I need to attach a ledger to a ICF wall using the Simpson ledger attachment hardware. The ledger is under a large eve, well protected from the ellements and 8′ above grade. Is it necessary to use a treated ledger?
Thanks.
I need to attach a ledger to a ICF wall using the Simpson ledger attachment hardware. The ledger is under a large eve, well protected from the ellements and 8′ above grade. Is it necessary to use a treated ledger?
Thanks.
Source control, ventilation, and filtration are the keys to healthy indoor air quality. Dehumidification is important too.
"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.
Get home building tips, offers, and expert advice in your inbox
Fine Homebuilding
Get home building tips, offers, and expert advice in your inbox
© 2024 Active Interest Media. All rights reserved.
Get home building tips, offers, and expert advice in your inbox
Become a member and get instant access to thousands of videos, how-tos, tool reviews, and design features.
Start Your Free TrialStart your subscription today and save up to 81%
SubscribeGet complete site access to expert advice, how-to videos, Code Check, and more, plus the print magazine.
Already a member? Log in
Replies
No. Standard framing lumber will be fine.
But make sure you flash it properly. There will be some wind-blown water getting in there every once in a while and you don't want it getting trapped behind the ledger.
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not brought
low by this? For thine evil pales before that which
foolish men call Justice....
Yes. You are attaching to insulated concrete.
PT all the way. Z flashed on top, Grace behind.
Bing
Yes. You are attaching to insulated concrete.
Really? And which substance in contact with which the ledger will be is likely to cause it to rot?
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
Water.
You gotta be kidding. What element of the 'insulated concrete' contains enough water to rot a piece of wood?
I'm gonna say it again: Concrete does not degrade wood in direct contact with it. The recent mania for spec'ing PT for all framing members in contact with concrete is not based in fact; it has been propagated by ignorant designers and code writers wishing to cover their butts. There are literally millions and millions of houses with plain, garden-variety SPF framing lumber sitting directly on slabs and foundation walls, and most of those were built long enough ago that if the concrete were going to do any damage to the framing, it would already have done it.
This 'you gotta use PT on concrete' hogwash is without a doubt the silliest, stupidest, most idiotic 'urban legend' to have been invented about home construction in the last 50 years.
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
FWIW, in my neck 'o the woods, code says all wood in contact with concrete shall be treated lumber.Mike HennessyPittsburgh, PAEverything fits, until you put glue on it.
Question: Does the code state that it shall be treated lumber, period? Or that it shall be treated lumber 'or other rot-resistant material'?
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
Not sure -- the inspector said "treated lumber".Mike HennessyPittsburgh, PAEverything fits, until you put glue on it.
Betcha he was paraphrasing something he didn't understand perfectly.
First off, no regulation specifying a particular product to the exclusion of any other could withstand a court challenge. Secondly, an engineer or other design professional licensed in the jurisdiction making such a regulation must be permitted to submit an alternative construction to satisfy the structural or safety concerns the regulation in question was written to address.
If I were in your place, I'd look it up for myself, or demand that the AHJ show me chapter and verse in the code. Just taking the unsupported word of 'Joe da B.I.' is how these stupid legends grow into 'duh, everybody knows that!' factoids.
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
"If I were in your place, I'd look it up for myself, or demand that the AHJ show me chapter and verse in the code."
LOL! I avoid ticking off the BI unless I have no other choice! Kinda like spitting into the wind, ya know? If he says "do it", unless I have a good reason not to, I generally smile and say "OK, Boss."
First, "treated lumber" is not brand specific. Second, why fight it? Treated lumber isn't all that expensive, it's readily available, and it works. The only "drawback" is the need to use stainless fasteners, but I think that's good practice anyhooz.Mike HennessyPittsburgh, PAEverything fits, until you put glue on it.
".....why fight it? Treated lumber isn't all that expensive, it's readily available, and it works."
That's what my first thought was upon reading the OP.
Gee, one would think from reading the replies we're talking about huge costs differences like whether or not to use closed cell foam insulation in lieu of batts.
Runnerguy
...why fight it? Treated lumber isn't all that expensive, it's readily available, and it works.
