Ash Dieback Disease (Chalara fraxinea) in Ireland

timfromtang

Hi all,
Having read a bit on tree injection, I find myself less and less satisfied with its potential to help us here with our chalara problem. The primary issue is long term damage to the tree from the injection process.
I am exploring alternatives,

suggestions anyone?

the Defra trial referenced elsewhere on this thread provides a starting point in choosing a suitable fungicide.

A super economical, safe, and widely applicable application method may be needed.

tim

ref:
http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/users/s/shear/public/restore/Perry%20et%20al.%20%201991.%20%20Exploring%20alternatives%20to%20tree%20injection.pdf

timfromtang

The_Conductor wrote: »

Further- how on earth do they reckon that 20 trees represents a statistically valid sample from which they can extrapolate the effectiveness of the treatment. If a third of the untreated trees became infected in the same plot (as per the paper)- this infers- two thirds of the established trees, were exposed to the pathogen yet displayed no symptoms. You could just as validly say that the provenance planted showed a 2/3 resistance to the pathogen in the given timeframe- as make any inference whatsoever, when they only treated twenty solitary stems.

Its bad science.

I agree conductor,
Bad Science abounds,
however in the case of biochar there is currently a great deal of hype and real world results, and on balance, given the established explanations of the increased cation exchange capacity provided by suitable activated biochar soil amendements, and the increases in adsorbtion capacity provided by the char, and also the massive increase in available pores and their diversity of sizes, it would seem likely to me that such "improvements" may help in increasing plant resistance to disease.

You should understand that this is simply my opinion, i have decided to go with this as a doable and credible thing i can do to perhaps help the trees.

Having read more concerning tree injection, i have rejected it as a credible doable solution or prophylactic.

Application of fungicides to crotches, or basal bark spraying, would seem instead to be a more suitable pathway to introduce fungicidal agents to infected trees.

We know that certain fungicides from the Defra trial in the UK were effective in preventing infection progressing past the leaves. I am really open to guidance and advice concerning suitable application methods.

tim


Bad science abounds indeed...
For example the BBC piece on tree injection with garlic extract, referred earlier in this thread, It turns out on research, that tree injection has a long and damaging history and is a less favoured treatment. In my ignorance of the details I was led down a dead end, less than helpful..........

tim

timfromtang

The biochar procedure seems to be,
produce the char at a suitable temperature, circa 400 deg C and above
activate the char partially and reduce both volatile content and PH by bottom quenching, soaking and draining,
crush the resultant char to a suitable size for soil amendement,
innoculate the char with nutrients and living organisms fungi bacteria etc
leave to react and become established,
apply to soil under trees with an air spade to a suitable depth (root proximity is key)

tim

Please see posts below for indications as to why Air spading is NOT the RIGHT WAY to apply soil amendments under mature trees.
thanks folks

SILVAMAN

How much ash has been planted on wholly unsuitable sites, simply to bring up the broadleaf component of the national planting programme, and to put money into the landowner's pocket?
Perhaps many of our ash plantations are simply pre disposed to disease due to the stress of growing on a poor site.

timfromtang

SILVAMAN wrote: »

How much ash has been planted on wholly unsuitable sites, simply to bring up the broadleaf component of the national planting programme, and to put money into the landowner's pocket?
Perhaps many of our ash plantations are simply pre disposed to disease due to the stress of growing on a poor site.

a relevant question I suppose,
It is unlikely however that much ash is planted on Wholly unsuitable sites, It is a site demanding species.
This thread however is NOT about putting money in landowners pockets,
nor is it I suggest about WHO TO BLAME or WHAT WENT WRONG

If you had some Ash that was stressed from growing on a poor site, what silvicultural measures could you take to improve the site suitability and resilience of the crop?

Further I'd suggest that this thread is not about looking for excuses for our failure to control the disease, rather it is about our further efforts to ramp up our response in the face of a changing disease situation

tim

SILVAMAN

timfromtang wrote: »

a relevant question I suppose,
It is unlikely however that much ash is planted on Wholly unsuitable sites, It is a site demanding species.
This thread however is NOT about putting money in landowners pockets,
nor is it I suggest about WHO TO BLAME or WHAT WENT WRONG

If you had some Ash that was stressed from growing on a poor site, what silvicultural measures could you take to improve the site suitability and resilience of the crop?

Further I'd suggest that this thread is not about looking for excuses for our failure to control the disease, rather it is about our further efforts to ramp up our response in the face of a changing disease situation

tim

Huge areas of ash were planted on wet rushy soils.
What to do? At this point in time, thin heavily favouring only the very best trees, and underplant with something suitable. In 20 years the ash will be dead, so best get a head start on another crop.
It's all about matching the trees to the site, or the right trees in the right places.

Oldtree

This thread, for the last 4 years, has been about all aspects of Ash Dieback. The disease, any information, website links, paper links, snippets of info and any comments or ideas people may have about any aspect and/or any related discussion points, they are all welcome imo. I will put up links or info to any related information or questions here so we can discuss it, be it imo good or bad, its the only way to dig down into the detail as to what might be effective or not in the particular circumstance of AD.

