Anne Frank Horse Chestnut Tree

quercus · 16th January 2008, 12:11 AM

No-one could have said it better, Sean...

polly · 16th January 2008, 01:20 AM

I completly agree Sean,
that tree was one of the only living things she could see out of her window was'nt it? And for how many years? That poor little girl.
She would have seen the seasons change through that tree and it kept her in touch with the outside world.
We had a similar story 6 months back, this lovely old lady lived whom we had done work for in the past had a horrific car accident and lost a leg .Her husband died just before that.
She had 8 months in re-hab, is learning to walk again,do everything all over.
She lives alone and has a beautiful big Ironbark ( can't remember specifically what sort) but she loves that tree. She sits under it and admires it every day for hours.She says it is one of the most important things in her life now and it means everything to her
she wanted us to come and prune it. We could'nt get down there( it's 100kms away and we were too busy) so she nearly got in the local loppers!
I managed to make a quick few phone calls for her to get three quotes from qualified arborists and her tree now looks beautiful.Mother nature is good to hold onto when you've got little else so i think they should do what ever is necessary to keep Anne's tree alive.You can visit Auschwitz or the other concentration camps as see the horror. With that tree you can see the hope.

Ekka · 16th January 2008, 01:36 AM

Sean, you forgot this.

I'm sure other places, cities etc have significant trees on registers and they get bi-annual or annual check ups.

The issue seems to be that the trigger for arborist action is often a negative one, when things are going bad, the tree failing, losing branches etc.

Whilst it may be hard to check every tree every year you'd certainly expect that significant trees be checked. What if the significant trees reside on private properties? ... does happen. I know that locally I have attended to properties to quote the removal of a tree. I usually try to check on the internet but many times end up calling the council to discover a Significant Landscape Tree Protection Order (SLT VPO). These are singled out trees, that protection order is not a blanket one for the city.

The owners sometimes look surprised and sometimes disgruntled for various reasons.

The issue is that those trees aren't cared for or reported upon, and sometimes people dont even know they have them!

If there was a pro-active approach where these trees were inspected, the longivity and safety would increase. However at the moment they get nothing, some of the trees will also get mistreated so they die in the hope the approval for removal then goes through.

I think an easily accessible website for all Significant trees would be a start, a site that provides details and when last inspected and what was on that inspection. Of course that will bring all sorts of issues out however if looking after significant trees is the goal then you need a plan.

A pro-active approach is what cities need to implement. It's caring for healthy trees that matters to, parking your tinnie there and chaining it up to the trunk whilst the bungs have been pulled and you wash it out isn't the best thing for a tree.

quercus · 16th January 2008, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polly

I completly agree Sean,
that tree was one of the only living things she could see out of her window was'nt it? And for how many years? That poor little girl.
She would have seen the seasons change through that tree and it kept her in touch with the outside world.
.

it was the only thing she could see, besides high level bombers and the fighters that raided the city...

quercus · 17th January 2008, 11:27 PM

A few architects, known for their great achievements all over the world in steel constructions, have designed a steel bracing system for the tree. Maybe it's a coincidence that the tree is standing in or close to their own backyard...

I personally think that this is not going to "hold the load" in case of a massive structural failure of the tree...

Ekka · 17th January 2008, 11:47 PM

Interesting, it wont prevent bits falling off like branches but should stop uprooting.

If the tree breaks apart between the 2m ring and the 8m ring then there's trouble.

quercus · 18th January 2008, 12:02 AM

If it fails between the two rings, that would mean that the dynamics of the stem are still in place after installing the frame. The general idea for this is to take dynamics away for the entire section wich is braced. If it can't move, then it's not likely to break. The only way I see this happening if the trunk would collapse on a horizontal axis.

I don't really know how the situation is on 9 m above ground, but if it is severely decayed there, I see the tree breaking apart just above the upper ring. If it were to fail at that point,possible damage and risk would increase severely.If uprooting would occur, the tree would fall down more gently and more slowly then when a large section including the massive crown where to free fall to the ground. Don't know if my sentences are correct on this.

I'd create a steel bracing for the tree, all the way up to where it divides into the upper crown section. This would require a setup of a lot more square feet area then the one they designed now.Let's not forget that this ridgid design is either a case of making it, or breaking it.