There are several reasons to fight it; one is the poor attitude about good workmanship its rôle as a 'panacea' has engendered (see my post to Mike M. above); another is that in general, PT lumber is inferior in quality to untreated framing lumber. It's twisty, full of knots and checks, and most of the planks are about half sapwood because they're made from the smallest damned trees I've ever seen run through a sawmill. I don't know why this should be so--and some people say it isn't in their regions--but it is an observed fact here and many other places.
One of the most important reasons not to use poisoned wood is that it is just that: Poisoned. It contains chemicals nasty enough to give full-grown carps with rough, calloused hands severe contact dermatitis--IMO that's a good enough reason all by itself to keep it out of anywhere a human being might come in contact with it, especially children. But ignorant or uncaring people continue to build decks out of the stuff, knowing full well kids are gonna be running around on that deck barefoot all summer long.
What are the cumulative effects of years of skin contact with CCA or ACQ? Nobody knows; they could even be far worse than lead paint. By the time we know, it'll be too late to do anything about it. But hey, look on the bright side: We could conceivably be looking at a great business opportunity in another twenty-odd years--PT Abatement Contrating.
But even that will have its difficulties: The stuff isn't biodegradable like untreated wood (obviously), and it can't be burned safely. So where are the future PT Abatement contractors gonna dump the stuff? NIMBY, I guess....
PT isn't nice stuff to manufacture, or to use either. In addition to the highly concentrated poison spilled at the manufacturers' plants (and there are always spills), we are also poisoning the whole damn planet with poisoned offcuts, poisoned sawdust, and poisoned demolition scrap.
Finally, one of the best reasons to fight it is that it just isn't necessary. Stipulating the occasional need for rot-resistant wood, there are numerous naturally-rot-resistant species readily available that have none of the poisonous drawbacks of PT and do as good or better a job of sending wood-munching microbes packing.
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
Mike,
You won't be ticking the building inspector off if you phrase it properly. What I do is copy the relevant passage and politely show it to the BI. That way he learns respect for you and learns something he may not have known..
It's how I got my extremely unorthdox construction technique approved..(without any engineers stamps etc.)
it says rot resistant. However the question is moot.. the ledger won't be in direct contact with the concrete.. we're speaking about ICF's here and they have 2.5 inches of foam between concrete and wood.
For some reason, I guess from inferring from what others were saying, that the ledger was going directly on the concrete. I'm not sure I'd wanna hang a ledger through foam, tho' I admit I've never looked into the structural issues/approved methods, having never faced the situation. Seems like maybe a good candidate for freestanding with support from below?
Mike HennessyPittsburgh, PAEverything fits, until you put glue on it.
it says rot resistant. However the question is moot.. the ledger won't be in direct contact with the concrete.. we're speaking about ICF's here and they have 2.5 inches of foam between concrete and wood.
Thanks; I knew that. It was actally excalibur and not Mike H. who originally posted that a ledger attached to 'insulated concrete' had to be PT, but he hasn't been back since.
I would, however, like the opinion of a few experienced framers about attaching structural ledgers to the concrete through 2.5" of foam. I'm not sure I'd be comfortable doing that.
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
attaching structural ledgers to the concrete through 2.5" of foam. I'm not sure I'd be comfortable doing that.
many wouldn't...
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming<!----><!----><!---->
WOW!!! What a Ride!
Forget the primal scream, just ROAR!!!
"Some days it's just not worth chewing through the restraints"
"I would, however, like the opinion of a few experienced framers about attaching structural ledgers to the concrete through 2.5" of foam. I'm not sure I'd be comfortable doing that."
You don't.
Simpson ICFLView ImageView Image
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
Jon
I hadn't seen that before.. thanks for the information.. I don't believe they had that option when I was pouring my ICF's at least the engineer involved didn't.
His answer was what I just gave a post earlier. That or using a brick ledger.
Just for information I hung 2 inch thick granite slabs around my whole foundation using that and now years later they haven't moved a tiny fraction.. the granite was attached using lag bolts drilled into the concrete. Looks a whole lot more elegant than the foam or worse looking at cement blocks..
Edited 10/5/2009 10:50 am ET by frenchy
Interesting. 14- or 16-ga galvy, anchored in the 'crete during the pour. Plaque sits flush with the foam surface (you have to kerf the ICF to install the anchored element) and is then considered a structural surface for mounting the hanger and ledger. 8 screws per hanger set; sets on 48" centers (most applications).
