Nursery Standards

Sean Freeman

There are a set of standards and specfications for nursery production of trees, believe or not they were written 11yrs ago!! Yes I know it takes time for change to happen but still 11yrs! Maybe the problem is that we as a profession don't know about these standards, or how to encourage the adoption of them by the nursery industry.

I recently did a plant stock inspection using the NATSPEC standards "Specifiying Trees" for a major company in Queensland, and so its been on my mind. I won't put the book up as
1) I don't have it as a pdf and to post it as scans would take too long and
2) the author deserves money for his work.
However there is a sample available on the net so I've posted that.

SpecTrees.pdf

It stems from the same work done in the US by Gilman et al and their work is amply explained and detailed here http://hort.ifas.ufl.edu/woody/nursery_production.shtml
theres 15 links to follow there that explain why and how the standards were developed and implemented, note there is a federal standard ANSI Z60.1 but also state standards in Florida, and California.

So if its an area you have some involvement in ie advising landscape design etc get yourself a copy of the book, or just engage your larger nursery supplier in a discussion about standards in production. I would bet that like me you have all seen way too many problems and defects in trees as a result of poor stock right back at the nursery stage....it aint necessary, proper production practices remove those problems completely.

Eric Frei

It explains terms but doesn't actually tell you what a good one is or what the standard is etc.

In other words, is there one with pictures?

__________________

Eric Frei

Boa

On this link you'll see many ... so there's an Australian Standard for nursery stock? Only avail hard cover and expensive. Or is the BS or British Standard?

http://www.saiglobal.com/shop/Script...arch=+Go+&TR=1

__________________

Sean Freeman

Thats the British Standard, haven't read it, so can't comment but would be very surprised if it was not based on the same roots as NATSPEC ie the Florida and Californian models.

Go here http://www.doacs.state.fl.us/pi/pubs.html scroll down the list on the left to Grades and standards..tree section divided into 4 files and below the palms and cycads section, in these pdfs you'll see exactly what is being defined as best practice in the nursery and how to recognise it in the plants you might consider buying.

As I've said previously this is for Florida but the principles established there have been adapted into NATSPEC and are shared no doubt by the British standard.

treeseer

That's my first time seeing the Florida standard and I cannot see a definition of the trunk flare or a statement of the need to have that point exposed and at or near grade. Boa not to violate a copyright or deny the man his due but could you please look at your Spec Trees and see if there is mention of these specifications found in the usa standard:

. The European nursery standards specify root pruning at every step, 4”-8” further out each time, to avoid these defects. The ANSI Z60 American nursery standards do not address this problem.

Root “balls”, the volume of soil packed inside a young tree’s packaging, have been getting rounder and rounder every year. Whether trees are grown in containers or dug from the field B&B (balled and burlapped), soil is commonly heaped around the trunk, where it does not belong. The trunk flare, where the trunk naturally turns into roots and the tree joins the earth, is all too often buried early in the growing process, and buried deeper yet at planting time. Some specifications still ignore the requirement in ANSI A300 (Part 6)-2005, 63.6.2.3, “The bottom of the trunk flare SHALL be at or above finished grade”. Instead, they instruct the landscape contractors to plant the root BALL at ground level, so the landscapers obediently follow this instruction, with disastrous consequences.

Arborists should have the ANSI standard—available from TCIA—in hand when they talk to growers and landscape architects and landscapers about deep planting. When these professionals see with their own eyes that the American Nursery and Landscape Association and the American Society of Landscape Architects are represented in ANSI, they will realize that they don’t have a stem to stand on when they bury trees. The entire green industry agrees that we should always be able to find the trunk flare.

Technically, the rootball does not even include the soil above the trunk flare. It is “measured from the bottom of the trunk flare to the bottom of the ball.” (ANSI A300 (Part 6)-2005, 63.6.1.2) If the flare is found and set to grade, in a hole “a minimum of 1.5 times the diameter of the root ball” (63.6.1.4), with mulch “applied near, but not touching the trunk” (63.6.2.9), the tree roots will not need to grow up in search of oxygen. But even if these standards are followed at planting time, the tree may not grow well. For some reason, there is nothing in the standard about the making sure the roots, at least the major roots, are growing away from the stem. Why not? You’ll have to ask your organization’s representative to the ANSI committee, and get your comments in before the standard is revised again in 2010. The ANSI pruning standard does not currently cover root pruning—perhaps with the right kind of input, that standard can change to provide needed guidance on this simple act of arboriculture.

