UKTC Archive

RE: stability of surviving stem of a split co-dominant tree.

Subject: RE: stability of surviving stem of a split co-dominant tree.
From: pwassenaer1022
Date: Jan 17 2022 19:43:51
Thanks, I stand duly corrected, I had not used that new functionality yet. We 
do most of our analysis in Arbostat, the tree pulling analysis software.

 

However, when we only do a tomograph on a tree with interesting features we 
always go to Treecalc to get a general idea of what it tells us about safety 
factors. If we are headed towards a removal recommendation we will then and 
only then go with a resistance drill to make sure that those results 
generally agree with what we found with the tomo..

 

The point is that just looking at the feature or the void or the drilling 
results just gives us that limited bit of  information about something that 
is actually quite complex, living and self-optimizing. There are so may tree 
and site factors to put into consideration to understand the import of the 
feature on “tree safety”.

 

And yes the fact that short, old and fat trees can be uber hollow and also 
uber “safe” seems to be lost on many in the arb community…too bad for those 
most wonderful of all the trees😊.

 

Cheers,

 

Philip

 

-----Original Message-----
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info <uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info> 
On Behalf Of David Evans
Sent: January 17, 2022 1:27 PM
To: UK Tree Care <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
Subject: RE: stability of surviving stem of a split co-dominant tree.

 

<<That usually considers fracture at the base. Harder to use when the area of 
concern is higher up....but possible.>>

 

Hi Philip

 

TreeCalc was updated about a year ago or so.  You can now measure your Safety 
Factors at any height above 1m.  Have a look at the 'New Features' link on 
the website.  I cost one more credit though.

 

<<Treecalc is an awesome and under used tool...>>

 

Yes, it's an incredibly useful tool that can help with our likelihood of 
failure decision-making.  My research here has established Arborists 
regularly give higher likelihood of failure decisions to trees that have 
higher Safety Factors, and lower likelihood failure decisions to trees that 
have lower Safety Factors.  I'm pretty sure it's because when Arborists see 
decay they think 'defect', see 'red', and increase their likelihood of 
failure.  As you know, TreeCalc can help recalibrate us with that part of our 
decision-making in Detailed Assessments by showing this.  It's one reason I 
use TreeCalc in Validator and Basic Validator training.  I thought it might 
be too much for non-Arborist Basic Validator training, but without fail it's 
been incredibly well received.  Previously, even those with Basic Tree 
Inspection training thought hollow trees, or trees with open cavities were 
'defects' that need dealing with, when they're usually natural 'features' 
with benefits.  Showing them just how decayed a low H/D ratio tree can get 
and still have a good Safety Factor is a revelation to them.  It's often one 
of the things they most enjoy.

 

Cheers

 

Acer Ventura

 

 

 

 

--

The UK Tree Care mailing list

To unsubscribe send  <mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info> 
mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

 

The UKTC forum is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy and 
Stockholm Tree Pits  <https://www.stockholmtreepits.co.uk> 
https://www.stockholmtreepits.co.uk




-- 
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

The UKTC forum is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy and
Stockholm Tree Pits
https://www.stockholmtreepits.co.uk