The architects state, that it doesn't form a problem if the steel structure would deform a bit during the years to come, and that's something that I find hard to believe. I see only triangular shapes, and for a triangular shape to deform, one corner or side must break. If this would occur, the structure would become worthless.

quercus · 18th January 2008, 11:46 PM

a timeline of events that I copy/pasted from the tree's website.

Timeline
Around 1850:
The chesnut tree is planted on the grounds inside a residential block just north of the Westerkerk, between the Keizersgracht and Prinsengracht. Look up the site at Google Maps.

1943/44:
Anne Frank writes in her Diary about the chestnut tree. While hiding in her safe house this is her only contact with outdoor life and the changing seasons that she can observe from her attic window.

1989:
A first threat to the chestnut tree: the Anne Frank Foundation plans to extend its buildings. It wants to expand its lot at the Keizersgracht, adjacent to the Anne Frank House, to a point quite near the tree. To render this possible, a considerable part of its root system must be cut off. Local residents oppose this intent to harm the tree and the plan is eventually dropped.

1993:
The soil surrounding the tree is cleaned up in connection with an oil spill. The Amsterdam City Centre Borough takes over the care for the tree. In the following years the tree recovers from the damage caused by this soil pollution.

Spring 2005:
In a circular letter to the local residents, the Borough announces that the chestnut tree is in a poor condition. Local residents ask Mr Werner, the managing director of Pius Floris Amsterdam, the company that attends to the tree on behalf of the Borough, what measures, such as improving the soil, are taken to counteract this decay. The reply is: nothing.

Local residents conduct garlic actions. They plant twothousand garlic cloves around the foot of the chestnut tree. Traditionally, garlic is an anti-bacterial remedy against tree disease.

25 June 2005:
The chestnut tree?s crown is cut. The Borough orders the tree?s crown to be reduced by Pius Floris. As a result, the tree no longer juts out as high above the houses as it used to and will suffer less from wind. This reduces its risk of being blown down.

February 2006:
Mrs Fassbinder and Mr Versteegen interview Mr Pius Floris, the founder of the mother company. They ask him whether the tree might benefit from treatment. He answers in the affirmative. His company can provide treatment for a sum of 1,000 euros.
Mr Werner, managing director of the Pius Floris Amsterdam company, promises he will request permission from the Borough for such treatment. In spite of repeated phone calls there is no positive reply.

Mr Werner then asks Mrs Fassbinder to allow him access to her garden in order to perform a pulling test to measure the tree�s stability. A date and time are agreed, but the pulling test is postponed for reasons that remain unclear. During follow-up telephone calls questions about this issue are not answered.

13 November 2006:
At an informational meeting called by the Borough, the local residents are presented with a study by Pius Floris Amsterdam. The study concludes that the tree should be cut. Local residents ask whether municipal tree consultant Hans Kaljee agrees with the report and its conclusions. Mrs Hijne, the civil servant in charge of the application for the cutting permit, adamantly confirms that he cooperated with the study and agrees with its conclusions. However, when the next day the local residents approach the consultant in person, he proves to be uninformed and not to be involved in the study and its conclusions in any way.
Local residents also requested the Borough for a second opinion, since one study constituted a very narrow basis for felling the tree. However, the Borough considers this unnecessary.

14 November 2006:
Articles in the morning newspapers reveal that the national and international press had already been informed of the need to cut down the tree.

20 November 2006:
The Borough publishes the application for the cutting permit. The local residents are informed of this by letter and told that the application may be perused at the city hall until 18 December.

18 December 2006:
Local residents submit their views. They are opposed to cutting the tree.

6 March 2007:
The submitted views do not prevent the Borough from granting a definitive cutting permit to the owner of the Anne Frank tree, Mr Pomes.

24 March 2007:
An action committee composed of local residents organises a colloquium about the Anne Frank tree in the Jordaan community centre. A panel of tree experts from all over the Netherlands discusses the study report by Pius Floris and unanimously agrees that the tree does not need to be cut. Conservation measures and anchors are a possible alternative.

April 2007:
The working committee orders an alternative study by the renowned English tree expert Neville Fay, who employs more refined methods than Pius Floris. The result is positive for the tree.

