[CANUFNET] Question to mailing list members

[Ryan Redvers]

Epicormic growth is the reaction to some kind of damage and or stressor. It is an attempt to revitalize. One that often succeeds, with strength and purpose.  The idea that these are necessary and essential is well backed here already and I support that.       Often these shoots thin themselves to some degree thinking of Acer Negundo and Gleditsia.      I know I am adding details here but I appreciate the awareness around Epicormic growth. I think it needs a new light shed on it. And largely has a new light on it already     The term 'suckers' is worse than 'water sprouts'.  Epicormic is a better term I think. Anyway with topped trees, by storm or saw, or both, we have options of utilizing and appreciating this epicormic growth, not fearing it. Saying it is weakly attached casts a generalization that applies not to all, likely few. As we do learn to accurately assess this growth we can manage through reductions, if it poses a likelihood of failure.  Trees can often be retained even if they are temporarily stripped via storm, or saw or both. I know I'm preaching to the choir here but I think the misunderstanding around epicormic growth is widespread.  Many species, given a decent soil bed, can thrive and adapt to severe damage, not that it is ideal but it is manageable. And they are often not given the usual luxury of terminal growth so epicormic growth is a good back up.     Thank you for the question Linda Moskalyk and sorry for the derail. I know this is beyond Elm Epicormics but I hope it gives perspective on epicormic growth.
Ryan Redvers 
Sent from Rogers Yahoo Mail on Android 
 
  On Fri, 5 Mar 2021 at 5:47 PM, Philip van Wassenaer via CANUFNET<canufnet at list.web.net> wrote:   #yiv3172670556 #yiv3172670556 -- _filtered {} _filtered {}#yiv3172670556 #yiv3172670556 p.yiv3172670556MsoNormal, #yiv3172670556 li.yiv3172670556MsoNormal, #yiv3172670556 div.yiv3172670556MsoNormal {margin:0cm;font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;}#yiv3172670556 span.yiv3172670556EmailStyle18 {font-family:sans-serif;color:windowtext;}#yiv3172670556 .yiv3172670556MsoChpDefault {font-family:sans-serif;} _filtered {}#yiv3172670556 div.yiv3172670556WordSection1 {}#yiv3172670556 
I have been working on DED for a long time and with some specific Winnipeg experience. Never heard of this!

  

I would ask the university researcher that made the statement to please provide some scientific evidence to substantiate that. Trees don’t usually grow things they don’t need. Removing sprouts is an aesthetic  driven practice, not much good to the tree as far as I can see. And could be a stress that attracts the beetles as previously mentioned here.

  

If you receive some good information to verify this, please do pass it along. Interesting query…

  

Cheers and have a great weekend all,

  

Philip

  

Philip van Wassenaer, B.SC., MFC

Urban Forest Innovations Inc.

1331 Northaven Drive

Mississauga ON L5G 4E8

Tel:  (905) 274-1022

Cell: (647) 221-3046

Fax: (905) 274-2170



  

www.urbanforestinnovations.com

  

From: CANUFNET <canufnet-bounces at list.web.net> On Behalf Of SOS Trees Coalition via CANUFNET
Sent: March 5, 2021 2:31 PM
To: canufnet at list.web.net
Cc: SOS Trees Coalition <trees at sostrees.ca>
Subject: [CANUFNET] Question to mailing list members

  

Here is a question that I would like to have posted to the subscribers:

  

Has anyone heard of the need to remove watersprouts from American Elm trunks because they could be a source of entry for the elm bark beetle?  We have been alerted to this by a university researcher who claims that leaving this growth on elms can leave them vulnerable to Dutch Elm disease. I have never heard of this and want to know if anyone has information to support it.

  

  

Linda Moskalyk

President

SOS Trees Coalition

Saskatoon

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

.

  

  
  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20210306/61692560/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3340 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20210306/61692560/attachment.jpg>