Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Sycammore

2»

Comments

  • #52
    gk5000
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 859 ✭✭✭gk5000


    There is no reason to believe the shoots are abnormal. The tree may have decided to pursue both normal sexual reproduction via seeds and also asexual reproduction via shoots to preserve its legacy.


  • #53
    Oldtree
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,104 ✭✭✭Oldtree


    gozunda wrote: »
    'Sound' by whose definition? Yours? Ok I will take that as read...

    But if you do wish to answer questions - there is one outstanding issue that you could give information on



    Go on - do share I'm sure there are several posters who are very interested as to the reason why....
    Really? no I don't think so... but it is a genuine reason:p


  • #54
    Oldtree
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,104 ✭✭✭Oldtree


    gk5000 wrote: »
    There is no reason to believe the shoots are abnormal. The tree may have decided to pursue both normal sexual reproduction via seeds and also asexual reproduction via shoots to preserve its legacy.
    It would not be usual for a mature sycamore to pursue this method of reproduction therefore there is every reason to believe the shoots are abnormal. As you will know sycamores are prolific seeders with a very high germination rate. An Aspen would be more in the arena you suggest.


  • #55
    Oldtree
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,104 ✭✭✭Oldtree


    I have to say lads that a 200 year old Sycamore is a wonderous plant (although non-native but that's for another day) with its own massive ecosystem. It predates our state, it predates the famine, the mere fact that it has survived this long is deserving of our respect and OAP is very lucky to own such a treasure.


  • #56
    O.A.P
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,379 ✭✭✭O.A.P


    Oldtree wrote: »
    I have to say lads that a 200 year old Sycamore is a wonderous plant (although non-native but that's for another day) with its own massive ecosystem. It predates our state, it predates the famine, the mere fact that it has survived this long is deserving of our respect and OAP is very lucky to own such a treasure.

    How old this tree is a guess . Its on the 1911 maps as a mature tree and my 70 year old father says it has always been that size in his lifetime.
    I started this thread saying 200 year old tree but it may be only 130 I don't know for sure .
    Its not an old tree around here by any scale even on my land, I have 3 trees that are older and next door have an oak that is really old.
    It would take 5 men holding hands to go around it maybe six. That tree must be near 1000 years or more I dont know. If it were mine I would find out if its up there with oldest trees in Ireland


  • #57
    gozunda
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Oldtree wrote: »
    Really? no I don't think so... but it is a genuine reason:p

    A real 'genuine' reason ? I am impressed. However Advertising & Self promotion and no back up doesn't add up no matter how you promote it.
    Anyone can adopt the self proclaimed 'expert' approach but please don't expect others to simply take such 'advice' seriously


  • #58
    Oldtree
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,104 ✭✭✭Oldtree


    gozunda wrote: »
    A real 'genuine' reason ? I am impressed. However Advertising & Self promotion and no back up doesn't add up no matter how you promote it.
    Anyone can adopt the self proclaimed 'expert' approach but please don't expect others to simply take such 'advice' seriously

    Why you persist I don't know but I am a qualified arborist. What are You?


  • #59
    gozunda
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Oldtree wrote: »
    Why you persist I don't know but I am a qualified arborist. What are You?


    So you have said.... You are also an advertiser and active promoter of an arboculturist group that you claim not to be a member off but directly promote?


    Therefore you may wish to review your persistence - over 50% of replies here are posted by you variously disregarding or trashing other posters replies. Not the most persuasive method of providing advice - ok.


  • #60
    Oldtree
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,104 ✭✭✭Oldtree


    gozunda wrote: »
    So you have said.... You are also an advertiser and active promoter of an arboculturist group that you claim not to be a member off but directly promote?


    Therefore you may wish to review your persistence - over 50% of replies here are posted by you variously disregarding or trashing other posters replies. Not the most persuasive method of providing advice - ok.

    Being an arborist is a professional qualification where you go to college study and take exams. If you wish then you can then become a member of the Arboricultural Association. I think you misunderstand the difference between a professional qualification and some sort of wishful thinking group.

    I take it from your reply you have no professional horticulture qualification, but are able to use google and Wikipedia. With that in mind the following is some study reading for you on your next visit to the library. Both are a very good read and much more informative than wikipedia.

