Cute little test

[MasterBlaster]

I scored 86%

http://www.plantamnesty.org/quiz.htm


Hey Gypo come take a test!

Ya love tests, right?

 

[seanlarkin]

I got 81%. It's amazing how much I've learned just doing our catalog and through the message boards. More amazing still is how much more there is to learn.

 

[Gypo Logger]

I scored 57%, but then again, I'm dumber than a sack of hammers.
John

 

[Gord]

86%...some of them are slippery!

 

[NickfromWI]

I got 95%! I have to figure out which one I got wrong.

love
nick

Cool website, MB

 

[NickfromWI]

As it turns out, I got 100%. Here is the one they say I got wrong...


6. Trees require pruning in order to:
a. corrrect structural defects and remove dead branches.
b. ensure blooming by forcing new growth.
c. control size.
d. None of the above


I said D, as I am a tree hugger and recognize that trees do not REQUIRE pruning. I disagree with that blanket statement. Perhaps if it said something along the lines of "Pruning can be beneficial for trees because it can:

Oh well. Let me email them and share my opinion.

love
nick

 

[Guy Meilleur]

Originally posted by NickfromWI
Oh well. Let me email them and share my opinion.

Take a number and pack a lunch. I emailed a response to the article on dropcrotching, with compliments and a few small questions, weeks ago and heard nada. Hope you have better luck!

I got tricked on the years-to-size question--oaks and pines here ain't near full height at 25 yrs. o well.

 

[Ax-man]

I got 86% ,, Since when are kites regular visitors to trees,,, That last question could go either way with a or b, depending on who is doing what to the tree, if it has a problem.

 

[kurtztree]

I got 81% need more studying I guess

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

I don't agree with a lot of the answers.

Guy, I liked your letter in TCI. I too found the article a little strident and opinionated.

Though i also applaud what Cass is trying to do in educating the public.

 

[MasterBlaster]

Originally posted by Ax-man
I got 86% ,, Since when are kites regular visitors to trees,,,

I removed a trampoline from a tree once.

It was barely damaged!

 

[treehugger01]

i scored 71 guess im the dumb ass huh?
Thanks ok i just got a silky gomatro and my arborist study guid is on its way..
I look forward to trying the gomatro it sure is a sharp hand saw.
Did I do ok buying it?
cheers!
edit
nope gypo is the dumb ass haha gyro. right on

 

[Guy Meilleur]

Originally posted by John Paul Sanborn
Guy, I liked your letter in TCI. I too found the article a little strident and opinionated.
they published it? how'd I miss that? If so that was a bigf freebie.
Yeah strident is the right word. All opinions, while blasting others for...opinionating!
Though i also applaud what Cass is trying to do in educating the public.

Me too, I've been a huge plantamnesty fan and member for years. Cass is the goddess of shrub shaping, and funny too.
The test was fun, and though we can suggest improvements in the questions, it's good for the general public.
But the article was for arborists, in TCI, and though I agreed with the majority of her opinions, that is what they were.

If it had been submitted to Arborist News, their reviewers would have probably tossed it for lack of data. They are tough that way, trust me. But when you look at TCI and AN sidebyside now TCI has much more good content.
Didn't it used to be the other way around?
What happened?

O and treehugger, 71 is passing; you can move to the next level!

 

[Stumper]

I got 90%. One of my "wrong" answers I disagree with the tester and the other -I don't know where the scientific data is -my answer is consistent with my observations. I concur that some of the questions were less than ideally worded, still it was fun.

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

I got one wrong and disaggree with the answer they called correct. The one about why it is required to trim a tree.

Which question got you Stumper?

Hey Guy, could you link me to your letter? I'd enjoy reading it.

 

[Guy Meilleur]

Originally posted by Mike Maas
Hey Guy, could you link me to your letter? I'd enjoy reading it.

I'll have to re-hunt for it; tried before to find it in the e-files but failed. Maybe I was so worked up when I wrote it I forgot to save it. Also hunting for last ish of TCI since jps says he saw it in print.

 

[TREETX]

Page 46 of the December 2003 TCI

Nice article Guy.

I disagree with point one. She was right about the lack of follow up care due to moves, etc. She was dead on in fact. She even gave data on how long a person lives in a house/moves/etc. This continuum of care is a PITA. Maybe you tackle it fine but I find it hard to stick people to it when they don't live in the state anymore. Even harder to do when you are demanding $$ up front for work to be done 3, 5, 7 years down the road.

You are dead on right that a lack or ***** in the armor of the continuum of care is no reason to call for the blanket condemnation of trees. Especially from a plant amnesty group...

A hazard is a hazard but in reguards to "dignity", the quote from the 2003 horse racing flick, Fleabiscuit, "You don't throw away a whole life just because it is old and a little beat up."

Keep the articles coming. I enjoy reading the amiable, topic based banter.

 

[TREETX]

BTW, I am interested in how you achieve this continuum of care?? Any pointers would be appreciated.

 

[Guy Meilleur]

Originally posted by TREETX
She was right about the lack of follow up care due to moves, etc. She was dead on in fact. She even gave data on how long a person lives in a house/moves/etc. This continuum of care is a PITA.
I agree. I've lost care of trees when new owners are too cheap or stupid to invest anything until they're dying and it's too late. I do find that if previous work by the arborist and investment by the owner and an idea of the tree's value and prognosis if care is curtailed are all passed on to the new owner, then care usually continues.

You are dead on right that a lack or ***** in the armor of the continuum of care is no reason to call for the blanket condemnation of trees. Especially from a plant amnesty group...
You got that totally right!

A hazard is a hazard but in reguards to "dignity", the quote from the 2003 horse racing flick, Fleabiscuit, "You don't throw away a whole life just because it is old and a little beat up."
Absolutely!! Trees deserve to live even more than horses; their byproducts contribute so much to our quality of life while horses' chief byproduct (I speak as a former horse owner) is manure.

Keep the articles coming. I enjoy reading the amiable, topic based banter.

[/B]It is useful, I think, to respectfully offer a reaction. Still waiting for Ms. Turnbull's response--was it in the mag? If it was I'll look harder for it.

I wish JoA would print responses to their stuff. I thought the research on live oak placement was vapid and anti-arborist. They promoted cutting down anything that interfered with a live oak, instead of pruning to facilitate coexistence.

 

[Stumper]

Mike, I "missed" 9 and 18. I'm aware of differing responses to pruning at various times of the year but proper pruning is more important than timing so I went went with Anytime on 9. I consider the April and October answer to be flat wrong. I'll buy April as less than ideal (though it winds up being the busiest pruning season because of human nature-everyone calls when it starts warming up) but I think the "October (when trees are losing their leaves)" is just wrong. The higher risk time is 6weeks or so prior to first frost.Heavy pruning then (okay bad idea number one-heavy) can result in a flush of tender growth that gets frost damaged.

On eighteen the question was how long (average) for the root damaged tree to die or fall over. The tester says 4-7 which may be correct-I chose 5-12 because it is more representative of my own observations.