The above from the page 8 article here: http://www.tcia.org/PDFs/TCI_Mag_July_07.pdf

This article is being revised for Arbor Age to include oz standards. Also needed are Tree Planting standards in oz--links please?

Sean Freeman

Hello guy, great to have you visit and share with us, welcome mate!

You make some really important points and they are interestingly greatly overlooked here, perhaps we just don't have urban tree populations of an age to reveal the consequences of both Stem Girdling Roots SGR's and buried trees as yet to stimulate widespread recognition of the problems...though they surely do exist, and many of us have seen the results of both. Here's one that I probably should have identified as being SGR as much as buried Wind throw.

Reading NATSPEC there is a section on Height of the root crown

"The root crown is the junction between the below-ground parts and above ground parts of the tree. Regardless of the size of the tree the root crown belongs at the surface of the root ball. Burying the root crown can lead to fungal infections, serious disruptions of the root system's structure and function or to the death of the tree (see Fig 2.4)

Height of the root crown assessment criterion:
- The root crown must be at the surface of the rootball. "

There's a diagram to show what the root crown is and the location it has to have for sustainable long term healthy growth.

I really think Ross Clark has done a great job in developing NATSPEC and very strongly recommend that all Arborists in Oz buy a copy of his book, trust me it will assist and simplify much of your interactions with clients in relation to not only buying new trees, but the early stages of their care.

treeseer

thank you sir that is just what i needed on growing standards. I will quote and attribute. Now, for Planting...?

SGR's are also widely overlooked here, that's why I wrote the article. People just don't want to get on their knees and get their hands dirty it seems...There is ome academic research that is useful but that takes a long time to get data and meanwhile our nurseries are churning out defects by the billions and our children's urban forest is stunted.

Sean Freeman

Ah... planting....not part of NATSPEC....but for those who are looking for useful quality information to support best practice they should spend some time viewing the Morton Arboretum website esp http://www.mortonarb.org/deeptreeroots/ where they'll find a wealth of recent research to guide proper planting, and the published proceedings from the 2003 conference "Getting the roots right"

treeseer

hard to believe there is no planting standard.

Astounding that the BS is 24 pages for $185.

ok sean next question: do green industry organizations in oz go on record as supporting NATSPEC? Here they are involved in writing the standard but you guys seem to trust pioneers to do the work.

in the usa, "Arborists should have the ANSI standard—available from TCIA—in hand when they talk to growers and landscape architects and landscapers about deep planting. When these professionals see with their own eyes that the American Nursery and Landscape Association and the American Society of Landscape Architects are represented in ANSI, they will realize that they don’t have a stem to stand on when they bury trees. The entire green industry agrees that we should always be able to find the trunk flare.

Sean Freeman

Its kind of complicated Guy due to the fact that our wonderful federal system divides and conquers!
So in the case of an activity that does not have a national standard written for it AS#### each state can develop its own specfications or regulations or code of practice (this is the case currently for tree work in Qld, NSW, and Victoria...there may be others but those are the ones I'm sure of!) and of course business and industry will over time align itself to those state benchmarks where applicable, and thereby support their retention and development etc.

Most states have a Nursery Industry association and these bodies have their own aim/benchmarks etc... We also have a national industry body, there are also all the same horticultural groups associations institutes and bodies at both a state and federal level...great eh?

Now Ross didn't do all his work on the specifications for trees alone, but he did follow through where others had tried and given up...in writing the specs he had to find an existing professional body into which these specs could fit and more importantly work...thats where NATSPEC comes in, most people won't have heard of then since it is really and building and construction based organisation http://www.natspec.com.au/page.asp?w...%20Information

What Ross has done (with others) is to develop an assessment system which fits perfectly into the NATSPEC model and so has made it very simple and easy for large firms to use NATSPEC to specify the quality and standards for their intended plant stock for say a major development site...in exactly the same way they would specify for street lighting or benches or sliding windows etc...

As for the support that Specifying Trees has got from other industry orgs, my good friend in the Australian Institute of Horticulture is in Hawaii right (where I was going too) now so I can't tell you with any certainty but having done some stock inspections for large landscape architect firms I can say some of the nurseries here in Qld have not even heard of NATSPEC!

Standards for tree protection (construction) amenity tree valuation and nursery production are works in progress here in Oz, and as always is the case with attempting something at a national scale very slow and laborious....but we will get there, in the meantime we have to try our best to ensure that tree works are ubdertaken to internationally recognised best practice.

treeseer

We have the same federal/state issues, good and bad. It sounds like a brilliant move, getting the standard taken on by the building people. With all their money and power they are in a much better position to get poor growing practices changed than arborist/environmentalist rabble. who are on the fringe. Of course it all still comes down to enforcement.

So now will those inspections and insightful inciteful reports result in buyer dissatisfaction--and returns of stock? In my home state I am blackbaled from speaking to landscape groups because I have shone a light on girdling roots in the landscape. Sorry you missed HI; this is the first time away from isa's conference for 5 years and I am missing it severely.
Our standard is thin and weak--very little agreed on, but it is a good start. we hadfalse starts getting bmp's done, then it was given to a grad student who had problems with it.we are on our 10th edition; major changes contemplated, we'll see...We need to do more international sharing--this has been very helpful to me.
Are you familiar with Arbor Age magazine's Bi-Annual version of the The Aust. Arbor Age ?The Consulting Arborist? which will source articles from Abroad and Locally which will only focus on issues for the Profession. Did you see anything like this 2 years ago, or is it just starting?

"This will really increase the awareness of the ever growing profession. As there are many new comers all the time in the practical side to the Industry, many original readers of AA are heading in this consulting direction."

true enough here, responding to a huge need.

Sean Freeman

I haven't seen the Consulting Arborist will keep my eyes open for that one!

treeseer

Do you have a good picture of stem-girdling roots?

Sean Freeman

We do see quite a lot of SGR's just like in the USA but these shots are from the thread I referenced previously, and again I probably missed the diagnosis since I now feel that the major structural weakness for this Euc was the impact of the SGR on the root tissues below it, yes the tree was buried to some extent but the SGR ensured the decline and death of too much functional tissue below it in the supporting butress roots, permitting fungal colonisation and failure due to wind loading.

Here's the fallen tree, also rains in the days before added to the mix


a closer look at the trunk


Where the SGR pressed against the trunk tissues


From another angle clearly showing the extent of the constriction


Highlighted


SGR's are particularly common in our street trees, both because of the poor nursery stock, but also due to hostile growing conditions that greatly deflect butress root growing directions at an early stage.

Attached Thumbnails

         

treeseer

what happened to the SGR that left the groove in the stem?

that tree wasn't grafted was it--doesn't look like it, but just making sure.

Do you have the pic with the groove in 3 meg or more size?

Sean Freeman

I'll attach the two photos of the groove as large as I have them but no they're not that big sorry.




As to what happened to the SGR, well my initial thoughts on the tree was that it had been buried and the SGR was very minor, but now I think the SGR was the main cause of the failure because it adversely affected the growth of the butress roots critical in holding the tree against the wind loading that night, the rain had a part to play too, and of course fungi.

Here's the twisting action put onto the tree in its failure


And here under the SGR on digging into the root tissues necrosis and fungal mycelium were present


The SGR itself showed signs of funal colonisation and I presumed this may have been initiated by mower damage to the above ground parts.

Attached Thumbnails

   

treeseer

on the 2nd pic to the left it looks like twine...?

too bad you don't have bigger pics, don't think the mag can use little ones.

would realy like to get one from au to put in the article.

