2 Fungi + 1 Crack + Lean + Target =?
- Thread starter treeseer
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
sac-climber
ArboristSite Operative
Treeseer, I think retrenchment is a good option. If that is the route you go, will you document it and share with us? I'd like to follow along with this.
Not my tree; someone just sent me the pics. If you've got an hour to spare for retrenchment try loading this https://meeting.psu.edu/p94y60hp9zi/ audio with this ppt. https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BwDLZFTEHeiBS3U1WlhPRFNhSUE/edit?usp=drive_web
Here's b&A on the oak with the 29# fungus
Attachments
Maybe it's just the picture but I don't see a difference. Were you able to determine the amount of sound wood? Also, after you submit your report, how do you word your disclaimer?
I just hope somebody cuts that god forsaken piece of crap down pretty soon, cuz I for one am pretty damn sick of hearing about it!!!! Its a ****ing tree,, and a dangerous piece of crap one at that!! Just be gone with it already!!
I mean if trees could die from being hi-browed to death, that thing surely would've been long gone by now!!!
I mean if trees could die from being hi-browed to death, that thing surely would've been long gone by now!!!
Is there and kind of drop zone?? Hopefully we can just climb up a little ways and put a skidder cable and choker on it, and one cut that **********!!! 
treeclimber101
UNCLE BUCK
Not the same tree rummy
Pics from slightly different angle; here are 2 from the other side.
The amount of sound wood was determined with a mallet to be significant. Specs based on pics: Shingle oak 10-15% off, 3-9' lengths, <3" cuts. Disclaimer was something like this:
ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS
1. Any legal description provided to the consultant/appraiser is assumed to be correct. Any titles and ownerships to any property are assumed to be good and marketable. No responsibility is assumed for matters legal in character. Any and all property is appraised or evaluated as though free and clear, under responsible ownership and competent management.
2. It is assumed that any property is not in violation of any applicable codes, ordinances, statutes, or other governmental regulations.
3. Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data has been verified insofar as possible; however, the consultant can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others.
4. The consultant shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services as described in the fee schedule and contract of engagement.
5. Loss or alteration of any part of this part of this report invalidates the entire report.
6. Possession of this report or a copy thereof does not imply right of publication or use for any purpose by any other than the person to whom it is addressed, without the prior express written or verbal consent of the consultant/appraiser.
7. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report, nor copy thereof, shall be conveyed by anyone, including the client, to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales or other media, without my prior expressed written or verbal consent.
8. This report and any values expressed herein represent my objective and independent opinion.. My fee is in no way contingent upon the reporting of a specified value, a stipulated result, the occurrence of a subsequent event, nor upon any finding to be reported.
9. Sketches, diagrams, graphs, and photographs in this report, being intended as visual aids, are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as engineering or architectural reports or surveys.
10. Unless expressed otherwise: 1) information contained in this report covers only those items that were examined and reflects the condition of those items at the time of inspection; and 2) the inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible items without climbing, dissection, excavation, probing, coring, radar, tomography, or drilling. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that problems or deficiencies of the plants or property in question may not arise in the future.
Attachments
That seems to cover all your bases.
I think so. No need to measure with resisto or tomograph on this one. Tree is more stable than when I got there which is all I'm claiming. The disclaimer is adapted out of the appraisal guide; i should vary it for each job but don't always. Freeware obviously; help yourselves.
OMG!
Just cut it down!
Jeff
opcorn:
Just cut it down!
Jeff
opcorn:
Pelorus
Uva uvam vivendo varia fit
That amount of legal jargon seems like a turn off. Lawyer up!
imagineero
Addicted to ArboristSite
Why the cardboard?
Cardboard stifles weeds (lots of lily rhizomes underneath would otherwise regrow). It also provides a food source for beneficial soil bioactivity.
Legal jargon is MEANT to turn off and turn away any potential claims, isn't it? Lawyers always complicate matters, often unnecessarily.
Hint: When anything's hard to read, I drag the tip of my index finger under the lines and say the words out loud.
Legal jargon is MEANT to turn off and turn away any potential claims, isn't it? Lawyers always complicate matters, often unnecessarily.
Hint: When anything's hard to read, I drag the tip of my index finger under the lines and say the words out loud.
Pelorus
Uva uvam vivendo varia fit
Legal jargon is MEANT to turn off and turn away any potential claims, isn't it? Lawyers always complicate matters, often unnecessarily.
Hint: When anything's hard to read, I drag the tip of my index finger under the lines and say the words out loud.
Excellent advice!
That the care and feeding of your historic trees can result in potential claims, (personal injury / property loss? ) thus necessitating lawyer jargon is interesting to me.
The care of EVERY tree can result in potential problems down the road. Some variation of that disclaimer goes on every report. Standard CYA contract language.
btw in 48 years of tree care, lately on many high-target and many (formerly) high-risk trees, never been even threatened with lawsuit. As with tree risk, the perceived business risk of caring for old and valuable trees far exceeds the actual risk.
To the extent that you can trust your knowledge, it's OK to trust the tree.
btw in 48 years of tree care, lately on many high-target and many (formerly) high-risk trees, never been even threatened with lawsuit. As with tree risk, the perceived business risk of caring for old and valuable trees far exceeds the actual risk.
To the extent that you can trust your knowledge, it's OK to trust the tree.
Similar threads