I don't see how this addresses the displacement of the load 2.5" from the fulcrum of the anchor, which is my primary worry with this type of configuration. The anchor plaque has 2 tabs about 8" apart, angled at about a 45º bias to the vertical load, but parallel. Hmmm. Any engineers out there want to critique or clarify this?
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
It totally depends on how it's attached..
Let me see if I can explain it well enough.. without getting overly complex..
In the end it's about point loads..
I can hang cabinets safely from SIPs with nothing more than screws. if I use enough of them and spread the load over a large enough area. That's the principle behind hanging a ledger off ICF's
Use enough fasteners and spread them out over a large enough area and there is no point load only a compression load.. Foam is used under massive weight on basements all of the time.. the load is spread over a large enough area that no point load results..
Boy that seems clear as mud. Am I helping?
How does using many fasteners rather than just a few change the vertical load of a deck ledger into a compression load? All it does is spread it out.
The same reason a large flat plate will float on top of soft sand while a bar of steel the same weight will sink.
I'm pretty certain I understand what you're trying to say, but you're using the term 'compression load' in a way that is, ahhh, not commonly accepted by the engineering fraternity.
Yeah, if you slap a set of cabs up against an ICF wall and drill a couple of dozen Piffin screws through the back, you're gonna compress the foam somewhat and you're going to divide the total compressive force by the number of screws involved. And yeah, the more screws you use, the lower the force each fastener has to resist.
But a set of cabs is not a deck, my seat-of-the-pants guess is that the forces involved are at least a whole order of magnitude greater.
What I worry about when fastening materials to a structural substrate through a thickness of foam or compressed FG or any other non-structural adjunct materials is that the weight of the material is displaced a certain distance away from the shear point in the fasteners. That shear point then becomes a fulcrum in a leveraged system, and the actual force placed upon the fastener is multiplied by the length of the moment arm.
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
Well I don't mount cabinets exactly that way. I use the french cleat method. But the same thing applies.. the cleat that is on the wall and screwed in place with a large number of screws to spread the away from any one screw. The pattern of the screws actually matter so I use the same pattern they use to spread loads out on aircraft.
Now as for putting loads on ICF's. My whole foundation has 2 inch thick granite stones that are 18" long and vary in length from 6 to 2 feet. Thus when you look at my foundation it looks like it's granite..
I hang all that granite with simple bolts screwed into anchor taps I drilled into the concrete at the same time I drilled the holes into the granite.. (That way I could be sure everything lined up) Then I pulled the granite off and redrilled for the anchors. and hung the Granite back on . Now there were 1/2 bolts so they were able to easily carry the load of that granite and I only drilled holes about every two feet.. now about 6 years after the granite went up. It hasn't moved a farkle. Not even a nano farkle. The compression of the granite against the foam has made it as solid as if it were welded.
That's only 2 1/2 inches.If you note my exterior timbers they are 6 inches away from anything solid and Lag bolts anchored to the inside timbers squeeze the foam enough so I was able to not only hang those timbers but also the tons of stone above
Hopefully you remember what the exterior of my house looks like. If not go to 39444.1& 85891.1 & 94941.1 for pictures.. Please remember the vertical timbers are morticed and tennioned to the horizontal timbers. So that while only the vertical timbers are actaully tied to inside timbers and the horizontal are lag bolted into the 1/2 inch of the OSB on the SIP's. That's as much as 20 feet of 4 inch stone hanging off those 1/2 bolts. not to mention the weight of the timbers.. Now as much as 8 years later not a single stone has moved.. I can't find a single crack in any place on all of those walls..
foam is surprisingly strong in compression..
So much so that the sides of NASCAR stock cars are required to have foam to spread the impact load away from the driver..
since they can impact walls at over 200 Mph I think that's pretty good testamony..
Look at Indy cars or even better Formula 1 cars..
That fiberglass (ok carbon fiber) can hit walls at 240 miles and hour and the driver walks away unharmed.. They actually test the nose and other critical parts to destruction. A formula 1 car weighs under 1000 pounds (with the driver) has 700+ horsepower and even the suspension is fiberglass (ok carbon fiber<grin>)
Last weekend In Suzuka Japan cars were slamming into the wall at over 160 MPH, some in head on impacts and the worst injury was a cut on a leg..