    The Physiology of Woody Plants by Pallardy and Diagnosis and The Prognosis of the Development of Wood Decay in Urban Trees by Schwarze. Let me know when you get through those and I can list a number of other worthy reads for you.

    It is paramount for you to note that when you reply to a post that it is an informed post esp when it relates to a matter of public safety, and that imo it is your responsibility should you decide to give advice on such a matter.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Oldtree
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,104 ✭✭✭Oldtree


    O.A.P wrote: »
    How old this tree is a guess . Its on the 1911 maps as a mature tree and my 70 year old father says it has always been that size in his lifetime.
    I started this thread saying 200 year old tree but it may be only 130 I don't know for sure .
    Its not an old tree around here by any scale even on my land, I have 3 trees that are older and next door have an oak that is really old.
    It would take 5 men holding hands to go around it maybe six. That tree must be near 1000 years or more I dont know. If it were mine I would find out if its up there with oldest trees in Ireland
    It is common to overestimate the age of trees, but even a 130 year old Sycamore is an exceptional plant. After the storms in '86 '87 there were enormous numbers of trees down in UK and France and records were kept in the clean up of tree girths and rings counted. I have not been able to track down those records recently. Age and girth can vary depending on site, woodland edge, open grown etc. But in Aubrey Fennell's book Heritage Trees of Ireland he has given the following as a general guideline:

    Oak, Ash or Lime

    Girth Age (years)

    3m 120
    4m 150
    5m 200
    6m 250
    7m 320

    so sycamore could be roughly somewhere in that area too.

    You might like to have a read of this where I have attempted to age dwarf ash on a limestone pavements.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=76652880

    The Tree Council of Ireland may be very interested in such very old trees in your locality, they maintain the Irish tree register.

    This too is interesting on ageing trees:

    http://www.forestry.gov.uk/website/publications.nsf/searchpub/?SearchView&Query=(estimating+and+age+and+veteran)&SearchOrder=4&SearchMax=0&SearchWV=TRUE&SearchThesaurus=TRUE


  • #62
    gozunda
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Oldtree wrote: »
    Being an arborist is a professional qualification where you go to college study and take exams. If you wish then you can then become a member of the Arboricultural Association. I think you misunderstand the difference between a professional qualification and some sort of wishful thinking group.

    I take it from your reply you have no professional horticulture qualification, but are able to use google and Wikipedia. With that in mind the following is some study reading for you on your next visit to the library. Both are a very good read and much more informative than wikipedia.

    The Physiology of Woody Plants by Pallardy and Diagnosis and The Prognosis of the Development of Wood Decay in Urban Trees by Schwarze. Let me know when you get through those and I can list a number of other worthy reads for you.

    It is paramount for you to note that when you reply to a post that it is an informed post esp when it relates to a matter of public safety, and that imo it is your responsibility should you decide to give advice on such a matter.

    Getting nasty now? You just don't get it do you? Continue banging on about your purported qualifications, unexplained advertising and promotion of commercial interests and provision of 'expert advice' even where it is not asked for.
    I note once again you are attempting to trash other posters. If you again wish to make personal remarks like that then I will report them.

    Unlike you I have not engaged in flagrant self promotion. My qualifications whilst extensive are relevant only when engaged in a professional capacity. If you are going to continuously bang on about yours perhaps you should post your CV because frankly from what has been posted by you is bizarre at best. The most important thing though if you are happy in your self belief then good for you....


  • #63
    Oldtree
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,104 ✭✭✭Oldtree


    gozunda wrote: »
    Getting nasty now? You just don't get it do you? Continue banging on about your purported qualifications, unexplained advertising and promotion of commercial interests and provision of 'expert advice' even where it is not asked for.
    I note once again you are attempting to trash other posters. If you again wish to make personal remarks like that then I will report them.

    Unlike you I have not engaged in flagrant self promotion. My qualifications whilst extensive are relevant only when engaged in a professional capacity. If you are going to continuously bang on about yours perhaps you should post your CV because frankly from what has been posted by you is bizarre at best. The most important thing though if you are happy in your self belief then good for you....
    That is an odd comment from you, Nasty!!! I suggest you reread your posts. What self promotion are you talking about???? If you feel it necessary then report my posts don't just sit there and threaten to do so.