To preface the following, I am talking in general about old ash veteran trees here, perhaps 100-150 years old and older.

I am not keen on the injection idea, in general, as it further damages the tree. A tree operates under negative pressure and when the cambium is breached it in effect sucks in the surrounding air, sucking in the surrounding spores in the air allowing the spores easy access, nomatter the size of the needle, with the injection sites also being possible avenues for decay to start.

If this idea has any efficacy it would have to be applied to the tree outside of the spore period and allow time for the wound to seal over, before AD spore release. How long does the Inoculation take to become effective and how long would it last in the tree? If this avenue was tried it and found to work, it could only be effective if continued until after the disease was completely removed from the wider environment. Could you end up ringbarking the tree with injection sites?

Biochar is to me a soil improver, a mix of charcoal, non-local fungi, seaweed and worm casts. I add liquid seaweed to my organic liquid manure for my tomato plants, it is looked at as a sort of vitamin boost of micronutrients making for a healthier plant, liquid seaweed can also be applied as a foliar feed. I think what they have done here is to make a super vitamin soil improver to include all things that are known to benefit plant health, but 20 ash plants is not enough of a basis to work from, they may have just been lucky with their 20 for some other reason.

The application method of biochar appears to get it into the soil, either at planting or by compressed air (air spading). These two methods are for young trees as any messing about with a vetran trees feeder root system (unless the ground is heavily compacted) is in my mind detrimental to the tree. A veteran tree will have formed an interdependant symbiotic relationship with the local Mycorrhizal network as well as root grafting with other nearby trees of the same species. The tree feeder root network is in the top 1 cm or so of the soil and can extend to well beyond the crown drip line.

Looking at the depth and comprehensive extent for air spading @ 2.35 in their video (up to 4-5 inches), it looks like the feeder root network would be destroyed on a veteran tree, by working the biochar into the soil. The only method of application I could think of is to apply the biochar as a dressing and allow weathering and worm action it integrate it into the soil. The structure and texture of the soil is an important part of a healthy system.

What depth of dressing? not a deep one as I wouldn't want the feeder root system smothered. Maby using a part leaf mould/part bio char might improve the general health of the tree.

I would suggest their general claims are a bit ott in the video, as they make a lifetime claim for betterment of the the tree by the application of biochar @ 2.12.

From the earlier mentioned Biochar newsletter pdf, this picture of application to a mature tree with a now damaged feeder root system, if an air spade was used:



http://www.britishbiocharfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/Newsletter-May-2016.pdf

tabby aspreme

Ash trees seem to put a lot of roots 6 to 9 inches from the soil surface , anyone who has ploughed near a hedge with ash trees will know this only too well, I would think if went more than 2 / 3 inches deep around an ash you would be damaging the roots

Oldtree

tabby aspreme wrote: »

Ash trees seem to put a lot of roots 6 to 9 inches from the soil surface , anyone who has ploughed near a hedge with ash trees will know this only too well, I would think if went more than 2 / 3 inches deep around an ash you would be damaging the roots

They would probably be the anchor/transport roots Tabby, but if fiberous would be feeder roots

There are buttress/anchor roots, transport roots and very fine feeder roots. I found an image the illustrates this (in a perfect world ) pic taken from this pdf : Construction Guidelines for Tree Protection (link below). There is also a tap root, but most nursery stock has this removed by undercutting in order to get a bushier root system going.



http://ddot.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ddot/publication/attachments/guidelines_tree_protection_during_construction.pdf

Oldtree

The minimum root protection area guidance for veteran trees is:

The Root Protection Area (RPA) should ideally extend in all directions from the tree stem to a distance equal to 15 times its diameter, or five metres beyond the canopy, whichever is the greater (Read, 2000).

page 57 from here

http://ancienttreeforum.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/ATF_book.pdf

With a rough life span of 300 years possible for ash, imo a post mature specimen would be 150 years old - thus a veteran. It could be said of Ash - 100 years to grow, 100 years to mature and 100 years to die.

The above publication has an ash with a girth of 3m as veteran, and a girth of 4m as ancient (page 17)

timfromtang

As I said in the you-tube video, "sure I have an infection and might not be thinking clearly", I owe a debt of thanks here to many for helping to prevent me from making serious errors.

It would seem given the information in the posts above that a topical application to the soil surface of biochar is likely to be a "better" application method than air spading.

tim

Oldtree

You are between a rock and a hard place tim, and we have no clear way to move forward.

A quick search on biochar lead me to this page that had some useful info, as I was concerned about how much charcoal the worms could cope with:

http://biochar.pbworks.com/w/page/9748043/FrontPage

Composting worms have been observed to be unaffected below 50% charcoal content, above which reduced worm activity could occur.

I would expect ordinary worms would not be able to cope with 50%.
The other >50% would have to be organic matter, perhaps already composted along with activators like a compost tea or maby a nettle tea.