Middle of April 2007:
Several local residents and the Dutch Tree Foundation submit objections to the Borough against the granted cutting permit. On top of this, an injunctive relief is requested from the district court to suspend the effectuation of the cutting. A few days later the court reports that the permit holder Mr Pomes has stated he will not use the cutting permit until the decision by the Objections Committee has been announced. The request for an injunctive relief is subsequently withdrawn.

May 2007:
The Borough?s Objections Committee conducts a hearing to discuss the written objections that have been submitted. During this hearing it transpires that the Borough wilfully misquotes a report by the municipal tree consultant: the report recommends further study instead of cutting the tree.

Summer 2007:
The objectors and the Dutch Tree Foundation set up a working committee to develop an alternative plan aimed at the tree?s preservation.

18 September 2007:
The Objections Committee issues a ruling, granting the objectors the opportunity to present an alternative plan before 1 January 2008.

October 2007:
A pulling test is prepared. This is to be conducted on Wednesday 14 November on behalf of the Dutch Tree Foundation.

13 November 2007:
In the evening a letter from the chairperson of the Objections Committee is delivered by courier. It states that the tree will be cut with the permission of Mr Pomes due to the acute danger of collapse. To support this decision they enclose the inspection report by Pius Floris, written in September 2007. The cutting is scheduled to take place on 21 November 2007.

14 November 2007:
Tree experts arrive in the morning to verify the Pius Floris inspection data on behalf of the Tree Foundation. However, before long a police officer arrives at the scene to deny them access to the tree. The pulling test is banned due to the acute danger that the test is presumed to cause. After talks between the tree?s owner and Mr Koot of the Tree Foundation permission is granted to conduct a sonic inspection. This inspection reveals that the tree?s three remaining supporting roots are strong enough to carry its weight.

15 November 2007:
Pius Floris repeats its inspection in the morning. This time around they do not wait a month and a half before presenting their results. The very same evening the objectors receive by courier a message from the Borough informing them of the results. The conclusions are identical to those of the previous report and the intention to cut the tree on 21 November is confirmed.

19 November 2007:
At long last Mr Pomes allows the working committee to conduct the pulling test. The Borough demurs and tells the Tree Foundation (but not the owner) that it will not be held accountable if the pulling test is actually performed. In spite of this, the pulling test is carried out just before dark: the tree turns out to be very stable.

In the mean time the Tree Foundation has also commissioned studies into the nature of the decay. These prove that the observed fungi are not of the aggressive variety that Pius Floris claims they are.

20 November 2007:
The district court rules in summary proceedings. The working committee is put in the right: it is granted permission to elaborate its alternative plan and is given the time until the middle of January 2008.

21 November 2007
In spite of the ruling by the district court, the Borough and the Anne Frank Foundation hold a press conference during which they repeat their claim that there exists ?acute danger?. They urge the Mayor of Amsterdam to proceed to emergency cutting.

December 2007
The Dutch Tree Foundation, the working committee Support Anne Frank Tree, the Anne Frank Foundation and the Borough Amsterdam Centre join in a mediation proces, lead by Eberhard van der Laan. The tree is subject to further analysis

17 December 2007: The alternative plan (PDF, 2.12 MB, / ) was presented by the working committee Support Anne Frank Tree. The report has english abstracts & conclusions.

3 January 2008: The treespecialists from both sides have made a joined statement about the tree's condition & care. For now, the tree does not endanger its surroundings. Its main risk is a breaking of the trunk: without leaves the tree can handle 200% of wind force 11, with leaves 100%. A supporting construction can be build to ensure safety in summer. With the construction and good care, the tree can live at least 5 to 15 years. The costs of the build would be around ? 50.000 and the care ? 20.000 this year, and later on a yearly ? 10.000.

16 January 2008: The appeal committee of the borough Amsterdam Centre has declared that the borough has rightfully granted the cutting permit. The borough says that this doesn't mean that the tree will be cut down. It regards the permit as a means to the owner of the tree, to cut it down in case Support Anne Frank Tree's plans to save the tree fail.

newguy18 · 19th January 2008, 08:04 AM

nice post Quercus garlic in an aid to trees with diease?a pull test what would that be or is it like the name sounds?