    Your earlier post:
    gozunda wrote: »
    Jeez would you give it a break. The OP asked for reasons that a tree would produce Watershoots. If you are what you appear to claim, you should have a good knowledge of the structure of a trees root system and how this can be effected by wind and other factors. Otherwise I would suggest taking a visit to the library.

    Wait Ill save you the bother - this article gives a good description of trees roots in plain English ..
    http://www.forestry.gov.uk/pdf/FCIN078.pdf/$FILE/FCIN078.pdf

    You appear to be hell bent on driving a single agenda on this thread. So be it, but don't attempt to thrash every other answer.

    Btw before you continue berating others opinions would you clarify if you are in fact a professional arborist? What are your qualificatbions and/ or experience. If you are not you are doing a helluva amount of free advertising for them.


  • #64
    gozunda
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Oldtree wrote: »
    That is an odd comment from you, Nasty!!! I suggest you reread your posts. What self promotion are you talking about???? If you feel it necessary then report my posts don't just sit there and threaten to do so.
    Your earlier post:

    I will put it as clearly as possible. you are the only poster claiming unique and expert knowledge whilst rudely dismissing other posters information. And have refused to answer queries regarding your promotion of yourself and the group in your signature - although you claim you are not a member remains unexplained despite a number of requests to do so from posters. I note rather than answering the queries your defence has been to trash other posters.
    For example - based on one single ref to a UK government information site put up for your in response to your question - you best shot is to throw claims of Wikipedia and Google use and go on the defence.

    You clearly don't have a clue how your posts are coming across. Read the replies for pointers, it may help.


  • #65
    Oldtree
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,104 ✭✭✭Oldtree


    gozunda wrote: »
    I will put it as clearly as possible. you are the only poster claiming unique and expert knowledge whilst rudely dismissing other posters information. And have refused to answer queries regarding your promotion of yourself and the group in your signature - although you claim you are not a member remains unexplained despite a number of requests to do so from posters. I note rather than answering the queries your defence has been to trash other posters.
    For example - based on one single ref to a UK government information site put up for your in response to your question - you best shot is to throw claims of Wikipedia and Google use and go on the defence.

    You clearly don't have a clue how your posts are coming across. Read the replies for pointers, it may help.
    You do have your knickers in a twist, don't you. I shall immediately run out and get a form from the Arb Ass that details my non-membership and publish it on here for you :rolleyes:

    I am still waiting for you to back up the small roots issue in any way shape or form, which would indicate to me that you had done a little more than a google search to try and find something to fit in with your post????:confused: allowing you to demonstrate some modicum of knowledge about tree pathology.


  • #66
    gk5000
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 859 ✭✭✭gk5000


    gk5000 wrote: »
    There is no reason to believe the shoots are abnormal. The tree may have decided to pursue both normal sexual reproduction via seeds and also asexual reproduction via shoots to preserve its legacy.

    Out for a short walk along country road today. About 25% of sycamores along the road have shoots - though does seem to be more prevalent near gates, where maybe a tractor has driven over the roots.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    Oldtree
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,104 ✭✭✭Oldtree


    gk5000 wrote: »
    Out for a short walk along country road today. About 25% of sycamores along the road have shoots - though does seem to be more prevalent near gates, where maybe a tractor has driven over the roots.
    As you say, that would more likely be a response by the trees to basal or root damage as against a form of natural reproduction, even as a response to damage from road salt. Basal shooting also happens where trees are cut like under the telephone wires. I have noticed a lot of ash here doing the same along the roads and in the fields where there has been obvious crowding of animals beneath the trees, sycamores too.


  • #68
    gozunda
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Oldtree wrote: »
    You do have your knickers in a twist, don't you. I shall immediately run out and get a form from the Arb Ass that details my non-membership and publish it on here for you :rolleyes:

    I am still waiting for you to back up the small roots issue in any way shape or form, which would indicate to me that you had done a little more than a google search to try and find something to fit in with your post????:confused: allowing you to demonstrate some modicum of knowledge about tree pathology.


    Sorry to disappoint but don't wear knickers. Though do try and refrain from such 8itchy style comments. They are tiresome at the very least. If you are an tree expert then I should not have to explain tree root system physiology to you. Otherwise if your knowledge is lacking at least read the article from the UK goverment forestry site I referenced - it explains such matters in easily understood language.

    By the way I note you are quite handy referencing another page on the same website after I posted my link - here. I take it there is a special rule for you to reference relevant information that is not then permitted to anyone else???


    By the way any person with a basic qualification in arboriculture should understand that the term you used "Pathology" is the study and diagnosis of disease. Quite clearly I wasn't referring to disease regarding root damage. I'm afraid your obvious
    Lack of knowledge and inability to refrain from trashing any other poster who puts forward any alternative proves more such promotion can only be bogus. And you are still unable to explain that whilst claiming to be a 'qualified arborist' you are for some strange reason not a member of an organisation that you are advertising and apparently promoting. Strange or what.

    To be honest you have taken a genuine enquiry and made it a personal fiefdom.

    If you are going to claim expertise over every single other poster, at least refrain from making such basic mistakes in terminology.

    Goodnight


  • #69
    gk5000
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 859 ✭✭✭gk5000


    gozunda wrote: »
    Sorry to disappoint but don't wear knickers. Though do try and refrain from such 8itchy style comments. They are tiresome at the very least. If you are an tree expert then I should not have to explain tree root system physiology to you. Otherwise if your knowledge is lacking at least read the article from the UK goverment forestry site I referenced - it explains such matters in easily understood language.

    By the way I note you are quite handy referencing another page on the same website after I posted my link - here. I take it there is a special rule for you to reference relevant information that is not then permitted to anyone else???


    By the way any person with a basic qualification in arboriculture should understand that "Pathology" is the study and diagnosis of disease. Quite clearly I wasn't referring to disease regarding root damage. I'm afraid your obvious
    Lack of knowledge and inability to refrain from trashing any other poster who puts forward any alternative proves more such promotion can only be bogus. And you are still unable to explain that whilst claiming to be a 'qualified arborist' you are for some strange reason not a member of an organisation that you are advertising and apparently promoting. Strange or what.

    To be honest you have taken a genuine enquiry and made it a personal fiefdom.

    If you are going to claim expertise over every single other poster, at least refrain from making such basic mistakes in terminology.

    Goodnight

    You are wasting your time. Never argue with a fool !


  • #70
    gk5000
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 859 ✭✭✭gk5000


    gk5000 wrote: »
    Out for a short walk along country road today. About 25% of sycamores along the road have shoots - though does seem to be more prevalent near gates, where maybe a tractor has driven over the roots.

    Nothing overly to worry about unless you see other symptoms.


  • #71
    monkeynuz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,115 ✭✭✭monkeynuz


    Oldtree wrote: »
    It is common to overestimate the age of trees, but even a 130 year old Sycamore is an exceptional plant. After the storms in '86 '87 there were enormous numbers of trees down in UK and France and records were kept in the clean up of tree girths and rings counted. I have not been able to track down those records recently. Age and girth can vary depending on site, woodland edge, open grown etc. But in Aubrey Fennell's book Heritage Trees of Ireland he has given the following as a general guideline:

    Oak, Ash or Lime

    Girth Age (years)

    3m 120
    4m 150
    5m 200
    6m 250
    7m 320

    so sycamore could be roughly somewhere in that area too.

    You might like to have a read of this where I have attempted to age dwarf ash on a limestone pavements.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=76652880

    The Tree Council of Ireland may be very interested in such very old trees in your locality, they maintain the Irish tree register.

    This too is interesting on ageing trees:

    http://www.forestry.gov.uk/website/publications.nsf/searchpub/?SearchView&Query=(estimating+and+age+and+veteran)&SearchOrder=4&SearchMax=0&SearchWV=TRUE&SearchThesaurus=TRUE

    There is one caveat to this, and that is if the tree used to be pollarded, it alters the rate of growth of the girth, I know this because in England we had an oak tree which predates our 16th century house and the girth was probably about 18 feet ish I never bothered to measure it though


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    Oldtree
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,104 ✭✭✭Oldtree


    gozunda wrote: »
    Sorry to disappoint but don't wear knickers. Though do try and refrain from such 8itchy style comments. They are tiresome at the very least. If you are an tree expert then I should not have to explain tree root system physiology to you. Otherwise if your knowledge is lacking at least read the article from the UK goverment forestry site I referenced - it explains such matters in easily understood language.

    By the way I note you are quite handy referencing another page on the same website after I posted my link - here. I take it there is a special rule for you to reference relevant information that is not then permitted to anyone else???


    By the way any person with a basic qualification in arboriculture should understand that the term you used "Pathology" is the study and diagnosis of disease. Quite clearly I wasn't referring to disease regarding root damage. I'm afraid your obvious
    Lack of knowledge and inability to refrain from trashing any other poster who puts forward any alternative proves more such promotion can only be bogus. And you are still unable to explain that whilst claiming to be a 'qualified arborist' you are for some strange reason not a member of an organisation that you are advertising and apparently promoting. Strange or what.

    To be honest you have taken a genuine enquiry and made it a personal fiefdom.

    If you are going to claim expertise over every single other poster, at least refrain from making such basic mistakes in terminology.

    Goodnight

    Thank you for pointing that out I should have said "Pathology and Physiology" as we do not know for certain the seat of the damage that caused the shoots, I must have got overexcited and forgot.


  • #73
    gozunda
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    O.A.P wrote: »
    I have one tree by the main road that is at least 200 years old.
    Today I had walk around the boundary and noticed that it has shoots (saplings) over 1 meter long growing from the butt or the roots. I've known the tree all my life, but this is new.
    I am wondering if this could mean the tree is beginning to die or not.
    I wouldn't worry normally and let nature take its course sycamore is bad firewood anyway but if it falls onto the road it could cost me a lot,
    The tree is solid doesn't look like there is rot anywhere but this new development has me wondering if its life is over.
    Thanks for any advice,

    OAP
    To get back to the tree in question can I ask if there are any other signs of damage to the tree that you have noticed? There may be be a link between changes in the tree structure and what you are reporting regarding the shoots at the base of the tree.


  • #74
    O.A.P
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,379 ✭✭✭O.A.P


    gozunda wrote: »
    OAP
    To get back to the tree in question can I ask if there are any other signs of damage to the tree that you have noticed? There may be be a link between changes in the tree structure and what you are reporting regarding the shoots at the base of the tree.
    The main trunk has started to rot from the top down in the last 7 or 8 years. Its only noticeable when its dormant , but it seems sound at the base.


  • #75
    gozunda
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    O.A.P wrote: »
    The main trunk has started to rot from the top down in the last 7 or 8 years. Its only noticeable when its dormant , but it seems sound at the base.

    It is not unusual for older trees to exhibit various forms of decay and remain viable. Such trees may show patches of decay, broken branches or flaking bark.
    Hollowing or crown dieback can also be fairly common. However many older tees continue to live for many years. The shoots would suggest that the tree is compensating by producing basal growth.
    Such shoots can be a good sign on older tree indicating that the tree growth remains active

    See

    http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/file/116003

    The above is taken from a very good resource that may be of help to determine a suitable course of action / management for older trees . (Obviously the UK legal info & etc can be ignored) Good luck with the tree.

    http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/publication/75035


  • #76
    Oldtree
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,104 ✭✭✭Oldtree


    O.A.P wrote: »
    The main trunk has started to rot from the top down in the last 7 or 8 years. Its only noticeable when its dormant , but it seems sound at the base.

    As suspected there is more to this story. As I mentioned before basal shooting is a response by the tree to damage of some sort and indicative of damage as sycamores usually produce very few, if any, basal shoots unless damaged, ep on mature trees.

    How much "rot" is there?
    What is the cause of the rot?
    How quickly is it moving down the tree?
    How far has the rot spread within the tree that you cannot observe?
    In your opinion if a branch breaks off or the trunk breaks off or the tree falls will it do so onto the public road?

    A book will not give you the answer you require esp on the public safety issue. You clearly must assume you have a hazardous tree unless told otherwise by an arborist. It is your legal responsibility. Perhaps it would be best if you contacted your local forest inspector and asked for a visit. He will tell you how to proceed with this tree.

    Bye the bye in forests it is possible for light alone to cause shooting when an opening is formed in the canopy when a tree or two is blown over allowing light to hit the trunk where it would not have normally.


  • #77
    tabby aspreme
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,039 ✭✭✭tabby aspreme


    monkeynuz wrote: »
    There is one caveat to this, and that is if the tree used to be pollarded, it alters the rate of growth of the girth, I know this because in England we had an oak tree which predates our 16th century house and the girth was probably about 18 feet ish I never bothered to measure it though

    Will pollarding increase or decrease the girth of a tree, have a beech here which was pollarded and has a girth of 4.5 m at 1 m off the ground


  • #78
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Just at the moment, this forum is somewhat short of mods, so a rather unedifying fight has been allowed to go on too long. In particular, I regret that Oldtree has been harassed and attacked by gozunda and gk5000, both of whom now have 1-day bans.

    OldTree stated in response to your queries that he is not a member of the Arboricultural Association. Since there's absolutely no way the matter can be settled, that's basically that. You don't get to decide that he is really and harass him on that basis.

    moderately,
    Scofflaw


  • #79
    Oldtree
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,104 ✭✭✭Oldtree


    tabby aspreme wrote: »
    Will pollarding increase or decrease the girth of a tree, have a beech here which was pollarded and has a girth of 4.5 m at 1 m off the ground

    A tree would normally increase in girth every year with the cambium growing outward and wood put down behind it. A tree is a self balancing system, roots to shoots. If the tree was pollarded the functions of the tree would slow down severely (as the crown and leaves (or buds) were removed) and therefore it would be expected that, until the tree has rebalanced (by shooting and root reduction), outward growth of the girth would reduce in pace, perhaps never regaining its pre pollarding momentum.

    So if you were to compare two identical trees and then pollard one of them, I think that the pollarded tree would always be of a lesser girth than the unpollarded tree, unless the pollarded tree then got some sort of unassociated fibre buckling or bottle butt and then in that case its girth could surpass the unpollarded tree.


  • #80
    TomOnBoard
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,121 ✭✭✭TomOnBoard


    O.A.P wrote: »
    The main trunk has started to rot from the top down in the last 7 or 8 years. Its only noticeable when its dormant , but it seems sound at the base.

    Far be it from me to criticize, but the original post suggested that the basal shoots had appeared without any other known accompanying issue and advice was sought. Its only now we hear that the main trunk is indeed rotting.

    To quote the O.P. in post #1 in relation to said shoots: "I am wondering if this could mean the tree is beginning to die or not."

    What a wild goose chase! I wish you had told us that in the first place! :(

    Not to mention the angst and bother that has come to pass on your behalf! Grrrr!


  • #81
    BreadnBuddha
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,311 ✭✭✭BreadnBuddha


    TomOnBoard wrote: »
    Far be it from me to criticize, but the original post suggested that the basal shoots had appeared without any other known accompanying issue and advice was sought. Its only now we hear that the main trunk is indeed rotting.

    To quote the O.P. in post #1 in relation to said shoots: "I am wondering if this could mean the tree is beginning to die or not."

    What a wild goose chase! I wish you had told us that in the first place! :(

    Not to mention the angst and bother that has come to pass on your behalf! Grrrr!

    There it is.

    OP, ask away as a layman.

    Don't mind this kind of nonsense.

    The experts forget that the rest of us aren't sometimes.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    TomOnBoard
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,121 ✭✭✭TomOnBoard


    BreadnBuddha wrote: »
    There it is.

    OP, ask away as a layman.

    Don't mind this kind of nonsense.

    The experts forget that the rest of us aren't sometimes.

    Well. excuse me for expressing my frustration with a post that was at best light on detail, and at worst witheld fact! Who are you to characterize my post as nonsense? Are you a Moderator, or are you just trying to goad me as others have done to Oldtree earlier in this thread.

    I am NOT an expert. However, I put some significant thought into ANYTHING I post on this forum, based on whatever limited knowledge I have, and which I am HAPPY TO SHARE. I have cast no aspersions on the O.P's expertise, nor did I post anything that could possibly be construed as criticism of his/her level of expertise. However, I did express frustration and downright annoyance that s/he put up a trawling post that ABSOLUTELY FAILED to disclose salient facts.

    How I am beginning to seriously regret contributing to this forum (although hopefully this thread is NOT a harbinger of things to come here) which, up until recently seemed to be constructive about the activity of Forestry (That's why it was set up!) rather than needling contributors in respect of legitimate posts.

    I stand by my criticism of the O.P.'s original post. It not only failed to disclose pertinent facts- it hid those facts, assumedly and/or hopefully unintentionally. As a result, a hugely productive contributor became embroiled in an argument that was totally out of character, and the O.P. stayed largely silent while that was going on. I abhor the way these fora and their threads can become Bear Pits and reasonable people get Mobbed by vile, pathetic trollers while the O.P stays silent, even though s/he has the power to close the thread at any time when the original objective has long since been hi-jacked!

    I welcome any response that deals with the salient points without personal invective..


  • #83
    O.A.P
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,379 ✭✭✭O.A.P


    TomOnBoard wrote: »
    Well. excuse me for expressing my frustration with a post that was at best light on detail, and at worst witheld fact! Who are you to characterize my post as nonsense? Are you a Moderator, or are you just trying to goad me as others have done to Oldtree earlier in this thread.

    I am NOT an expert. However, I put some significant thought into ANYTHING I post on this forum, based on whatever limited knowledge I have, and which I am HAPPY TO SHARE. I have cast no aspersions on the O.P's expertise, nor did I post anything that could possibly be construed as criticism of his/her level of expertise. However, I did express frustration and downright annoyance that s/he put up a trawling post that ABSOLUTELY FAILED to disclose salient facts.

    How I am beginning to seriously regret contributing to this forum (although hopefully this thread is NOT a harbinger of things to come here) which, up until recently seemed to be constructive about the activity of Forestry (That's why it was set up!) rather than needling contributors in respect of legitimate posts.

    I stand by my criticism of the O.P.'s original post. It not only failed to disclose pertinent facts- it hid those facts, assumedly and/or hopefully unintentionally. As a result, a hugely productive contributor became embroiled in an argument that was totally out of character, and the O.P. stayed largely silent while that was going on. I abhor the way these fora and their threads can become Bear Pits and reasonable people get Mobbed by vile, pathetic trollers while the O.P stays silent, even though s/he has the power to close the thread at any time when the original objective has long since been hi-jacked!

    I welcome any response that deals with the salient points without personal invective..


    Are you calling me a troll ?
    It was suggested in post 21 to have a better look at the tree and I did then noticed at the very top of the main trunk the rot about 4 foot long (6-to 8 years old at a guess) it may be longer but I cant get with in 25 foot of it with a ladder. Unless I set it up on the road.
    I said there was no sign of rot in the O.P because I missed it as its not at all easy to see.
    So I followed the advice given here .
    I caused no row here or ever have in 6 years of contributing but your last post has angered me.


  • #84
    Taltos
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,830 ✭✭✭✭Taltos


    All - please take a step back.
    There have already been a number of infractions and bans on this thread so it is being monitored closely.

    Remember if you have an issue with a post/thread - report it - don't respond in frustration/anger or accuse ANYONE of being a troll.
    We just ask that constructive advice is offered in good faith, similarly the advice sought is not static, through some of the suggestions in this thread the OP has been able to provide more detail - that is part of what these threads are all about - to help each other with forestry issues/queries.

    All of your input is valued and welcome - however anymore personal attacks or messing behaviour and we will be forced to act, something we really don't want to do.

    OP if you want this thread closed now please let us know, however if there are any more problems here as well as issuing infractions/bans we will have no choice but to close it.


  • #85
    O.A.P
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,379 ✭✭✭O.A.P


    Taltos wrote: »
    All - please take a step back.
    There have already been a number of infractions and bans on this thread so it is being monitored closely.

    Remember if you have an issue with a post/thread - report it - don't respond in frustration/anger or accuse ANYONE of being a troll.
    We just ask that constructive advice is offered in good faith, similarly the advice sought is not static, through some of the suggestions in this thread the OP has been able to provide more detail - that is part of what these threads are all about - to help each other with forestry issues/queries.

    All of your input is valued and welcome - however anymore personal attacks or messing behaviour and we will be forced to act, something we really don't want to do.

    OP if you want this thread closed now please let us know, however if there are any more problems here as well as issuing infractions/bans we will have no choice but to close it.

    Yes please do nothing more to gain from it


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement