Help me gauge field Level Of Knowledge regarding Forest Pathology

[madhatte]

Will do.

Meanwhile, here's a factsheet on Verticillum Wilt, to which Maples are listed as susceptible. Does this look like what you're seeing?

 

[slowp]

Will that ring discoloration show on a dead tree? I may have to whack the high stump off to see a fresher bit of the tree. This is starting to get interesting.

 

[madhatte]

I'm not sure. It's not one I'm particularly well-attuned to. I can spot white-speck conks from 100 yards away at midnight under a new moon, but maple pathology is new territory. Sure gonna find out more, though!

 

[slowp]

I'm trying to show the white powdery? stuff that appears on the sick trees.

Here it is on the inside of the bark.

Looking at the top of a snag.

A closeup of the leafy lichen? found on limbs.

View attachment 180978
View attachment 180979
View attachment 180980
View attachment 180981

 

[madhatte]

The lichen looks like good old Peltigera, which grows all over the place.

The pitch streamers and the white stuff where cambium ought to be are strongly reminiscent of Armillaria, and it happens that there is a newly-described species which parasitizes bigleaf maples. I wonder if maybe that's the pathogen here?

 

[RandyMac]

While I recognized sick trees, I rarely went beyond considering how it would effect falling the tree or calculating defect. It's pretty easy to spot Bat-ears and such that indicate potential weak spots in the trunk. I did read up on Arceuthobium spp., Viscaceae aka Dwarf Mistletoe. There is a whole bunch of that crap in the Klamath/Siskiyous and Sierras, can make for an ugly tree.

 

[madhatte]

I rarely went beyond considering how it would effect falling the tree or calculating defect.

That's exactly the knowledge I'm looking for. I have a picture in my head of an overlay of 'ologist knowledge vs logger knowledge, a bunch of overlaps, and finding a way to train our crews to tell me what I want to know.

 

[RandyMac]

There are observable effects that lead the uninformed to believe that trees are diseased. Case in point was a stand of Sierra Lodgepole along the banks of the Yuba. It was a mixed age stand, with 10 year old saplings and fully mature trees. The mature trees ran in the 20" range, big for Lodgepole, all had an orange band at the base, extending up maybe a foot. The younger trees were clear of the orange. The landowner was in a minor panic thinking that his trees were dying. I could see nothing else wrong and chipped some of the orange off. After a bit of study, I determined that the orange was lichen that had changed color after being submerged in flood water.

 

[slowp]

If that white is armillaria, I think that the theory of two bad things hitting the maples at the same time might be true. Now, what is making them die so fast?

 

[madhatte]

Haven't heard back from the state Sudden Oak Death specialist. I'm thinking he'll have some insight.

After a bit of study

A bit of study goes a long way!

 

[RandyMac]

In the last few weeks we have been running up to Grants Pass for appointments. I have observed that something is after the Madrones, in a big way. They are very sick, withered leaves, starting on the lower limbs, leaves are turning a reddish brown. I saw quite a few blown down, maybe roots are also effected. The Tanbarks look good though. The scruffy ass pines along the Illinios River aren't looking good, but perhaps they never did.

 

[madhatte]

Madrone decline is well-documented, though poorly-understood. From my observations, it appears that a declining Madrone often shows bacterial, fungal, viral, and insect damage to varying degrees in different places on the same tree! This one has a lot of folks worried, as Madrone is not typically a commercial species, so it is likely to be overlooked as an indicator of overall forest health. The tanoaks (Lithocarpus spp) appear also to be indicators of overall forest health, and have been identified as susceptible to Sudden Oak Death.

Meanwhile -- I've discovered something very interesting regarding Laminated Root Rot: the stain, visible on the stump for only a short time between cutting and six weeks later when it fades to invisibility, develops like a photograph after a day or two exposed to air. It is brightest about a week after cutting. I'm not sure when the fading begins. I'll post here when I know more.

This is important because if we're going to be asking log crews to mark stumps when they see the stain, perhaps they should be looking at the stumps some time after falling? I can see that this is impractical, but so is me chasing after a faller two days later to look for disease.

Meh. I just want a map of where disease is and how severe and how quickly it moves and through which soils and hosts. Is that too much to ask of the universe?

 

[Gologit]

Meh. I just want a map of where disease is and how severe and how quickly it moves and through which soils and hosts. Is that too much to ask of the universe?

Realistically? Yes, it probably is too much to ask. Especially if you're going to depend on logging crews as a reliable and constant source of information.

Most of the guys I work with have a very limited range of knowledge about tree diseases and, quite frankly, no real urge to increase it. Our focus is, quite necessarily, on harvest. On occasion we've mentioned things we've seen to our 'ologists and foresters but we very seldom get any feedback on it. If the information that we've given is ignored constantly we tend to quit giving it.

I wish there was more information available to us in the woods about stuff like you're talking about. Most of what we know are easily identifiable things that pertain to our harvesting.

Maybe what I'm talking about is one of the biggest differences between working government ground and private sales. I work almost totally on private ground and the focus is completely different.

I wish you success with your projects. I think it will do a lot of good and help insure a sustainable timber supply. Just don't look for a huge amount of help from us knuckle-draggers. We'd help if we could but until we're better informed as to what to look for and until we feel that our input is going to do some real good you're pretty much on your own.

 

[madhatte]

We'd help if we could but until we're better informed as to what to look for and until we feel that our input is going to do some real good you're pretty much on your own.

And therein lies the challenge: information has to be a two-way street. Academia has this nasty habit of keeping its cards close to the chest, on account of the "Publish Or Perish" mentality and the desire to not get "scooped". Companies do research only to solve "problems" which cost them money.

 

[slowp]

Both of you have described the FS also. We "field people" were deemed to be uneducated. When our marking crew on the Okanogan reported seeing a spotted owl, and it was a spotted owl, the wildlife biologist did not even get out to check. We were told that it was not the right habitat, therefore it was not a spotted owl. We had a couple of amateur birdwatchers on the crew. The bird fit the description to a T and held still while we looked at it. After that, our foreman was so mad, he said he would report seeing a spotted owl on every sale and he did.

Later somebody else who was deemed to be more of an expert verified the original spotted owl did exist.

Now, in the FS contract, there is a time limit mentioned for getting the borax stuff on the stumps for laminated root rot. I can't think of what it is, because we didn't commonly use that provision. It is in the Upper Cispus contract.

That's why I'm wondering about feller buncher operators. How well can they see the stain from the machine? Will they be inclined to get out of their warm cab and look around? Or will some flunkie be hired to follow behind, marking the stumps and sprinkling the borax on the stumps?

Just something to think about.

 

[RandyMac]

Eh, log it flat and burn it all, start over.

 

[Gologit]

Now, in the FS contract, there is a time limit mentioned for getting the borax stuff on the stumps for laminated root rot. I can't think of what it is, because we didn't commonly use that provision. It is in the Upper Cispus contract.

That's why I'm wondering about feller buncher operators. How well can they see the stain from the machine? Will they be inclined to get out of their warm cab and look around? Or will some flunkie be hired to follow behind, marking the stumps and sprinkling the borax on the stumps?

Just something to think about.

The last Circus job I was on was a combination of feller buncher and hand falling. We had to hire a kid to sprinkle stumps. There's no way you could have a f/b operator climb out of his machine every time he dropped a tree. That would be so wildly counter-productive that it wouldn't make sense to have the machine there in the first place. I suggested it to one of the f/b guys, just for fun, and his suggestion involved a sack of borax, the USFS, Squeaky the Forester, and an anatomical impossibility. We called the forester Squeaky because she had a voice like Alvin the Chipmunk and kinda looked like him too.

 

[RandyMac]

"Squeaky", atleast that is a name that can be used in an open forum.

 

[Gologit]

And therein lies the challenge: information has to be a two-way street. Academia has this nasty habit of keeping its cards close to the chest, on account of the "Publish Or Perish" mentality and the desire to not get "scooped". Companies do research only to solve "problems" which cost them money.

Well said. Two entirely different viewpoints, and until something can be done to bridge that gap progress will be slow. It's already too slow.

I think that both sides would do well to adjust their attitudes toward the other. We have a mutual interest even if the methodology is completely different.

Okay...we've defined the problem. That was easy. Now, how do we fix it?

 

[RandyMac]

What does the borax do? I'm clueless and not the first time.