Sean Freeman · 20th January 2008, 02:57 AM

Thankyou for posting that Quercus, most of the timeline I was aware of but not confirmed, and being so many thousand kms away my harping on about this tree and the appauling rubbish going on regarding its mis-management was (I felt) making others reject the good sound qualified opinion that the tree could stay.

Pius Floris should be ashamed of what either he or those claiming to represent him have done and said on record with regards this tree. Sadly i believe this is not the case, like some others I have had dealings with, there comes a point when the individual's position becomes more important than the actual quality and value of the work they do...the more letters and braiding after their names the worse it becomes...self appointed Arboricultural Gods I call them, and yes they do know who they are.

Ekka · 20th January 2008, 05:00 AM

Well, what fun this tree has been.

The issue with the pull test is that people think the tree will break when the test is done. Also, personally I dont feel it's that good anyway.

They dont pull a tree to failure, they put a certain amount of tension and measure the response with fine censors. But is where and how they pull on it how nature works the canopy in storms? I doubt it.

However that together with picus, resistograph and VTA all forms an opinion. The issue is knowing at what numbers the tree will fail ... like oh yeah, when it gets to 19% wall thickness then it falls over.

So, what they have had to do is think outside the box from when will it fail to how will it fail and how do we prevent that.

Failure of limbs has been dealt with, and likely no-one allowed under the canopy. That leaves the trunk and roots to fail. Before you know it you can say that ...

most trunk failures are within 4m of the ground and most blowovers take a soil radius of no more than 2.5m

That said the new safety structure is engineered for that scenario and that takes pressure of the when it will fail problem.

Of course then there's the cost, some-ones going to have to pay the $100K+ to make it happen and then the removal anyway on top.

Maybe they can ask if our BCC will donate, afterall they shelled out $260K on moving a fig tree on a private golf course that no-one knew existed.

So tell me, do you think the tree will die before it fails, like be sitting there as some dead tree or do you think it will fail whilst alive?

quercus · 20th January 2008, 12:49 PM

I'm fairly sure when I say that this one's gonna fail while still alive, if nothing is done. At least it will when the crown stays in the same way it is in now. I don't really know how the tree was assessed at height, and therefore I cannot say wether it will or won't fail above the structure and at what height. But I do know that if the structure completely takes away dynamics, and therefore keeps the trunk in place whilst the rest (all above the steel structure) is still allowed to move freely, in accordance to the trunks condition right above the steel construction, it could fail right above the structure. This would be the same as a failure at the base, but due to the ridgidity of the structure, it's evident that the tree can now simply be seen as much shorter. So what situation do we have now? The full crown has the same resistance during a storm, but the leverage is shorter and diameter decreases when going higher. By placing this structure, we're only changing the breaking point of the tree. That is ofcourse if readings have shown that the tree is severely decayed right a bove the tructure so it's either bending or breaking at that point. The dynamics of this, when it fails right above the structure will far exceed damage if it were to break at the base or simply fall over.Do you understand what I'm trying to say?

The steel structure costs about 15.000 USD.

newguy18 · 20th January 2008, 05:33 PM

couldn't cabling and bracing take care of the canopy?

15th January 2008, 11:25 PM	#26 (permalink)
Quintrex Afterburner is shakin' Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Sydney Posts: 414	Re: Anne Frank Horse Chestnut Tree __________________ Heightmaster

16th January 2008, 12:11 AM	#27 (permalink)
quercus Afterburner is shakin' Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: belgium Posts: 414	Re: Anne Frank Horse Chestnut Tree No-one could have said it better, Sean...

16th January 2008, 01:20 AM	#28 (permalink)
polly former member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Adelaide Hills Posts: 74	Re: Anne Frank Horse Chestnut Tree I completly agree Sean, that tree was one of the only living things she could see out of her window was'nt it? And for how many years? That poor little girl. She would have seen the seasons change through that tree and it kept her in touch with the outside world. We had a similar story 6 months back, this lovely old lady lived whom we had done work for in the past had a horrific car accident and lost a leg .Her husband died just before that. She had 8 months in re-hab, is learning to walk again,do everything all over. She lives alone and has a beautiful big Ironbark ( can't remember specifically what sort) but she loves that tree. She sits under it and admires it every day for hours.She says it is one of the most important things in her life now and it means everything to her she wanted us to come and prune it. We could'nt get down there( it's 100kms away and we were too busy) so she nearly got in the local loppers! I managed to make a quick few phone calls for her to get three quotes from qualified arborists and her tree now looks beautiful.Mother nature is good to hold onto when you've got little else so i think they should do what ever is necessary to keep Anne's tree alive.You can visit Auschwitz or the other concentration camps as see the horror. With that tree you can see the hope.