Sean Freeman

I think that was a Ficus feeder root...not absolutely sure, I'm thinking as I type that I have a few other eg's of buried trees failing under fairly severe conditions, the pics are again small but maybe a new thread is the way to go here...SGR's who's seen evidence...and Buried trees why is it still going on? I don't know just thoughts....

Eric and I have, in a number of other threads, mused about buried trees and the adventitious roots that keep the canopy vital looking till a strong enough storm comes and fells the whole tree. Sometimes trees just don't do what they should to get greater protection and attention from us, they're just too damn good at surviving, persisting, rather than turning up their toes after we abuse them knowingly and unknowingly.

Here's some pics I took almost 2yrs ago of really well planted (NOT) Caesalpinia ferrea street saplings...now these trees still look ok if all you consider is the seasonal new growth!! Oh yes our council planted these with great fanfare maybe 6 yrs ago...so far three have died.

Attached Thumbnails

     

treeseer

good idea on the new thread.

that caesalpina seems to hae had a major branch removed--no scarring--bad move--major strain on the tree.

Eric Frei

Guy

Check this thread, pic 4 in post #3, the tree failed a couple of weeks ago, there was a girdling root if you look carefully, they cut it to test it.

New Farm Jacarandas

__________________

treeseer

what were they testing for?

Eric Frei

Fungi

They suspect phellinus noxious

They send samples to DPI and culture them + microscope.

I still hold my stance, air spade and resistograph is the only sure fire way to know.

I went there on Friday and the ring road is still closed and it was like a council truck carpark around the trees ... still. They're bamboozled, cant open the road, then a press release came out saying they'd only close the road when forecast winds exceeded 50km/h but Friday it was dead still and closed anyway.

They may cut the trees down, they may not. Imagine the politics on either decision. Too many others have already come out and had ganaderma.

Still no rain, drought is set in, it's warming up now and soon the growing season will be on. August traditionally has our strongest westerly winds.

What also intrigues me is why such poxy tiny replacements have been planted, why not bigger ones to quickly fill the void. Are same replacements wise? Is the fungi still in the soil and same species susceptible? Interesting case for sure.

__________________

Sean Freeman

Great opportunity for council hort to trial soil treatments to combat the fungi...but I'm thinking we'll not hear much about it even if they do, plenty of good products out there with big claims they really should do a trial..of course well before they replant!!

sharpend

You know I do believe we have all read the volume 18,#7-jul.07' issue. Question is seems to me, how do we as tree care proffesionals/climbers[since I don't quallify as arborist.] get this message to customers, as well as convince them that this sort of study into their trees,in all of their various physiological functions, are worth the expence? Dig it and show them? On a diffrent note, great site. Buuut, maybe I'm wrong,but seems to me that the whole point of having a public forum to discuss tree health,disease,diag..... is to further the cause NOT to set ourselves apart as a knowledgeable group,for lack of a better statement.I realize we as a comunity we don't want homeowners trying to do what we do- even though it does make for good footage-again,buut don't the trees in Q.L.,or Liberia,or S.America,or I don't know, wherever affect us all? Why be coy? This time sorry but thanx.

Eric Frei

Where I am the vast majority of people including the nursery style horticulturalists, landscape architects, landscapers etc have little understanding of trees.

The general public are way behind and the attitude toward trees is woeful. Here it's a ignore it, then hack it or remove it attitude with the cheapest being the best bloke for the job in too many cases.... I call them the legends, so many Queenslanders have some legend know it all mate it's not funny.

I refer many members of the public here, I can in my own time and convenience help, it's a lot easier to say something once and have it heard thousands of times over by emailing a link. Sure, people have to help themselves, they have to read and register and send pictures etc and maybe still not get a definitive answer to their needs.

But sharing what to look out for the incidence of poor nursery stock trees will hopefully diminish. That's what this thread is about. That's the beginning of the cycle.

Right tree

right place

planted right

cared for right

= more work for us, better work for us, better trees for the planet and client, less arborphobia about falling trees and removals of pest species and troublesome trees.

90% of what I do is removals, I'd have far better a business doing 90% trimming and tree care.

Just my 0.02

__________________