As we are trying to improve the soils, this doc gives a few organic ideas that could easily be added to the mix:

http://iofga.org/wp-content/uploads/ORGANIC-FERTILISERS-AND-SOIL-AMMENDMENTS1.doc

timfromtang

Having read some of the useful information posted here on biochar (last post) by oldtree,
It would seem that there is a decision to be made concerning reaction temperature, since this influences volatile and condensate content of the biochar.
High temp char (c. 650-700 deg C) esp when bottom quenched a la Kon-Tiki kiln, would have a high activated carbon content, and low volatile and condensate content.

Is this the most desirable kind of biochar?

On the opposite end, in areas without the influence of man, and with naturally occuring forest fires, the available char would be low temp produced, have a lower surface area, and rich in volatiles and condensates.

What properties should I be shooting for in trying to make a biochar soil amendement with the aim of using it to increase tree resistance to disease?

I notice that carbon gold in the UK talk of a low temp reaction for the product they produce

Low temperature woody charcoal (more so than grass or high cellulose) has an interior layer of bio-oil condensates that microbes consume and is equal to glucose in its effect on microbial growth (Christoph Steiner, Energy with Agricultural Carbon Utilization (EACU) Symposium, June, 2004)

Any ideas folks,,, me mind is meltin here..........

It would appear I need an alternative charcoal production method to produce low temperature char, the Kon-Tiki would seem less suitable due to its high reaction temperature.

Figure 1: The properties of biochar greatly depend upon the pyrolysis temperature. Temperature effects on carbon recovery, CEC, pH and surface area. Lehmann (2007), Front. Ecol. Environ. 5:381-387. [1]

tim

Oldtree

So how much Biochar should one use?

As little as 2% per volume can have an effect and the maximum suggested upper limit is 20%. But any where between 5% and 10 % is good.

Say you have a 4 ft x 4 ft raised bed =16ft2 (1.44m2) apply biochar about 1cm deep and dig in about 12 – 15 cm deep. Then the require volume would be about 7/kg of Biochar. Or about 5 kg per m2.

If you want to inoculate with compost a 50:50 mix resting for around 2 weeks should be used. The same would apply for compost tea, expect leave stand for 24 hours.

from here

http://www.biocharireland.com/

Their suggestion of DIY open brush biochar looks like it may suit you:

http://www.biocharireland.com/dib-do-ityourself-biochar.html

maby a pit burn may be better with less smoke again?

can get organic seaweed for the mix easily, liquid or powder:

https://betterplants.ie/organic-seaweed-fertiliser/

timfromtang

Hi All,
We had a good meeting this morning, the advisor, forester, and I, we walked looked and talked.
Our youngest stand will be cleared and buried as per Dept SAP. For the moment we will manage and watch carefully the older stands.
I am free to prepare char from "waste" wood here and to begin the process of making bio-char soil amendement.
all good really
tim

99nsr125

timfromtang wrote: »

Hi All,
We had a good meeting this morning, the advisor, forester, and I, we walked looked and talked.
Our youngest stand will be cleared and buried as per Dept SAP. For the moment we will manage and watch carefully the older stands.
I am free to prepare char from "waste" wood here and to begin the process of making bio-char soil amendement.
all good really
tim

Super, sounds like the standard slash and burn policy is allowed to be
questioned now. That allows that idea nobody has thought of that ends up
saving everybody to be listened to and get through.

Oldtree

Very positive news tim

I'm just about to post a link to a really good TED talk that gives more good reasons for retaining older trees.

Oldtree

The most important bit from the new figures is this statement:

Taken together these new findings have widened the general geographic distribution of the disease and confirm the presence to a greater or lesser extent of the disease in all 26 counties in Ireland.

the new findings:

To date in 2016, i.e. up to 30th June 2016, findings of the disease have been confirmed in a further 49 forestry plantations

In the same period there was also one confirmed finding in a commercial nursery, two confirmed findings in farm landscaping / agri-environment scheme plantings in County Tipperary, 11 individual samples taken from trees in roadside / motorway landscaping plantings in Counties Galway, Kildare, Laois, and Westmeath which tested positive, and 13 individual samples taken from trees in native hedgerows in Counties Roscommon, Tipperary, Wexford, and Wicklow which tested positive.

Again... for a slightly better breakdown on the figure of 528 confirmed infected sites on the Island:




Distribution map of confirmed findings of Ash Dieback in Ireland (as of 30th June 2016).
The locations of horticultural nurseries and garden centres are not depicted.

As well as over 100 other sites again not depicted for some reason making analysis difficult



No update since 2015 from NI, but still claimed that:

Northern Ireland is not currently included on the interactive map because no cases have been confirmed in the wider environment there,

That statement has to be a nonsense at this stage!

https://www.daera-ni.gov.uk/articles/ash-dieback-disease
http://www.forestry.gov.uk/ashdieback#Distribution

The_Conductor

49 plantations? Fecking hell- in other words, they're not checking. I did a quick recce in Sligo a few weekends ago- found 20 diseased stands (all 20 that I checked). I had used them previously for my thesis, many many years ago........