Me neither. You lost me that time. Sounded to me like you thru-bolted 700-nano-fractal x 4"-thick granite slabs to the outside of your house as siding and then drove an F-1 carbon-fibreglass Suzuka into it at 160mph and cut your leg....
;o)
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
Yes I did get off on a tangent there didn't I?
I was trying to show how modern technology allows non-traditional building techniques and instead of being weaker it's actually much stronger..
Sorry for the confusion.. If you want me to, I'll try to walk you through the total structural load idea and why hanging a ledger thru 2 1/2 inches of foam isn't a bad idea.. (if done properly)
Tangents-R-Us....
;-)
...be tangentially challenged...
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
Sorry Frenchy, I'm usually pretty good at understanding structural discussions but I have no idea what you are talking about.
I don't blame you. In all my time looking at, reading about, discussing construction techniques, I've never seen a house built in a similar manner. This is asolutely unique!
This is one where you have to come here to look at yourself to understand.. Bottom line?
My whole house is built on bolts canteleverd through 6 inches of foam. The walls wind up 16 inches thick. Look at the picture again and if you need me to, or want me to, I'll talk you through the construction process and show you how the load is carried..
Thanks for the offer. I'm a bit pressed for time these days. Maybe at a later date.
my copy of the 2006 ibc says " or naturally durable woods" which are western red cedar,heart redwood,etc.
Thanks for that info; I don't have an IBC up here--I'm still running on my annotated edition of the NBCC.
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
However the wood in this case would not be indirect contact with the concrete.. Did you forget the 2.5 inches of foam?
You are actually correct!
Concrete WILL degrade wood in direct contact with it, if there is moisture in the soil that the concrete is able to absorb. If you have a good water management system then I would agree with you, but there are so many houses out there with damp foundations that I would be careful about propagating your thesis.... I've replaced a rotten sill or two and it's no fun. PT sills are a panacea but an effective one.
and... codewise, PT is called for in situations where wood might get get wet... mudsill, ledgers, stringers, porch bands, girders, joists w/in 18" of dirt, etc. Places that might not have proper drainage details, or that are difficult for just anyone to detail.Alternative woods are allowed, but i have a hard time making sure I'm only putting down sapwood free white oak or black locust... and walnut just plain deserves to be used somewhere else.If it's my warrantee, it's pee tee.http://www.tvwsolar.com
We'll have a kid
Or maybe we'll rent one
He's got to be straight
We don't want a bent one
He'll drink his baby brew
From a big brass cup
Someday he may be president
If things loosen up
Agreed on all counts. I do not like working with PT at all, but it's hard to find the other stuff.
Side note--recently I saw a 30yo pile of black locust firewood, left in the woods. Good as new. I don't think PT would have looked as good as that stuff.
Mike I got white oak, black walnut and tamarack approved as rot resistant by showing the woods properties in the book.
Concrete WILL degrade wood in direct contact with it, if there is moisture in the soil that the concrete is able to absorb. [emphasis added]
The important point to remember is that it's not the concrete doing the damage. It's the water. No water, no damage. It's critical that people understand that. (BTW, anybody who doesn't, e-mail me privately; I've got a nice bridge for sale in Brooklyn, NY, special price this week only for BT members....)
If you have a good water management system then I would agree with you, but there are so many houses out there with damp foundations that I would be careful about propagating your thesis.... I've replaced a rotten sill or two and it's no fun. PT sills are a panacea but an effective one.
Mike, I would be careful about that word, 'Panacea'; it means 'cure-all'. In addition to houses with damp foundations, there are also a lot of houses out there with bad framing, bad flashing, bad roofing, and bad design. Is PT a sufficient 'cure-all' to cure all those ills?
The way the PT industry presents their product--and the way too many people are starting to think about it--the answer would seem to be 'yes.'
But it's not. Using PT for mudsills as a 'magic bullet' to replace good design, good flashing, and good foundation work is like thinking you can dip yer wick any damn place you want as long as you wear a condom. Or like thinking you can ride your Harley through traffic at 140mph as long as you wear a helmet.
