# Sealing Wounds?



## huskycandoit (Nov 6, 2004)

I worked with a guy today that insisted on treating each cut with a sealer. I believe in the school of leaving the wound as is, thinking that sealing holds moisture in the wound causing the sound wood to rot.

What is your practice?


----------



## Elmore (Nov 6, 2004)

*sealer*

When pruning I don't use it but when removing the understock from a successful graft I will seal the cut end. Lately I have been using a product called Doc Farwell's Seal and Heal


----------



## xander9727 (Nov 6, 2004)

I only believe in coating wounds on Oak trees between April and September to prevent the spread of Oak Wilt. I will not prune during these months but if a branch must be removed or there is storm damage I will coat. I believe that it inhibits healing. I get this from articles I have read and seminars I have attended.


----------



## xander9727 (Nov 6, 2004)

Mike you bring up a great point. Do you remember any details of the article, what publication, month, year, issue, who did the study? I would love to read it......I'm always looking for ways to improve myself.


----------



## Tree Machine (Nov 6, 2004)

I never coat, but I do fill small up-welled cavities to prevent the rain from going in and catalyzing decay.


----------



## glens (Nov 6, 2004)

It's a multipurpose compound which is now familiar to me...


----------



## Guy Meilleur (Nov 7, 2004)

Sealants can do more harm than good; Shigo's observations did lead to the current avoidance except in cases of specific disease transmission.

I use a shellac-based sealant on big wounds, especially ones that will be prone to cracking. It's only experimental, but it seems negligent not to try something to lessen decay.


----------



## Treeman14 (Nov 7, 2004)

"Let's do SOMETHING, even if its wrong."

- Jack Hanson


----------



## Guy Meilleur (Nov 7, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Treeman14 _
> *"Let's do SOMETHING, even if its wrong." *


Wow, that is Funny. Was the definition of what is wrong cast in stone 20 years ago? Only the closed-minded oversimplify to preserve a paradigm.

From Fungal Strategies of Wood Decay in Trees, p. 162: "Cracks in the wood form pathways for wood-decay fungi to overcome a reaction zone. This phenomenon has already been observed by Shigo."
Therefore, preventing cracks preserves codit. If you have questions about wood decay, read the book.


----------



## Tree Machine (Nov 7, 2004)

*Here are Dr Shigo's cracks*

What Guy said, what Maas said, and what what Treeguy14 said.

The image shows an up-welled cavity forming. Rain percolates into it, the irregular surface adds greatly to the surface area within the cavity as available food for fungus. 

I saw this next cavity as, well, what guy said, to do nothing was to be negligent.

And then the ZEN left hook outta nowhere,


> Only the closed-minded oversimplify to preserve a paradigm.


 Dang, Mister, where'd ya come out with that? That sorta like kinda summates all potential for endless possibilities, new change, expression of ideas, shedding the shackles of convention and stripping away our old, tired beliefs, truths and ways. We're not talking about filling cavities here anymore.

Mueller, you're way ahead of your time. You're like, a _Tree Nostradamus_.


----------



## Tree Machine (Nov 7, 2004)

"Let's do SOMETHING, even if its wrong."

I can agree that this intentioned effort is SOMETHING. I invite anybody to support how it may be wrong.


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Nov 7, 2004)

TM,

The best solution for stopping decay is 100% moisture. The decay organisms are aerobic, take away oxygen ane they die. Keeping wounds dry or saturated is the best way to reduce decay. When you put goop on the wound you're providing an environment that is moist, neither dry nor saturated. the perfect environment for decay. 

At one of Shigo's talks he suggested that we set up small pumps and spray nozzles in cavities to keep the wood saturated. Not realisitic in the big world but sure could be rigged easily. People have fish ponds, water features and irrigated turf, why not do the same for trees?

How can doing something, even if it's wrong, be the best solution? That's a cute thing to say but what validity does it have? 

A friend of mine took her daughter to the dentist for a checkup. The dentist has some gizmo that senses cavities. He suggested putting in a dozen fillings. She called a cousin who is a dentist and was told that this gizmo is not tested and proven. She took her daughter to another dentist who found one cavity and a couple of places to watch. The gizmo dentist was asked about the different diagnosis and was told that his gizmo is the latest tool. He couldn't balance the other diagnosis. My friend knew that he was babbling and was trying to bamboozle her with techy stuff. Would you want to subject yourself or your children to needless fillings?

Tom


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Nov 7, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Tree Machine _
> *And then the ZEN left hook outta nowhere,
> 
> "Only the closed-minded oversimplify to preserve a paradigm." -Guy Muieller
> ...



Doesn't have to be looked at as Zen mystery.

Is not shedding the shackles, stripping away old beleifs reminiscient of Plato's Cave Alleghory (quoted by Doc Shigo)?

Following in his teachers footsteps (Plato) Aristotle extended this to a flow of logic; that we look at things as a succession of steps that end up at the finish as a result. A clean, deductive result, to result etc. understanding. But, Nature's system knows it's target, so the steps are not haphazard to where they end up; but rather performed to get to a goal, that lends to the next; because it is calculated more inductively from goal to previous step. A pattern that is harder for us to follow. So our logic moves one way and Nature's working kinda the other; thus the pardigms in understanding.

It seems the good doc, knew he was giving us these new things, and there would be these battles that he seeked to prepare us for.

The paradigm's are all around in many things. Donella Meadows' twelve leverage points to intervene in a system deals with the deep truth of revealing a paradigm being the best leveraged power to provide change in a buisness hierarchy. 

Thomas Kuhn in "Structure of Scientific Revolutions" really brought out the understanding of paradigms in our century, in an examination of the history of science as we know it. How many times the only way to advance, was to turn around and go the opposite direction that our understanding was taking us.

Let the real light shine.

Or,
something like that.......
Deuce!
:alien: :alien:


----------



## ROLLACOSTA (Nov 7, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Mike Maas _
> * Current ideas of using paint, wax, epoxy, and human sperm, only make wood decay faster. *





human sperm who did research on this product ??...or are you just kidding


----------



## xander9727 (Nov 7, 2004)

Mike,
Is that an off site preparation or do you apply it "fresh off the tap"?

If there are multiple trees do you have others assist?


----------



## ROLLACOSTA (Nov 7, 2004)




----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 7, 2004)

The world is dying for answers.


----------



## Tree Machine (Nov 7, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Tom Dunlap _
> *TM,
> 
> The decay organisms are aerobic, take away oxygen ane they die. When you put goop on the wound you're providing an environment that is moist, neither dry nor saturated. the perfect environment for decay. *



OK, thank you for establishing that decay organisms are aerobic. Take away oxygen and they die. This is a very key point. 


What if this 'goop' you speak of is impermeable to oxygen, as well as moisture, and yes we trap some moisture in the cavity that was there to begin with. Why is this a perfect environment for decay. Lets talk CODIT. Let's say the tree compartmentalizes fairly well, there was a small cavity, but the callus fully closed over and sealed. 

Did the tree finally create a perfect environment for decay for itself? That would be a pretty lousy defense, in the evolutionary sense.

No, the tree closes over and creates a *c*ompartmentalization *o*f the *d*ecay *i*n the *t*ree.

My intent with my field experiment is to complete the CODIT process ahead of Mother Nature's intended schedule. Right now I'm working on small, but progressive degenerative cavities, attempting to arrest decay in its tracks. If the CODIT walls inside the tree are intact, and the sealed wound site creates an oxygen / water impermeable barrier, CODIT is, by definition, complete.


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Nov 7, 2004)

There are trees that have weak CODIT walls, like basswood and maples. There are also decay organisms that are hearty eaters. Combine the two with the right environment and the decay is likely to weaken the tree. 

Quite a while ago I found some information on using ethylene glycol in a mixture as a rot resistant treatment. The US Navy has a recipe that they use on their wooden ships. It seemed to me that it if worked there it might have some merit in trees. There is a bit of phyto-toxicity but that might be a trade off to lessen the decay. The Bob's, Underwood and Wulkie, both seemed to think the idea has merit. The next step would be to interest a grad student in doing the research. Nick, are you reading this? 

Tom


----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 7, 2004)

But of course.  I'm in a different field, though. I'm taking on an intern to do tree research this summer, though. Her picture is right here:
<---

In all seriousness, I plan to take on an intern each year for the foreseeable future since I know the value to students of offering these opportunities and since I know there are benefits that our company can reap in a best-practices sense.


----------



## xander9727 (Nov 7, 2004)

I think I 'll offer a groundie internship this summer. 

If I can get work for free and make them happy at the same time I'll be set.


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Nov 7, 2004)

We have student interns at Swingle. They get paid the same as any of the summer help. The company arranges for housing too. Nothing fancy but it's much easier for them to come out for the few months and not have to work out leases. The interns generally rotate through the departments to get a feel for what is going on. 

Tom


----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 7, 2004)

We don't have much in the way of departments, really. Besides the tree side and the landscape side.... But that's because we have a tenth of the staff. 

I would want to find out what they want to do - research of tree topics, study business practices, etc.... I'd be willing to work with all kinds of subjects.


----------



## Guy Meilleur (Nov 8, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Tree Machine _
> * decay organisms are aerobic. Take away oxygen and they die. * TM I commend your experimentation, but isn't oxygen present in the wood?
> *What if this 'goop' you speak of is impermeable to oxygen, there was a small cavity, but the callus fully closed over and sealed.
> *


The pic showed goop out as far, and next to, the callus. Shouldn't it be inside the callus, so it doesn't slow closure?


----------



## Tree Machine (Nov 8, 2004)

Very good questions, keep em coming.... and if you're gonna quote me, please don't attach the end of one sentence to the beginning of an entirely different one, otherwise it doesn't say what I meant it to say. You're 'fuzzy' quote looked like this.


> What if this 'goop' you speak of is impermeable to oxygen, there was a small cavity, but the callus fully closed over and sealed.


 My actual one said this:


> _Originally posted by Tree Machine _
> [B
> What if this 'goop' you speak of is impermeable to oxygen, as well as moisture, and yes we trap some moisture in the cavity that was there to begin with. Why is this a perfect environment for decay?
> 
> ...


In answering my own question, No. The tree does not create a bad situation for itself. That would be a lot of work in being counterproductive to its own health and survival. Evolution selects against that sort of thing.

In answering Guy's question about the sealant being up against the callus, slowing closure.... what I'm proposing is this intervention CREATES closure. I know this is bold to say, but I will be as thorough as necessary in standing by the statement. Prevention, or arresting decay in trees is a topic of study I take very seriously.

Here's a facet of the experiment pointed out by Guy, of keeping the sealant inside the inner callus zone. Can anybody tell me what's wrong with this picture? This was a protruding stub. I surguried it down to a concave surface and applied the sealant. Yes, I touched cambium on the callus. The tree will forgive me on that. What's wrong with the application? Then we can move on to Guy's question about oxygen being in the wood, and another CODIT lesson and more on aerobic fungal biology.
*TM,
The best solution for stopping decay is 100% moisture.* 
I'll be glad to blow this limiting defense out of the water.


----------



## Guy Meilleur (Nov 8, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Tree Machine _
> * Can anybody tell me what's wrong with this picture? This was a protruding stub. I surguried it down to a concave surface and applied the sealant. Yes, I touched cambium on the callus. The tree will forgive me on that. * Did it give you a guarantee, did you get a royal pardon, or a papal pass? That is some serious nicking. I cringe when I nick, a little out of guilt for wronging the innocent tree, but mostly because of giving ammo to the "Thou shalt not excavate, because man is inherently evil and shall break barriers if he cleaneth the tree of Knowledge" crowd.
> 
> Didn't mean to fuzzify your quotes; was just cutting to the chase as I saw it.
> Now tell us how you solve the inner oxygen and % h2o etc. Is silicone phytotoxic?


----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 9, 2004)

Yeah, don't cut into woundwood! We can't all be creative in our tree work habits and say it's ok because we've got anecdotal experience to back it up! There are reasons for having experiments and trials. And if you're going to conduct this on jobsites, I believe the customer should be appraised beforehand and dually compensated.

Yes, I started my last sentence with a conjunction, but I think the grammar gods will pardon me.


----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 9, 2004)

And I am an expert on the topic of nicking. I can show you my driver's license.


----------



## Tree Machine (Nov 9, 2004)

We all know that in plant systems, wounding stimulates cell division, that is a plant's defense. I nicked the wound tissue, and that is not right, I'm not going to defend myself. I will say that I've excavated a number of cavities over the years, nicked wound tissue and come back years later to inspect the same cavity, noting that the callus had recovered and was moving along fine. I, too, cringe when I touch callus. 

Actually, I don't much like cutting off limbs at all, because when I do, there's Mike Maas on my left shoulder, and Guy Mueller on my right watching EVERY move I make. Keeps me righteous with the tree.

And Nicrosis,... compensate my customers? Experiments and trials are expensive, long-term and involve graduate students who would need to climb trees to view the hundreds of trial cavities and then years later dissect the trees to see the result inside.

Who, in the near future is going to do this research? Who will pay for it? Why would anyone outside of our arborist community care? Of what economic value is it to anyone?

I am not a frickin renegade cowboy. I have a deep and passionate interest in trees and have seen too many unchecked cavities worsen and enlarge. After dissecting hundreds of trees, paying special attention to the cross-section through cavities and having run a commercial mycology lab for almost three years, I don't see many graduate students, or professors quite as able, or motivated, to do this work.

We can go back and forth. Some people like to talk and feel like they're doing something. Some people do something, and then talk, and progress. I didn't put my head up here on the chopping block for glory, attention or approval. I have seen little progress in cavity filling since the demise of the concrete and tar paper guys. 

This is not the first thread on this topic, but excuse me for actually stepping forward in attempting a progressive treatment, starting with the worst, up-welled decaying cavities. If you think cavity filling as a treatment is somehow invasive, explain this commonly used treatment....

p.s. this tree died


----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 9, 2004)

Very good points. And Shigo did many of the things you described and wrote at length as we've all read. The money is there, the TreeFund has to start sending it in the right directions, and we should be pooling resources with other groups that are concerned about the same thing. Shigo, for example, came out of the wood products side in his research of decay.

I know what you're saying about research, and I think you're right about it not being something many people will do. I for one cannot do that. But to be conclusive, you have to be. Or you have to rely on others' research and draw your own conclusions. But to experiment without the controls set up is not going to deliver the concrete results we need. So short of that, I'm going to continue based on the hard facts presented by Shigo.

And to differ from that, you have to disclaimer things as experimental or accidental. From my perception of this thread, I thought you were showing this as a proper tree care method and not just toying around with something different. Maybe I'm still not concluding correctly...


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Nov 9, 2004)

TM,
The best solution for stopping decay is 100% moisture.
I'll be glad to blow this limiting defense out of the water.


Well... 

How do you balance decay with underwater logging? How about the wood foundations taken out of port cities?

Or were you making a pun? 

Tom


----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 9, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Tom Dunlap _
> *How do you balance decay with underwater logging? How about the wood foundations taken out of port cities?*


Underwater logging? It took me a full 10 seconds to recall that submarine operation..... Thanx. 

Air or water submersion, it's more about the organisms in the air and water than the medium itself. If you have sterile air or water, it's going to prevent decay. But where will you find that??


----------



## xander9727 (Nov 9, 2004)

In a hospital of course! Think Nick think! Just transplant the tree to a hospital and wa la the problem is solved.


----------



## Guy Meilleur (Nov 9, 2004)

Compensate customers whose trees are cared for in an experimental way? Boy, that's whack--it works the other way, if anything. No authority looked at branch protection zones at nodes without laterals, but they are there. 
People who had ice damage treated with heading cuts instead of removal were GLAD to have it done. they will pay extra for the followup pruning, for the results of healthy and well-balanced trees.

A lot of the "research" that directs our BMP's is nothing more than observations made by someone who had a connection to the govt or a U to lend authority and pay for the printing. 
How do you do a controlled experiment on mature trees? Gilman et al use little trees to get results in just a few years, and keep the costs out of the stratosphere. I plan to stub back some little white oaks to barren nodes, and others to laterals, and leaving some as controls, this winter. If the hours and brainstrain get compensated by a grant, great. But in the end, how well do the results translate to older trees? Your guess is as good as mine.

TM, keep up the good work and trying new things. I don't think nicking callus is always the end of the world, but I've seen disease advance thru those types of wounds. There are authoritative folks out there who are anti-field experimental, which mike and I are not. If you think WE'RE jumping on you, just wait til you get squashed by those big boys. I'll PM you the footprints on my behind sometime, if you want to see em.

Now where were we? I support your work--a sealant that stops cracking and does not impede closure sounds beneficial, but what about the inner H2O and O2?


----------



## Tree Machine (Nov 9, 2004)

Thank you, Guy

Let me start with Tom and decay and 100% moisture. Like when a ship goes down that was carrying a load of cargo, like the old wooden ships, the Spansh Galleons downed in Florida waters (???? hurricanes!) No remants of the ship, but we'll attribite that to its parts floating away. What about the treasure chest? Why when Mel the treasure hunter guy found the mother lode from the _Atocha_, was it all in a pile on the ocean floor? Where was the chest? Wood does not last very long in warm, shallow marine waters, but that's another story.

Why are boats primarily made out of material other than wood? Hmmm just a question to ponder.

But on to Tom's question about underwater logging? Well, I see logs and other tree parts in streams and rivers and they decompose.... oh but you're talking about ships carrying logs that spilled their cargo, or went down. You will not get decomposition for a number of reasons. Foremost, deep down underwater there's this thing called hydrostatic pressure, where the pressure gets huge the deeper you go. Fungus simply has not evolved under conditions anything like this. The pressure alone will kill it.

How much sunlight is there, down deep? There's a myth that mushrooms grow in total darkness, which is both a wive's tale and false, with exceptions in the lower fungi (yeast, molds, etc). Higher fungi (produces mushrooms, or fruiting bodies) have evolved over billions of years with this really regular diurnal rhythm of nighttime-daytime. This, as far as I know, has been rather constant, for the last billion or two years and the fungi have evolved under those condition, not underwater where beyond 50 meters deep, sunlight, for all practical purposes is nonexistant. Mycelium can grow in the dark, but to complete the reproductive cycle, light is a must.

Temperature. How warm do you think it is a meter off the bottom of Lake Superior, or any freshwater lake or saltwater body? Probably cold. Fungi, in their normal environment, have evolved with varying temperatures. They depend on those fluctuations for their development, partly the reason you see mushrooms pop up overnight (cooler temps) or some that fruit only in the Fall (cool snap, after the Summer heat). Mushrooms, with few exceptions (notably Enoki, _(Flammulina velitipes)_) do not thrive in the cold, cold conditions. It takes a warming up for the dormant mycelium to revive and continue the decay process. On the bottom of a highly pressurized, dark, submarine world, the temperature does not fluctuate much. It's like a perpetual refrigerator.

So, there's no need to go into the fact that actual reproductive fruit bodies (the mushrooms themselves) can not develop and cast spores deep down underwater, pretty much bringing reproduction to a grinding halt. I doubt, also, that there's abundant oxygen down deep, but I only know certain things about the deep marine environment, and how much or little oxygen there is, is only a guess. I will leave the topic of oxygen for another post. 

Any questions so far as to why one can say "100% moisture will prevent decay" and how they could substantiate their point and actually be right? OK, lets move into a land-based environment in conditions that are more realistic to what we're working with.


----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 9, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Guy Meilleur _
> *Compensate customers whose trees are cared for in an experimental way? Boy, that's whack--it works the other way, if anything. *


That's not nice, and it's not true. If someone came out to my property to do some plumbing work and proceeded to use regular adhesive for one pipe, some peanut butter for another, and a special concoction for another and charged me for the service, I would be left feeling ripped off. If someone came out and said, I'd like to try out some new adhesives, can I do this service for free? I would be listening.


----------



## Guy Meilleur (Nov 9, 2004)

TM, why is the prognosis bad on the cavity? Did you measure it, are there cracks, what?

Nick, it is VERY nice to let customers contribute to experimentation on their trees. They do not want them treated in the "regular" way, because they understand that regular is not always right. Concrete in cavities and asphalt pruning paint used to be regular tree service. Should those arborists who went against those norms have worked for free? 

I know you just went thru 4 years at the U, learning the regular ways and the science behind them.That's a good thing, but there is room and reason for questioning those ways that do not seem to always make sense or work well.

I agree with you about disclaimers; the client should understand all the options, and be in on the decision to try something "irregular".


----------



## Tree Machine (Nov 9, 2004)

*pooling water, no need to measure anything*



> TM, why is the prognosis bad on the cavity? Did you measure it, are there cracks, what?


It was once just a flat wound site from a limb removal. Then the surface started decaying. Than a small cavity formed. Water pooled and the cavity grew larger. Water still pools in there and if I were to extrapolate into the future I would see water continuing to pool, and likely the cavity getting even larger. Because of this, alone, I would say, prognosis bad. The fact that it is hackberry doesn't help its own situation.

I have seen cavities of all different sizes, and trees that were entirely hollow. They all share one commonality; the fungus progressed faster than the tree could fully compartmentalize around the original wound site.


----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 9, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Guy Meilleur _
> *They do not want them treated in the "regular" way, because they understand that regular is not always right. *


Well, we've got some value differences here... Personally, I'm not a fan of alternative medicine in human health.care - something spilling over into my attitude about plant health care. Not that I prefer to pop pills, but I prefer nutrition and exercise with conventional medicine versus with alternative treatments.


> _Originally posted by Guy Meilleur _
> *Should those arborists who went against those norms have worked for free? *


Think this through with me, please. Alternative or experimental does not automatically equal better! Maybe the peanut butter adhesive is better, but likely not.

Certainly, there are more promising experiments than others, but experimental hogwash is hogwash beginning to end.


> _Originally posted by Guy Meilleur _
> *I know you just went thru 4 years at the U, learning the regular ways and the science behind them.That's a good thing, but there is room and reason for questioning those ways that do not seem to always make sense or work well.*


No poo-pooing needed here. I know enough to question what I hear. I'm cautioning against using customers as guinea pigs. Yes, it may be what they want, and it may be better than convention. But frame it in that context.


----------



## geofore (Nov 9, 2004)

*saltwater/fresh*

Woodworms live in saltwater and not in fresh water. Woodworms are not fungi but they do eat through wood in saltwater. Looking just for fungi you'd miss the woodworms at work.


----------



## Guy Meilleur (Nov 9, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Nickrosis _
> * I'm cautioning against using customers as guinea pigs. Yes, it may be what they want, and it may be better than convention. But frame it in that context. *


They should be the first to know; full dosclosure. The more disclosure, the more client buy-in and belief and support. 

Re the loyalty to 'conventional" (what does that mean?) vs. alternative medicine, that's a good offtopic topic. Homeostasis vs. heterostasis; wherever your comfort zone is.  

I've had good and bad conventional and alternative doctoring; no reason to reject either because of categories. Trees are no different.

"Should those arborists who went against those norms have worked for free?" 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


N: Think this through with me, please. Alternative or experimental does not automatically equal better! Maybe the peanut butter adhesive is better, but likely not.

You get a C on that response, because it failed to answer the question.  ( Have you been watching the debates on TV again?) 

Selling conventional treatments that you know will not work, now that's fraud. When conventional treatments have been seen to fail, trying something else is hard work and not a hobby. Working for free cheats your paying clients.


----------



## xander9727 (Nov 9, 2004)

Copper plating stops wood worms........maybe one of Paul Revere's descendents will make us some cute little caps.


----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 10, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Guy Meilleur _
> *You get a C on that response, because it failed to answer the question.  ( Have you been watching the debates on TV again?)*


Sorry...I was cutting and pasting on a 320x240 screen. Should they work for free? What a silly question. It's a matter of hindsight being 20-20. I give you D on that question. 



> _Originally posted by Guy Meilleur _
> *Selling conventional treatments that you know will not work, now that's fraud.*


But of course.




> _Originally posted by Guy Meilleur _
> *When conventional treatments have been seen to fail, trying something else is hard work and not a hobby.*


If it fails once, it maybe an unforeseen factor. If it fails just for you, you might want to check how you're doing. If it keeps failing and fails for others, it should come out of the toolchest of options.


----------



## glens (Nov 10, 2004)

*Random thoughts*

TreeMachine didn't mention the pertinent point in "prognosis-bad.jpg" that you're looking at the north side of the house.

Nick doesn't approve of experimental services being charged-for, yet in the field of human health care he prefers "conventional" medicine as opposed to alternatives.&nbsp; My knee-jerk reaction to that is that the alternatives are usually the things that have been done since ancient times and the "conventional" stuff is usually highly experimental and more costly to the customer because of it!

I seem to have some memories of working on overhead doors at (Campbell Soup's?) mushroom farms in Chicago and those buildings were devoid of light...

Glen


----------



## Tree Machine (Nov 10, 2004)

Kind of devoid of light. The mycelium (the white filamentous stuff with the wood-digesting enzymes) does not need light. Mycelium does its work beneath surface of the bark and into the xylem. However, mycelium can grow in the light also, but there is a better chance, then, that it will dry out. Light becomes important only in fruiting, or reproduction; the actual creation of the mushroom.

At Campbell's Mushroom farm they'll keep it dark during the spawn run phase, and they'll turn on the 'lights' during the flush. Economical. Even then, light can be low, and adjusted to fit the human schedule (cropping, or pickin the buggers). This is off-topic, in a way. Button mushrooms grow off compost. We're talking about wood-decomposers in their wild, undomesticated state.

Good point on the north-side thing, I forgot to add that to my 'prognosis bad list'. The cavity faces the west, open to every rainstorm coming in from the west. I could measure the cavity, and in ten years measure it again. However, I know it will enlarge. 

CODIT is cool, but fungus is ferocious. Given a regular supply of water and wood, fungus just naturally and spontaneously digests wood back to soil. It doesn't have any say-so. It's what fungus does to ensure survival and perpetuation of it's specie.


----------



## Tree Machine (Nov 10, 2004)

On to Nick's concern about charging the customer for experimental cavity treatments. Did I ever say I was charging customers for this service? To be completely honest, I am not really thinking about the homeowners, just the health of the tree. If I list 'Cavity inspections and treatment' that means I do whatever I can to lend advantage to the tree in overcoming the abscess.

I may list this service on the sheet, but timewise, it is a minor element as compared with deadwooding and tip pruning and cleanup. I inspect every cavity I come across, for the sake of observation. Most of the time I do nothing with it.

If I choose to shoot some moisture-cure in the cavity, I do not charge them for the product, it just gets included in the price of the service. If I decide to risk my camera, and schlepp it up into the tree, I do that, well...., pretty much for you guys.

I have to go to work, now, but I look forward to getting back to Tom's two-part question, part one about being 100% submerged in water and, and WAIT, I forgot about the wood foundations in port cities; they're pounded deep into the mud. There is simply no oxygen deep in the muds. Only anaerobes work down there (methanogens) and these bacteria ore not wood decomposers.

Part two of Tom's question was about Oxygen, creating an oxygen impermeable barrier, and isn't there oxygen in wood? I'll approach this with you tonight. It's a very good question.


----------



## Guy Meilleur (Nov 10, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Tree Machine _
> * To be completely honest, I am not really thinking about the homeowners, just the health of the tree. . I inspect every cavity I come across, for the sake of observation. Most of the time I do nothing with it.
> 
> *


A man after my own 

"I could measure the cavity, and in ten years measure it again. However, I know it will enlarge."

Umm, I have less confidence in the pathogen and more in the tree, usually. ID'ing the pathogen, if possible, helps a lot. But if experience tells you that this one will expand and you want to experiment, hey go for it.

Don't mind Nick, he's just looking to C his A. With a bigger company that is a bigger consideration.


----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 10, 2004)

Yeah, thanks. 

I'm not trying to be a jerk here. My point essentially is that experimental techniques are not automatically better than "conventional" practices just because they are new or unique, etc.

My reasoning for using effective "conventional" practices is because of the strong history behind them. Not just personal, anecdotal experience, but the numerous studies and reports as well.

For new problems to solve, you don't have this ready-reference, of course, and have to rely on less-tested techniques. As you've mentioned, that is something that the customers should be briefed on.


----------



## Tree Machine (Nov 10, 2004)

And I'm not trying to be a renegade.


> My reasoning for using effective "conventional" practices is because of the strong history behind them


For hundreds, maybe thousands of years if you had an infected wound you would rub salt into it. If it abscessed, you would pack salt into it. Sometime later, after much pain and agony from the gangrene, you would die.

Then one day a cat named Joseph Lister said "Hey, I've got this new antiseptic liquid that'll kill all the microbes we haven't discovered yet."

But Nick's great, great, great, great, great, great grandpa said, "Hey man, that's whack. We have these conventional methods with strong history behind them."

Nick, I can appreciate your conservative approach, actually, no I can't. Aren't they teaching you to think outside of the box, or are they brainwashing you to learn and do, only that which has already been learned and done?

I would think you would be the first to step up and gather more information, mebbe ask WHAT the product is, what are it's properties, how does it differ from other methods, what does it cost, etc. not be the only one to poo-poo the idea with next to no information. You, sir, don't live in the dark ages. You're supposed to be on the cutting edge. We count on the newly and formally educated to bring us the latest stuff, not the same stuff we already know. If you're gonna slash a new method, at least investigate it and give us a valid reason why its not worthy. Giving us this 'conventional, historical tested methods' crap just doesn't fly. You've got an education. Step up and show it. Talk from the standpoint of biology, because we're not talking convention and history. We're talking about trees.


----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 11, 2004)

I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings.


----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 11, 2004)

What you chose not to quote was the essence of my argument. We're no longer talking about anything specific here... My point was and is:



> _Originally posted by Nickrosis _
> *My reasoning for using effective "conventional" practices is because of the strong history behind them. Not just personal, anecdotal experience, but the numerous studies and reports as well.*


Rubbing salt into a wound was not a decision concluded by numerous studies and reports. It was solely anecdotal. And if you expect me to be a know-it-all whiz kid, you're mistaken. I'm a human being who's had a lot of great opportunities, but I don't have an answer for everything.

I stayed generic to the topic of sealing wounds because that's been hashed over for decades, and I believe Shigo's word is the final word. There will be progress and improvements on the thought, but it remains proven scientifically, anecdotally, and experientially that sealing wounds outside of disease pressure concerns is not a sound arboricultural practice.

Let's begin or end there.


----------



## xander9727 (Nov 11, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Nickrosis _
> *if you expect me to be a know-it-all whiz kid, you're mistaken. *




Say it ain't so Nick, say it ain't so!


----------



## Tree Machine (Nov 11, 2004)

It has little to do with feelings. I respect you, buddy, but you surprised me. I know academia pumped you full of good science. I'd kinda hoped you'd grab my by the scientific horns and ask me legitimate scientific questions, like Tom has done.

"Hey Tree Machine, before you go feeding us this zany idea you have on product X, what exactly is your reasoning for thinking this is a solution to the problem?"

I might answer, "Nick, I live in an area where treemen have 'cared' for trees for the last 75 years. I see many, many cavities on a day to day basis, some small and forming, some advanced, and others whose progress led to the demise of the tree, huge cavity, trunk hollowed to the ground, and often pretty clear where the problem started."

Trees tell us their story, if you know how to 'listen'.

Cavities start with a wound site, whether natural or man made, and if the conditions are right, a cavity will expand until CODIT walls stop the expansion, or the CODIT walls do not, in which case fungus enters the sapwood, heartwood and travels unchallenged up and down the center of the trunk.

My position is to make the conditions 'not right' for the fungus to continue on its path. Fungus needs wood (non-living tissue), water and air. We can't eliminate the wood because we're dealing with a living, wooden organism, but we can address the water and air, and I feel we can literally choke off the fungus' needs and arrest its development. 

Concrete was doomed from the beginning as a solution because it cracks, and never makes a perfect 'seal' to prevent the intrusion of insects, water, and air. There seemingly would be a commercially available product out there that would do this.

In observing compartmentalization through Shigo's writings, viewing the wound sites, looking into cavities, cross-cutting these areas during takedowns and flush-cutting off the protruding wound sites during takedowns, I have learned much about how compartmentalization happens, and how and why it can go wrong. These are just human, empirical observations with the intent of learning and understanding.

Don't ask me why this area of tree care intrigues me so. Mebbe if I am able to stop the progression of a problem in a tree, then I have done my job as a tree care professional.

In this image, surface closure is almost complete, and it looks like the tree will win this race (as oaks are pretty good at doing). What if the tree can be given a head start, and then left to do what it's going to do? My thought is if we can artificially create 'closure', the callus would continue to work its way across the artificial surface, eventually covering over completely as nature would have it. We're not intervening in the growth of the tree, but rather arresting the progress of the ubiquitous fungus.


----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 11, 2004)

My take on arboriculture is a bit different. I look at trees as being organisms that are doing just fine every day. They close over wounds on their own, and if they don't, they make room for other trees to move in. In the case of a very important tree to someone, I would be more than willing to help support the tree and extend its life, but I think the next development we need is something that would actively go after the fungal pathogens. Maybe Arbotect or a relative is a solution for that.

Too many times, I see people overreacting to cavities when really, trees have stood for a thousand years with cavities. And I don't know enough about them.... But filling them is not something that I see as aiding the natural process of the tree. This is all too touchy-feely for me. When talking about science, I prefer much more definitive information and research. And this is not doing it for me. And that's also why I don't do research!


----------



## ROLLACOSTA (Nov 11, 2004)

i have enjoyed reading the above posts , nice one NICK and TREEMACHINE..MIKE, GUY etc..thanks..this is real tree talk


----------



## Guy Meilleur (Nov 11, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Nickrosis _
> * When talking about science, I prefer much more definitive information *


 Me too, Nickster. That's why I experiment with fighting fungus; because the most definitive information is what we do ourselves, and personally witness the results.

There is more acidity and different pathogens in our atmosphere; getting worse all the time. Trees are very slow to adapt, so working extra to help the tree against human-caused problems seems to be an arborist's duty.

When will there ever be definitive scientific research on the decay of large wounds? Never--too many variables, too long a time period, too little funding. I can't sit on my aspirations for respectable professionalism by going by the book, and watch hellplessly as the inevitable rot happens.


O and Mike, the next ant thread will exclude carpenter ants, which will hopefully lead to a level of conclusiveness satisfactory to your standards. I thought the thread proved that hacks who sell ant fears to whack trees have zero basis for their nefarious practices.


----------



## Tree Machine (Nov 12, 2004)

Thank you, Rolla. Thanks ANYONE for being open-minded to new possibilites.

Mike,


> once that little bit of dead wood is covered over, and it will no longer be a threat to the tree. Like if you used paint to cover an AIDS sore on your forehead.



Where you get your comparisons, I just don't know.

With regards to the first part, however, that would be correct, and here's why; Complete closure completes the CODIT scenario. Encapsulating the wound site _completely_ keeps out tunnelling insects, stabilizes the moisture within, creates a barrier to the food source (wood, in the case of fungus, and fungus in the case of ants, centipedes, pillbugs, etc), and shelter, and seals the site from active air flow. 

Paint has been the 'sealant' of choice, and is where all the research has been done. Paint is not much of a sealant. It's a thin coating which peels with time, especially if there is no primer. Do you know ANY arborist who had ever primed his wound site before painting? On the same hand, do you know ANY professional painter who would use paint over bare wood. NO, because the paint will not hold up, and will peel and flake over time. Painting wounds is as doomed to fail as filling cavities with concrete.

Painting wounds was most often done with black paint, which would cause a hot spot, possibly inhibiting callus progression. Painting was often done with a brush attached to a pole saw, put on from a distance. Was it latex paint, oil based, epoxy? was it a thick coating, or thin, and was the coverage complete, or just sort of slapped 'on there'. Who knows how standardized was the practice and do you think a hair-thin layer of paint is going to be any kind of barrier for a boring insect? How much of a barrier can it be to air exchange?

Anyway, that's entirely another area, painting fresh cuts. I'm interested in stopping the expansion of progressive, degenerative cavities by artificially mimicking what the tree is attempting to do, which is to compartmentalize, and seal over completely, preventing the intrusion of water, bugs and the exchange of fresh air. Moving from acute decay, to a simple internal defect.

I'm unsure as to why I'm taking a stand on this. I personally have nothing to gain. I don't sell this sealant adhesive and have no deal with the manufacturer. I'm not one of those who defends his side 'just to be right'. I just care about trees, and have an immense amount of experience and understanding of the nature of higher fungi, both in the lab, and in the field. 

The trees can't speak for themselves, so that's my motivation. I'm speaking for them. I just can't see a growing cavity, with fungus and bugs and water in it being of any benefit whatsoever to the health and well-being of the tree. Turning a blind eye to these problems is not what I consider authentic, responsible tree care. Please, don't anybody take that offensively. You've not been given the tools to deal with this aspect of tree care. I'm just tired of waiting for someone else to do the work.


----------



## Tree Machine (Nov 12, 2004)

Thank you, sir. Are you filling cavities, or coating surfaces?


----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 12, 2004)

Rapid/complete closure = better situation for the tree?

Why, I can achieve rapid closure with a flush cut and fertilizer! It's more than that!


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Nov 12, 2004)

TM,

You talked about rubbing salt in wounds and the work of Lister. That is interesting but, like Shigo reminds us, we're dealing with botanical not biological organisms. I don't know enough about the chemistry of decay, only the mechanics, to say anything about the similarities or differences between infections and decay. shigo has taught me enough to keep plants and animals seperate though.

I think Nick made a reference above to what scientific research is. doing random, uncontrolled projects is hardly research. Interesting anecdotal observations though. But, how does anyone know if the soup that you've been putting on the wounds has anything to do with the advancement or containment of the decay? Heck, for all we know there might have been some special organism floating around in the air at the same time you made the cut. This organism could have settled onto the cut and been sealed inside when you put your magic potion on the wound. 

Until proper research is done it's irresponsible to claim that any of the magic goops work. I sure would like to see a magic potion on the market. Wulkie had many good things to say about wound dressings. I think I remember him saying that too many researchers have been scared off by Shigo's work. In actuality, I've read in one of Shigo's works that he says that the dressings available at the time didn't curtail decay. That doesn't mean there isn't something to be developed. 

For a long time I've thought that this process might have merit for trees:

http://boatbuilding.com/content/rot.html
http://www.rotdoctor.com/

I googled ["wood decay" boats] and found this link to an FPL paper. I see in the index there's some info on ants too. Oops..wrong thread, unitentional hijack 

http://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/fplgtr/fplgtr113/ch13.pdf

I think there were 170 hits on the search. 

We do need to remember that ships are built from lumber not wood. Dead and living tissues is the difference. 

More googling

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q="wood+decay"+prevention&btnG=Google+Search

Tom


----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Guy Meilleur _
> *Me too, Nickster. That's why I experiment with fighting fungus; because the most definitive information is what we do ourselves, and personally witness the results.*


I can't agree with you on that definition of definitive.  It's not your eyeballs. It's having 100 eyeballs and more. It's statistic analysis. It's determining if the improvements you're seeing are significant and if they're the result of the variable(s) you're testing.



> _Originally posted by Guy Meilleur _
> *When will there ever be definitive scientific research on the decay of large wounds? Never--too many variables, too long a time period, too little funding. I can't sit on my aspirations for respectable professionalism by going by the book, and watch hellplessly as the inevitable rot happens.*


Youthful optimism and patience is a blessing for me here, apparently. I see so many great developments building that I know we're going to see more of this. It's happening already. But the key to this, and I really believe it, is partnering with other industries and groups that also think the topic of decay is important.

Think a wood products firm cares about decay? Think the Forest Service would give an ear? Think that the TreeFund has tree research as a goal? Think arborists around the world are interested?

Spread the cheer.


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Nov 12, 2004)

How do you measure "worse"?

Callous development?
Wound closure?

Until anyone can duplicate your results, they're anecdotal. 

Has the decay changed on the inside?

When looking at hazard trees the size of the wound or decay isn't the issue. It's the ratio to sound wood. A five inch wound to the Treehouse Tree that was pruned in CA last year is neglibible. That same five inch wound on a 5 1/2" limb wound have a significant impact on the limb, but not the tree. 

Shigo has addressed both of those issues. It's what's going on inside that matters. Look at the lives of the "Desperate Housewifes", smiling on the outside and crying on the inside  This observation is from watching DW in three minute clips over about 45 minutes...


----------



## rumination (Nov 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by netree _
> *
> 
> Sidestep: In my experience, a cavity will usually develop in pruning cuts over 5 inches or so. The callus simply doesn't form fast enough to cover the wound. It's also my experience, being someone who actually does alot of removals, that such cavities end up being a failure point down the road more often than not.
> ...




This may be totally nitpicky and besides the point, but I think that cavity and callous formation rates are variable among species and environments. There are some species of trees that will easily callous over a 5" wound before a cavity can form. Also remember that a cavity only becomes a concern if it breaks through the original CODIT walls. Some species of trees are very good at containing decay. Others are not.


----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by netree _
> *Neither nitpicky OR beside the point, Leon. A valid observation.*


Not to be neither nitpicky nor beside the point, but one should use "nor" as a conjunction when using neither.


----------



## rumination (Nov 12, 2004)

As in "Nick is neither anal NOR uptight about editing the grammar in other people's posts" ?


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Nov 12, 2004)

Erik wrote:

Sidestep: In my experience, a cavity will usually develop in pruning cuts over 5 inches or so. The callus simply doesn't form fast enough to cover the wound. It's also my experience, being someone who actually does alot of removals, that such cavities end up being a failure point down the road more often than not.

If the tree failed at a decay point it was a hazard tree in my book. 

I think that there is a graph in one of Shigo's books that shows the race between containment and closure. 

I do agree with you on wound size in some trees. When I was working in MN I really resisted making a cut bigger than 5" on a silver maple or basswood/linden. The race between containment and decay would generally be won by decay. And this was on any size SM limb/trunk. Now, if I had to make the same cut on a similar sized white/burr oak or maybe even an elm I'd be more comfortable. Those species had a better chance of winning the battle with decay.


----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 12, 2004)

I've gotta catch some zzz's, but I do want to say that I think this thread is bringing up great discussion points. Many times, I wish we would talk about some of these things....and even though they are near and dear to our hearts....."tree values" if you will....they are topics that should be discussed if we are to progress as a profession.

I can honestly say that my heart beats a little faster opening up this thread (and waiting for it to load on my 200 MHz machine with an 802.11b connection on a 320x240 screen). I'm excited to see what people are saying and more than happy to share myself.


----------



## rumination (Nov 12, 2004)

I have a question about your experiments with sealants, Erik.

As Tom said the key is what is going on inside the tree. Although the trees with the sealants do not exhibit cavities, doesn't the possibillity exist that decay is still spreading inside the tree at the same rate as those trees with visible cavities? It's just that the decayed wood doesn't have anywhere to go when it's all sealed up. Of course, decayed wood is stronger than no wood, but I think it would still be important to know.

Have you been able to make any observations about this, or will we have to wait until the trees come down?


I hope this question makes sense...


----------



## a_lopa (Nov 12, 2004)

worms and there castings will exelerate growth in just about everything,wouldnt exelrating a trees growth help heal wounds its all in the worms


----------



## Guy Meilleur (Nov 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by aussie_lopa _
> * wouldnt exelrating a trees growth help heal wounds its all in the worms *


lopa, increased nitrogen feeds the fungus as it fertilizes the tree.

Erik, I don't understand the aversion to networking with the traditional scientific community. How else is cavity work going to be anything beyond some isolated cranks in MA, IN, NC etc. gathering anecdotal experience?

Personal and mutual gratification of the sort you describe may or may not happen, but it is beside the point. The understanding and validation that comes from comparing experience and observations with other is the point; the valid point Nick made. I'd much rather die knowing I connected with others to the evolution of my industry than to know in my heart I was right but be unable to show that to others.

There must be a way to get together on this. "I've read in one of Shigo's works that he says that the dressings available at the time didn't curtail decay. That doesn't mean there isn't something to be developed." Science should never sleep.


----------



## NeTree (Nov 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Tree Machine _
> *Paint has been the 'sealant' of choice, and is where all the research has been done. Paint is not much of a sealant. It's a thin coating which peels with time, especially if there is no primer. *



Bear in mind when applying paint or tar-based dressings, we're applying to a porous surface, not a sheet of steel.

I think that's why it doesn't work; in order to be effective, one would have to apply more than one coat- perhaps five or more- to fully make the surface NON-porous. 

Allowing proper (and recommended) drying time between coats, I don't see where that would be even remotely practical for anyone outside of your own trees on your own property.


----------



## xander9727 (Nov 12, 2004)

There you go again Erik, trying to be practical.


----------



## NeTree (Nov 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by xander9727 _
> *There you go again Erik, trying to be practical. *



Yeah, I know... I keep trying to quit using common sense, but I'm addicted to it. Thankfully, it's a rare affliction these days...


----------



## Guy Meilleur (Nov 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by netree _
> * I love the way you say "crank".
> * Ooo, you savage!
> 
> ...


For me and many people, definitely, but not enough for Nick and many others. Anecdotes may agree with other anecdotes, but unless it's more formally tested and documented it'll still be anecdotal. 

If all this work by field scientists like you and TM is done in harmony with lab scientists somewhere and published somehow, it would be far more persuasive. Nothing wrong with saying that, is there? Easy now fella.


----------



## NeTree (Nov 12, 2004)

But Guy... the experiments have to be done to get there, don't they?

Simply dismissing the notion as quackery before more scientific tests can be arranged/accomplished just doesn't work for me.

I would say so far it sure looks promising...

The only way to prove or disprove is to try and see.

I'm sure many thought Shigo was a quack before he became "accepted".

Point being, even anecdotal proof should be enough to convince you it's worthy of further investigation.

Don't shoot the salesman before you see what he's selling. 

That's my issue with "accepted" scientific community; close-mindedness to daring to try something new or different, no matter how silly it may sound at first.

If you went back in time 100 years, people would think you were a few cans short of a six-pack if you told them what we have and have done by '04.


----------



## a_lopa (Nov 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Guy Meilleur _
> *lopa, increased nitrogen feeds the fungus as it fertilizes the tree.
> 
> and???so what ,where not talking fungi were talking healing,would you rather try your witch doctoring on a wilting dieback :angel: :angel: :angel: :angel:*


----------



## Tree Machine (Nov 12, 2004)

*Ossijinn*



> I think that's why it doesn't work; in order to be effective, one would have to apply more than one coat- perhaps five or more- to fully make the surface NON-porous.



That was my thought, having seen painted wounds from arborists of the past. As I picked at the 'sealant' and inspected, the edges, near the callus usually were curled and peeling. I'm not sure how the stuff holds up to moisture, UV rays, freeze-thaw cycles and the movement of the callus. 

Completely filling and creating an absolute seal is the basis for my thinking we can arrest decay. I don't feel that sealants of the past did this effectively. If there is the ability for air to enter into the wound site, I believe that success will not be possible. Here is my oxygen schpeel.

We've ascertained that fungus is an aerobic plant. It has no chlorophyll, like other plants, so it does not practice photosynthesis. It does not, therefore, take CO2 and the energy from sunlight and create carbohydrates, proteins and fat. It is very much the reverse.

Fungi, as a family, get their energy from the carbon source, cellulose, of which wood is mostly made. Certain fungi have even been shown to be able to feed on hydrocarbons as a carbon source, and are used industrially to detoxify contaminated spill sites. This fact, alone, forces me to question using tar as a wound sealant.

Anyway, the fungus also uptakes nitrogen in the food source to biofabricate the enzymes, which are the true work horses of the fungus. The fungus, with their powerful enzymes, degrade cellulose and as a waste product, produce carbon dioxide. This is essentially a fermentation reaction, though most of us have a view of fermentation quite different, but also involving a fungus called yeast. The reaction is quite the same, however. Carbohydrates are broken down, with carbon dioxide being one of the biochemical 'waste' products.

Here's where full, complete sealing 'SEEMS' to make sense. From a purely scientific standpoint, this is my hypothesis (educated guess).

Fungus is a consumer of oxygen, and a producer of carbon dioxide. If we were able to encapsulate the fungus inside the tree, effectively cutting off the free source of oxygen (ie Air) this would seem limiting to the expansion and growth of the fungal body. There may be some available oxygen within the wood, but the fungus, I feel, will consume it faster than it can be replenished. Also, carbon dioxide levels will rise as oxygen levels fall, and the seal would prevent escape of the carbon dioxide. 

Fungal growth, in this hypothetical scenario, will be arrested by virtue of cutting off it's necessary raw material (oxygen), and essentially smothering it in its own waste product (carbon dioxide).

That's the scientific hip I'm shooting from. It makes sense, and is proven, but just not in a tree cavity. The obstacle to overcome in giving this a go would be to have a product that could create an absolute sealing barrier, one that would withstand large temperature fluctuations, ultraviolet radiation, rain and must also be non-toxic to the tree and callus. As well, it would have to be able to remain intact for 10, 20, 50 years. Lastly, it would have to be applied in a manner that disallowed any air exchange (no leaks). 

Will it work? That is, as they say, the $64,000 question.


----------



## Guy Meilleur (Nov 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by aussie_lopa _
> *
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## a_lopa (Nov 12, 2004)

yes it is tricky old master


----------



## Tree Machine (Nov 12, 2004)

Nutrition plays a marital role in tree vigor, and ultimately, tree vigor may be the most important aspect of a tree's defense.


----------



## a_lopa (Nov 12, 2004)

if i was old n frail id want every bit of nutrition to fight off disease,i also have a worm farm that i enjoy,the nutrients that come outa there make anything thrive,its unreal what i can get them to munch throu,i make em kebabs with newspaper tied with bacon rind they love it,worms are the key to vigorous growth IMO maybe i like worms to much


----------



## Tree Machine (Nov 12, 2004)

Epoxy resin, is this the same as fiberglass resin? Is is flexible? Doesn't it get mixed, and it's a viscous liquid until it sets, and then it hardens? I'm not exactly sure what you're using, but am intrigued. More detail, please.


----------



## Tree Machine (Nov 12, 2004)

OK, I could see it as a sealer over a surface cut, since it is applied as a thick liquid, it would seep into the pores or cracks, but as far as filling a cavity, it would be a challenge to get it to adhere and stick to the top side of the cavity. I am not discounting the idea. I think it's an excellent suggestion.


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Nov 13, 2004)

Erik wrote:

That's my issue with "accepted" scientific community; close-mindedness to daring to try something new or different, no matter how silly it may sound at first.

Are they closed minded because they ask that you be able to replicate your findings? How do you prove what you claim? Proofs are the basis for science. 

You might be onto something, using epoxy. I'm pretty skeptical though, but that's by nature, I'm a Capricorn  You're right though, the real proof will be found when trees with the same wounds and conditions are dissected. 

Do you know what Shigo's research path was at the beginning of his career?

Tom


----------



## Guy Meilleur (Nov 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by netree _
> *No. They're close-minded because the mere mention of an idea that doesn't fit within their neat mental "box" is automatically a point for ridicule; *


Scientists are by nature skeptical; all skepticism is not ridicule. Yes some will mock anyone who's not in their crowd, so you must suffer fools gladly to be in the NEWTS. But in the end the data and the reasoning behind it will determine acceptance. btw, "anecdotal" does not mean "quackery"; it literally means "unpublished".

Erik I thought that rough-tough urban loggers had thick skin, but you're thounding kinda thenthitive there buddy. You even make a questioning colleague and your #1 fan out to be "adversarial". O and Thanks for volunteering to be our fearless founder; you musta ghostwritten that post then eh??

You and Tom have unveiled the NEWTS biggest obstacle to proof, that until now you'd have to cut down the tree. Radar is getting cheaper; maybe we all can use it to measure cavities someday. For now, all NEWTS have to take the first step up from anecdotery: document when where what and how they are treating and sealing.


----------



## Elmore (Nov 13, 2004)

*"Bacseal"*

aussie_lopa, do you have access to a Bayer product called "Bacseal"? It may prove to be a product with some promise in this field. I have another plan of action, a recipe so to speak but am unsure if a mere horticulturist, primarily a grower of small trees, and his ideas and theories would be welcomed and accepted into this exclusive band of elite woodsmen called "NEWTS". I may want to register my process with the patent office first or maybe just keep it to myself. The more big trees that come down may mean more smaller ones being sold.
<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v186/Elmore/Ginkgo/MayfieldchipbuddedJune20048-17-04resized.jpg"width=550>


----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 13, 2004)

*Re: "Bacseal"*

Elmore, I'm a Horticulturalist in Training, myself.

Why do ginkgos have a tendency to send out such low branches like that in greenhouses? I've seen that before...


----------



## Guy Meilleur (Nov 13, 2004)

*Re: "Bacseal"*



> _Originally posted by Elmore _
> * I have another plan of action, a recipe so to speak but am unsure if a mere horticulturist,... ideas and theories would be welcomed and accepted into this exclusive band of elite woodsmen called "NEWTS". *


Hey Brad guess what--you're in! 

Forget the patent--too expensive to apply. Can we hear about your recipe? Anyone who  will have their membership revoked!

Is Bacseal only available in nz? that's where all the hits were. If we can't buy it in the US then we have to make our own from scratch huh?

Nick, this is the 3rd time you've tried to derail this thread. You'll be washing the blackboards after school if you keep that up...


----------



## Elmore (Nov 13, 2004)

*My reply*

You guys are just being nice to this lowly horticulturist in order to obtain my secrets. heh heh  

Nickrosis, "Why do ginkgos have a tendency to send out such low branches like that in greenhouses? I've seen that before..."
This is a spring budded 'Mayfield'. That low branch is the scion. I took a photo of that one because of it's initial growth response. Initial growth from most buds, almost all of them, usually are a simple whorl of leaves and remains so, for at least one season from that bud but this one immediately started to elongate. It is the only one that I have seen, so far, to have an immediate growth response like this. The other two pots show budded trees with the typical growth response. ' Mayfield by the way is a columnar male form, a fastigiate form, said to grow 30' x 8'. Cool  

Guy, as far as I know "Bacseal" is only available in NZ & maybe Australia. The folks I have spoken to at Bayer USA don't even know what it is. It is usually used, down there in grafting citrus.
My secret recipe may be coming soon. Stay tuned


----------



## NeTree (Nov 13, 2004)

Here's a tree with a little decay in it.


----------



## NeTree (Nov 13, 2004)

Dissection.


----------



## NeTree (Nov 13, 2004)

Another view.


----------



## Guy Meilleur (Nov 13, 2004)

Nice pictures. That defect may have exceeded the strength loss safety criteriaby a little bit, eh? Bad CODIT too.


----------



## NeTree (Nov 13, 2004)

More of the trunk.


----------



## Guy Meilleur (Nov 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by netree _
> * I believe a "cap" of epoxy could have prevented this.
> *Might've been worth a try...
> 
> *But then, I wouldn't have advocated removing a healthy limb that large to begin with. *


Careful now, or you'll be booted out of the BULLS--Brotherhood of Urban Logging Leprechauns.


----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 14, 2004)

*Re: Re: "Bacseal"*



> _Originally posted by Guy Meilleur _
> *Nick, this is the 3rd time you've tried to derail this thread. You'll be washing the blackboards after school if you keep that up... *


Dear me, I hope you're kidding.

What's a blackboard?


----------



## Tree Machine (Nov 14, 2004)

Good way to observe, Mr Firewood Splitter.

Mike Maas, all valid points, and all the widely varying points and arguments for and against are creating a boundless arena of infinite argument. Hang with me for a couple minutes.

Yesterday I took down 36" DBH beech tree. There were wound sites of all different sizes, and differing degrees of closure.

One thing I always have done when bucking limbs or logs into firewood is to cut ANY protruberance off flush with the log or limb. Other tree guys think I'm anal, but the firewood guys appreciate it, and it gives me a chance to see some of what's happening just inside the wound bulge, at least in one plane. I attempt to crosscut through, to get a view of another plane if the cavity falls on a crosscut.

It was an unusual day in that I had three guys helping me, actually one ground guy, and two guys there for the firewood. I grabbed my camera and was going to take some shots of these wound sites, before, and after cutting them off flush, but my camera was twinking out. Then the stump guys showed up. Desperately, I'm trying to pull off some shots with 5 guys watching me as I was narrating why I was doing what I was doing, as if anyone there could have cared. 

No shots, but a realization set in. This would be very difficult information for ANYONE to collect and document, even if there were a protocol. For PhD's or grad students to collect the data they would need to coordinate schedules with an arborist, or by some impossible circunstance, BE an arborist. Then, the arborist would have to greatly slow his work schedule to accomodate the necessary communuication and allow the data collectors to do their thing, meaning it's costing the arborist money. It would have to be a special arborist.

In streamlining, meaning cutting out the grad students and professors (even if they WERE available) means the arborist would have to do the data collection himself, also costing him time. Much of the data collection would have to be photographic and there would have to be some consistency, rather a protocol, if this were to be data collection to be used for 'research'.

Even if there were a dozen NEWTS aligned and coordinated, I'm not so certain that we could develop a research protocol that would be recognized by a committee, academic or industrial. Research, especially if it is intended for publication, is very, very involved and goes so much further than designing an experiment with results that can be replicated. Without a formal, structured research plan, there will be no definitive results.

I bring this to light because the word research has been used in this thread, rather loosely, and I don't see it as practical Also, research takes work, time and costs money.

A number of doubters have cried, "anecdotal", but gentlemen, I believe that 'anecdotal' is as good as it's going to get. I don't see 'research-proven' being a reality. I think if we were to accept anecdotal as our 'data', over the course of time, 'generally agreed upon' might evolve into 'accepted industry practice'. There's just too many variables, interspecie differences, climate, original wound size, atmospheric spore loads and seasons during which the wound originated to get any sort of consistency. Plus, our results may take years or decades to prove themselves out, and only upon dissection of the tree would the results be observable, and only then possibly definitive.

This does not, however, mean that we are incapable of finding something that works amongst ourselves. It's just getting absolute, definitive, satisfying proof, I feel, is next to impossible, _even if the method does work._ This is because we will never have the 'research' to back it up; just anecdotal claims from professionals in the field. We might be best to accept that this may be as good as it will get.


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Nov 14, 2004)

TM,

Great post!

You're right, anecdotal may be the best we can expect until there is money in the federal budget to support proper research. 

In the history of arborculture book there is a lot written about the use of glop and gloop to fill cavities in the early part of the last century. After some of the tree surgeons started to observe the decay process. After gathering a lot of anecdotal info cavity work changed. It might be that we're in a place in time to look at the subject again. with the power of the Internet the NEWTS may be the medium to take things forward.

Tom


----------



## Tree Machine (Nov 14, 2004)

Thank you, Tom.

I would love to think that we, as an interconnected group, could solve this problem. All the hard work done up til this point has essentially yielded no good answers, no beneficial results.

Work in this area has been at rest for some time. Even in the prior work, the researchers have been isolated point groups, mostly academia.

We, with the help of the internet, are the world of arborists, not a handful of well-intentioned academicians where cavity filling with tar and paint was one of possibly dozens of other projects they had going on.

I really think we are the strongest possibility in finding a solution, as we are out there with our hands on trees, consistently, day after day, year after year. This alone, I think makes us possibly more qualified than anyone else on the planet to carry out the work.


----------



## rumination (Nov 15, 2004)

I am an arborist working at a univeristy owned arboretum. One of the main purposes of the arboretum is research. I believe that at this arboretum are some of the necessary resources to conduct the kind of research that is being discussed here. Trees for wounding and dissection and space to plant more, are readily availiable. Trees grow much more quicly here (and decay more quickly too!), significantly shortening the necessary research time to get meaningful results.

I would be more than willing to devote a part of my work and spare time to such a project. I am by no means as experienced or knowledgeable an arborist as most involved in this discussion, but I am always interested in exploring and learning more. A group effort at defining the methodologies and parameters for the experiments would be both necessary and desirable.

OK, now for some nitty gritty stuff. To obtain most grants for research it is necessary to have a professor as Principal Investigator on the project. There is no forestry department at the university here. That being said, I could probably find a professor related to the arboretum or in the College of Tropical Agriculture that would be willing to sponsor such a project.


Sooooo....if you guys are really serious about undertaking such a project, I am offering a potential space to do it in. There may other obstacles that I am not yet aware of, but if there is a desire to pursue this idea I will find out. So whaddaya think guys?


could be a trip to Hawaii for you in there!


----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 15, 2004)

Thanks, Leon.

I'm lining up a wounding study over here myself. Yes, it takes a long time, but I have the years and the resources to do it. Whaddya say to that? Naysayers!


----------



## Tree Machine (Nov 15, 2004)

Thanks for stepping forward, Leon. Thank you Nicrosis.

I'm getting the feeling that we're at least aligned in that post-wounding decay is a problem, and that either preventing or arresting that decay is desirable. I believe we represent mebbe the only population that would care about this, or are even remotely aware that it's an issue. So, for the problem to be solved, the trees are more or less counting on us.

Leon has a solid point, that of needing a Principal Investigator, and backing money for that source to coordinate the effort. Might I propose a suggestion? Ask Dr Shigo about whom he would suggest. Ask him for a referral. There is the remote chance that there is a current investigation desperately seeking a group such as ourselves for field support. As I say, remote chance, but, there may also be a previous investigator who might wish to take another stab at it, given the new approach and set of conditions.

Once the preliminaries are established (who, what, where, when, why and how much money is available to fund the project), then the foundation of the research is built upon collection of all prior and related studies. Again, Dr Shigo may be willing to forward us his amassed reference bibliography. I know he's not in the thick as much as during his core years, but my feeling is that he would be interested in catalyzing our progress.

Fortunately this is not stand-alone research to be built from the ground, up. We are able to build upon the shoulders of giants.


----------



## Guy Meilleur (Nov 15, 2004)

> _Originally posted by rumination _
> *
> I would be more than willing to devote a part of my work and spare time to such a project. *


So Leon, does this mean that the Lyon is roaring again? Last I heard it was caged. Are longterm (and we're talking over 3 years here) relations good enough with the U to start any work on that site?

Sidetrack--It'd be nice to prevent decay on those Albizia$; any thought to TGR's on those?

And Nick--have you found an academic advisor for those wounding studies?


----------



## rumination (Nov 15, 2004)

Guy, Lyon is still not open to the public. However, the U has expressed interest in stimulating research at the Arboretum. They are interested in any grant money it would generate, of course. (Universities usually take a percentage of grant funds for projects done under their auspices)





As for TGRs, a friend of mine is currently conducting experiments with cambistat on albizia and several other species at the moment. Should be another 9 months or so before definitive results are in.


----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 16, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Guy Meilleur _
> *And Nick--have you found an academic advisor for those wounding studies? *


Not really looking for one.


----------



## Guy Meilleur (Nov 16, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Nickrosis _
> *Not really looking for one. *


"Doesn't have to be in an institution, of course. But it certainly helps to have the resources of it. And it's easier to find impartiality."

Consistency?


----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 16, 2004)

Well consider that I am a full-time student.

If I was at a university with a professor in a related field, it would be much easier for me. For now, though, I don't need to apply for a grant and don't need to get someone to commit as a PI. But whenever I do research projects, I know which profs to call for setting up design parameters. 

And by the time this is done, I will have a PhD.


----------



## Guy Meilleur (Nov 16, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Nickrosis _
> *I'm lining up a wounding study over here myself... For now, though, I don't need to get someone to commit as a PI. But whenever I do research projects, I know which profs to call *


Huh? Are you or aren't you? Calling them is one thing; getting them to give the right answers is quite another. 

"And by the time this is done, I will have a PhD."

Yes, Pile it high and Deep enough and you will get a Post-hole Digger. And that will be worth...


----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 16, 2004)

What will I need a PI for? PIs are for getting grant money which I don't need. Of course I will be getting input on this and of course a university will be involved. But I don't need a PI, I just need an intern and an advisor for the intern. Then an intern for the next year, and the next year, and the next..... 

But let's back up. What's the null hypothesis we are trying to test? "We know" that wound dressings are at best insignificant. I say "we know" because that is the current belief that you would have to disprove. So the onus is on you, Guy and fellow NEWTS, to disprove the present reasoning. My hope is to find out more information about wounding and wound response, not to try to prove the null hypothesis false because I believe that would be a waste of time.


----------



## Elmore (Nov 16, 2004)

I have doubts as to the unity among the participants of this dialogue. Several groups have formed in relationship to the order of NEWTS ... HAHA (Horticulturists Assigned to Help Arborists), HOHUM (Horticulturists Organizing Help for Urban Managers) and HEEHAW (Horticulturists Earnestly Endeavoring to Help Arboricultural Workers). As founder and chief operating manager of these organizations, I have been in communications with the members and I have grave concerns as to the future progress in the sharing of information regarding control of wood decay. These concerns are due to a recent lack of co-operation and cohesiveness showing among various factions within NEWTS. Perhaps research and dialogue in regard to wood decay can continue among the various individual groups but I feel that the sharing of principals and the results of research and trials undertaken to improve tree work will surely be hampered. This lack of empathy towards co-operative efforts in improving techniques seems to be coming, primarily, from individuals who by the nature of their past responses, had been caught up in the "Red State" ideology and since a mandate has been established and the Bush administration has made secrecy its default position perhaps a similar position should be established right here in the private sector. The culture of secrecy in government is not unlike the culture of secrecy in many areas outside of government. People know that information is related to power, and often they want to control information, in order to enhance their own power. So new rules may restrict access to confidential trade secrets and your right to know. Perhaps an ownership society is a wonderful idea after all. Maybe Guy will help with the costs of a patent if I make him a partner.


----------



## xander9727 (Nov 17, 2004)

Looks like someone else needs a tinfoil lid. Try the dapper, it really makes you look sofisticated.


----------



## a_lopa (Nov 17, 2004)

maybe a citronella based sealant would work ok


----------



## Guy Meilleur (Nov 17, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Nickrosis _
> * What's the null hypothesis we are trying to test? "We know" that wound dressings are at best insignificant. I say "we know" because that is the current belief that you would have to disprove. *



That's not the aim. The goal would be to prove a positive, not to disprove a negative. The "current belief" you're talking about is a sociological figment; a great generalization that is not a starting point, just a departing point. Why pay it any mind?

Science and sociology don't mix well, do they?


----------



## Guy Meilleur (Nov 17, 2004)

> _Originally posted by aussie_lopa _
> *maybe a citronella based sealant would work ok *


lopa yes blending in a botanical oil is something to consider.


----------



## Reed (Nov 17, 2004)

This reminds me of the study that was mired in approvals for five years before implementation. It involved disagreements on the protocols relating to sample procurements and validity of observations based on the language of classifications not yet standardized. 

It was intended to be the blue-ribbon collection of evidence that would indicate if oak wilt was killing trees South of the Mason Dixon line. "Decline" was the suggested invader (diosporii) but wasn't considered pathogenic. Layman's evidence indicated an epidemic yet academia intervened and insisted "no, impossible". 

Reality proved otherwise, careers were admonished (or if not, should've been). What is now the most costly hardwood disease epidemic in American forest history can be simply traced back to the ignorance of certain then-qualified individuals and that intervention at the early stage would've established perimeters similar to fire lines ahead of rolling incendiary events. 

All the destruction could've been avoided. To carry it further, the misguided attempts to correct the growing die-offs based on current knowledge, inventions included the use of compounds to alter the invader we know today to have embedded abilities to mutate itself around attempts to sterilize it's virulence. 

Not necessarily idiocy in it's finer definitions, but arrogance in the extreme. A lot like a Christian oilman in charge of a war against a nation and it's opposing beliefs. WE restrict research to those who design the limitations, thus the results. 

I'm half-way through a field study (reaking of allegory and circumstance) on the merits of a phermone-copy deterrent applied to wounds in a very active vectoring environment which results of such may apply an area-disease management logic appropriate to the needs of demand. Not replication but vangaard attempt. Minus academia. 

Just a short story of caution when limiting the thrust of questions through the filters of conventional thought. It's convention afterall, that has us responding to global hatred by hating them back.


----------



## Elmore (Nov 17, 2004)

*heh heh yeah!*



> _Originally posted by xander9727 _
> *Looks like someone else needs a tinfoil lid. Try the dapper, it really makes you look sofisticated. *


<img src="http://www.adalib.org/pathfinder-attl_raccoon.gif">
<img src="http://www.evl.uic.edu/caylor/GIFS/CARTOONS/raccoon_P1.gif"width=450><img src="http://www.econedlink.org/lessons/EM314/images/hunter.gif">


----------



## ArtifexArboreus (Nov 17, 2004)

I find that a cocktail of Deisel fuel and concrete is best for sealing after cuts and work wonders for filling cavities. If anyone is interested in my recipe, feel free to give me a call @ 1-800-dumb-ass. 

There is no proven benefit to sealing wounds. Ask anyone who knows anything about this business and they will tell you the same. If they say different, then you aren't following my instructions above, "Ask anyone who knows anything about this business." 

If your still sealing wounds, you are wrong. If you maintain that it is proper, then you are uneducated. I suggest reading a book, not listning to what some old-timer told you.

Remember, sealing a wound is BAD BAD BAD.

Mr. Blaster, sealing under your pits b4 a long work day is GOOD, GOOD, GOOD.


----------



## xander9727 (Nov 17, 2004)

AA,
Please tell me that wasn't your best attempt at writing a thread advocating education.


----------



## xander9727 (Nov 17, 2004)

*Re: heh heh yeah!*



> _Originally posted by Elmore _
> [B [/B]



Elmore,
If you're looking for a coonskin cap I may be able to Stihl you one.


----------



## Tree Machine (Nov 17, 2004)

*AA's just trolling for a reaction*

Artifex, I can't really tell if you're being honest, or deliberately sarcastic. 

The question is not whether or not former attempts at preventing or arresting cavity development have worked. Those research attempts have shown one thing; that those methods tested didn't prove beneficial. This is of benefit to us, as we know not to try those methods again. Asking old timers won't help, nor will asking new timers. They're all working with essentially the same information.


> There is no proven benefit to sealing wounds. Ask anyone who knows anything about this business and they will tell you the same.


 We pretty much established that 8 or 9 pages ago. We already _know_ what the benefit would be; we are just trying to figure out how to get there.


> If your still sealing wounds, you are wrong. If you maintain that it is proper, then you are uneducated.


 If you are sealing wounds with products that have been disproven, of course you are wrong. Education has nothing to do with it, and reading a book on the subject will only tell us what we already know.

I know you're just kidding. That's because someone just like you, a hundred years ago said, "There's no cure for polio, there's no stopping the plague, powered flight is not possible!"

Where we're going with this is beyond what's been done, into the realm of what's not been done. There are surface wounds out there becoming absceses, abscesses becoming cavities, cavities becoming hollows, some leading to early tree demise and/or failure. Some of us feel that this sort of thing may be preventable.

Ignoring the wound sites doesn't seem to be slowing or stopping decay any better than applying tar, cement and paint, so what's a treeguy to do?

Hey, here's a nifty idea.... test some of the new-era cidal agents, static agents, high-tech sealants or other yet untested items, lac balsam, citronella, polyester epoxy resin or combinations thereof. We know if we do nothing, we'll keep getting what we're getting.

Some of us think there may be a simple, economically feasible preventative. To all you naysayers, here's a cud to chew: This is just tree science, not rocket science.


----------



## xander9727 (Nov 18, 2004)

> _Originally posted by ArtifexArboreus _
> *I find that a cocktail of Deisel fuel and concrete is best for sealing after cuts and work wonders for filling cavities. If anyone is interested in my recipe, feel free to give me a call @ 1-800-dumb-ass.
> 
> There is no proven benefit to sealing wounds. Ask anyone who knows anything about this business and they will tell you the same. If they say different, then you aren't following my instructions above, "Ask anyone who knows anything about this business."
> ...



Albert Einstein said it best: "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds".


----------



## Elmore (Nov 19, 2004)

*PreEmptive Strike on Decay*

Here is what I was thinking in regard to decreasing wood decay at large wound sites. Apply a borate such as Timbor or Solubor, disodium octaborate tetrahydrate. Timbor is labeled a pesticide and mixes at 1lb per 1g of water. Applied to wood till runoff, wait 1/2 hr and apply again. If exposed to rain it should be sealed. Solubor is identical but is labelled AG, as a foliar source of boron. Read the label, it's the law. A good product to seal with is Doc Farwell's Grafting Seal or Seal & Heal. Both products are the same. Color is the difference. Yellow is used by a lot of grafters in OR. Green is used by a lot in CA. May be available in gray. Also have a white Tree Paint that may be identical. I have some green but would like to try the gray.
I spoke to Jeffrey Lloyd of Nisus and he indicated some problems with callous growth associated with contact to the borate. If sealed I would think that it wouldn't matter as it originates from meristem. My concern is with translocation and uptake by the living organism, the tree. Mr Lloyd suggested use of a "Knockdown Insecticide" in conjunction with quaternary ammonium compounds, no sealing of wound. The quaternary ammonium compound suggested is didecyl dimethyl ammonium chloride (DDAC).
More info : http://216.48.37.142/pubs/viewpub.jsp?index=7114
http://www.nisuscorp.com/brochure.asp
http://www.farwellproducts.peachhost.com/


----------



## trzz (Nov 19, 2004)

*stuff*

I need to get A shigos book. I had heard second handed that you shouldn't cavity repair or paint. We all have done it at somepoint. I am a climber first of all. I see the damage of cavitys. I have repaired them too. I have watched my hocus pocus allow a branch to encapsulate the filler thus preventing ramshorning. Remember when doctors said vitamin c was bad for you? This month this is next month their cure is. While I admit NOT having a cance to read Dr. Alex Shigo's book feel common sense should have some degree of play. If you are a climber you are in essance a Dr. Doctors practice medicine to heal and help the sick as we practice Arborculture to help and heal the trees. This is my personal take. I have seen borers in Arizona ash trees burrow into properly pruned cuts. Maybe I need to add a pesticide to the water based paint. Not house paint professional pruners paint.


----------



## trzz (Nov 24, 2004)

*Idea to ponder*

If putting paint on cevered branches is bad because of fungis. My question to all (retorical ofcourse) is do you clean and use a fungiside/vericide after each tree you trim? Also remember new members will always go over old discussions. Trying to stay with the current topic while putting their .02 on the knowledge they share or would like to affirm on the old topic. Climb on


----------



## Guy Meilleur (Nov 25, 2004)

hey trzz, that's not a rhetorical question but one that easily deserves an answer. I rarely use sealant, certainly <1% of wounds. The ones that get sealed are the ones with the highest probability of major decay. 

When you know from long experience that certain wounds are likely to shorten the safe useful life of the tree, it's negligent not to try something to stop or slow that decay.


----------



## xander9727 (Nov 25, 2004)

Well put Guy.


----------



## trzz (Nov 25, 2004)

*Yea*

Thats what I think. I have never seen a problem on any area I have ever painted. Maybe just blind luck. Ash trees in houston get borers and where I see the hole of their home is in the severed portions of the branch structure.


----------



## trzz (Nov 26, 2004)

*paint*

I use a product called Tree Cote. It comes in a bucket and is water soluble. I feel it is better for the tree. I am needing info on a possible poisn to mix with paint. Something not to dangerous incase of hand/face contact with paint. I am considering boric acid but I don't know if it would affect tree in a negitive way. I think its only poisnous if you consume it but before I try it I'll need to ask a chemist and a horticulturist. Anyone know of one?
heeeheehheeeeheeee waiting for input


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Nov 26, 2004)

> _Originally posted by netree _
> *Forget the ingredients, but mostly a tar, right? I also remember there being 1% of something or other? *



Creosote comes to mind.

Trzz-be carefull about home brew pesticides. You can get into a bind with EPA and whatever you have for a DNR out there.


----------



## JeffE (Nov 26, 2004)

*Re: paint*



> _Originally posted by trzz _
> I am considering boric acid but I don't know if it would affect tree in a negitive way.



Boric acid is sometimes used as an herbicide, so probably that's a risky idea.


----------



## trzz (Nov 26, 2004)

Thanks netree and jeffe. Maybe stick to a commercial insecticide. Paul, I don't think it has creosote because it is water soliuble. It unfortunately does not have an ingredent list. However this is their address. Treekote
tree wound dressing pruning and grafting compound. product of Walter E. Clark & Son
550 Grassy Hill Rd. 
Orange, Conn. 06477-0756
I have the gallon container size. Let me know what ya think. Sincerely Trzz


----------



## Elmore (Nov 30, 2004)

*Info put out by Walter E. Clark & Son*

http://www.google.com/url?sa=U&start=10&q=http://www.waltereclark.com/wwounds.htm&e=7317 

but, I believe that it is an asphalt emulsion which likely has phytotoxic properties.
Doc Farwell's Seal and Heal is a better product.
For a commercial insecticide I suggest Permethrin. Better, if you have it, is Lindane or chlorpyrifos.
<img src="http://www.headlice.org/images/nyplindane.gif">
Permethrin works well. http://www.google.com/url?sa=U&star...sticides/permethrin/cox-report/cox.htm&e=7317

To stimulated callous formation you might try applying IAA, Indoleacetic acid, 0.1%, in a paste to the meristematic tissue.


----------



## trzz (Nov 30, 2004)

Would permethrin in a paint(Doc farwells) be potentually hazzardous on open wounds?


----------



## Nickrosis (Nov 30, 2004)

The paint is the problematic part, permethrin is pumped out in canning factories to keep the flies down.


----------



## xander9727 (Dec 1, 2004)

Nick,
Didn't you intern in a cannery one summer?

Was their motto "We eat what we can, and what we can't, we can"?


----------



## trzz (Dec 1, 2004)

yea not like the good old days when they used ddt instead of fans & flyswats.


----------



## Nickrosis (Dec 2, 2004)

xander9727 said:


> Nick,
> Didn't you intern in a cannery one summer?
> 
> Was their motto "We eat what we can, and what we can't, we can"?


I can't canfirm nor defly.


----------



## xander9727 (Dec 2, 2004)

I like it!

How long did it take? Was it an instant response or did you ponder on it a while?


----------



## Nickrosis (Dec 2, 2004)

Instant response. Kinda like when the flys in the cannery were enveloped in the fog and instantly were knocked down. Some people were stupidder after working there because iffin they breathed the air, it made 'em dumberer.


----------



## Stumper (Dec 3, 2004)

Nick, What a bunch of blarn...er Barney.


----------



## Curtis James (Dec 3, 2004)

I have a few recepies of home made tonics. I think a
they're quite interesting and a lot less evasive and toxic. They'er more for prevention of fungus and what have you. 
Treatment of tree wounds.
In a one quart spray bottle, mix one shot glass of antiseptic mouthwash, a few drops of liquid dish soap, and fill the remainder with water. Apply directly to wounds.
Clean up tonic.
1 cup antiseptic mouth wash 
1 cup liquid dish soap
1 cup *chewing tobacco juice
* to make juice put one package of chewing tobacco in a nylon stocking to hold it together. Then steep "bag" in one gallon of boiling water like a tea bag.

use-remove all old mulch from around tree. spray entire plant top to bottom to the point of run off. apply every two weeks before seven p.m.

I have found thaat the tobacco spray helps with most aqll pests. It can be mixed stronger weeker ect. If somthing like this can help maybe the cavity filler can as well.


----------



## Nickrosis (Dec 3, 2004)

*You seem serious.*

How do you know it works?


----------



## xander9727 (Dec 3, 2004)

I'm curious as well.


----------



## Curtis James (Dec 5, 2004)

I got these from one of the classes I went to. An older gentlemen that taught a few of the classes handed them out. I held onto mine so I could try it out later. They work wonders. Some world famous gardener created these concoctions. I believe his name was Jerry Baker? I'm not sure. THey have been around for years. He has alot of house hold fertilization recipeis as well.


----------



## Curtis James (Dec 5, 2004)

I just threw them out there. Obviously these aren't to practical on a mighty oak or any large specimen just thought it was interesting and something to consider.


----------



## Tree Machine (Dec 8, 2004)

I know that there's a solution to this problem, whether sealing wounds to prevent cavities, or filling cavities to prevent advanced decay and hollows. 

I've been pouring through the web, seeing if there's anything useful I could bring back to you, beyond that of my field observations. I keep finding similar findings on old research. 

If we can keep fungus from entering the wound site at the time of wounding, or kill the fungus and fill / seal the cavity (facilitated compartmentalization), I have a feeling the tree will otherwise do fine in closing over the site, assuming the wound is a reasonable size to manage (under 10 or 12 cm or so (4-5 inches). Even this is a rough measure, and varies from specie to specie on what 'too big" a wound actually would be.

Anyway, I'm back from the web expedition and came across a lot of generally interesting stuff, but only found one real nugget of potential. I read through this site exhaustively, but only clipped out one piece for you to read. Please read the parts under the picture slowly. Absorb this introduction. This almost brought tears to my eyes.


----------



## xander9727 (Dec 8, 2004)

You're a little too emotional.


----------



## Tree Machine (Dec 8, 2004)

Too emotional, maybe. Without a director of some sort we're flapping our arms, but we don't have wings. I'm not sure even the best of intentions are going to go far without some guidance, some structure, some foundation and some direction. I alluded earlier to 'standing on the shoulders of giants'. I just have a strong feeling we've found our giant.

It's a long shot. We've aligned ourselves as a leaderless team with a mission. Without a leader, this thread will eventually sink to the arboristsite cellar like all other threads, and there'll be a few guys out there, occasionally trying various methods, with the movement as a whole going NOWHERE.

I'm emotional about anything I truly care about. No apologies. I just have a sense that the solution will end up being so simple as to boggle our minds. Let's hope so.


----------



## Stumper (Dec 8, 2004)

Curtis, There are many who believe that Jerry Baker is best described as "a legend in his own mind". On the other hand tobacco juice and soap are both proven insecticides. Nicotine is available as a concentrate. It is the most powerful organic insecticide available(and is SCARY lethal to insects and animals). I guess that, if nothing else Jerry Baker has proven that you can spray all sorts of things on plants without killing them. I've been asked why I haven't weighed in on this thread (after all I seem to have an opinion on everything,right?). I won't be surprised to hear of some effective sealants at some point. Actually I've read of a scientific study prior to WWII that found benefits from a Beeswax, Lanolin and turpentine mixture-but the conclusion to that study was something along these lines "While there where demonstable benefits from using the sealant, they were quite small. Yes, this is beneficial but probably not sufficiently so to justify the effort involved in application." A truly affective anti fungal/anti bacterial sealant would be nice for those large wounds that happen through accident or unavoidable severe pruning. Most of the time, when we do things right , they aren't needed. Frankly, I am still ecstatic over being able to stop using asphalt sealants 15 years ago because had science in hand to show they weren't just unnecessary but slightly harmful. Sealant application added time and effort to every single tree, ruined clothes and spotted up my glasses. Good Riddance!!!!! The nature of woody plants includes their decay in the design. We may be able to slow and inhibit that in some instances to our benefit- That will be cool, but I doubt we will ever halt it-and I don't worry too much about it. As I mentioned to sopmeone privately-In my low humidity area the only real problems stem from storms and horribly bad "care".


----------



## MasterBlaster (Dec 8, 2004)

Hey, sealing wounds is easy!!!


----------



## Stumper (Dec 8, 2004)

Butch, That's the way! The perfect sealing technique prior to removal.


----------



## xander9727 (Dec 8, 2004)

Nice saws!


----------



## Tree Machine (Dec 9, 2004)

*look inside...*

Here's a shot of a small cavity, on its way to becoming a bigger cavity. It had been raining for a couple days and I'd been out climbing in it, making the best of the situation. I always look inside cavities, just a habit of observation. This one compelled me to go down and get the camera, as the rain was taking a break.

See the white in there? That's mycelium, or fungal hyphae, the living, active body of a fungus. Most people think of mushrooms when they hear the word 'fungus', and that is accurate, but a 'mushroom' is the reproductive part of the fungal life cycle. Most of the time in a fungus' life it spends in the mycelial stage, growing and expanding it's network and it's mass, softening and feeding on wood i.e. causing decay.

Most of the time when you look inside a cavity, you don't see the mycelium, but it's probably in there. Right on the surface, exposed to air, the surface mycelium will usually dry out, but just below the surface, where the wood is nice and moist and protected from the outside, it's probably doing quite well in it's dark, invisible world. It's a very natural process, quite fascinating, from a purely biological standpoint.


----------



## Tree Machine (Dec 9, 2004)

Here...


----------



## Stumper (Dec 15, 2004)

Mikey's back!


----------



## NeTree (Dec 16, 2004)

Mike, go have a beer...

It doesn't HAVE to be credible. It can serve merely as a topic of discussion, or as a case to be disproved.

How many articles are posted here to be either proved or debunked? Think about it.

As for ants killing trees, we already have a thread for that.


----------



## Tree Machine (Dec 16, 2004)

I guess the question to be asked, then, is, what is the mechanism by which wounds become cavities become hollows then become failed stems and trunks? How does it happen? Mike seems to think my 'lame picture', which is simply a snapshot of biology in action[QUOTE<b>... will only be about as big as the area compartmentalized by the tree.</b>[/QUOTE] Ideally, yes. But if water can get inside and hold, the rules of compartmentalization change.



> The walls of compartmentatalization will surely stop any advancement shown in your lame picture.


 That's pretty much a shotgun statement. I wish it were true. If it were, cavities wouldn't turn into hollows, etc.


> Fungus ain't so tough


 The fact remains, Fungus eats wood. Ants eat fungus, as do kajillions of organisms in the animal kingdom. It's a big, biological, interdependent network, but that's not our focus here. 

Also, my intention is not to fearmonger. I can seperate the emotion from it and be scientific and objective since I have no personal motive, nothing at stake here. Do you get it, Mike? There is nothing in it for me, and I'd go as far as to say I go out of my way at personal expense to share the biology. Stirring fear would be quite counterproductive to the mission. Now contribute, or shut up.


----------



## Tree Machine (Dec 16, 2004)

*Peace*

Yea, but I didn't really <i>mean</i> shut up. 

Thanks for steppin aboard, Buddy. Everybody, read what Mike just wrote. It's brilliant, and it's all true. I personally am fully aligned with that.

I am also a great respector of Dr. Alex Shigo. 

Now, at this time in history, we have different sealants, fungicides and an orchestra of competent tree climbing practitioners, and the internet, and THIS THREAD. It is a different time, and a different set of circumstances for <b>those who care about trees</b> to step up and take another swing at this issue. I think Dr Shigo would be proud of us, taking the initiative. Heck, shall we invite him into the thread?


----------



## xander9727 (Dec 16, 2004)

You mean we change the facts as we get more information/experience/knowledge.......sort of like learning.....what ever happened to the good old dark ages?


----------



## Tree Machine (Dec 16, 2004)

Yea, Xander. It <i>is</i> like learning. Learning evolves, goes through stages and is an endless process.

Continuing with what Mike said..


> Besides tree health and injury size, the factors that determine if decay can break CODIT walls also include: spieces, geographic location of the tree, type and location of injury, luck, and several others.


Let's talk about one of the several others, the one that I consider primary, and that would be the potential of the wound site to hold water.

I took this shot earlier today. See the snow in it? It will melt, and seep into the nooks and cracks and go only where water can go when it cooperates with the laws of gravity. Then it freezes. Then it thaws. More snow, or precipitation, gets in the cavity. Melt. Freeze. It will do this all Winter.

Do you you know what water does when it changes phase, from liquid, into solid? It <i>expands</i>. Most things in nature contract as they get colder. Water does the opposite. It expands. It gets bigger. It can exert phenomonal forces if contained, whether in a steel water pipe, or a tree cavity.

If liquid water sits in a cavity, hydrostatic forces (gravity), or the weight of the water, pushes down into the bottom of the cavity. We can do nothing about gravity. Liquid water freezes in the cavity and exerts mighty forces on the CODIT walls. There is nothing we can do about the weather and meteorology in general, nor the properties of water.

What we DO have control over is keeping water out.

See this is not technically 'decay' breaking CODIT walls. This is a natural, invisible force; not the bain of all cavities, but one possible scenario that happens in the Winter, when fungi are essentially dormant. The fungi will wake up in the Spring and possibly have new routes through the CODIT wall and are able to get past and go the deeper interior of the tree.

This scenario is speculative, based on what I know of natural forces (gravity, hydrostatic pressure, phase changes of water).

What we know about fungi and their role of decay in trees is NOT speculative. That's just plain biology.


----------



## xander9727 (Dec 16, 2004)

TM,
There you go again using the laws of physics. What ever happened to old wives tales?


----------



## Tree Machine (Dec 16, 2004)

Wive's tales, propaganda and convention all can be mistaken for knowledge. There's no work in attaining that sort of 'knowledge'. All you have to do is believe it.


----------



## xander9727 (Dec 16, 2004)

You mean a penny and bacon won't really remove infection?

Next you'll try and tell me that men don't have one less rib than women.


----------



## Tree Machine (Dec 16, 2004)

Mebbe a penny seaed into the wound site? Hmmm...? 

OK, enuff. Let's get back to biology.

As Mike also said, not every wound will turn into a cavity. True. This is a crucial point. It is up to the individual climbing practitioner to determine which wound is ien route to becoming a cavity. I see this as a cavity by cavity assesment.

Which wounds might become cavities? Wounds whose bare-wood cross section begins to crack. Wounds whose bare-wood cross section <i>has</i> cracked. Wounds whose bare-wood cross section has visual signs of progressive decay. Wounds whose bare-wood cross section faces upward, or toward prevailing precipitation. 

Here's a few examples:


----------



## xander9727 (Dec 16, 2004)

TM,
I believe you're doing ........research. Keep it up, I'm listening.


----------



## Tree Machine (Dec 17, 2004)

*But isn't research 'academic' ?*



> TM,
> I believe you're doing ........research. Keep it up, I'm listening.



Research? That might be intimidating to the naysayers. For the sake of all, let's break that word down into a definition and see if, indeed, we are doing 'research'.

This is from the _Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary_ 
re-search
1 : Careful or diligent search
2 : Studious inquiry or examination; esp. explanation or experimentation aimed at the discovery
and interpretation of facts and the revision of accepted theories or laws in the light of new
facts.
3 : The practical application of such new revised theories or laws.

Yup, we're doing research.


----------



## Tree Machine (Dec 17, 2004)

Here's a couple more pictures, Mike. These two shots are of the same wound site. Note especially the second image. Image two is in perfect focus at the surface, but is completely out of focus looking into the cavity. This is because the hollow goes way into the heartwood. 

This progression started years ago as a limb having been removed. Any comment, Mike?


----------

