# Would You Climb This One?



## woodchux (Dec 15, 2006)




----------



## Grace Tree (Dec 15, 2006)

I wouldn't. Is that left leader over the com wires?

Phil


----------



## Climb020 (Dec 15, 2006)

Need more info than that as well as more pics of that hollow. How high do you need to climb it? What are you intending to do to the tree? How much of the tree is hardwood at it's weakest point? A general rule of thumb is 10% of hardwood to be safe to climb but also differs by species as well as other things.


----------



## Chucky (Dec 15, 2006)

The pics are kind of small. No way you can safety into a nearby tree?


----------



## JTinaTree (Dec 15, 2006)

If I could tie in to a tree near it without having too bad of a angle on my lifeline I would.


----------



## ggttp (Dec 16, 2006)

*nasty*

That looks pretty bad. I would prob have to try and get a crane to it. Like they said earlier if i had a good/excellent tie in point in a surrounding tree i would. If i were you i would stick with a crane or bucket. If you dont have a bucket work the price of a crane in your bid.

This pic is one i did the other day. It looked real bad but i had no prob.


----------



## Ekka (Dec 16, 2006)

Climb020 said:


> A general rule of thumb is 10% of hardwood to be safe to climb but also differs by species as well as other things.



Wow, I've never ever heard of such a liberal rule, many will fail long before 10%.

That hollow is close to the ground, that tree is also cracked and decayed, to even consider your life on it is just nuts especially when it's such easy access for a bucket or crane etc... look at the pic, that's the front yard with a car right near it.

No wonder this is one of the most dangerous jobs in the world ... advice like that just helps it along. :jawdrop: 

Not long ago a young guy died here in Sydney, apparently ignored the fruiting bodies and swelling at the base ... tree collapsed him in it. Was a great climber but perhaps poor arborist, didn't evaluate the risk very well.

Today I bid a lightening struck half dead, first thing I looked for was bucket access ... got that so the rest is easy.


----------



## Jim1NZ (Dec 16, 2006)

I would look very carefully at the neighboring trees for a suitable roping point.


----------



## jmack (Dec 16, 2006)

woodchux said:


>


 when i first read the title i assumed impossible spots, yea unsafe to climb if you got wires there you got some chance of equipment, yea do not climb, more info would be good, who is da client? why is the tree stll standing? , whats the power company say will they assist? who is involved in this debate about climbing this thing, what #s are out there on this, are any #s accepted at this time


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Dec 16, 2006)

Climb020 said:


> A general rule of thumb is 10% of hardwood to be safe to climb but also differs by species as well as other things.


Unless Woodchux is a complete moron, the thread is a joke. Even with a safe tie in, there's no way this tree is safe to climb. It's ready to implode on itself just standing there. One good chomp from an ant and it's comming down. A woodchuck wouldn't even climb this thing.
The 10% rule has me interested. I've heard of various thumb rules before, but that one sounds like a thumb up the a$$ rule. LOL! 
Good response Ekka.


----------



## diltree (Dec 16, 2006)

I would climb this with hopes of prunning and restoring this tree. Ofcourse it would be a gaffless climb, I would never want to create any wounds in my Restoration attempt. The rule of thumb is 10%, so I should be ok climbing up the tree, and with over 10% of sapwood remaining the tree should bounce back with plenty of new growth next spring.:monkey:


----------



## stihlatit (Dec 16, 2006)

diltree said:


> I would climb this with hopes of prunning and restoring this tree. Ofcourse it would be a gaffless climb, I would never want to create any wounds in my Restoration attempt. The rule of thumb is 10%, so I should be ok climbing up the tree, and with over 10% of sapwood remaining the tree should bounce back with plenty of new growth next spring.:monkey:



The joke thread is two over and one down. Some people put no value on life it seems. Wear a parachute and hope it has time to open. It is not whether you can get away with climbing it. It is assessing the risk properly and putting into perspective the consequence of your action. Don't climb it as has been said use a crane or get a professional.


----------



## beowulf343 (Dec 16, 2006)

diltree said:


> I would climb this with hopes of prunning and restoring this tree. Ofcourse it would be a gaffless climb, I would never want to create any wounds in my Restoration attempt. The rule of thumb is 10%, so I should be ok climbing up the tree, and with over 10% of sapwood remaining the tree should bounce back with plenty of new growth next spring.:monkey:


Ha, ha sweet response!!

But seriously, I wouldn't climb that thing-looks like it might disintigrate just looking at it!