That PT mudsill might survive ground moisture being absorbed into a badly dampproofed foundation wall...but what about the untreated plates/studs nailed to it? Will they survive being in contact with a soaking wet hunk of PT? Or what if the roofers screw the pooch and put valley flashing on the dormer side walls, so they leak slowly right down through the main building wall? Is that PT mudsill gonna stop all the studs, sheathing, and plates above it from rotting out?
I don't think so, Gertrude.
So what's the answer? Do we just start building the whole effin' house outta PT? Do we have to poison the studs, plates, rafters, joists, casing, base, crown, sheathing, subfloor and finish flooring, doors, windows, and every other damn thing?
Or--horrors!--should we just insist that people who design and build houses learn to do it correctly so that water won't get into places it's not supposed to? Wouldn't that be easier? And better?
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
OK, "panacea" is not quite accurate--some amount of common sense must go along with the PT.
some amount of common sense must go along with the PT.
Agreed...but if common sense were common enough, we wouldn't even be having this argument!
The problem is mental inertia and a disgraceful tendency to believe any idiotic idea if it gets enough airplay. That is why I take the trouble to rail against indiscriminate use of PT: to sensitise people to the truth that it is not 'required' by building codes, and that no, concrete does not dissolve wood into piles of punky sawdust.
Over the last several hundred years, craftsmen equipped only with hand tools and naturally-occurring materials figured out how to build wood-framed houses that will last a century or more. They did this by developing good techniques and good design...but we, lazy, 'instant-gratification' types that we are, are reversing that process and trying to substitute gee-whiz witch's-brew materials for common sense and careful craftsmanship.
It's a fight worth fighting, if you take pride in your work at all.
Just what I think....
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
Edited 10/5/2009 9:59 am ET by Dinosaur
"And which substance in contact with which the ledger will be is likely to cause it to rot?"
That's the question you asked, which substance. My answer is water, not concrete, nor the water in the concrete. Water that will assault the wood ledger from the exposed side, moisture trapped between the concrete and the ledger. (You've given in to calling it a ledger I see...)
We'll never agree on this point; fair enough. I remember the thread you had with the rail that rotted out very well; it's the only time I've EVER seen "pt" that looked like that, after a short or long period of time. I have simply chalked it up to a huge difference in material depending on the region. I CAN tell you that I've done enough replacement decks and porches that were done with Fir and rotted out to not chance it, when I know that the PT that I get will last.
I never said that concrete will cause wood to rot. Don't try to make it sound like I did. You're tilting at windmills is fine, but common sense would indicate that where wood is forbidden to be in direct contact with crete, it's because of the moisture issue, ie; water trapped between the crete and the wood. Concrete also stays damp for a long time, in case you've never noticed. Thus keeping the wood in contact with it damp as well. I'm aware that there are 400,000,000 houses with plain fir sill that's 50 years old and fine. I can tell you a bunch of other things that I've seen on old houses that are wrong, too.
As to railing against the BI, you're totally unrealistic in this regard. You can talk all you want, as you did in the "pt stair stringer" thread, but you don't know what you're talking about. THEY WILL RED TAG YOUR JOB, The End. You can appeal, it will take months, during which the job will stop, and you'll still lose. Are you telling me that that's what you'd do? Good luck to your customers then. Personally, I think that the requirements for hardware and tie downs are an obscene, ridiculous waste of $ in most parts of the country, but the code says I put em, so...I put em.
This may all sound like I'm po'd, which I'm not at all, but I think that telling people that come to this board for advice that it's fine to use regular framing lumber outside where it's exposed to water is, plain and simple, bad advice that shouldn't be followed, both because it's bad practice, AND because the BI in 99% of the country will slap em and make em change it. No arguement, no appeal, take it apart and re-do it.
Peace out
Bing
As to railing against the BI, you're totally unrealistic in this regard. You can talk all you want, as you did in the "pt stair stringer" thread, but you don't know what you're talking about. THEY WILL RED TAG YOUR JOB, The End. You can appeal, it will take months, during which the job will stop, and you'll still lose. Are you telling me that that's what you'd do?
What I'd do is make sure it never becomes an issue on my job. I would read the applicable code carefully, present the plans specifying an accepted alternative to PT (there is always an alternative), and get it all stamped before I ever started work.
