# Technical removal!! Let's talk



## rbtree (Mar 12, 2002)

With Oxman's help, I finally have some pics to show of this bad boy. They don't do a very good job of conveying the layout, obstacles, difficulties, possible procedures, etc but here goes.

I'm still not sure exactly how we'll do the job. As you'll see, the structural integrity is poor due to the two broken tops on the main trunk. The resultant long laterals go out a crazy angles that will be difficult to get out on, and will require delicate rigging to limit shock loading. I'm figuring on guying the laterals and top in some fashion to stabilize both. 

Resistographs taken in the lower trunk show a lot of decay. There is a large, deep cavity which, to its credit, has closed up most of the way with good callous.


----------



## Nickrosis (Mar 12, 2002)

I'd flop it downhill. At the same time, here you have several options if you did climb it. If the tree started to fall, you could jump into the pool. In all seriousness, this is an instance you would wish ANSI approved working from a crane. If you could do that, it would be less hazardous to the climber in case the tree collapsed. If you do judge it safe to climb, follow your own advice and take small pieces gently.


----------



## rbtree (Mar 12, 2002)

Here's a view from below, from a neighboring waterfront lot. Landscape everywhere, a slight downward slope, rockery. There are two homes below, we will have to park the chip truck at one, use another's pine tree to anchor lines at about the 18 foot height level. Later, we'll bring in a 40 foot boom which we can use for the wood after it has been skidded to within reach with my chain saw rope capstan winch. The homes all are worth $4-10 mm, I'd reckon, and the combined landscape values would approach 3-5 mm, I'd guess.

We'll need to dig some plants and a 5" 15 foot tall alaska cedar, hopefully lose an old beauty bush in our way, tie back a 30 foot tall wild hawthorne, protect other trees somehow, all to open a work zone below for some limb removal and wood lowering. We may be able to crib up (with downed material, tires, and wood)the slightly sloped small drop zone to allow for some free dropping of some wood or small branches. All the brush has to be taken out downward onto the neighbor's drive area. it will have to be tossed down, so hopefully we can speedline and/or DWT it all down. 

I'm planning on taking 2-3 hours to rig and guy the tree with a couple guys before bringing in a full 6 man crew- 2 climbers, one lowering on the tree side, one speedlining, 2 gmen each at the tree and at the chipper/rope anchor. Then remove the wood the next day. Add it all up, and, unless it is easier than I think, and you have 55-70 manhours, or $3300-4700. But it is priced at 2800-3400. I'd be happy with 60 per manhr instead of 65 due to the high profile of the job, and the possiblility of landing more work in this exclusive gated community. On the other hand, this job entails significant risk, and we should be compensated for that. Another bid by a very reputable company, in fact the one that did the report, was no higher. However, I likely will inform the client, for whom I have worked previously, that I may need more $, or may have to change the plans if we feel the risk is too great. ( I don't yet know how long a crane boom, likely 150 feet+ would be needed, and if it could even be parked below. That is a heck of an imposition on the neighbors.


----------



## rbtree (Mar 12, 2002)

Here's a view from behind the pine tree in which we plan to install the DWT/speedline double pulley, at 20-25 feet in height. The second sheave will be used for a control line in case we need to tug the branch to the drop zone. DWT, hopefully, will work, as, opposite from speedlining with a tight line, it spreads out the load. But, since the anchors are so far apart, the effect will probably be more like speedlining, which is what I'm trying to avoid, high anchor loading.


----------



## rbtree (Mar 12, 2002)

And another from below, showing the bad structure and one sided nature of the tree.


----------



## rbtree (Mar 12, 2002)

If we could get a crane in with a boom long enough, and the neighbor allowed it, I'd do it. And may still suggest it. But I've been in the tree and don't think the risk of failure while we're delicately rigging is too great. The worst thing is some of the angles involved- both climbing and rigging. Redirects will be the order of the day!

Minor (hopefully) damage to the landscape will have to take precedent over (high risk to)bodily harm.

In this high rent district, I reckon the pool is heated, so maybe the swim idea would work!!! Might need a flying squirrel's webs though........


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Mar 12, 2002)

i never had a lot of luck with capstan winch; but love the idea; any advice?

One time; it did work well for us to float some limbs out over a garage roof, pool, fences etc. We mounted a redirect 10' off the ground by the truck out front; and then the winch to anchor at ground. The winch pulled a line thru the redirect pulley at 10'; that pulled a limb out over the obstacles below as it was being lowered from the tree; in the back yard. i had one rigging line in the tree, lowering each limb. We had preset the opposite ends of each limb with remaining rigging lines; loading each in turn to the capstan winch, and then spirited them out. It worked very nicely floating limbs out like that!

i always look to run rigging line thru another high anchor (or 2) in situations like this to share loads and impact about some independant supports in compromised situations. 

i really believe in guying compromised or leaning trees against lean, or from 2 sides if straight. i like lacing a 3/1 down tree to anchored come along/portawrap. In this way i can pull line into portawrap and take another bite on the line. Then; finish with line tied directly to come along at almost full extension. In this way we can take up slack with come along as balance of tree changes during dismantling, restabilizing it. It also gives 2 contact/ bracing choke points fortifying target tree as a firm cylinder while stabilizing, per system of support.

Good Luck!


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 12, 2002)

What about speedlining all the brush and small wood, up to where you are standing, where you took the first picture from? You could park the truck and chipper right there.

Another possibility is to speedline the brush over the area where the person is standing in the first photo, and then lower to that spot. A few sheets of plywood to protect the grass would help, then cut stuff up to sizes that can be carried up the steps.

Then speedline the body wood down in small pieces, or just lower firewood chunks down and roll and/or carry them out to the bottom by hand. The largest chuncks could be quartered or halfed so they can be handled.

The only way that little pine would take loading 20' up is if it were guyed. The Maple tree will also need guying.

I would not raise my price, that looks bad. Plus, it only looks like a good days work for a 3-4 man crew, to me. Maybe another half day or day, to finish off the firewood removal and clean up.


----------



## DDM (Mar 12, 2002)

Mike? what kind of rope do you suggest for a mainline of a Speedline? and whats the best tensioning device?


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 12, 2002)

what kind of rope do you suggest for a mainline of a Speedline?

1/2" static line, for smaller stuff. Bigger static rope for bigger stuff.

whats the best tensioning device?

GRCS.


----------



## rbtree (Mar 12, 2002)

Ken:

I got my 
Simpson winch from Tom Dunlap, and modified the rope inlet guides to allow bidirectional work. The first time i used it, we impaled the line on those little points of the guide as I was lowering the piece. So Ian had to swing over and chunk the piece down while it was suspended. No problem as we had a safe LZ, were just testing. the rope was OK, thankfully, a new 1/2 inch double braind I'd purchased for a strong winch line. It's also a great, plenty strong size for medium lowering. 

I lifted and swung a fallen alder off a house with it, tying the split tops halfway out and taking two 45 foot tops. Appx 800 pounds each.They swung top a safe drop zone, so I didnt bother with a backup line. The cutting was being done from the oldgrowth stump the tree lodged on, which had saved the roof from any damage. the secondf cut was delicate, so Bob finished it from a second story balcony with the power pruner. 

I used it to lift huge 54" dbh atlas cedar branches into the speedline on a $5700 120 manhr underbid job we did last winter. We were able to let the wraps run through with no resistance as the brnaches were sliding out. Back up was a lowering/control line. Most of that the branches on that tree were lifted just usung the speedline bight.

Next, we lifted an 85 foot, 35 Degree leaning 15' dbh bitter cherry out of its hung spot in a maple. Retrievable block was in a nearby leaning alder that we'd thinned. I installed a Vt ahead of the winch, portawrap behind, so after the lift, I could take the wraps off the winch. Worked OK, just needed a 7/16 tenex instead of a 3/8 Technora, it ws hard to break it free under all that tension.

DDM, As the material is fairly light, we'll use my 1/2 inch double braid, or even Arborplex for the speedline. The little bit of stretch that these semi dynamic/ semi static lines give will be fine in this situation as We''l be limiting shock and stress loading, plus using guy lines. We'll be needing 200-300 feet of line, and only have one that long. On that atlas cedar, we used the ultimate static line, Puget Sound Rope's Plasma, 0.5 elongation, 31500 tensile, at 1/2 inch!! But at about 1.75 a foot wholesale, I'll pass on the 250 foot length needed.

Mike, the lay of the land and tree does not lend itself to working uphill, nor do the elegant landcape, stairs to the upper level, etc etc.

I will be guying the tree, including parking a pickup behind that pine to back guy the speed/DWT line.

One thing I have less experience with than you decurrent tree experts is width. Not that I cant do it, just that we work high more than wide out west.

Dan Kraus and Mike Oxman both have video cameras, and Mike's is digital, so we'll be posting a few segments of the action. Should be fun.

One good thing with the tree is the high canopy, and that no lateral limbs are over 1 foot in diameter. Bad thing is the structural problems, and crazy angles required to reach the leggy stuff.

I'm hoping that 6 of us can brush it out in four-five hours, and rig the wood in two-three. Wish it could go faster, or with smaller crew, but can't see how.

Enjoying the discussion......


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Mar 12, 2002)

I've done a number of box elder that look like that, maybe not in the stem, but the crown. 

A few years ago we had a pair of elms that was like that, had to lower stuff down small becuse there was no where to go big. I tried speedlining but the only path we hadthe tips would hang up in a hawthorn. And we were way in a back yard, behind a pool, scuplture.....

In KC we had one that would have been easy if we had 300 ft of static line, but we could not rig anything without too much slack, even having the GRCS. This hackberry was in the middle of a slate roof....

Sometimes the only viable tool is time and effort


----------



## rbtree (Mar 19, 2002)

**&^%$** IT's dumpin pow big time and We gotta do the tree!!!!!!*

Stevens Pass has 35 inches of new snow in the last 28 hours and still snowing 2-3 inches an hour. It and Snoqualmie are closed today and tomorrow due to high avalanche hazard. Baker has received 28" of 4% moisture content fluff!!!!!It warming a bit, but if the areas are open, Thursday will be EPIC!!!!!!This is as good as it gets out here and better than average in utah.

Anyhow, now that I'm done yakking, we started the tree today. Tied and tarped bushes, the pool, guyed the tree to itself, inspected the bad areas, and dropped a bit of brush. It looks like it will go okay. If it is dry tomorrow, we'll get skads of photos. Mike Oxman will likely write an article for the mags, as the procedures should be technical and delicate enough to warrant a story. And the setting is out of this world!!! We didn't guy anything to the ground, as the anchors are limited, and we will be very crefull with loading of anchor points. We may still however. A lot of brush can be lowered to save on the sketchy speedline area and method.

Rog


----------



## rbtree (Mar 20, 2002)

*Freaking amazing weather to be in this tree!!!*

Well, we did most of it today. 200 feet above Puget Sound's whitecap strewn waters, 10-30 mph winds, about 35 degrees. Then about noon, it starts snowing, and never stopped. it started sticking about 3 and an inch or so accumulated. Tom Ford and I were both in the tree. With more prep work, setting the speedline, etc, we probably didn't cut the first branch til almost 10 am. Then, even though we had lines everywhere (including a bunch of guy lines), we still had to share one lowere line a bit. This slowed us both down. I pieced out a lot of small branches and was able to free drop them, using two slings to catch them first. On the bigger branches on the back side of the tree, I lowered them, and had also tied on the other lower line in the other leader, so that they would come into the drop zone.

The speed line was run into the pine tree, (see earlier photo) through a block , and back to my pickup, using a Z pulley rig. The guys needed more lifting power, so they used another pulley. This had to be with a separate line, as the 220 foot 0.5 inch dubble braid was maxed out. We used a 220 foot 1/2 inch NE Treeline as the lowering and travelling line. It was ok, but a bit bigger or stronger line would have been a bonus. We had figured thing out about right, as we were able to just clear the landscape below. After lowering out 5-7 foot pieces onto Dan Kraus' Hobbs LD, of the sweeping main leader, it was found to be hollow, by about 10 inches of the 30 inch last cut.

I'll post some pics as the digital dudes send em to me!!

The weather gods must be testing me: In the last three years, we've done three EXtremly technical removals, in the $2500-$6000 range, and all three were in brutal weather, cold, windy, and today that plus 
snowy!!

We've put in about 57 manhours so far, with at least 20 more to go, so it would look to be horribly underpriced. 77x65= $5000.

My thanks to Dave, Tom , Michael, John, and Tad, you were great!!


----------



## Oxman (Mar 21, 2002)

*Gray day*

Roger is in the upper part of the maple tree, Tom is down lower, on the right. 

There was a nice assortment of ropes, with two sets of rigging going on simultaneously. It's kind of interesting when a disembodied voice shouts out, "Grab that Rope!".

With a dense hedge and 15' of elevation separating Tom's zipline ground crew from Roger's letdown ground crew, visual communication was limited. 

When the snow flurries began, we thanked our stars that it wasn't rain. There were a few jokes about the snow actually being sawdust, and how much only two climbers were generating.


----------



## Treeman14 (Mar 21, 2002)

Try not to dwell on the money part of it. Just think of all the fun you had. Seriously, there is a great feeling of accomplishment that goes along with completing a job like this. Congrats on getting it done with no problems. BTW, it looks like some kind of giant spider was up in that tree.


----------



## rbtree (Mar 27, 2002)

Finally got 'er done, Wow what a job, 93 manhours!!!

I'll talk about it later, here's some photos. Took 30 minutes to warm up my feet in my p/u while Tom finishing lowering out the secondary huge leader!


----------



## treeclimber165 (Mar 27, 2002)

What's all that white stuff? And why are ya all bundled up? Heck, it's the end of March- I've been sweatin in 85* weather all week!
 

Congrats on a challenging job, can't wait for more pics!


----------



## rbtree (Mar 27, 2002)

The following Monday, two days ago, What a difference in the weather. Spring has sprung!!

Ian lowering out some small stuff. The main trunk was too hollow and weak to lower, we dumped 18" to five foot pieces, then butt snubbed the last 16 feet and let er drop! Had to crib up with wood to miss the 6" dbh alaska cedar that was too big to move.

Customer's D30 Canon digital SLR, 28/70 f/2.8 L, ~250 sec @f 8.0.

Just before it started snowing during the limbing, I had my camera hauled up, pulled out my EOS 1N and 28/70, forgot to zip my case, it shifted,and I almost spilled its contents a 70/200 $1600 lens, $300 flash, $300 2x extender!! Phew!!!!


----------



## rbtree (Mar 27, 2002)

Well, Bri, underneath us that snowy day, many plants were in bloom, flowering plum, etc.

Monday was great, yesterday was cold and blustery, today cool and moist, no wind. Still 25 feet of snow in the hills.


----------



## rbtree (Mar 27, 2002)

Spider web anyone? We had three guy lines, three lowering blocks, one speedline block, and another pulley or so somewhere, I'm certain. LOL. 9 ropes total, methinks. 

And Mr Maas, inventor extraordinaire, will be chagrined to see that we had no ground anchors. Me too, after seeing the wood!!! Just wait til I get the wood photos posted that Scott Baker shot. Well come to Seattle this summer, and dont miss his talk on tree biology.

Done a slew of hazard trees, storm, dead, dying in my 30 years of tree werk, but nothing even approaching this baby!!

Just cut the last branch, now to make the beeline for the preheated pick up truck, Thanks guys!! Brrr. 

The experience was a close second to a December '93 day in Lake Louise, Alberta. It was 14 below F, breezy, and I was standing alongside the Women's World Cup Downhill race, attempting to shoot some pics. It is hard to hold a 300 mm f/2.8 lens steady, even on a monopod, but even harder when your teeth won't stop chattering! It was one degree from the temp at which the race would have been postponed. The women that did not have face masks had put white tape on any exposed skin. I had a photo published of a Russian gal, it was there in plain sight!


----------



## rbtree (Mar 27, 2002)

Powder snow and flowering plums......

...and an icicle on the end of a rope, to say nothing of a nose!!


----------



## rbtree (Mar 27, 2002)

Ian getting into position to lower some wood. Three blocks left over. See the two tops guyed together, eight feet above that point was my primary tie in. Hollow and open on one side below where the two guyed limbs join the trunk........


......dicey to say the least!!!


----------



## Oxman (Mar 28, 2002)

*Internal decay*

Can this tree be saved? (Cue melodramatic organ music.)


----------



## treeclimber165 (Mar 28, 2002)

*Re: Internal decay*



> _Originally posted by Oxman _
> *Can this tree be saved? (Cue melodramatic organ music.) *



SURE! It's got almost 1/4" live wood on that one side, it'll be fine! Just build up a huge landscape berm about 18" deep around the trunk, and it won't hurt the tree a bit to dig that swimming pool about 3 feet away from the tree!


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Mar 28, 2002)

Yuo can save it for a drumb to call tribal meetings.


----------



## rbtree (Mar 28, 2002)

ZIPidydoodahzippideday!!!


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Mar 29, 2002)

Very good JP!

i like putting 2 contact points on speedline for: spreading out weight on line, more friction, more clearance. Real nice pic and ;esson here!

Also; sometimes; mostly i hang the load from the line; but sometimes i drop the load onto the line letting th far end stradle, and the stub end getsslinged and binered only. It 'll ride if ya get it write. Then more support, friction etc.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 29, 2002)

What are all those ropes hangind down?

If this tree was hollow, why isn't it guyed?


----------



## rbtree (Mar 29, 2002)

Bout time you showed up, Mike, were your ears burning?

There are three guy lines in the tree, lashing branches and leaders together. There was only one possible ground anchor point that would have done any good. I considered it, but it could have applied some forces that I didn't like. It would have required two lines meeting into one, then to a birch 130 feet away, over the pool. I did have one unused bull rope, in retrospect, I wished we'd installed it. We were careful to not do much shock loading of anchors, although we did have to really tension the speedline to lift branches clear of the landscape.

We used a total of 11 lines, including a tag line for a few branches, and a stop line draped around the speedline to keep the branches from sliding into opposing shrubbery, as the line was being slacked. The lowering control line ostensibly could have controlled this movement, but the two ground crews had no visual contact. No problem, it just made things run a bit smoother a few times.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 29, 2002)

It's hard to get the scale of things from a picture, but it looks like there are tons of anchor points all over. Even a small tree has lots of holding power right at the base.

In the last picture, I see a speedline and it looks like two climbers. Then there are 6 or more lines hanging down.


----------



## rbtree (Mar 29, 2002)

Mike, due to the structure of the tree, and the lean bias, the only anchor that would have helped is the back one that i mentioned. Here's my first try at drawing. I had considered ground guying my lifeline points, but saw no need, as body weight applied little stress. Had I only had one new top to work out of instead of two tied together, I would have.

While we did have to tension the speed line a lot, it was after dropping each limb onto it, so there was no shock loading. and the speed line went through a crotch in the left leader and was deadended in the main leader, low enough down that there were no significant side loads. Within a 30 deg. either way range of 180 deg. off the load, there was no ground anchor point.

As Scott Baker pointed out, while this tree was structurally unsound, it still had an incredible amount of strength. He has Klaus Mattheck's fractometer, and explained the extremely high strength of reaction wood. If he ever gets his photos to me, I'll post shots of the main fork union area, which is completely hollow, but loaded with reaction wood. Hope you are in Seattle, as we plan to deliver the hollow butt section (complete with fake hibernating bear) to the arboretum for his seminar.