----------



## clearance (Dec 16, 2006)

diltree said:


> I would climb this with hopes of prunning and restoring this tree. Ofcourse it would be a gaffless climb, I would never want to create any wounds in my Restoration attempt. The rule of thumb is 10%, so I should be ok climbing up the tree, and with over 10% of sapwood remaining the tree should bounce back with plenty of new growth next spring.:monkey:


Very funny, actually some ISA cert. people on this site would believe this. Where exactly does one draw the line? Where does the desire to preserve horribly compromised trees stop and the desire to preserve human life kick in? I remember this 10% "rule" from an earlier talk here about removing hazard trees around powerlines, can't remember the poster. Stop the insanity. On a related note, it will be intersting to see how many "safe" trees in the PNW now get cut down, after so many of thier "safe' brothers came smashing down onto powerlines, houses, cars etc recently. Now even treehuggers have the fear, the news has been full of nasty tree stuff, good, and good for business as well.


----------



## adkranger (Dec 16, 2006)

*Nope*

Climbed some sketchy trees in my day, earlier days more sketchy than now for sure.... But they say with age comes wisdom. For me, it's not just looking just at the wound and immediately associated rot but;

1) where the wound/weakness is on the stem
2) how much wieght above and how distributed(vertically or out on a vector)
3) what associated hazards are nearby, power lines, house, etc...
4) type of tree, wood structure

Probably more, but that's what came to mind initially. I remember taking down a completely hollow Silver Maple in a municipal zoo, 14" DBH. Hollow section ran from ground to a height of about 10', small compact crown with only two central leaders. Had to piece it down into roughly 10'x10' area. Knew it was hollow from sounding with my axe before climbing and over ruled the bosses idea of drop hitchin' the tops into the stem, duh. Went w/o difficultly, if running a tad long for the bosses preferences. I did install a safety in another healthy stem for the crown work. After down measured 1.5" of healthy wood around the complete circumference, rest air space.:jawdrop: Still have a 3' section on my porch for a walkin' stick, umbrella holder from that tree. Would I do that one again, now? Maybe, depending on the totality of the situation. Certainly not if the outter circumference was breached by a large open or through & through wound, large spreading crown, power lines in/near crown, etc...

As a side note to that tree TD, there was a little added stress to the situation with Timber Wolves, Coyotes and Big Horn Sheep in the neighboring pens that were less than enthusiastic about our noisy presence. Needless to say dropping pieces on the other side of the fences was out of the question, at least as far as my groundies sake was concerned. 

Crane or bucket that bad boy and incorporate it into your bid. You'll be happy you did. That's definitely not one to low ball.


----------



## Climb020 (Dec 16, 2006)

My source for the info is a TCIA Pocket Guide: Identifying Hazard Trees.
I will now recite a paragraph to illistrate my point of 10% as rule of thumb but like I said you need to take into concideration other factors in the tree.

"The table below shows the minumum wood thickness that constitutes a 50% strength loss. When using this table, remember to subtract the bark thickness from both the diamter measurements (D-tape value minus two times the bark thickness). Stregnth loss will be greater (trunk weaker) if there are cracks, cavity opening or other weakening factors. In those cases, the thickness of sound wood for a given trunk diamter will need to be greater than the values listed for it to be climbable.

Diameter of Stem/limb * Thickness of sound wood *
10" 1"
20" 2"
30" 3"
40" 4"
50" 5"

*Not including bark"

If you still do not agree with what I have said then go and take up your case with TCIA being you must be more educated then the indiviuals that work there.

As well that tree can still be climbed but as the ways to go about doing appartly do not matter to jokers on this thread. Improvise and think outside the box it isn't rocket science here. I have done tree like it before and probally will do them again. If you are too incompetant to do the job then pass it on.


----------



## Ekka (Dec 16, 2006)

adkranger said:


> hollow Silver Maple in a municipal zoo, 14" DBH.
> 
> After down measured 1.5" of healthy wood around the complete circumference, rest air space.



14" DBH = 7" radius

1.5"/7" = 21% wall thickness, now imagine 10%! Then chuck in a crack, hollow and decay... 

Good advice, just did that to illustrate the numbers for others.


----------



## Grace Tree (Dec 16, 2006)

Climb020 said:


> If you are too incompetant to do the job then pass it on.


I'll pass.


----------



## Climb020 (Dec 16, 2006)

Ekka said:


> 14" DBH = 7" radius
> 
> 1.5"/7" = 21% wall thickness, now imagine 10%! Then chuck in a crack, hollow and decay...
> 
> Good advice, just did that to illustrate the numbers for others.



Apparently you did not read my whole thread. If cracks/hollows exist there needs to be more then 10%. But argueing doesn't matter. As you see it I am just a kid that doesn't know the difference between my :censored: and a hole in the ground.


----------



## Ekka (Dec 16, 2006)

Climb020 said:


> "The table below shows the minumum wood thickness that constitutes a 50% strength loss. When using this table, remember to subtract the bark thickness from both the diamter measurements (D-tape value minus two times the bark thickness). Stregnth loss will be greater (trunk weaker) if there are cracks, cavity opening or other weakening factors. In those cases, the thickness of sound wood for a given trunk diamter will need to be greater than the values listed for it to be climbable.
> 
> Diameter of Stem/limb * *Thickness of sound wood **
> 10" 1"
> ...