But it sounds to me like you're gonna let a bunch of ignorant Näzis push you around. That's not good.
Look, Bing: We are no longer living in the 'bad old days' when if you didn't grease the BI's palm your job got shut down. The biggest fear most municipalities have today is the fear of being sued for abuse of power, or getting accused of corruption in the media.
Sure, a BI can make your life miserable, but only if you let him. Go in with a viable alternative, signed off by a licensed professional if needed. Then if he red tags it, or delays the permit unreasonably, sue him, the mayor, and every man jack in city hall. And call the newspapers, too, hollering about how the PT manufacturer's lobby has the city admin in its pocket. That'll get some action.
And if that doesn't work, key his ride. ;o)
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
I remember a closet that was attached to an apartment that I lived in. It had a roof over it, it was built on a slab, and had no standing water. I noticed that the sheetrock was in pretty bad condition and decided to take it out. The sill was either S, P, or F--I'm not totally sure which. What I am sure of is that the sill was so rotten, that I just used a screwdriver to pry up the gunk and scrape it up.
Concrete is one of the most porous building materials we use in our houses. It wicks up moisture faster than wood does. I can see it on my patio when it rains, it sucks the water up like a thirsty sponge (I've been meaning to treat it for a while now). So you don't need to convince me or sale me anything. Just keep right on using your "SPF" and I'll stick to PT.
Sorry I can't hang out and pick fights on Breaktime, but I've got a real job picking fights with inspectors.
Edited 10/5/2009 6:49 pm ET by excaliber32
Um, I think you have me confused with someone else. I'm the guy who's been saying PT the whole time...
Bing
How well protected is "well protected?" Fully enclosed, or a deck? Is a "large eave" a foot or six feet?
I see snow and wet leaves piling up. I guess I'd ask why NOT treated?
AitchKay
Why wouldn't you use a treated ledger? I wouldn't even consider anything else outside.
Are you getting all this? ;o)
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not brought
low by this? For thine evil pales before that which
foolish men call Justice....
FYI, I heard from the OP by e-mail; he's opted for an untreated ledger, flashed with Grace. One of his concerns was the potential for interaction between ACQ and the galvanised Simpson hardware.
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
It is good to be heard now and then, isn't it?
I think you and I went to differnt schools together.
We lost one of the best ever bred pups in our breed to cancer that was attributed to an PT wood splinter.
Where I can at all avoid exposure to PT lumber I do, and that encludes my family and pets.
Thanks; sorry to hear about the pup.
Although it feels like it sometimes, we're not really shouting down a well. Remember the grassroots uproar and purchase resistance that eventually forced the PT industry to take CCA off the market.
Unfortunately, there are big profits to be made by poisoning wood, so they replaced CCA with ACQ. But ACQ is arguably even worse, because although it is a 'less poisonous poison,' the concentrations of poison are higher.
They're not gonna give up easily.
Well, me neither.
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
I think there is a market for non-toxic, rot-resistant wood. Seriously; we all know about Locust and Walnut and Tamarack ("Hackmatack" around here) but the general public, and most folks in the construction world, only know "PT."
PT certainly was a triumph of marketing, as is synthetic decking. With the green movement under way, the time is ripe for a triumph of locally harvested, naturally rot resistant lumber.
Bingo.
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
>>Well, me neither.
Same here.
We lost the pup about 14 years ago. 4 months after she had taken the Best of Opposite Sex title at the National Specialty show that year. We had been offered some really big $$ to sell her or leases her for breading but that was never an option to DW. Even today, when ask to name a near perfect example of Cardigan Welsh Corgi, most notable breeders that saw her will say Rydowen's "Ode to Joy".
She chewed on a CCA treated deck board and got a splinter in her gum. We dicovered it when it strted to fester a little. Took her to the vet and had ithe splinter extracted and some surrounding tissue, because it didn't look right to the vet. The biop. came back positive, so they went back in and excavate a larger area. All to no avail. It came back and afew months later we had her put down, rather than let her suffer.
The vet couldn't say that there was a direct link between the CCA and the cancer, but she thought it highly likely, considering that none of the litter mates of Joy every developed any form of cancer.
Dave, thanks again for sharing that painful story. I will print it out and show it to people considering using PT for decking and balusters.
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....