It sounds like there is a don't look-don't tell policy going on here..........

Oldtree

The_Conductor wrote: »

I did a quick recce in Sligo a few weekends ago- found 20 diseased stands (all 20 that I checked).

The lack of discovered infected wider environment sites in Ireland alone does seem odd given the rapid spread and discovery in the UK in the wider environment.

The presentation of the infected sites figures by the our Dept website is odd.

The exclusion of over 100 sites by the Dept on their infected sites map is odd.

That there are no wider environment infected sites in Northern Ireland is very odd.

The_Conductor wrote: »

It sounds like there is a don't look-don't tell policy going on here..........

All is not well in the state of Denmark.......

timfromtang

The_Conductor wrote: »

49 plantations? Fecking hell- in other words, they're not checking. I did a quick recce in Sligo a few weekends ago- found 20 diseased stands (all 20 that I checked). I had used them previously for my thesis, many many years ago........

It sounds like there is a don't look-don't tell policy going on here..........

They are not checking????
who are "they"?
I'd suggest it is We who should be checking.
Have you reported the 20 diseases stands you found to the forest service, or indeed informed the plantation owners, one would presume so.
It's hard to manage "don't look don't tell" if we ALL look and all TELL.


tim

Oldtree

I have not found any cases yet but have no doubt I will, There appears to be a few ways to report suspect trees

Reporting Suspect cases

Forest owners, forest nursery staff, and members of the public are asked to be vigilant for the disease and report (with photographs, if possible) any sites where there are concerns about unusual ill health in ash, to the Forest Service, Department of Agriculture, Food & the Marine, by e-mail forestprotection@agriculture.gov.ie or by phoning 01-607 2651.
Nursery stock producers should direct queries to your local Plant Health Inspector immediately. Alternatively, queries can be sent by e-mail to plantandpests@agriculture.gov.ie, by fax to 01-627 5994, or by contacting the Department’s Offices on 01-505 8885. Reports will be followed up by relevant staff from the Department.

TreeCheck App

TreeCheck allows members of the public to report suspected cases of disease or insect attack of any tree species. Using a GPS-enabled smartphone the location of the suspect tree may also be recorded by the app to allow a follow-up inspection by Inspectors in the relevant jurisdiction if required. It is hoped that this App will help not only with regard to the early detection of new occurrences of Ash Dieback disease, but also other possible pest and disease outbreaks.
All reports received will be acknowledged and those of particular concern taken forward for follow up by specialist plant health inspectors.
To access the TreeCheck App scan the attached QR with your smart phone or type the address
(Or just click this web address) https://www.treecheck.net into your mobile web browser. (It is not available in the App store.) You will be presented with the App and the option to save a link to your home screen. Follow the directions for your phone. Please note if you have a GPS enabled phone you may be asked to “Share Location”. Choosing to share your location enables us to have accurate geo-location data to assist our Inspectors in the event we need to investigate your report further“

http://www.agriculture.gov.ie/forestservice/ashdiebackchalara/#pressreleases

But as previously mentioned I have a criteria

Oldtree wrote: »

I have thought about it. In my circumstance if I find AD in my semi natural/ancient woodland there would be little reason to report it as AD would clearly be omnipresent in the wider environment and there are no ash plantations nearby to infect my wood, nor to be infected by.

If I happened to discover it while passing an Ash plantation I would mention the discovery to the owner and allow him to make the decision.

If I found it in a roadside planting or public landscaping I would report it.

The main reason why there is such a low findings rate here as compared to the UK is that the UK invested in 2012 in Genie II's or III's a portable affordable (£8,000) diagnostic device, takes a half hour to give a result, we bought "one" in 2012 that I was told of (no mention of Genie's on the dept website) , but we generally send the samples to the lab afaik!

2015 Survey
The Department repeated its systematic and targeted plant health surveys in relation to the disease over the summer months of 2015.
The associated laboratory tests on material sampled during this survey was completed in October 2015.

http://www.optigene.co.uk/chalara-fraxinea/
http://www.optigene.co.uk/instruments/instrument-genie-ii/
http://www.optigene.co.uk/instruments/instrument-genie-iii/

Heres how the FC went about it in 2013

JohnBoy

The_Conductor wrote: »

49 plantations? Fecking hell- in other words, they're not checking. I did a quick recce in Sligo a few weekends ago- found 20 diseased stands (all 20 that I checked). I had used them previously for my thesis, many many years ago........

It sounds like there is a don't look-don't tell policy going on here..........

01-607 2651

Has anyone spoken to a person on that number, or received a callback from them?

I posted pics of trees I was concerned about in this thread a few years back. was told first time round nothing to worry about, just an early frost, second time I insisted on sampling but was not there to see it done and it was done too late in the autumn, to be able to identify the effected trees in my opinion. This year I took my own samples and couldnt get anyone to answer on the number above or ring back from the voicemails. I recently put up bird and bat boxes under Glas. I dont know if any of the the trees around the farm I fixed them to will be alive afterwards, many are showing symptoms. This time I contacted a friend in the department who referred me to someone supposed to be relatively senior on this and beyond a we're looking into it and will be back to you type of response I've heard nothing.