16th January 2008, 01:36 AM	#29 (permalink)
Ekka Eric Frei Administrator - Brisbane L5 (Dip) Hort Cert III Arb + some Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Brisbane Posts: 5,659	Re: Anne Frank Horse Chestnut Tree Sean, you forgot this. I'm sure other places, cities etc have significant trees on registers and they get bi-annual or annual check ups. The issue seems to be that the trigger for arborist action is often a negative one, when things are going bad, the tree failing, losing branches etc. Whilst it may be hard to check every tree every year you'd certainly expect that significant trees be checked. What if the significant trees reside on private properties? ... does happen. I know that locally I have attended to properties to quote the removal of a tree. I usually try to check on the internet but many times end up calling the council to discover a Significant Landscape Tree Protection Order (SLT VPO). These are singled out trees, that protection order is not a blanket one for the city. The owners sometimes look surprised and sometimes disgruntled for various reasons. The issue is that those trees aren't cared for or reported upon, and sometimes people dont even know they have them! If there was a pro-active approach where these trees were inspected, the longivity and safety would increase. However at the moment they get nothing, some of the trees will also get mistreated so they die in the hope the approval for removal then goes through. I think an easily accessible website for all Significant trees would be a start, a site that provides details and when last inspected and what was on that inspection. Of course that will bring all sorts of issues out however if looking after significant trees is the goal then you need a plan. A pro-active approach is what cities need to implement. It's caring for healthy trees that matters to, parking your tinnie there and chaining it up to the trunk whilst the bungs have been pulled and you wash it out isn't the best thing for a tree. __________________ Remember to use the "search" function, if you have answers/questions post them so everyone can benefit. Free Tree and Green Industry Link Directory Qualified Brisbane Tree Lopping Brisbane Tree Care, Consultations and Arborist Reports Forum Sponsors

17th January 2008, 11:47 PM	#32 (permalink)
Ekka Eric Frei Administrator - Brisbane L5 (Dip) Hort Cert III Arb + some Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Brisbane Posts: 5,659	Re: Anne Frank Horse Chestnut Tree Interesting, it wont prevent bits falling off like branches but should stop uprooting. If the tree breaks apart between the 2m ring and the 8m ring then there's trouble. __________________ Remember to use the "search" function, if you have answers/questions post them so everyone can benefit. Free Tree and Green Industry Link Directory Qualified Brisbane Tree Lopping Brisbane Tree Care, Consultations and Arborist Reports Forum Sponsors

18th January 2008, 12:02 AM	#33 (permalink)
quercus Afterburner is shakin' Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: belgium Posts: 414	Re: Anne Frank Horse Chestnut Tree If it fails between the two rings, that would mean that the dynamics of the stem are still in place after installing the frame. The general idea for this is to take dynamics away for the entire section wich is braced. If it can't move, then it's not likely to break. The only way I see this happening if the trunk would collapse on a horizontal axis. I don't really know how the situation is on 9 m above ground, but if it is severely decayed there, I see the tree breaking apart just above the upper ring. If it were to fail at that point,possible damage and risk would increase severely.If uprooting would occur, the tree would fall down more gently and more slowly then when a large section including the massive crown where to free fall to the ground. Don't know if my sentences are correct on this. I'd create a steel bracing for the tree, all the way up to where it divides into the upper crown section. This would require a setup of a lot more square feet area then the one they designed now.Let's not forget that this ridgid design is either a case of making it, or breaking it. The architects state, that it doesn't form a problem if the steel structure would deform a bit during the years to come, and that's something that I find hard to believe. I see only triangular shapes, and for a triangular shape to deform, one corner or side must break. If this would occur, the structure would become worthless.