That said, this was by far the diciest, riskiest removal of a standing tree we've ever done. After seeing the wood, and seeing some of the 4-5 foot logs shatter upon impact, we were all very thankful that the job proceeded without any surprises.


----------



## rbtree (Mar 29, 2002)

A mistake Ian made, shown in this shot, was not stringing the line through the central block, out of sight in the photo.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Mar 29, 2002)

Very good; that is what i saw when you posted; but didn't want to 'attack'...........

The next thing for maximum would be the block held right against anchor tight i think, then tag line put on top side of load (in same position) and run line to top for most leverage(someitmes into a "V" so it can't come out). Setting it up this way you could make wide mouth hinge; walk it to a point of folding on back cut as ground guys pulled on tag line in torqued back position pulling on maximum leverage point to s-l-o-w-l-y fold load into pre-tightened rigging line/ pulley; then run. Having a pulley for pivot will put more load on anchor (than friction redirect); folding load slowly into it will lessen impact substancially, and then running load will make have less pull on anchor; for you will not be supporting the whole load. Being; as what ever the force of load is, must be matched by brake force to hold it, with pulley as redirect, any weight you are running and not holding back; takes 2x that amount of load of anchor system i think.

This slow folding over into the rigging is where i visualize a hydralically dampened hinge action in gin pole post; to eliminate momentum as load turns down 180 degrees. All the leveraged pull is to get it to fold earlier with a meatier hinge; then the pull is released once folding is committed into action. The heftier hinge will usher slower movement of load inverting; than if it just started folding under its own weight with less hinge. Until faces close on knotch cut. Same thing on dropping trees; wide mouth for most ushered motion, wedging and pulling from highest leverage, torqued back to commence folding with more fiber holding. At least it seems to work for me.........

Also, i was wondering if that pulley was a heavy duty block or 'rescue' type; but i wasn't there to make these decisions; and pix can be decieving. Obviously Y'all did well...........


----------



## rbtree (Mar 29, 2002)

good points all, spyder.

We had run out of lowering blocks and eye slings. When I set that 4 inch 16000 SMC drop side stainless pulley, with poor sling choice, I was only lowering smaller stuff, and I was able to wrap the sling to get the block close to the action. Even that piece Ian is lowering is reasonably light, and we let it run a long way. So not up to Arbormaster standards, but no big deal. The block shows no sign of overloading. (I've seen some destroyed from slam dunking wood onto them, not by us though!) I do use it occasionaly for stuff a bit too big, will likely work on doing less of that. I was running around, shooting with three different cameras, or i would have had him set through both blocks. No need to worry about proper tag line setting, tho, the piece had a big lean, and came over smoothly anyhow. I do have to remind Ian to cut open faces, though.


----------



## riggs (Mar 29, 2002)

I'll be honest with you , Why is this a technical removal? Looks routine , Why all the anchors , is the base all messed up , and why two guys in the tree . Looks like a dog and pony show .


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Mar 29, 2002)

There is a pic of the butt on another tread posted by Mike Oxman. It had a fissure and very little meat left.


----------



## rbtree (Mar 29, 2002)

riggs, 

take a closer look, my friend. read the whole thread, look at all the photos. I'd scan and post the resistographs, but the quality is already poor. Waiting for more photos showing incredible structural problems to be sent to me. Come to Seattle, listen to Scott Baker's talk, see the trunk section up close and personal...... 

No need to prove myself, mine and the crew's experience, abilities, and reputation are second to none.

For the difficulties presented by the tree and site, extreme (possibly) risk of some tree part failure during operations, we should have been compensated WAY above the price of highest bid.


----------



## riggs (Mar 29, 2002)

I read the whole thread and saw the photos . Now , I'm not questioning your abitlity , I just think you over did it . Spent the day before getting set up , and not making a cut till 10 a.m , the next day , sounds like more show than go . Also, you weren't so concerned about the tree to place two climbers in it . So , you said let's talk .


----------



## rbtree (Mar 29, 2002)

Guess you shoulda been there to show us how it should have been done. Know dan Kraus? He video'd day one, ask him. or Oxman. Actually that was day two, as it took close to 14 manhours the first day just to prep the ground, tying shrubs, trees, tarping same, guying the tree, and cutting a tiny bit of brush. Day two was cold, that did slow us a bit. Two lower lines and speed line had to be set. Two truck for speed anchor, one to back guy the anchor tree,one to dead end the line. Z pulley had to be set, then another pulley was added later. When that wasn't enough, my fiddle blocks came out.
Experience: Tom Ford- 20 yrs , myself 30. ground: Oxman-30, Dave Wyatte-30, . One green gman, he did fine, and another great one.

Actually, Riggs, I'm kinda repeating myself. you should do a better job of reading the entire thread. Everything is explained, including the reason for two guys in the tree. Hell, one climber for the required four gmen, you got to be kidding. And, it was impossible to do the job with less than four on the ground, two at each station. True, often Tom or i would have to wait, as the ground guys were occupied, as well i needed both lower lines to bring my brush into the drop zone. Couldnt speed the back side. By the way, three were busy controlling every branch that was rigged out on the zipper.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 29, 2002)

I have to admit I noticed, but was to polite to say, two climbers working a hazarous tree seemed wrong.


----------



## rbtree (Mar 29, 2002)

Mike, we were way out of each other's way. 

Here's a model that should help a bit:

Here, we we preparing to move the speedline to the lateral i'm in. I ran it through that large crotch and back tied it to the central stem. As well, i rigged the extra tail of a guy line in the same fashion.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 30, 2002)

I wasn't thinking you would be in each others way, or hit each other with someting, although that is certainly possible, I was thinking that you have an unguyed tree, a speedline side loading, a hollow base, and you put <I>two</I> men at risk.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Mar 30, 2002)

One other thing, you only showed pictures of the things that went well. I got my hands on a picture of you making a mistake!

Check it out:


----------



## treeclimber165 (Mar 30, 2002)

ROFL Mike!!!!

Another thing to remember is that this tree is a heckufa lot bigger than it looks in the pics. It's quite an accomplishment to remove a tree this size with zero impact. From what I gather, the only landing area under the tree was incredibly small and even then anything landed there had to be toted out a long way in tiny pieces.


----------



## riggs (Mar 30, 2002)

First off , if you can't take feedback than don't post your "job" . Second , I've seen Dan Krause at ITCC , not on a job . Third I think you lost money on that job . One climber could have done it , but it was show time , I understand . I call that a Hazardous removal that you made technical . I'm sure you'll fire back with your income tax return , but you went forum to forum to get people to veiw this job , ask for feedback and as soon as someone disagrees you get salty . No one got hurt , nothing got broke , another successful tree job . I'm just not like "wow" , more like "huh?"


----------



## rbtree (Mar 30, 2002)

I'll go you one better, brian,


rotfLMFAO!!!


Good thing He had his hard hat on!!!!!!!!!
But he landed on the stump that the landscapers were too wimpy to finish digging out........
........and then the log rolled over on him.....

......and then he said....... not tonite ,dear, I have a buttache.....
''
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'

I'm going to print that and give it to Ian this morning. Maybe I'll show it to him just as he's starting up one of the maple's we're pruning today.

'
'
'
'
that's if the proctologist has given him a clean bill of health to return to work....


----------



## dan kraus (Mar 30, 2002)

I hate to be one to keep this thread going on and on but I noticed my name being used, and thought I should speak for myself. Roger invited me to film his removal. I'm still recovering from a torn ACL tendon in my knee so I have some free time and I'm trying to get a collection of tree work on film. I filmed the Job, but I didn't do any advising. To many cooks spoil the soup. My concern was getting the best angle for my camera.


----------



## Toddppm (Mar 30, 2002)

From the get go , I was thinking it didn't look that bad too, after seeing the pics it is bigger than I thought but looks like it went pretty good. Seems like the biggest hurdle was access? But then again I've never even done a crane job as a climber, always just roped stuff out since I've been on my own.


----------



## riggs (Mar 31, 2002)

Thanks for the side email RB , like I said I don't question your ability , or your crews experience . Sometimes I wish I had a crew with that much experience (sometimes) . Sometimes I shoot from the hip and rub people wrong , too many saw chips snuck in the ear .


----------



## rbtree (Mar 31, 2002)

Ears? With me its also eyes, nose and throat.

Cough, spit, sneeze...........

Had any cool weather out there recently?

Or have you just continued to enjoy the warmest winter on record?.......

.......which we missed-wet and cool most of the winter-

Well, Ian didnt show up for work today, recovery period must be longer than I thought. His loss, my customer had us in stitches all day, she should be in comedy. (Met her 365 days ago, she was host of my old girlfriend's big b-day bash. Took me that long to get around to calling her to do the work that we'd discussed over libations at the party- great marketer that I am!) Then she served us dinner w/ vino; told stories about her husband, off fishing, but he didnt know which end of the pole to hold, etc etc. It was hard to eat between the giggles!! I got home at 8 pm. Whilst waiting for Ian, who never showed, and John, who he was supposed to pick up, I visited an old customer across the street, who had forgotten about us and had someone else do some work last time. But I sold him $1000 worth of work. 
 

Ran into a rat in a cavity, she said, "kill it, I hate rats" but I didn't want to get ratblood on my beard. Tried to stuff it way up inside, he backed out, then I whacked it with my handsaw, he came out snarling, so I flicked him into the canyon just before he latched on to some bodypart!!


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Mar 31, 2002)

Well, i guess i might have been guilty before of trying to do things to present in pix. It does take some compromise, time, thought, the tree never looks as big etc. And mine never turn out half that good. So, i appreciate someone elses superior effort in this regard, open sharing, and even keel through "cross exam-i-nation"! Thanx guys!


----------



## rbtree (Apr 1, 2002)

*More Pics*

Many thanks to Scott Baker.

Come to ISA 2002 Seattle, to hear his talk and see samples from this tree and many others.


----------



## rbtree (Apr 1, 2002)

almost as many ropes as snowflakes......geesh!!


----------



## rbtree (Apr 1, 2002)

Ready to zip


----------



## rbtree (Apr 1, 2002)

zippedy


----------



## rbtree (Apr 1, 2002)

.....doodahzippedyday


----------



## rbtree (Apr 1, 2002)

forgot jpg


----------



## rbtree (Apr 1, 2002)

Inside the butt......




.......oh yeah, lots of strength there.....


----------



## rbtree (Apr 1, 2002)

Hey, bright eyes


----------



## rbtree (Apr 1, 2002)

Hey, there's a brain in there, trust me, well, somewhere


----------



## rbtree (Apr 1, 2002)

Guess the maple was just a sprig, huh? compared to this monster


----------



## rbtree (Apr 1, 2002)

coming out of hibernation?


----------



## rbtree (Apr 1, 2002)

Gee, think those'll hold 'er together?


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Apr 1, 2002)

Nice photos, thanks.

The shot with the branch hanging off the speedline, really shows the side loading you put on a <I>very</I> hollow tree, with two men in it. IMO, this work should not have been done without guys from tree to ground, at least one, and maybe two or three. 

On a tree like this, I would compare guys, to tying in, in terms of safety.

I have mentioned the use of guys in a few threads now, including the speedline thread. The speedline is where you <I>really</I> need the support, as well as when working on trees with structural problems, in this case you have both. 

Every climber decides the amount of risk he or she is willing to take, in this case you far exceeded the risk I would have taken.


----------



## rbtree (Apr 1, 2002)

Hey mike,

I rather agree. However, a few points. Yes, with some more complicated rigging, we could have guyed it back. And wish we had.

But, frankly, it was the large laterals we were worrying about. These we had guyed to each other, not all that securely due to the angles, I feared. We did a lot of lowering directly off them, and needed to stop the branches fairly quickly, and then let some of the speedline bight be pulled out, thus raising the branches to clear the landscape. And that all went well.

The speedline was anchored below those laterals, in the bad central leader, which was also used to lower 4-6 foot sections of the big secondary leader. True, it was a weak trunk, but the side loads were minimal comparable to its strength, I think. Remember, those branches were not huge, or heavy, like some huge spreading southern oaks, for example. It was close to 20 inches where the line was tied, I think. I don't remember feeling any appreciable stress or movement when Tom was doing his rigging. A rough idea of side load: 250-500 lb branches, 1500-3500 load at anchor. (variable based on bight in speedline, and angle to ground). I would guess that that tree would have withstood a non shock sideload of close to 30000 pounds. Remember, until the speedline is straight, loads aren't fully felt. The effect become more like DWT, the closer the anchors, and more the bight.

Scott Baker was there for a while, I will ask him what he thinks, and Dan Kraus. Scott explained the fractometer, and how reaction wood has amazing strength.

However, the arborist report estimates the strength of the tree at 0.28 on a scale of 1.0. The threshold for decison for removal is 0.3, at least for the company that did the report.


----------



## rbtree (Apr 1, 2002)

Mike, just talked to Scott. He knows more about tree dynamics, loads, physics than most of us peons. Plus he was there. And has 25 years of hands on experience, he's not just a consultant. He agrees with me and everyone else there that there was little need for anchors. The side loads placed on that trunk by winds on the canopy were many times greater than anything we did. Plus, the load kept getting less with every branch cut.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Apr 1, 2002)

I wonder what it would take for Scott to say guys would be recommended.

Mabe instead of 90% decayed trunkwood, it would need to be 99%.

Predicting the strength of a tree with decay, fractures, and holes, is not what I would call an exact science.

Would Scott put his son or daughter in that tree and pull sideways with 29,000Lbs? He did say it would hold 30,000lbs. How about 20,000lbs? 10,000lbs? 6,000? That would be 5 to 1 safety factor. How about 3500? 0? Think about it.

A guy is the simplest rigging there is. Done it 100's of times, take 5 minutes, and one or two ropes.


----------



## riggs (Apr 1, 2002)

Easters over , I don't have to be nice anymore . On a scale of 1 -10 (1 being easy) I place that tree , according to your pictures and threads a "4" . That wasn't from the hip , it was combat stance . Cedar picture is cool , but out of context . All them ropes , oh what a tangle web we weave ....


----------



## rbtree (Apr 1, 2002)

Riggs, it wasn't that hard, you're right, just in a tough spot, bad weather didnt help, etc. With a longer boom to get the wood out easier, and perfect efficiency, no picture taking, etc, maybe we could have done it in 65 manhours (all prep work included)--but I doubt it. 75 for sure.

you must have a heck of a lot of huge, extremely tough or hazardous trees in philly to rate this a 4. It was a 8-10 in my book- personal experience only, of course.


----------



## Joe (Apr 1, 2002)

Roger: thanks for sharing the pictures and commentaries. It has been very entertaining. It's nice to see others work, like you've shown through a progression from beginning to end. It does get 1 to think about alternative approaches to rigging this specific tree at any point during the removal. 