So yeah, dont look, dont tell would sum up my experience so far.

embraer170

JohnBoy wrote: »

Has anyone spoken to a person on that number, or received a callback from them?

I posted pics of trees I was concerned about in this thread a few years back. was told first time round nothing to worry about, just an early frost, second time I insisted on sampling but was not there to see it done and it was done too late in the autumn, to be able to identify the effected trees in my opinion. This year I took my own samples and couldnt get anyone to answer on the number above or ring back from the voicemails. I recently put up bird and bat boxes under Glas. I dont know if any of the the trees around the farm I fixed them to will be alive afterwards, many are showing symptoms. This time I contacted a friend in the department who referred me to someone supposed to be relatively senior on this and beyond a we're looking into it and will be back to you type of response I've heard nothing.


So yeah, dont look, dont tell would sum up my experience so far.

Overwhelmed and underresourced maybe?

99nsr125

Forestprotection@agriculture.gov.ie Alternatively, queries can be sent by e-mail to plantandpests@agriculture.gov.ie

I tried both the above email addresses and they must have went into the black hole of NAMA because I received absolutely nothing back.


Does anyone know where I could get a sample tested privately
Thanks in advance everybody.

Oldtree

99nsr125 wrote: »

Does anyone know where I could get a sample tested privately

Not specifically, but give the State Lab a ring and ask them if they can do it for you (they do the Dept's tests afaik) or maby they could point you in the right direction.

http://www.statelab.ie/contact.html

Oldtree

Have just reread the dept's webpage and noticed these bits of positive info:

Spore trapping

As part of its Ash Dieback work programme for 2016 the Department this summer is undertaking another spore-trapping element in collaboration with INRA. Sampling for the presence of airborne spores will take place during the peak sporulation period, with traps distributed over a wider geographic area and in a wider range of settings than sampled for in 2015.

Breeding for Resistance

In May this year Teagasc secured a €350,000 research funding commitment from the Research Division of the Department to screen 1,000 ash genotypes for disease tolerance in Lithuania, an area under high disease pressure, while retaining the genetically similar sister trees to these 1,000 trees here in Ireland. As part of the research project systems for propagating resistant material will be also developed using biotechnological approaches to facilitate mass plant production. The ultimate aim again is to develop a population of Irish planting stock, tolerant to the disease.

over 100 Danish ash trees have been identified as tolerant to Ash Dieback disease and whose progeny also display high levels of tolerance.

JohnBoy

Well it's official

Oldtree

JohnBoy wrote: »

Well it's official

Not good to hear.
Did you manage to get a response from the dept in the end?

fergus1001

The_Conductor wrote: »

49 plantations? Fecking hell- in other words, they're not checking. I did a quick recce in Sligo a few weekends ago- found 20 diseased stands (all 20 that I checked). I had used them previously for my thesis, many many years ago........

It sounds like there is a don't look-don't tell policy going on here..........

I have personally confirmed 2 cases of ash dieback, the forest service are depending on forestry companies to do the ground work for them, if you have a stand of ash have it checked immediately don't wait, there is funding to have the area reconstituted which will have to be done through a registered forester

On Tims post, you are allowed to use the timber yourself or by your immediate family members or have it taken in by a registered facility

JohnBoy

Oldtree wrote: »

Not good to hear.
Did you manage to get a response from the dept in the end?

Yes and no. I have a friend who works there and I got onto him in the end and he made something happen to get someone to actually look at it.

Stupid that I had to go that way though.

Dozer1

still held up here, none of the clearance options were viable to me, Dept tell me that there is a "new" plan coming out for older plantations affected, any body got idea when that will be announced?

timfromtang

Dozer1 wrote: »

still held up here, none of the clearance options were viable to me, Dept tell me that there is a "new" plan coming out for older plantations affected, any body got idea when that will be announced?

I have not gone with any of the reconstitution options offered by the department after all, We simply decided that we'd do better managing the disease ourselves, we have plantations affected that were planted in 1996, 2001, 2003, and 2011. Thus far I have concentrated on removing infected stems in the older stands, and there is in each area enough natural regeneration to remove the need to plant replacements. I will remove the marked diseased trees in the youngest stand later on this winter and replace them with properly certified stock.

Since we are still fairly early in the rotation and stocking levels are high,
and given an expected survival rate 0f 2-8% of stems,
there is potential for some portion of a final crop of ash,
these will be resistant trees

the "costs" involved seem to be largely labour which we are suppling ourselves, there will be a need to purchase a number of replacement plants of course, we are fortunate in that we can micro manage our forest as there are only 100 acres in total, and only 44 of these have an ash component.

tim

Oldtree

timfromtang wrote: »

and given an expected survival rate 0f 2-8% of stems, there is potential for some portion of a final crop of ash, these will be resistant trees

Where did you get this info from tim?

Oldtree

There were also notable increases in findings in forestry plantations in a number of counties where the disease had previously been detected, particularly Counties Clare, Cork, Galway, Laois, Kilkenny, Mayo, Meath, Tipperary, Wexford, and Wicklow.

It would be worthwhile to know how many samples were taken overall in 2016 and how many of those samples were positive.

The total for individual infected site findings are now at 538 for Ireland.



The DAFM provided map, for some reason, does not include all 538 sites.


http://www.agriculture.gov.ie/forestservice/treediseases/ashdiebackchalara/#currentfindings

NI figures are now a year out of date

https://www.daera-ni.gov.uk/articles/ash-dieback-disease

With the NI infected wider environment figure on the UK FC site listed as 0.
Noteably the infection figure for the wider environment for the UK as a whole is 37.8%.

http://www.forestry.gov.uk/chalara#Distribution

One element of the spore trapping experiment was to place spore traps at 10-15km intervals along the east coast from Wexford to Louth. Preliminary results received from laboratory analysis by INRA indicate the presence of airborne spores of H. fraxineus on traps placed at the southernmost and northernmost parts of the east coast of Ireland, near Rosslare, Co. Wexford and Castlebellingham, Co. Louth respectively, i.e. at either end of currently known eastern distribution.

Been blowing in on the wind too so..... wonder if that is from Europe or the UK?

A focussed consultation with industry stakeholder representatives and other relevant bodies on proposed Scheme changes and related matters will be undertaken over November and December 2016.

timfromtang

Oldtree wrote: »

Where did you get this info from tim?

I presume you are referring to my 2-8% survival rate, I am guessing here, based on the european experience of up to 10% survival rate in small areas, and the worst rates of loss seen at about 1%.

tim

SILVAMAN

Interesting piece in the Guardian about better resistance in British Ash to ash dieback, but the downsize is they are more susceptible to emerald ash borer.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/dec/26/british-ash-trees-may-resist-dieback-disease-research-reveals

Oldtree

Results from the 2016 Chalara Ash Dieback Survey indicate further spread of the disease to native ash in the wider countryside.

As a result of buffer surveillance at affected sites in 2015, Ash Dieback was detected in mature hedgerow ash trees at 3 locations close to infected recently planted trees, suggesting very localised spread at that stage.

well I guess they kept that quiet for a year for a reason???

They then move on to 'group" 2016 wider environment figures into a grid map, so no real numbers

The map below shows 10km Irish Grid squares in which at least one confirmation of ash dieback infection in native ash trees has been made

https://www.daera-ni.gov.uk/articles/ash-dieback

Silverscott

Having an Ash woods 11 years old. A forester contractor had a look recently and said it may have ash dieback. But said he couldnt be sure until the leaves are on it. Is this the case that you cant test it or take a sample of bark or is it only the leaves that can tell for sure. Thanks

Oldtree

Silverscott wrote: »

Having an Ash woods 11 years old. A forester contractor had a look recently and said it may have ash dieback. But said he couldnt be sure until the leaves are on it. Is this the case that you cant test it or take a sample of bark or is it only the leaves that can tell for sure. Thanks

There are other ways to give a good indication of the disease. There are many photo id's of non leaf symptoms if you have a look through this thread, but be careful not to confuse with other diseases.

some here:

see here for further info

http://www.forestry.gov.uk/pdf/FCPH-ADD_photoID.pdf/$FILE/FCPH-ADD_photoID.pdf

http://www.forestry.gov.uk/forestry/INFD-92AHUK

http://www.forestry.gov.uk/forestry/infd-8zlksx

Perhaps ring below but be prepared for a wait by all accounts.

Forest owners, forest nursery staff, and members of the public are asked to be vigilant for the disease and report (with photographs, if possible) any sites where there are concerns about unusual ill health in ash, to the Forest Service, Department of Agriculture, Food & the Marine, by e-mail forestprotection@agriculture.gov.ie or by phoning 01-607 2651.

http://www.agriculture.gov.ie/forestservice/treediseases/ashdiebackchalara/

http://www.forestry.gov.uk/chalara

https://www.daera-ni.gov.uk/articles/ash-dieback

timfromtang

Greetings all,
Well the time for action has come, after saying no thank you to the forest service offer to dig up and bury our 5 year old ash (14 acres or so) and replant, (i.e. reconstitution scheme) we are now ready to begin the process of dealing with our infection.
The plan is....
since the fungus has sex on the forest floor over winter, and releases new infective spores the following summer, this cycle must be broken.

We are going to remove all infected plants (some 85 marked so far, perhaps double that number after a thorough examination) (note there are appx 14,000 stems in total) these infected plants will be uprooted.

WE are fortunate to own a kindling machine and i have a quantity of dry (but dirty) waste wood to run through it. I plan to make enough kindling to have a fire on the ground surface where the infected stems stood, the infected stems will also be burned.