18th January 2008, 11:46 PM	#34 (permalink)
quercus Afterburner is shakin' Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: belgium Posts: 414	Re: Anne Frank Horse Chestnut Tree a timeline of events that I copy/pasted from the tree's website. Timeline Around 1850: The chesnut tree is planted on the grounds inside a residential block just north of the Westerkerk, between the Keizersgracht and Prinsengracht. Look up the site at Google Maps. 1943/44: Anne Frank writes in her Diary about the chestnut tree. While hiding in her safe house this is her only contact with outdoor life and the changing seasons that she can observe from her attic window. 1989: A first threat to the chestnut tree: the Anne Frank Foundation plans to extend its buildings. It wants to expand its lot at the Keizersgracht, adjacent to the Anne Frank House, to a point quite near the tree. To render this possible, a considerable part of its root system must be cut off. Local residents oppose this intent to harm the tree and the plan is eventually dropped. 1993: The soil surrounding the tree is cleaned up in connection with an oil spill. The Amsterdam City Centre Borough takes over the care for the tree. In the following years the tree recovers from the damage caused by this soil pollution. Spring 2005: In a circular letter to the local residents, the Borough announces that the chestnut tree is in a poor condition. Local residents ask Mr Werner, the managing director of Pius Floris Amsterdam, the company that attends to the tree on behalf of the Borough, what measures, such as improving the soil, are taken to counteract this decay. The reply is: nothing. Local residents conduct garlic actions. They plant twothousand garlic cloves around the foot of the chestnut tree. Traditionally, garlic is an anti-bacterial remedy against tree disease. 25 June 2005: The chestnut tree?s crown is cut. The Borough orders the tree?s crown to be reduced by Pius Floris. As a result, the tree no longer juts out as high above the houses as it used to and will suffer less from wind. This reduces its risk of being blown down. February 2006: Mrs Fassbinder and Mr Versteegen interview Mr Pius Floris, the founder of the mother company. They ask him whether the tree might benefit from treatment. He answers in the affirmative. His company can provide treatment for a sum of 1,000 euros. Mr Werner, managing director of the Pius Floris Amsterdam company, promises he will request permission from the Borough for such treatment. In spite of repeated phone calls there is no positive reply. Mr Werner then asks Mrs Fassbinder to allow him access to her garden in order to perform a pulling test to measure the tree�s stability. A date and time are agreed, but the pulling test is postponed for reasons that remain unclear. During follow-up telephone calls questions about this issue are not answered. 13 November 2006: At an informational meeting called by the Borough, the local residents are presented with a study by Pius Floris Amsterdam. The study concludes that the tree should be cut. Local residents ask whether municipal tree consultant Hans Kaljee agrees with the report and its conclusions. Mrs Hijne, the civil servant in charge of the application for the cutting permit, adamantly confirms that he cooperated with the study and agrees with its conclusions. However, when the next day the local residents approach the consultant in person, he proves to be uninformed and not to be involved in the study and its conclusions in any way. Local residents also requested the Borough for a second opinion, since one study constituted a very narrow basis for felling the tree. However, the Borough considers this unnecessary. 14 November 2006: Articles in the morning newspapers reveal that the national and international press had already been informed of the need to cut down the tree. 20 November 2006: The Borough publishes the application for the cutting permit. The local residents are informed of this by letter and told that the application may be perused at the city hall until 18 December. 18 December 2006: Local residents submit their views. They are opposed to cutting the tree. 6 March 2007: The submitted views do not prevent the Borough from granting a definitive cutting permit to the owner of the Anne Frank tree, Mr Pomes. 