[CANUFNET] Beech Bark Disease

Mon Feb 27 14:58:43 EST 2012

The beech forest at Killbear provincial park is being decimated at the
moment...is this a satellite or is the northern front already there? Is
there a website with current BBD information on it?

Philip van Wassenaer, B.SC., MFC

Principal Consultant

Urban Forest Innovations Inc.

Mississauga, Ontario, Canada

 <http://www.urbanforestinnovations.com/> www.urbanforestinnovations.com

-----Original Message-----
From: canufnet-bounces at list.web.net [mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net]
On Behalf Of Boysen, Barb (MNR)
Sent: February-27-12 10:30 AM
To: Canadian Urban Forest Network; forestreecare at nexicom.net; Canadian Urban
Forest Network; Canadian Urban Forest Network
Cc: McLaughlin, John (MNR); Wilson, Richard (MNR)
Subject: Re: [CANUFNET] Beech Bark Disease

Hello

I am passing on this note from Dr John McLaughlin

Barb Boysen

---------------

Hi Barb,

   I am working on a BBD publication with an Ontario focus, which we hope
will be published by this summer. Because BBD has been in Ontario for less
time than in the Maritimes or New England, some of the information and
observations from those areas need to be adjusted to reflect the Ontario
situation. 

   In Ontario we are currently focussed on defining the limit of the spread
of the scale (the "Advancing Front"), the fungal infections that cause the
cankering and tree decline/death (the "Killing Front"), and on identifying
putatively resistant trees, i.e. trees which do not become infested with
scale, and therefore do not become infected by the pathogen. BTW, in Ontario
I only consider Neonectria faginata important in BBD. The native N.
ditissima (syn. Nectria galligena) is rarely found associated with
infections, and even then at insignificant levels.

   Retention of trees without scale infestation among trees with abundant
scale and/or cankers is essential; these are the beech of the future,
similar to the situation with butternut. What we have also observed, and are
beginning to study is possible "disease tolerance", i.e., trees that became
infected as the first wave of scale and fungal infection moved through, but
which survived with only superficial damage. We have seen cases where the
infections (cankers) look really bad, but they don't penetrate all the way
to the cambium, and even become contained by tree defence mechanisms. These
trees may remain in a vigorous condition even though they look bad.  We
don't know how long, and under what conditions this disease tolerance will
last; we have seen trees that suffered a second, fatal wave of infection. If
you don't suspect that the trees are showing much disease tolerance, and
decline and death looks like it will be quick and widespread it is probably
best to remove heavily infected trees, which will rapidly become hazard
trees, and also to reduce the inoculum load (i.e. the abundance of infective
N. faginata spores) in the immediate area.

   Another observation is that trees along the south-western advancing front
seem to survive longer than trees along the northern advancing front. This
may be because of environmental factors contributing to greater tree vigour
in the southwest.

   On the topic of BBD workshops, Richard Wilson and I are interested in
holding more workshops this year. Norfolk County and Simcoe County have
already expressed interest, but no dates or locations have been chosen. The
best time for such workshops is probably early fall, when both the scale and
Neonectria fruiting bodies are best observed.

   Finally, I can't miss an opportunity to say this - always advise people
to be careful when moving firewood (or don't do it!). We have satellite BBD
locations far in advance of known areas of either scale or disease which can
only have been introduced by human vectors, probably on firewood.

Bye for now,

John

John A. McLaughlin, PhD

Forest Research Pathologist

Ontario Forest Research Institute

1235 Queen St. E.

Sault Ste. Marie, ON

Canada

P6A 2E5

tel: +1 705-946-7419

 <mailto:John.McLaughlin at ontario.ca> John.McLaughlin at ontario.ca

 <http://ontario.ca/ofri> http://ontario.ca/ofri <
<https://webmail.ontario.ca/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://ontario.ca/ofri
>
https://webmail.ontario.ca/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://ontario.ca/ofri>

________________________________

From:  <mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net> canufnet-bounces at list.web.net
on behalf of Boysen, Barb (MNR)

Sent: Sun 26/02/2012 4:25 PM

To:  <mailto:forestreecare at nexicom.net> forestreecare at nexicom.net; Canadian
Urban Forest Network; Canadian Urban Forest Network

Cc: McLaughlin, John (MNR); Wilson, Richard (MNR)

Subject: Re: [CANUFNET] Beech Bark Disease

Hello

Ed & Bohdan are correct.  I've attached a one page document with some
general genetic guidelines for forest managers. Two of those apply here:

- Retain trees exhibiting resistance to insect and disease problems.