It is my hope that the fire will kill any infective matter on the ground and reduce reinfection rates this coming growing season.

weekly inspections are planned throughout the growing season to monitor infection rates, and any infected stems will be removed immediately, and the ground underneath sterilised with a kindling fire. this should also prevent infection spread.

opinions ?

advice ?

note that the forest service has stopped premium payment on this parcel until the situation is resolved, It is my hope that they will come and inspect the plantation after the sanitation and if they find no infected plants, my mam who relies on the premium for her retirement income will get the due payment.

Replacement plants will be of approved provenance of course, i rather fancy adding some potentially more valuable species, cherry, walnut et al, and will be planted the winter after plant removal.


tim

greysides

Your plan relies on burning the sources of re-infection, the plants themselves and the spores nearby.

Plants, no problem. Spores...... that would concern me.

The key question is how far spores will spread from an infected plant. Is it actually known how far spores will spread? You would need to sterilise all this area. Is it feasible? Both in terms of the width of burnt zone and in terms of the ability of the heat to reach to the depth where spores may be lodged.

Other plants in that area would need to be burnt too as they may have spores on them, to infect them or spread further onwards.

Working in the area is likely to end up spreading spores on boots, clothes, machines. Some of these can be disinfected but can it be done before they have had a chance to spread spores outside your protection limit. Is there a known effective disinfectant and protocol established?

Not knowing your situation and the disposition of the infected trees, it would nonetheless seem sensible to sacrifice plants between burnt areas as these are most likely to show up infection later.

My experience of disease spread is animal based, not plant based. A lot of the principles could be extrapolated but there will be obviously many difference once it gets down to detail.

From a TB point of view, once a herd is infected it is better to get rid of all infection in the one go, even if this means some animals are sacrificed unnecessarily (due to limitations of testing/over-zealous test interpretation), than to be too cautious in removing potential carriers and paying the price in a longer period locked up once more spread has occurred. It seems to me that the period locked up is a bigger issue for most than the scale of the losses.

In your case, extra time spent controlling the spread to where it can be verified eradicated may have a down-side too.

I understand you're trying to save the majority of 14,000 plants but instead of removing just 85 (plus others later identified), you might be better off to be severe in your approach and remove, say, 850 if it actually results in the disease being controlled.

Is it possible to sterilise an area with chemmicals/disinfectants? Maybe spray nearby plants beyond the burnt area?

What sort of growing surface is left after burning? Suitable for re-planting?


Lots of questions and no answers from me but I think these are the issues you must have already considered in reaching your decision.

timfromtang

useful questions thank you,
It is my understanding that infective spores originating from infected plants in the plantation, will not be released until summer when the infected petioles in the leaf litter produce fruiting bodies.


I accept that continuous vigilance and removal of infected stems will be necessary, for some years to come.

Since i see the disease in the wider environment locally too, it is likely that we will suffer reinfection from those sources too.

from my understanding of the disease cycle, i believe that if infections are removed as they happen, then the disease cycle is broken as the fungus needs to overwinter in the leaf petioles from fallen leaves and do its sex thing, and infective ascospores are subsequently released from those infected petioles the following summer.

time will tell

I have agreed with the forest service disease control man that if things get out of control i will go ahead with the reconstitution scheme (i.e. if next summer many more plants are infected)

I do expect that over the coming years as the disease gets more established in the irish environment that infective pressure will rise, and i accept that i may end up replacing the greater portion of the ash crop over the coming years, however, those few resistant individuals that i hope to find within the planted stock will be precious indeed. I am hoping that 1-10% of the plants will show some resistance to the disease, and that i can keep many more alive for long enough to get some sort of economic return. these plants are 5 years in the ground, and I am 50, if i can keep the bulk healthy until first thin I may still have some sort of economic return from the plantation around my 65th.

It has been my experience that trees will grow just fine where there has been a fire on the ground, esp if not planted until 12 months after the fire.

In the past we saved a crop of blight struck spuds by spreading a thick layer of straw over the haulms and burning it, then harvesting the spuds, they kept well over winter and the blight spores did not spoil the stored tubers. i assume that the fire killed all.

Since I am trying to make a living from just 100 acres of plantation forest (i do not receive the premium payments) I do have the time to intensively manage the disease, albeit at the expense of other activities which generate income from value added timber products produced on farm.

NOTE WELL
I do not intend to allow any infective material to persist on site where it may present a risk to ash trees elsewhere in the wider environment.

tim

Blackcurrants

These are a series of photographs taken last month apart from the first which was midsummer last year on a different site. Hopefully they'll help you spot infected trees more easily. The easiest way to identify an infected tree is to look for epicormic branching where you wouldn't expect to see any. Discolouration of the branches and the lesions are much harder to spot in the canopy.



20160725_115355.jpg

July last year, dead leaves still attached to infected branches.



20170110_133721.jpg

Three different sized and aged lesions on the main stem.

20170111_123609.jpg

Old lesion healed over. I imagine this will be similar to the damage that will be caused up the trunk of the tree where the epicormic growth allows the disease in. It's been suggested that trees in an advanced stage of infection could break apart from the impact of felling.

20170111_123633.jpg

Typical diamond shape with the branch the fungus traveled down in the centre of the infected area.