24 March 2007: An action committee composed of local residents organises a colloquium about the Anne Frank tree in the Jordaan community centre. A panel of tree experts from all over the Netherlands discusses the study report by Pius Floris and unanimously agrees that the tree does not need to be cut. Conservation measures and anchors are a possible alternative. April 2007: The working committee orders an alternative study by the renowned English tree expert Neville Fay, who employs more refined methods than Pius Floris. The result is positive for the tree. Middle of April 2007: Several local residents and the Dutch Tree Foundation submit objections to the Borough against the granted cutting permit. On top of this, an injunctive relief is requested from the district court to suspend the effectuation of the cutting. A few days later the court reports that the permit holder Mr Pomes has stated he will not use the cutting permit until the decision by the Objections Committee has been announced. The request for an injunctive relief is subsequently withdrawn. May 2007: The Borough?s Objections Committee conducts a hearing to discuss the written objections that have been submitted. During this hearing it transpires that the Borough wilfully misquotes a report by the municipal tree consultant: the report recommends further study instead of cutting the tree. Summer 2007: The objectors and the Dutch Tree Foundation set up a working committee to develop an alternative plan aimed at the tree?s preservation. 18 September 2007: The Objections Committee issues a ruling, granting the objectors the opportunity to present an alternative plan before 1 January 2008. October 2007: A pulling test is prepared. This is to be conducted on Wednesday 14 November on behalf of the Dutch Tree Foundation. 13 November 2007: In the evening a letter from the chairperson of the Objections Committee is delivered by courier. It states that the tree will be cut with the permission of Mr Pomes due to the acute danger of collapse. To support this decision they enclose the inspection report by Pius Floris, written in September 2007. The cutting is scheduled to take place on 21 November 2007. 14 November 2007: Tree experts arrive in the morning to verify the Pius Floris inspection data on behalf of the Tree Foundation. However, before long a police officer arrives at the scene to deny them access to the tree. The pulling test is banned due to the acute danger that the test is presumed to cause. After talks between the tree?s owner and Mr Koot of the Tree Foundation permission is granted to conduct a sonic inspection. This inspection reveals that the tree?s three remaining supporting roots are strong enough to carry its weight. 15 November 2007: Pius Floris repeats its inspection in the morning. This time around they do not wait a month and a half before presenting their results. The very same evening the objectors receive by courier a message from the Borough informing them of the results. The conclusions are identical to those of the previous report and the intention to cut the tree on 21 November is confirmed. 19 November 2007: At long last Mr Pomes allows the working committee to conduct the pulling test. The Borough demurs and tells the Tree Foundation (but not the owner) that it will not be held accountable if the pulling test is actually performed. In spite of this, the pulling test is carried out just before dark: the tree turns out to be very stable. In the mean time the Tree Foundation has also commissioned studies into the nature of the decay. These prove that the observed fungi are not of the aggressive variety that Pius Floris claims they are. 20 November 2007: The district court rules in summary proceedings. The working committee is put in the right: it is granted permission to elaborate its alternative plan and is given the time until the middle of January 2008. 21 November 2007 In spite of the ruling by the district court, the Borough and the Anne Frank Foundation hold a press conference during which they repeat their claim that there exists ?acute danger?. They urge the Mayor of Amsterdam to proceed to emergency cutting. December 2007 The Dutch Tree Foundation, the working committee Support Anne Frank Tree, the Anne Frank Foundation and the Borough Amsterdam Centre join in a mediation proces, lead by Eberhard van der Laan. The tree is subject to further analysis 17 December 2007: The alternative plan (PDF, 2.12 MB, / ) was presented by the working committee Support Anne Frank Tree. The report has english abstracts & conclusions. 3 January 2008: The treespecialists from both sides have made a joined statement about the tree's condition & care. For now, the tree does not endanger its surroundings. Its main risk is a breaking of the trunk: without leaves the tree can handle 200% of wind force 11, with leaves 100%. A supporting construction can be build to ensure safety in summer. With the construction and good care, the tree can live at least 5 to 15 years. The costs of the build would be around ? 50.000 and the care ? 20.000 this year, and later on a yearly ? 10.000. 16 January 2008: The appeal committee of the borough Amsterdam Centre has declared that the borough has rightfully granted the cutting permit. The borough says that this doesn't mean that the tree will be cut down. It regards the permit as a means to the owner of the tree, to cut it down in case Support Anne Frank Tree's plans to save the tree fail.