Joe


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Apr 2, 2002)

Once again i have tried to capture stuff like this in pix and movies; it never looks as big or difficult as it was, hard to show scale of things etc.. i think we all need to take this into consideration; and also respect the effort, and all it has wrought hear!

And as far as this web, or web of lines............ you don't expect a spy-der to complain do ya? 

It is like being a control freak i guess, ushering such power and size gracefully into a specific spot.................. can breathlessly make you smile inside to orchestrate that correctly!

At least that is how it is with this passionate addict!


----------



## rbtree (Apr 5, 2002)

*Another behemoth today!!*

Well, today's maple dwarfs the last one. Over 4.5 feet dbh, two houses close, carport right underneath, stream on one side. Full spreading canopy. It has some decay, but it's structure appears sound and should present no extraordinary difficulties. Speedlining will work. No guying necessary, likely, MM.
And we can get my new crane guy in with his 90 foot of reach. The guy with the $205 minimum for two hours on site, travel included!!!! Dinner and drinks on me, Mike!!! A specialty wood buyer is coming to see if there is any value, crossing my fingers. He pays up to $5 a board foot for the best figured wood!! Anything will help, as it is another too low price. Competitive bids were way too low, but the job is being half paid for by a friend. He's an ex coworker, and is donating his labor. Plus, there are three alders for $800-1000 that will be a breeze.

Another great photo opportunity, plus DK is shooting video again.  I'm not sure if we'll have any digital cameras available, but will shoot lots of film, and am getting a film scanner soon. So be patient. Forecast is for increasing clouds and showers, hope not for today, as it is clear as a bell right now!!


----------



## rbtree (Apr 5, 2002)

Thanks, Dave and Marilyne!

for getting me the last of the photos!!

Here's the speedline sequence I shot from next to Tom. Note you can actually see all the way across Puget Sound. It didn't start snowing for a nother 1-2 hours, but was darn cold and breezy. Well, do you you see a glove on Tom's hand? No, what a stud, eh?!! A Vermont hardman for sure. Meanwhile I'm fumbling with the camera, freezing to death. i think I would have felt warmer if he had had gloves on!!

Now, 16 days later, we start an even bigger tree. But now it is sunny, high yesterday of over 65 degrees, oh yeah!! Calling for clouds and rain, not happening yet!!


----------



## rbtree (Apr 5, 2002)

Oops, fist pic:


----------



## rbtree (Apr 5, 2002)

ZIPzip.....


----------



## rbtree (Apr 5, 2002)

Looks like i should stayed a retired "pro" photog, taking pics of my hand and all!!!!!!! 

Aw, heck, blame it on the cold and wind.....   :


----------



## rbtree (Apr 12, 2002)

*Another behemoth*

Well big for residential Puget Sound anyhow:

4.5 feet dbh, 5.5 feet at the ground. I couldn't figure out Dave's idiot proof (but not me) digital camera during the tree wreck, but got some film, plus Dan Kraus shot video again. Still shopping for a film scanner....

This tree also was hollow, and had some central top breakout, resultant large secondary leader size, but was a pretty straightforward removal. The quarters were close, but everything went real smooth. Appx manhours to get it down to the size shown were 25. We also did 3 alders the same day, plus I shot a bunch of pics. I did 3 more alders Saturday, and with the appx 4-5 hours for the craning, we'll be at about 45. 12 of those provided by Jerry, who got me the job, so there's no cost there. I had dropped the price $200 for his help. Job is at $2800 minus appx $350 in crane and trucking. Plus the alder logs should bring about $200 at the mill. So that is around $80 per manhour, a far cry from our take on the first tree! As well, we produced over twice the chips from this job. What a difference site layout and tree structure can make!!


----------



## rbtree (Apr 12, 2002)

Coon's nest is out of sight in 20 inch hollow center of trunk:

forgot pic, see 2 posts down


----------



## rbtree (Apr 12, 2002)

Here coony, nice boy, easy now!!


----------



## rbtree (Apr 12, 2002)

Ok, from barely puter literate moi:


----------



## treeclimber165 (Apr 12, 2002)

Heckufa hollow in that trunk! I couldn't help but notice the ancient flush cut on the trunk about 15'-20' up on the 1st pic. Never even started to compartmentalize. 

Isn't it a shame that the richest customers can get our services for bargain rates, yet the average workin' stiff ends up paying top dollar......


----------



## rbtree (Apr 12, 2002)

Yep, Brian, that, plus the old top breakout, was likely the start of problems with this tree. Otherwise, with it's location near a stream, and having had no major construction within 15 feet of the trunk, it would likely have been in great shape. 

Bigleaf maple is the largest maple species in the world; there are specimens over 150 -160 feet tall, and 11 feet in diameter. 

In relation to the old cuts, few trees can handle 24 inch cuts, flush or not. Bigleaf are notoriously poor compartmentalizers.


----------

