good comments so far. The need for accurate measurement does stand out. And Dan has a point re target; a VERY busy intersection. but unfortunately have not seen the crown in the pics, and have yet to go to googlemaps.
 
Listen Guy, simply because I happen to agree with a PhD plant pathologist's recommendations for dealing with the presence of Inonotus dryadeus fruiting bodies at the basal flare of these white oaks, is no reason for you to get uptight, or MR tree to spaz out.

I've got lots of respect for your work and opinions as an arborist. It's just that on the subject of mature trees with basal fungal infections like A mellea, G lucidum and I dryadeus within range of people or homes, I take a far more conservative approach in dealing with them than you apparently do.

Just that. Nothing more.

jomoco
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom