# Decay Detection



## Legit_Arborist (Mar 31, 2010)

What methodology for decay detection do you utilize in the Commercial marketplace? Does anyone have any experiece using PiCUS Sonic Tomography? There is a new completitor for the PiCUS Sonometer called Fakopp...I'll mispell the name I'm sure...Does anyone have any experience with this unit? We are interested in utilizing this type of decay detection at our campus and am interested in feedback.


----------



## treeseer (Apr 2, 2010)

i use a mallet and noninvasive probes, mainly. Stem decay is an exaggerated aspect of tree risk assessment. 

See the entire tree!


----------



## isaaccarlson (Apr 2, 2010)

you have to read the whole tree. look at the roots, bark, branches.....there are times when you have to make a judgement call. I made one a couple days ago. It was a maple that had 3 main trunks joined at the ground. One of them looked kinda funky....it was leaking sap all over so I looked the whole tree over. There was an ant mound at the bottom of the tree and the soil was all moist. Some of the branches were dead/dying and it looked like it might have some center rot. I talked it over with the HO and he said it was up to me. I decided to take the funky looking one down and read the stump. Turned out they were all center rotted and the ants were coming up from what was left of the roots and feeding on the sap. The tree was removed. There are also a few oaks/cherry that need to come down due to center rot/bug infestation.


----------



## tree md (Apr 2, 2010)

Sounds a lot like this tree:












I've shown this to treeseer before and we've discussed it. I had some history with this Red Oak. I had deadwooded it before and treated it for an ant infestation. I also cleaned the rotten wood out of the wound. The HO painted the wound later on without my knowledge. When I came back a year later it had seriously deteriorated. I think painting the wound had a lot to do with it. I cleaned it out again and advised HO not to paint the wound. Finally it deteriorated to the point you see in the pic. I recommended removal. The tree was compromised but I sounded it out with a mallet, looked it over and assessed it as safe enough to rig from. Rigged some pretty large pieces too.


----------



## isaaccarlson (Apr 2, 2010)

looks like you have some fungus in there too. If it were my tree It would come down before getting weaker. IMO. Not good to have a possible blow-over.


----------



## pdqdl (Apr 2, 2010)

I think you will find that the tree maintenance market does not support paying for an expensive machine that provides marginally improved understanding of a tree's condition.

Government institutions and research facilities perhaps, but it would be a very specialized tree assessment business that could justify the expense of such a machine. I suspect that the only time it would be necessary is when you are planning on dealing with lawyers and the courts.

After all, mallets are pretty cheap. With experience, they probably do about as well. Even a Tanaka gas powered drill motor for increment boring would be cheap by comparison.


----------



## Legit_Arborist (Apr 2, 2010)

pdqdl said:


> I think you will find that the tree maintenance market does not support paying for an expensive machine that provides marginally improved understanding of a tree's condition.
> 
> Government institutions and research facilities perhaps, but it would be a very specialized tree assessment business that could justify the expense of such a machine. I suspect that the only time it would be necessary is when you are planning on dealing with lawyers and the courts.
> 
> After all, mallets are pretty cheap. With experience, they probably do about as well. Even a Tanaka gas powered drill motor for increment boring would be cheap by comparison.



I would agree with you. I think the sounding method is obviously very inexpensive and simple...but not always reliable...even if you have a good deal of experience using that method.

The reason I started this thread was because I was curious to get feedback on anyone who had used the Tomography. The digital decay detection instruments are very fascinating and there is one in particular being developed by a young guy out in Holland...I can't remember the name of the device. It's very similar to the PICUS Sonometer but it's name is something like Fakopf. I've seen it in action before and it's really impressive what kind of imagry you can produce.

I understand that most commercial outfits won't find the benefit of using these tools because, let's face it, it's hardly a commercial need. But the right customer or firm that has mature landscaping, especially if the arborscpe is diverse, may find tools such as these very useful. Although, the majority of the time these tools aren't used unless there is some form of consultation by an RCA or BCMA required. Hardly a commercial normality.


----------



## Legit_Arborist (Apr 2, 2010)

tree md said:


> Sounds a lot like this tree:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This is a perfect example of why I'm interested in the advanced devices for decay detection. There was obviously severe branch codominance prior to the limb failure and the arborist probably could have supposed some degree of internal decay...most likey to the degree that sounding would not have been able to detect. Even if the arborist wasn't paid to do an investigation using these tools, one who owned the device could have done the test on their own to confrim or negate their assumptions of potential limb failure and evaluate risk. 

As much as I think the sounding method has it's place, I don't think it would have been able to provide the same level of predictive information that a digital imagery device would provide.


----------



## Legit_Arborist (Apr 2, 2010)

treeseer said:


> i use a mallet and noninvasive probes, mainly. Stem decay is an exaggerated aspect of tree risk assessment.
> 
> See the entire tree!



Treeseer, why do you think that. That sound like an opinion whereas my experience would suggest that stem decay is extremely important to be able to determine both for the safety of climbers and for the evaluation of risk for potential targets.

Not attacking you or trying to be confrontational...just honestly curious as to why you think it's an exaggerated part of risk assessment.


----------



## treeseer (Apr 2, 2010)

Legit_Arborist said:


> Treeseer, why do you think that. That sound like an opinion whereas my experience would suggest that stem decay is extremely important to be able to determine both for the safety of climbers and for the evaluation of risk for potential targets.
> 
> Not attacking you or trying to be confrontational...just honestly curious as to why you think it's an exaggerated part of risk assessment.



Stem failures account for <10% of tree failures, based on 2 very good studies. Yet stem wall thickness is an obsession among some assessors, who overlook roots and branches, and also overlook strength gain factors and mitigation options.

Confronting is cool if it's about opinions not personalities. 

I'd buy a tomograph if i had the cash. I know lots of folks with resistographs.
Next assessment tool I buy will probably be a Shigometer.


----------



## ddhlakebound (Apr 2, 2010)

Legit_Arborist said:


> Treeseer, why do you think that. That sound like an opinion whereas my experience would suggest that stem decay is extremely important to be able to determine both for the safety of climbers and for the evaluation of risk for potential targets.
> 
> Not attacking you or trying to be confrontational...just honestly curious as to why you think it's an exaggerated part of risk assessment.



When a stem is decayed inside, but intact outside, a decay column which is small enough to be missed by sounding is causing a very insignificant strength loss in the stem. We can quantify that strength loss, at the price of invading the stem (or $$$ tomography). If the stem is decayed enough that strength loss is significant, it will be easily noticed by an experienced ear. 

If a wound or canker allows us access to the decay, we can more easily quantify the strength loss with non invasive methods. 

Most failures I've seen occur in bad branch unions, overly extended limbs, and root plate failures. I can only remember 2 times in my limited experience I've seen a column of decay in a main stem as the cause of failure. There are probably a few I'm not remembering. 

That's why it's an "exaggerated" part of hazard assessment. 

When it comes to dynamic rigging, that quantification becomes much more necessary, but you're already in the removal process and can invade the stem to quantify then anyway. 

Are stoplights and street lights kept in the air by a solid metal pole? Why?


----------



## ddhlakebound (Apr 2, 2010)

Legit_Arborist said:


> This is a perfect example of why I'm interested in the advanced devices for decay detection. There was obviously severe branch codominance prior to the limb failure and the arborist probably could have supposed some degree of internal decay...most likey to the degree that sounding would not have been able to detect. Even if the arborist wasn't paid to do an investigation using these tools, one who owned the device could have done the test on their own to confrim or negate their assumptions of potential limb failure and evaluate risk.
> 
> As much as I think the sounding method has it's place, I don't think it would have been able to provide the same level of predictive information that a digital imagery device would provide.



To the first part, why? The original tri-dom stem would have been easy for a noob to see as an eventual failure point. Cabling would have likely prevented the failure, and kept 3/3 of the tree for much longer than 2/3 were allowed to stand. Simple. Cheap. (in comparison) Effective. RW Experienced based. 

How much hands on tomography have you done? Does any of that tomography include disection to verify or nullify the conclusions you drew from the machines output? Don't get me wrong, it's a great tool. I'd love to have one, and learn to use it effectively. But in the end, it's just a tool, and the working arborist holding it MUST be able to accurately interpret the readings. (And that takes usage and disection to verify findings until an experience level is attained.)

But I don't expect you to get that, as you've been nothing but a giant poo-pooer of us working guys who don't know nuthin bout dem dere trees.


----------



## treevet (Apr 2, 2010)

Decay readings are all well and good................if decay was a static entity. Decay, like rust, never sleeps. This is why in conjunction with a decay assessment an identification of the pathogen and its virulence both in intrinsic terms and in relation to its favorable or unfavorable environment is necessary through culture or fruiting body identification or whatever. The whole story, as mentioned above involving other variables must be considered.


----------



## derwoodii (Apr 2, 2010)

I have used Picus often enough to be positive of its benefits. A good mallet is 1st best tool in your kit. But for analysis that can be seen and understood by your customer or lay persons the picus gives a good picture in color of a trees trunk section showing sound vs decay wood.


----------



## jefflovstrom (Apr 2, 2010)

I cannot rep any of you guys- gotta spread it around-But you have provided valued info to a guy that says 15 years in a research lab. Interesting.
Jeff


----------



## treevet (Apr 2, 2010)

"Diagnosis and Prognosis of the Development of Wood Decay in Urban Trees", by Francis Schwarze is a good read (didn't say easy.....or cheap) if you really want to arm yourself with knowledge about this subject.


----------



## ozzy42 (Apr 2, 2010)

tree md said:


> Sounds a lot like this tree:


Aahh ,That's just surface rust.I could get that out with a buffer.


----------



## treemandan (Apr 2, 2010)

jefflovstrom said:


> I cannot rep any of you guys- gotta spread it around-But you have provided valued info to a guy that says 15 years in a research lab. Interesting.
> Jeff



Man you all seem to have that guy in the red!


----------



## derwoodii (Apr 2, 2010)

treevet said:


> "Diagnosis and Prognosis of the Development of Wood Decay in Urban Trees", by Francis Schwarze is a good read (didn't say easy.....or cheap) if you really want to arm yourself with knowledge about this subject.



Your right not easy read at all. I spent a week with this chap learning his craft. What a interesting bloke an English German who plays the the violin. Then relates how decay and wood growth affects/improves the sound quality of wood instruments.


----------



## treevet (Apr 2, 2010)

derwoodii said:


> Then relates how decay and wood growth affects/improves the sound quality of wood instruments.



He and Shigo would have much in common.


----------



## derwoodii (Apr 2, 2010)

Sadly I never got to met Shigo. He was kinda my tree guru. I worked for the company that brought him and his learnings to OZ in the early 80ies. Then each of his visits down under after I was else where. 
Schwarze was great, I had 5 days learned about 5% of his lesson, which translated to about 95% more than I did know. He and Claus Mattheck who is kinda the dark lord or Ozzie Osbourne of trees are both worthy to learn from.


----------



## treevet (Apr 2, 2010)

derwoodii said:


> Schwarze was great, I had 5 days learned about 5% of his lesson, which translated to about 95% more than I did know.



Shigo used to say "I will leave you still confused but you will be in a much higher level of confusion".


----------



## Legit_Arborist (Apr 3, 2010)

derwoodii said:


> I have used Picus often enough to be positive of its benefits. A good mallet is 1st best tool in your kit. But for analysis that can be seen and understood by your customer or lay persons the picus gives a good picture in color of a trees trunk section showing sound vs decay wood.



I absolutely agree with you. Sounding is a very good hands-on approach, especially since having advanced detection systems are both expensive and take time to set-up and use. When in the field...especially before a climb, it would be unrealistic to suggest using tomography and resistography to judge the safety of a tree.

I guess I'm just fascinated about it's implications toward research and how the imagery can substantiate observations made before actually cutting a tree down. They also help, if and when accurate, to convince a tree owner about the safety value of their tree to make the decision to remove it more reasonable.


----------



## Legit_Arborist (Apr 3, 2010)

treemandan said:


> Man you all seem to have that guy in the red!



I don't really care. See, I can log off of this site and forget about all of you and enjoy my sleep. Jefflovstrum obviously has a personal issue with someone in his area and believes it to be me. So yes, apparently I'm the target. Jefflovstrum, you should move on, I have...you'll never know who I am so just accept that and go to bed.


----------



## Legit_Arborist (Apr 3, 2010)

treevet said:


> "Diagnosis and Prognosis of the Development of Wood Decay in Urban Trees", by Francis Schwarze is a good read (didn't say easy.....or cheap) if you really want to arm yourself with knowledge about this subject.



I own it and use it as reference.


----------



## Legit_Arborist (Apr 3, 2010)

treeseer said:


> Stem failures account for <10% of tree failures, based on 2 very good studies. Yet stem wall thickness is an obsession among some assessors, who overlook roots and branches, and also overlook strength gain factors and mitigation options.
> 
> Confronting is cool if it's about opinions not personalities.
> 
> ...



That's a great factoid about stem failures. The California Tree Failure Report also has a great deal of tree failure statistics. Overlooking roots and branches is foolish and I am also aware that many stem failures are caused by decay from branch failures of wood decay fungi of roots as well. 

So even though stem failures account for a smaller sample of tree failures, the decay detection devices available to measure internal decay are interesting. I've used the Fakopf device 2x by happenstance with the developer of the device and really enjoyed what it can do. I want to know if anyone in hear has ever used them and if they've found it to be beneficial.


----------



## Legit_Arborist (Apr 3, 2010)

ddhlakebound said:


> When a stem is decayed inside, but intact outside, a decay column which is small enough to be missed by sounding is causing a very insignificant strength loss in the stem. We can quantify that strength loss, at the price of invading the stem (or $$$ tomography). If the stem is decayed enough that strength loss is significant, it will be easily noticed by an experienced ear.
> 
> If a wound or canker allows us access to the decay, we can more easily quantify the strength loss with non invasive methods.
> 
> ...



Great response. I can see your point on why you considerate "exaggerated."


----------



## derwoodii (Apr 3, 2010)

Legit_Arborist said:


> I absolutely agree with you. Sounding is a very good hands-on approach, especially since having advanced detection systems are both expensive and take time to set-up and use. When in the field...especially before a climb, it would be unrealistic to suggest using tomography and resistography to judge the safety of a tree.
> 
> I guess I'm just fascinated about it's implications toward research and how the imagery can substantiate observations made before actually cutting a tree down. They also help, if and when accurate, to convince a tree owner about the safety value of their tree to make the decision to remove it more reasonable.



Picus as a pre climb hazard assessment tool unlikely, I never had a tree that gave cause, we sense a trees structure with eyes hands and feet.
I am about to field trial a Infra red camera, says it can highlite indicators of structure in a tree body language far better than your eyes. Pre trial sales pitch looks quite good, not super convincing but all these tools are worthy of a look n support as they are cutting edge enterprises trying to better our understanding.
Let you know in about a month.


----------



## treevet (Apr 3, 2010)

Quite often you can do a pre climb hazard assessment and deem a tree unsafe to climb and if you aren't an armchair arborist (like you are) you have to go up there anyway .....or someone else will (and bye bye client).

Jeff Lovstrom is not the only one that dislikes your demeanor and attempts at condescension. NOBODY here thinks you are anything more than a noob (yet). You haven't said anything yet that struck me as anything more than average.


----------



## treeseer (Apr 3, 2010)

Wow, someone more condescending than me? Glad to have you here! 

"Decay, like rust, never sleeps."

Sorry Dave, as much as I love Neil Young and musical metaphor, decay does sleep--die?-- when it is walled off and denied oxygen.

I looked into the Fakopp from afar when writing the decay detection devices article for arborist news, but have no personal knowledge of its use.

A week with Schwarze...you lucky bastid!

ddh, thanks for paying attention to the trees!


----------



## treevet (Apr 3, 2010)

treeseer said:


> Wow, someone more condescending than me? Glad to have you here!



didn't go that far Guy


----------



## derwoodii (Apr 3, 2010)

"Decay, like rust, never sleeps."

A week with Schwarze...you lucky bastid!

Heres some light reading martial from Schwarze Mr fun-guy :monkey: Its heavy going, the pictures work better for me. Later today I try n post a few trees picus jobs. One that years later failed though its column wall (my fault) One that the test was spot on.
For further picus info.
http://www.enspec.com/

Off today, shoot a few tin cans then 1960 70 80ies road, dirt, trials & x bike show.


----------



## Legit_Arborist (Apr 3, 2010)

derwoodii said:


> Picus as a pre climb hazard assessment tool unlikely, I never had a tree that gave cause, we sense a trees structure with eyes hands and feet.
> I am about to field trial a Infra red camera, says it can highlite indicators of structure in a tree body language far better than your eyes. Pre trial sales pitch looks quite good, not super convincing but all these tools are worthy of a look n support as they are cutting edge enterprises trying to better our understanding.
> Let you know in about a month.



Let me know how that goes. That sounds very interesting.


----------



## Legit_Arborist (Apr 3, 2010)

treevet said:


> Quite often you can do a pre climb hazard assessment and deem a tree unsafe to climb and if you aren't an armchair arborist (like you are) you have to go up there anyway .....or someone else will (and bye bye client).
> 
> Jeff Lovstrom is not the only one that dislikes your demeanor and attempts at condescension. NOBODY here thinks you are anything more than a noob (yet). You haven't said anything yet that struck me as anything more than average.



Good thing I'm not looking for you to employ me then isn't it. I could really care less about your assessment of me. Thank you for the free personal evaluation though. Those are always so fun to receive.


----------



## treeclimber101 (Apr 3, 2010)

Decay Detection = look for fungus , cavities , and if climbing the tree use the tree very little for rigging and or tie in, cavemanish perhaps but it has worked so far, and a resistograph no can't justify it..


----------



## treevet (Apr 3, 2010)

treeclimber101 said:


> Decay Detection = look for fungus , cavities , and if climbing the tree use the tree very little for rigging and or tie in, cavemanish perhaps but it has worked so far, and a resistograph no can't justify it..



We are discussing how to detect the EXTENT of the cavity or fungal attack (delignified wood) so as to make a decision on "risk" of failure to target/s and whether or not to intervene someway if necessary by mitigation or eradication. 

How do you do that 101?


----------



## treeclimber101 (Apr 3, 2010)

treevet said:


> We are discussing how to detect the EXTENT of the cavity or fungal attack (delignified wood) so as to make a decision on "risk" of failure to target/s and whether or not to intervene someway if necessary by mitigation or eradication.
> 
> How do you do that 101?


Of what the tree , thats what I eradicate when a customer calls with a tree with considerable damage , I take no chances when it comes to safety of a tree , and when in doubt which there always is in decaying trees my first reaction and recommendation is removal, especially with all THE LEGIT ARBORISTS SWIMMING THE WATERS. Good luck in your quest to eradicate dacay . Maybe you an talk the owner into a ten yr. program of scribing out the decay ...., and filling the cavity with concrete, lol..


----------



## treevet (Apr 3, 2010)

treeclimber101 said:


> Always is in decaying trees my first reaction and recommendation is removal, especially with all THE LEGIT ARBORISTS SWIMMING THE WATERS.



:monkey:


----------



## treeclimber101 (Apr 3, 2010)

treevet said:


> :monkey:



, you know what an expert witness is right , Oh Holy One


----------



## derwoodii (Apr 4, 2010)

Legit_Arborist said:


> Let me know how that goes. That sounds very interesting.



Thermal IR of Trees. I had to cut down article to get it to attach. Only one pic, but it shows where concept is coming from.
Extract 
As a result, cooler areas Blue appear at the surface that is associated with the altered or destroyed tissues below the surface. Warmer areas Yellow Red can be interpreted as being associated with healthy tissues and cooler areas can be interpreted as being associated with altered or destroyed tissues.


----------



## outofmytree (Apr 4, 2010)

> Wow, someone more condescending than me? Glad to have you here!





> didn't go that far Guy



You guys remind me of Jack Lemmon and Walter Mathau in Grumpy Old Men. Who gets Sophia Loren?


----------



## treeseer (Apr 4, 2010)

Thanks derwoodii, interesting image, shows rot at crevices wiht included bark, right where it usually is. the rot could also have been assessed by excavation but that is dirtier work and not near as pretty. digging also a good bit cheaper.  but has limits when decay is more extensive.

101, that is a beyootiful pic; shows a tree that has covered an infection so well that it may be stronger than it was before infection started, like a human bone adds extra tissue to be stronger. 

your cya on recommending removal whenever you see rot is not defendable. no need to fear expert witnesses; it's truth that (usually) wins out, and you as a knowledgeable practitioner may be more of an expert than someone with more college than field experience. 
o and i think vet was talking about eradicating the risk by eradicating the tree. however, rot like in that thermal image may indeeed be eradicated if excavated and exposed. in any case less fussin and fightin please. 

oomt, Sophia can go with me; I'm less grumpy!


----------



## treevet (Apr 4, 2010)

treeseer said:


> > o and i think vet was talking about eradicating the risk by eradicating the tree. however, rot like in that thermal image may indeeed be eradicated if excavated and exposed.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## tree md (Apr 4, 2010)

This thermal imaging is interesting to me. 

I had a friend come down from IA a couple of years back. He is some kind of big wheel for the postal service. Not sure of his title but he is over maintenance in some capacity. Anyway, he was training at one of our large postal training facilities down here and stayed with me while he was in school (we're old hunting buddies and he also does tree work). He was telling me about the thermal imaging device he was training on. He said that you could scan mechanisms with it and see things like areas where bearings are wearing out and whatnot by the heat signature it put off. He said it is part of a preventative maintenance plan the postal service was implementing to try and save money by solving small mechanical problems before they become big ones. He said it is the way of the future. I never considered it could be applied to arborculture.

Interesting stuff.


----------



## derwoodii (Apr 4, 2010)

tree md said:


> This thermal imaging is interesting to me.
> 
> I had a friend come down from IA a couple of years back. He is some kind of big wheel for the postal service. Not sure of his title but he is over maintenance in some capacity. Anyway, he was training at one of our large postal training facilities down here and stayed with me while he was in school (we're old hunting buddies and he also does tree work). He was telling me about the thermal imaging device he was training on. He said that you could scan mechanisms with it and see things like areas where bearings are wearing out and whatnot by the heat signature it put off. He said it is part of a preventative maintenance plan the postal service was implementing to try and save money by solving small mechanical problems before they become big ones. He said it is the way of the future. I never considered it could be applied to arborculture.
> 
> Interesting stuff.



Yup the article is about 1+ meg so I cannot post it. It has many good pictures of about 3 - 4 interesting large test trees, before normal and then IR vision. If any want, PM me we can figure out how to pass on.
I,m pending use of gear by a company down here. They will look at a tree we have picus history and then we can look at the IR as compare.

Critics may scoff at this new fangle techno but I say, Thats what was said about fire and the wheel. 
Yes you can see what IR shows with ya own eyes, but this is brand new so be patient.


----------



## treeseer (Apr 4, 2010)

derwoodii said:


> They will look at a tree we have picus history and then we can look at the IR as compare.
> 
> Critics may scoff at this new fangle techno but I say, Thats what was said about fire and the wheel.
> Yes you can see what IR shows with ya own eyes, but this is brand new so be patient.



by golly there may be science going on here.


----------



## treevet (Apr 4, 2010)

derwoodii said:


> Yup the article is about 1+ meg so I cannot post it. It has many good pictures of about 3 - 4 interesting large test trees, before normal and then IR vision. If any want, PM me we can figure out how to pass on.
> I,m pending use of gear by a company down here. They will look at a tree we have picus history and then we can look at the IR as compare.
> 
> Critics may scoff at this new fangle techno but I say, Thats what was said about fire and the wheel.
> Yes you can see what IR shows with ya own eyes, but this is brand new so be patient.



All well and good.....we have identified a defect, quantified its volume and hopefully the species of pathogen....we have considered the environment and its effects on success of the primary pathogen or the sequence of pathogens......great.....and we have looked at the whole picture in making an educated decision as to how to react or not react at all....but

what are we going to do about the pathogen because as I mentioned before...fungi (live fungi Guy) like rust...never sleeps. The defect we have quantified is not going to remain the same as when quantified. Trichoderma may stall the invasion but how can it be replenished to be effective and I doubt very much if Guy's blowtorch is going to eradicate the problem.

Are we back to square one?


----------



## treeseer (Apr 4, 2010)

treevet said:


> ...fungi (live fungi ) like rust...never sleeps. The defect we have quantified is not going to remain the same as when quantified.
> Are we back to square one?



living rust sleeps, or creeps, or leaps, or dies.

shoot man who is counting? 

i forgot--is this a hypothetical tree or real?


----------



## tree md (Apr 4, 2010)

Guy is going to show up with a couple of heavy hitters and a blow torch and eradicate the problem... He's gonna get medieval with that fungi... :hmm3grin2orange:


----------



## derwoodii (Apr 4, 2010)

treevet said:


> Are we back to square one?



Yeah kinda but I say we are about square 1.2 we now know a wee bit more. Here's a subject I failed. A big old Poplar with a mechanical wound to base ? hmm lets check it out with picus. 5 years ago report said do A ,B,C & D and tree should be retainable. I did A.B & C and forgot about D the follow up retest. Dam thing could a killed some one.










I was looking at the wrong spot the decay had moved ?? upwards not traditional downwards. Claus t/r ratio says @32% sound I reckon had about 29% left and decay had broken out of the column.
So depending on your species the Codit may hold n seal for useful life span, clearly not so with Poplars.
Another story to tell, Codit is very good with many of our hard wood gums.


----------



## treevet (Apr 5, 2010)

have bitten my lip long enough and nobody else is gonna say it but.........

"decay in trees is over rated" is hogwash. Also the person who compared a tree stem to a steel pole and said something like "why don't they make the poles solid?" Well.....try taking a chunk out of the hollow steel pole in a flex point from the wind and see if it doesn't fold right in that spot.

pls note next post


----------



## treevet (Apr 5, 2010)

treeseer said:


> i Stem decay is an exaggerated aspect of tree risk assessment.



everybody afraid to challenge this generalization?


----------



## pdqdl (Apr 5, 2010)

I think that the point being made with the street light analogy was that a hollow structure is adequately strong to do the job. 

We have all seen hollow trees that were still standing with no signs of decline many years after decay had presented obvious signs of structural damage. Hence the conclusion that hidden stem decay is not generally as important an element of risk assessment as "obviously rotten, needing to come down".

Of course, I would love it if all my customers would call me to remove every tree that might have some hidden decay. I could buy me a new *Detect-A-Rot Pro3000* (made in China), and go make a bunch of money condemning trees. I could get paid to remove trees that are not huge rotten risks, and then maybe get paid to plant replacements, too.

So far, there are no signs of that happening. 

In fact, I have never been called to come evaluate a healthy looking tree for hidden decay, so detecting any hidden decay is a rather moot point. I often get asked to provide a recommendation for a tree close to a structure that may or may not already be compromised. So far, I have not felt any need for sophisticated equipment.

Personal story: My children's babysitter once asked me to look at her rather large hackberry tree, that had a sunken area in the lawn next to the trunk on the north side of the tree, and was showing some pretty obvious damage. Hackberry trees in this area are also notorious for stem failures. She was concerned that it was going to fall on the children while they were playing.

I advised her that there was no signs of dieback in the crown, that the tree was obviously thriving, and that in the absence of a big wind the tree would probably continue to thrive for another 15 years. I also advised her that the prevailing stormy winds were generally from the south, and that the tree was strongest on the south side, but that hackberry trees were notorious for breaking off in the wind. I suggested that she move the swingset, that there was probably little risk to any children, because they were not going to be playing under the tree in a big windstorm. My conclusion was something like "Sure, it will blow over in a big wind, but nothing was going to fall off the tree in fair weather".

She called me the very next week to clean up the blown over tree! 

As I had predicted, it went over in exactly the direction and conditions that I had predicted, and it was a heck of a lot cheaper to pick up the pieces than to remove in a conventional manner.




BTW: the new *Detect-A-Rot Pro3000* comes with the slogan of "Your new Detect-A-Rot will detect a lot of new business" (try saying this with your best Charlie Chan fake Chinese accent)


----------



## tree md (Apr 5, 2010)

treevet said:


> have bitten my lip long enough and nobody else is gonna say it but.........
> 
> "decay in trees is over rated" is hogwash. Also the person who compared a tree stem to a steel pole and said something like "why don't they make the poles solid?" Well.....try taking a chunk out of the hollow steel pole in a flex point from the wind and see if it doesn't fold right in that spot.
> 
> pls note next post



When I get called out to advise whether or not a decaying tree needs to come out I am always going to recommend removal when it is over the house. Yes, I have seen plenty of hollow trees that have done just fine but I have also seen a lot twist over and break off. I'm not going to tell someone who is asking my opinion that the tree is safe if it is rotting and leaning over their children's bedroom. I'm just not going to take a chance like that. I'd rather be wrong and remove the tree than be wrong, leave it and it fail.


----------



## treeclimber101 (Apr 5, 2010)

treevet said:


> have bitten my lip long enough and nobody else is gonna say it but.........
> 
> "decay in trees is over rated" is hogwash. Also the person who compared a tree stem to a steel pole and said something like "why don't they make the poles solid?" Well.....try taking a chunk out of the hollow steel pole in a flex point from the wind and see if it doesn't fold right in that spot.
> 
> pls note next post


I agree with you .... Your still a tool though....


----------



## Legit_Arborist (Apr 5, 2010)

treevet said:


> have bitten my lip long enough and nobody else is gonna say it but.........
> 
> "decay in trees is over rated" is hogwash. Also the person who compared a tree stem to a steel pole and said something like "why don't they make the poles solid?" Well.....try taking a chunk out of the hollow steel pole in a flex point from the wind and see if it doesn't fold right in that spot.
> 
> pls note next post



Thank you. I agree. Wouldn't matter if I had said that. I don't perform the physical work so my comments don't carry any weight apparently.


----------



## treevet (Apr 5, 2010)

treeclimber101 said:


> I agree with you .... Your still a tool though....



yeah.....a jackhammer that's gonna break up that concrete inside your head one of these days


----------



## treevet (Apr 5, 2010)

Legit_Arborist said:


> Thank you. I agree. Wouldn't matter if I had said that. I don't perform the physical work so my comments don't carry any weight apparently.



Hang around and keep at it and you will gain a little weight :newbie:


----------



## treevet (Apr 5, 2010)

pdqdl said:


> > I think that the point being made with the street light analogy was that a hollow structure is adequately strong to do the job.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## pdqdl (Apr 5, 2010)

Treevet, I'm not picking any argument with you, I was only justifying the analogy posted by another. 

I believe the contention posited by ddhlakebound was that the strength of a tree with difficult to detect damage (wall thickness great enough to mask the damage from sounding) is not mitigated so greatly that it requires condemnation. I believe that his analogy to the strength of a hollow structure like a street light was on target, and is further supported by your own assertion regarding the consequences of removing a chunk from that same structure. Too much damage is both obvious to detect and obviously cause for alarm.

Perhaps I have erred in assuming that the fancy machines are for targeting hidden damage, which seemed to be ddhlakebound's take on this thread. I have always presumed that a big hole in a tree was pretty obvious, and didn't need much more evaluation. 

My comments regarding physiological decline in conjuction with elevated risk of failure are based on my personal observations only. I don't think that I have ever encountered a tree that was shown by sounding to be defective and hazardous that did not also have some pretty obvious signs of failure all over the tree. Either it will have fungal growths erupting from the trunk, or prominent cavities higher in the tree, and most often shows crown dieback.

When the procession of disease exceeds the rate that the girth of the tree is increasing, the vigor of the tree declines, and it is obvious that it is time to go. _Sounding invariably detects this advanced condition, as you are aware._

Given sufficiently adverse weather, even a perfectly healthy tree will blow over. No amount of currently available hazard assessment can quantify all the risks involving a potential tree failure, except only total removal. This is something that I am quite pleased to do for my customers, but usually only after I advise them that it is going to take a big wind to send it over.

Now if someone could develop a system that could accurately quantify wind loading, tree stem strength, and root ball stability, so that it could be stated that any given tree will blow over at X wind velocity, then I would support that all the way.

Until then, I'll keep my splitting axe ready to pound on the trees a bit before I cut into them.


----------



## ddhlakebound (Apr 5, 2010)

pdqdl said:


> Treevet, I'm not picking any argument with you, I was only justifying the analogy posted by another.
> 
> I believe the contention posited by ddhlakebound was that the strength of a tree with difficult to detect damage (wall thickness great enough to mask the damage from sounding) is not mitigated so greatly that it requires condemnation. I believe that his analogy to the strength of a hollow structure like a street light was on target, and is further supported by your own assertion regarding the consequences of removing a chunk from that same structure. Too much damage is both obvious to detect and obviously cause for alarm.
> 
> ...



Thanks pdqdl. I wanted to post a response this morning, but no time....You explained it better than I could have anyway.


----------



## treevet (Apr 5, 2010)

Points taken pdqdl. You can scope a tree and quantify it and just out of range upward or downward it could be drastically different and you have not read that. I have a great example of that in a centuries old Bur oak nearby which was hit by lightning and has a 70 foot defect that would be prohibitively difficult logistically to read the entire fault. So you do the best you can to mitigate and see if the client can withstand the risk. If you could read it all you likely would do the same thing.

Not many years ago before the Resistograph but long after the Shigometer (which takes a high level of expertise to decipher) I went to an IAA seminar (they have great seminars) at Purdue University where a drill was the only tool used. You simply drilled a hole into the perceived defect with a very small diameter bit (long enough) until you transitioned from sound wood to altered wood which could be judged by the shavings emitted. You took a reading at 4 sites around the perimeter and obtained a percentage that was evaluated against a threshold. This was a very high level group putting on this risk eval. seminar of whom I cannot recall but could find in the material if pressed. Internationally renown. 

Invasive....yes...significantly...who knows. The Resistograph requires wounding as does the Shiogometer. Picus...not so. But may be prohibitively expensive for the private tree care owner. Don't even see any large tree co.s employing them likely for that reason around here. I have asked.


----------



## treeseer (Apr 5, 2010)

The difference between "When I get called out to advise whether or not a decaying tree needs to come out I am always going to recommend removal when it is over the house." and



treevet said:


> So you do the best you can to mitigate and see if the client can withstand the risk.


is knowledge and field experience. You're right, Legit--not working in the field is a serious limit. But field work is only half the story; book work is the other.

" You simply drilled a hole into the perceived defect with a very small diameter bit (long enough) until you transitioned from sound wood to altered wood which could be judged by the shavings emitted. You took a reading at 4 sites around the perimeter and obtained a percentage that was evaluated against a threshold. This was a very high level group putting on this risk eval. seminar "

This method has been roundly discredited due to unreliable use of formulas and unjustified wounding and different thresholds for different species, as derwoodii showed.. Plus, stem failures are rare; we need to look more to the flare and the forks.


----------



## tree md (Apr 5, 2010)

treeseer said:


> The difference between "When I get called out to advise whether or not a decaying tree needs to come out I am always going to recommend removal when it is over the house." and
> 
> 
> is knowledge and field experience. You're right, Legit--not working in the field is a serious limit. But field work is only half the story; book work is the other.
> ...



LOL, if I remember correctly Guy, you advised me to not remove that tree I posted the picture of. I am not in the business of taking chances with a client's life and property on the possibility that the tree might be sound enough to make it. I'm in the hazard mitigation business. It's just a tree, another one will grow in it's place. Is it really worth risking life and property over?


----------



## treevet (Apr 5, 2010)

treeseer said:


> " You simply drilled a hole into the perceived defect with a very small diameter bit (long enough) until you transitioned from sound wood to altered wood which could be judged by the shavings emitted. You took a reading at 4 sites around the perimeter and obtained a percentage that was evaluated against a threshold. This was a very high level group putting on this risk eval. seminar "
> 
> This method has been roundly discredited due to unreliable use of formulas and unjustified wounding and different thresholds for different species, as derwoodii showed.. Plus, stem failures are rare; we need to look more to the flare and the forks.



Just pointing out that this was THE state of the art by those that do the crediting and discrediting with far more credentials than you or I. How far have we come since then? Not very....but working on it. Will or can it every be science? I say no because just too many variables.

In that case the tools were simple and available and affordable. Tomography tools are complicated, unavailable and unaffordable. Got to look at the whole picture just like you advised in regards to the tree.

Tell me a little about your recent "sounding" readings.

PS. If you think stem failures are rare take a walk through the woods and find most shears in the 4 foot range. Decay more often than not the villain.


----------



## tree md (Apr 5, 2010)

treevet said:


> Just pointing out that this was THE state of the art by those that do the crediting and discrediting with far more credentials than you or I. How far have we come since then? Not very....but working on it. Will or can it every be science? I say no because just too many variables.
> 
> In that case the tools were simple and available and affordable. Tomography tools are complicated, unavailable and unaffordable. Got to look at the whole picture just like you advised in regards to the tree.
> 
> ...



I spend a lot of time in the woods and see this as well. I'll try to take some pics next time I go to one of my favorite areas in the woods. There are 4 mature white Oaks that are broke over 3-4 feet on the stem within about a 250 yard strip of woods. I'm sure there are more around but these are just the big, mature trees that I have noticed.

I have have also cleaned up the mess on more than a few that have failed at the stem over the years. I think I've got some pics of some somewhere... I'll look.


----------



## treevet (Apr 5, 2010)

That is the prob w finding evidence in the residential setting. Stumps are Ghandi...where as in the woods...still there for all to see.


----------



## derwoodii (Apr 9, 2011)

Well I had a old gum with some nasty decay looked at by Thermal camera and the best determination assumptions were made with this new technology. We then dismantled and sectioned up the trunk so able to see what was going on inside. The thermal results kinda got some bits right but missed lead us in others areas. Its tricky and much to learn on how to interpret the images, this twas more a suck it n see test piece.
For me I,m not so convinced at the mo of any great future, but I reckon like all new ideas you need to be patient and supportive of any who wish to try. Perhaps in time it may show things that we can not see now.


----------



## treeseer (Apr 9, 2011)

derwoodii said:


> Well I had a old gum with some nasty decay looked at by Thermal camera and the best determination assumptions were made with this new technology. We then dismantled and sectioned up the trunk so able to see what was going on inside. The thermal results kinda got some bits right but missed lead us in others areas. Its tricky and much to learn on how to interpret the images, this twas more a suck it n see test piece.



Good on you for giving it a go. is the camera yours? would be interested in more about that experience. looking at tomographs myself now, as you may have seen in arbor age.


----------



## pdqdl (Apr 14, 2011)

Never done it, so my comments might be way off track, but what the heck. Everybody has an opinion, right?

Thermal imaging is likely to only show areas of very active biological growth, which probably translates to moist areas that are really simmering with decomposition organisms working overtime. These conditions are very likely to occur where there is lots of decay, but that does not mean that decay will be restricted to the hot spots.

You will most likely find the hot spots where there is lots of bacterial decomposition in addition to fungal, and there is most likely to be a requirement that the affected areas have some sort of stratification present that restricts air movement and cooling. Otherwise, it might be growing a lot, you just wouldn't see it.

On the other hand, heavily decomposed areas that are dry are probably not going to show up because the decay has sucked most of the energy out of the wood, and the heat producing bloom of decay organisms just isn't supported by the local conditions anymore.


----------



## pdqdl (Apr 14, 2011)

*A foolproof decay technology, waiting to be invented.*

There is technology available that can easily and accurately tell us the extent of decay in a tree. Plus it is non-invasive, and would not even spread disease. Too bad it doesn't exist in any form useful for tree diagnosis that I am aware of:

Ground penetrating radar!

These contraptions can see through solid objects and generate 3-D views of them:Ground-penetrating radar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Pipe Penetrating Radar (PPR) is an application of GPR technologies applied in-pipe where the signals are directed through pipe and conduit walls to detect pipe wall thickness and voids behind the pipe walls."

_I suspect that it will be a long time before this technology graduates to trees._


----------



## treeseer (Apr 14, 2011)

i saw this demo'd in 2005, and know guys who use it to find roots (dependably) and also trunk decay (kinda sometimes)

o and the hotspots seen by thermal cam are of tree growth, not fungal growth.


----------



## jefflovstrom (Apr 14, 2011)

I am still waiting for a lab report so we can procede.
Jeff :msp_smile:


----------



## jefflovstrom (Apr 14, 2011)

Yeah, I sprelled proceed rong! I know!
Jeff :msp_tongue:


----------



## jefflovstrom (Apr 14, 2011)

In California, we deal with ' heat sink'.
Jeff


----------



## sgreanbeans (Apr 15, 2011)

jefflovstrom said:


> I am still waiting for a lab report so we can procede.
> Jeff :msp_smile:


 
A little garlic, some Goya Mojo sauce and a hot grill, we in bizness


----------



## sgreanbeans (Apr 15, 2011)

With dollars and cents in mind, how much is the shigo one as compared to resisto? I like the resistograph, going to get one this year if the season goes as as planned


----------



## Legit_Arborist (May 11, 2011)

jefflovstrom said:


> I am still waiting for a lab report so we can procede.
> Jeff :msp_smile:


 
Try omphalatus oleatus - pretty common


----------



## Legit_Arborist (May 11, 2011)

jefflovstrom said:


> I am still waiting for a lab report so we can procede.
> Jeff :msp_smile:


 
You should take a bite out of it....yummy! Let me know how the diarrhea festival that will ensue treats you.


----------



## Legit_Arborist (May 18, 2011)

Legit_Arborist said:


> You should take a bite out of it....yummy! Let me know how the diarrhea festival that will ensue treats you.


 
However...due to it's location on the stem...it could actually be _Pleurotus oysterus_ "oyster mushroom" in if so....very very edible! Get out the butter!


----------



## BonnieSue (May 18, 2011)

*Can an expert tell me an opinion about this tree*

 
Can an expert take a look at this tree and tell me what you think. I've had a lumber company take a look at the picture and was told to have an arborist give me advice. I've been after landlord to get this tree off the property since I moved in. Now it have ruined my car. BAD!! :msp_angry: I would greatly appreciate HONEST reply's. I feel as if I do not have a leg to stand on here. By looking at this tree I would have to determine internal decay but i'm not the expert, which is why I turned to this website. I hear it is very successful and if i needed the RIGHT answer than this was the website to come to. Please help me! View attachment 184496
View attachment 184497
View attachment 184498
View attachment 184496
View attachment 184497
View attachment 184498


----------



## jefflovstrom (May 18, 2011)

I hope 'Legit_Arborist' answer's, because he is AWESOME!!!!!
Jeff :msp_tongue:


----------



## jefflovstrom (May 18, 2011)

BonnieSue said:


> Can an expert take a look at this tree and tell me what you think. I've had a lumber company take a look at the picture and was told to have an arborist give me advice. I've been after landlord to get this tree off the property since I moved in. Now it have ruined my car. BAD!! :msp_angry: I would greatly appreciate HONEST reply's. I feel as if I do not have a leg to stand on here. By looking at this tree I would have to determine internal decay but i'm not the expert, which is why I turned to this website. I hear it is very successful and if i needed the RIGHT answer than this was the website to come to. Please help me! View attachment 184496
> View attachment 184497
> View attachment 184498
> View attachment 184496
> ...


 
You can search a qualified guy here,\.
Jeff 
International Society of Arboriculture


----------



## jefflovstrom (May 18, 2011)

jefflovstrom said:


> You can search a qualified guy here,\.
> Jeff
> International Society of Arboriculture


 
Look to the top right and click on what you are.
Jeff


----------



## BonnieSue (May 18, 2011)

jefflovstrom said:


> Look to the top right and click on what you are.
> Jeff


 
Thank you so much. I will contact them.


----------