19th January 2008, 08:04 AM	#35 (permalink)
newguy18 Tree World Icon Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Live Oak Florida home of the crapiest trees you will ever see. Posts: 2,185	Re: Anne Frank Horse Chestnut Tree nice post Quercus garlic in an aid to trees with diease?a pull test what would that be or is it like the name sounds? __________________ Have your say join us today. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzkd_m4ivmc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzfzb...eature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-OqK...eature=related

20th January 2008, 02:57 AM	#36 (permalink)
Sean Freeman PDF King & Arborist Extrodinaire Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Townsville Nth Queensland & Gold Coast Sth Queensland Posts: 1,521	Re: Anne Frank Horse Chestnut Tree Thankyou for posting that Quercus, most of the timeline I was aware of but not confirmed, and being so many thousand kms away my harping on about this tree and the appauling rubbish going on regarding its mis-management was (I felt) making others reject the good sound qualified opinion that the tree could stay. Pius Floris should be ashamed of what either he or those claiming to represent him have done and said on record with regards this tree. Sadly i believe this is not the case, like some others I have had dealings with, there comes a point when the individual's position becomes more important than the actual quality and value of the work they do...the more letters and braiding after their names the worse it becomes...self appointed Arboricultural Gods I call them, and yes they do know who they are. __________________ Sean Trees are poems that earth writes upon the sky, We fell them down and turn them into paper, That we may record our emptiness. - Kahlil Gibran

20th January 2008, 05:00 AM	#37 (permalink)
Ekka Eric Frei Administrator - Brisbane L5 (Dip) Hort Cert III Arb + some Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Brisbane Posts: 5,659	Re: Anne Frank Horse Chestnut Tree Well, what fun this tree has been. The issue with the pull test is that people think the tree will break when the test is done. Also, personally I dont feel it's that good anyway. They dont pull a tree to failure, they put a certain amount of tension and measure the response with fine censors. But is where and how they pull on it how nature works the canopy in storms? I doubt it. However that together with picus, resistograph and VTA all forms an opinion. The issue is knowing at what numbers the tree will fail ... like oh yeah, when it gets to 19% wall thickness then it falls over. So, what they have had to do is think outside the box from when will it fail to how will it fail and how do we prevent that. Failure of limbs has been dealt with, and likely no-one allowed under the canopy. That leaves the trunk and roots to fail. Before you know it you can say that ... most trunk failures are within 4m of the ground and most blowovers take a soil radius of no more than 2.5m That said the new safety structure is engineered for that scenario and that takes pressure of the when it will fail problem. Of course then there's the cost, some-ones going to have to pay the $100K+ to make it happen and then the removal anyway on top. Maybe they can ask if our BCC will donate, afterall they shelled out $260K on moving a fig tree on a private golf course that no-one knew existed. So tell me, do you think the tree will die before it fails, like be sitting there as some dead tree or do you think it will fail whilst alive? __________________ Remember to use the "search" function, if you have answers/questions post them so everyone can benefit. Free Tree and Green Industry Link Directory Qualified Brisbane Tree Lopping Brisbane Tree Care, Consultations and Arborist Reports Forum Sponsors

20th January 2008, 12:49 PM	#38 (permalink)
quercus Afterburner is shakin' Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: belgium Posts: 414	Re: Anne Frank Horse Chestnut Tree I'm fairly sure when I say that this one's gonna fail while still alive, if nothing is done. At least it will when the crown stays in the same way it is in now. I don't really know how the tree was assessed at height, and therefore I cannot say wether it will or won't fail above the structure and at what height. But I do know that if the structure completely takes away dynamics, and therefore keeps the trunk in place whilst the rest (all above the steel structure) is still allowed to move freely, in accordance to the trunks condition right above the steel construction, it could fail right above the structure. This would be the same as a failure at the base, but due to the ridgidity of the structure, it's evident that the tree can now simply be seen as much shorter. So what situation do we have now? The full crown has the same resistance during a storm, but the leverage is shorter and diameter decreases when going higher. By placing this structure, we're only changing the breaking point of the tree. That is ofcourse if readings have shown that the tree is severely decayed right a bove the tructure so it's either bending or breaking at that point. The dynamics of this, when it fails right above the structure will far exceed damage if it were to break at the base or simply fall over.Do you understand what I'm trying to say? The steel structure costs about 15.000 USD.

20th January 2008, 05:33 PM	#39 (permalink)
newguy18 Tree World Icon Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Live Oak Florida home of the crapiest trees you will ever see. Posts: 2,185	Re: Anne Frank Horse Chestnut Tree couldn't cabling and bracing take care of the canopy? __________________ Have your say join us today. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzkd_m4ivmc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzfzb...eature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-OqK...eature=related

23rd January 2008, 03:21 AM	#40 (permalink)
quercus Afterburner is shakin'