20170111_124834.jpg

New epicormic branches already showing signs (colour) of the infection all the way up the main stem.

99nsr125

Are you certain the third picture is Chalara because we had a mysterious lesion on a young ash which healed exactly like that and had early leaf fall too.

Sadly whilst I was away at work it was cut down and burned for firewood but the stump failed to generate new shoots unlike a buddy close by that put on 6ft of growth in 2016

Blackcurrants wrote: »

These are a series of photographs taken last month apart from the first which was midsummer last year on a different site. Hopefully they'll help you spot infected trees more easily. The easiest way to identify an infected tree is to look for epicormic branching where you wouldn't expect to see any. Discolouration of the branches and the lesions are much harder to spot in the canopy.

20160725_115355.jpg
July last year, dead leaves still attached to infected branches.

20170110_133721.jpg
Three different sized and aged lesions on the main stem.

20170111_123609.jpg
Old lesion healed over. I imagine this will be similar to the damage that will be caused up the trunk of the tree where the epicormic growth allows the disease in. It's been suggested that trees in an advanced stage of infection could break apart from the impact of felling.

20170111_123633.jpg
Typical diamond shape with the branch the fungus traveled down in the centre of the infected area.

20170111_124834.jpg
New epicormic branches already showing signs (colour) of the infection all the way up the main stem.

Blackcurrants

99nsr125 wrote: »

Are you certain the third picture is Chalara because we had a mysterious lesion on a young ash which healed exactly like that and had early leaf fall too.

Sadly whilst I was away at work it was cut down and burned for firewood but the stump failed to generate new shoots unlike a buddy close by that put on 6ft of growth in 2016

I can't be certain as the stem was on the rack and it could have been mechanical damage, but going by how fast the infection spread throughout the plantation and the infected young stems, particularly of the copice growth, I would be fairly confident that it was healed lesion. The disease is easy to see and identify on the young green bark but very tricky to spot on older stems.

I would also have thought that if the tree in question had had a healed lesion that there would be other infected plants near by.

Oldtree

Blackcurrants wrote: »

I can't be certain as the stem was on the rack and it could have been mechanical damage, but going by how fast the infection spread throughout the plantation and the infected young stems, particularly of the copice growth, I would be fairly confident that it was healed lesion. The disease is easy to see and identify on the young green bark but very tricky to spot on older stems.

I would also have thought that if the tree in question had had a healed lesion that there would be other infected plants near by.

It looks like a good sealing is going on there that has been sealing for some time and looking more like a response to mechanical damage. With the disease spreading so rapidly I don't think it's AD related. The wound looks to be about 5-6 years old maby more.

Did the tree have any other symptoms or was it tested?

Older mature tree stems appear to have witches brooms where the tree is showing signs of AD related dieback.

Blackcurrants

Oldtree wrote: »

It looks like a good sealing is going on there that has been sealing for some time and looking more like a response to mechanical damage. With the disease spreading so rapidly I don't think it's AD related. The wound looks to be about 5-6 years old maby more.

Did the tree have any other symptoms or was it tested?

Older mature tree stems appear to have witches brooms where the tree is showing signs of AD related dieback.

Attachment 409859
This picture is a close up of a 4 year old stem of copice. The stem is only about 3" in diameter. It can't be as old as you suggest. You can see the top of another diamond shaped area below and to the right of the healed scar.
These two additional images are off a different stem from the same copicing stump. You can see the stem we're talking about in the background of the first of the two new images and how the tree is repairing around the wounds.

What does AD stand for?

Oldtree

Blackcurrants wrote: »

Attachment 409859
This picture is a close up of a 4 year old stem of copice. The stem is only about 3" in diameter. It can't be as old as you suggest. You can see the top of another diamond shaped area below and to the right of the healed scar.
These two additional images are off a different stem from the same copicing stump. You can see the stem we're talking about in the background of the first of the two new images and how the tree is repairing around the wounds.

What does AD stand for?

AD ash dieback.

I can see what you mean. The second photo with the stem in the background gives a much better perspective.

What lead me to believe that the wound was more mechanical in origin was that it was so clean looking and the tree response to the wound was not what I had expected from a dieback related wound.

99nsr125

Aww crap

The follow up pictures are exactly what we had.

First noticed it in 2009, it had been cut back to the stump before so had 3 stems. Cut back again in 2015, never regenerated, stump now decayed away and timber burnt.

I should ad this was a natural seeding from nearby Ash

It's closest buddy is 10 ft away and grew strongly last year.

I'll be keeping a closer eye on the ones that were nearby this season

Fingers double crossed, either wasn't it or we have immune varieties

Blackcurrants wrote: »

Attachment 409859
This picture is a close up of a 4 year old stem of copice. The stem is only about 3" in diameter. It can't be as old as you suggest. You can see the top of another diamond shaped area below and to the right of the healed scar.
These two additional images are off a different stem from the same copicing stump. You can see the stem we're talking about in the background of the first of the two new images and how the tree is repairing around the wounds.

What does AD stand for?