- Reduce or delay removal of large trees with good growth, form and
resistance until regeneration is established.

This has been important in the recovery programs for chestnut, white pine,
elm, butternut and now beech and ash.  It is also important to keep enough
living trees, even less vigorous ones that are not hazaards, in any one
population to allow them to continue to cross pollinate and maintain genetic
diversity in the species, as checks and balances for these new pests and
pathogens species evolve in and with our forest communities.

MNR's Dr Richard Wilson and Dr John McLaughlin have held workshops recently
in southern Ontario to help people understand the rationale for this with
beech.  I have copied them here

Barb Boysen

Forest Gene Conservation Association

 <mailto:barb.boysen at ontario.ca> barb.boysen at ontario.ca

 <http://www.fgca.net> www.fgca.net

________________________________

From:  <mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net> canufnet-bounces at list.web.net
on behalf of  <mailto:forestreecare at nexicom.net> forestreecare at nexicom.net

Sent: Sat 25/02/2012 6:28 AM

To: Canadian Urban Forest Network

Subject: Re: [CANUFNET] Beech Bark Disease

Bowdan is correct. Never recommend the removal of a putitively resistant, or
resilient tree to any disease or insect attack. There are always some trees
(<5%) in a population that will pass on genetic resistance to the next
generation. Saying all this, we must consider that the larger beech trees
will not 'canker' similar to the regenerating trees which will be more
deformed. Older, larger >60 cm dbh trees will likely have the initial
population of beech scale when they first invade the area. That population
of scale will subside over time and the two Nectria fungi responsible for
bbd will then kill the trees over a number of years. The whole process is
10+ years or more.

There is lots of information on bbd out there.

Ed Czerwinski

Forestree Care

Sent on the TELUS Mobility network with BlackBerry
________________________________

From: "Koskinen, Jennifer" < <mailto:Jennifer.Koskinen at stantec.com>
Jennifer.Koskinen at stantec.com>

Sender:  <mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net>
canufnet-bounces at list.web.net

Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 13:34:36 -0700

To:  <mailto:canufnet at list.web.net%3ccanufnet at list.web.net>
canufnet at list.web.net<canufnet at list.web.net>

ReplyTo: Canadian Urban Forest Network < <mailto:canufnet at list.web.net>
canufnet at list.web.net>

Subject: [CANUFNET] Beech Bark Disease

Good day,

To cut or not to cut?  Beech Bark Disease (scale and fungus = canker) is
destroying our beech trees.  I have observed cankering on many American
Beech (Fagus grandifolia) trees in forests throughout Southern Ontario.  I
would definitely recommend a tree (located in/adjacent to a
public/residential area) in poor condition with this canker to be removed.
But what about removing trees that appear to be in good condition, minimal
to no deadwood in crown, no observed rot on the stem, But with minimal signs
of infection on the bark?  Without knowing how long these 'good condition'
trees with small patches of infection will survive should we go ahead and
remove them to be proactive?  Or retain them and possibly have them die in
one or two years becoming a hazard tree?

What do you guys think?  Are there any pathology tree experts out there?

-jk

Jennifer Koskinen, HBESfcon

ISA Certified Arborist ON-1234A

Stantec

49 Frederick Street

Kitchener ON N2H 6M7

Ph: (519) 585-7442

Fx: (519) 579-8664

 <mailto:jennifer.koskinen at stantec.com> jennifer.koskinen at stantec.com

stantec.com < <http://www.stantec.com/> http://www.stantec.com/> 

The content of this email is the confidential property of Stantec and should
not be copied, modified, retransmitted, or used for any purpose except with
Stantec's written authorization. If you are not the intended recipient,
please delete all copies and notify us immediately.

ü Please consider the environment before printing this email.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20120227/84777f59/attachment-0001.htm>