OK, I undertsand your point now. Do you recall in the walnut cabling
actualli initiated the decay? Or was there evidence the decay pre-existed
and the hardware installation allowed it to spread?
The real point is how long the cabling extended the life of the tree. If a
non-invasive brace extends it longer at an acceptable cost it is - in those
repects anyway - superior.
----- Original Message -----
From: Jerry Ross
To: UK Tree Care
Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2006 12:00 PM
Subject: Re: Non invasive cable brace
On the other hand, the point I was trying to make about decay-prone
species was not that one should anticipate decay by bracing, but that
drilling holes will CAUSE (or rather permit) decay. In those cases I'd
certainly agree that non-invasive is better. I remember taking down a
Walnut with three cables fitted and at each bolt insertion there was
bark death and decay, with one branch having broken at that point...
(And as far as I recall, that was a case where the tree's original
structure wasn't such that the braces were needed in the first place.
The cabling had actually caused its demise!)
--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info
The UKTC is supported by The Arbor Centre
http://www.arborcentre.co.uk/