If I am reading this correctly it appears that they are giving a stem diameter then a wall thickness. which is a little confusing for some readers and potentially puts people who mis-interpret in the firing line.

I would find any publication rendering a 10% wall thickness rather liable if they do suggest it's "safe".

But going back to the original info as you posted and quoted above. Remember, it's diameter and WALL THICKNESS

50" dia is 25" radius.
5" wall thickness on a 25" radial stem is 20%.


And another, 20" dia is 10" radius.
2" wall thickness on a 10" radius is hello ... 20%


It would be likely in a test and in verticle compression that a solid piece of wood say 20" dia and 3' long compressed to the point it busted would infact be twice as strong as a piece of hollow wood with a 2" thick wall ... that is likely and hence why in engineering tube is used a lot.

However, what engineers do is have uniform structures generally more solid from the foundation up. 

What that tree has is a base that is ?% weaker lower and going up to most likely to an increased strength wood as the wall thickness gets larger. Imagine a hollow fishing rod being used the wrong way around.

Also, these compression tests dont take into consideration horizontal leveraged stresses.

I checked the website and that pocket guide sells for $4 ... surely you'd take that into account as usually you get what you pay for. Go and read some real books.


----------



## 1I'dJak (Dec 16, 2006)

Ouuuch! I'd climb the tree closest to it...tie in....and chuck my grapple into the high crotch... give her a few good tugs and see how the top wobbled... if no good, i'd abort and hopefully get my claw back...if alright, then i'd swing over, and avoid climbing it from the bottom up...you can throw in all this formula crap but there are so many variables to consider that 'true' eperiments try to eliminate...


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Dec 16, 2006)

Climb020 said:


> My source for the info is a TCIA Pocket Guide: Identifying Hazard Trees.
> I will now recite a paragraph to illistrate my point of 10% as rule of thumb but like I said you need to take into concideration other factors in the tree.
> 
> "The table below shows the minumum wood thickness that constitutes a 50% strength loss. When using this table, remember to subtract the bark thickness from both the diamter measurements (D-tape value minus two times the bark thickness). Stregnth loss will be greater (trunk weaker) if there are cracks, cavity opening or other weakening factors. In those cases, the thickness of sound wood for a given trunk diamter will need to be greater than the values listed for it to be climbable.
> ...



What we have here is good information being used incorrectly.
The tree in the picture is dead, cracked, and has huge holes. There is no sound wood at all, and more importantly, it is not an unbroken cylinder of sound wood. The excellent information from the TCIA has nothing to do with this tree.
Also, Ekka correctly pointed out the percentage of wood in the chart is 20%, not 10%, but again, it doesn't apply to this tree.
You are right, given time and ropes, a good arborist could basically elevate himself up next to the tree and do the removal, but when I read, "climb a tree", I think putting a lanyard around it and spike up, or throw a rope in the tree and climb that way. This tree could not be safely climbed that way.


----------



## DDM (Dec 16, 2006)

This tree is why some of us have Bucket trucks.Woodchuck where are you in SC?


----------



## adkranger (Dec 16, 2006)

To further Ekka's post; another factor to consider in stem strength is rigidity/flexibility. To that end whether it is hollow inside the 10-20% good wood or just punky wood. I would think that a rotten stem with solid sapwood and punky center would be preferable to work on than a hollow "tube". The rotted wood will still offer some strength to the stem, even if just from a flex stand point. Just compare using the cheap, hollow pole saw sections from the foam filled ones (both made from same shell material). Or imagine a paper towel tube's strength vs. the same tube filled with sand and ends duct taped closed. Which would be stronger? The linear strength is in the paper tube in each situation but the filled tube will endure more flexing before failure over the hollow one I suspect.

Merely considering the static strength of the "tube", or good wood in the stem, say 10 or even 20%, is not enough. You must also consider the lateral and torsional forces applied both initially supporting the structure and as you work the tree the stesses will change. What would concern me more with the Woodchuk's tree is the vertical split with that gaping hole more than a mere cavity alone. I was working Sugar Maple many years ago with an extremely weak crotch that actually failed after the weight was removed from it. It wasn't shock loading from lowering since we false crotched into a separate tree. Near as I could tell the tree had compensated for the leader's poor attachment point for so long that removing the weight put enough reverse stess or tension release to the cause failure. It would have been disasterous had we not tied off the leader stem to the good stem prior to working it. It was quite interesting situation, hard to explain unless you were there to witness for yourself. Injured and stessed trees are the toughest to dope out. Ever have a storm damaged tree's stem practically explode after removing weight and stress from it. Tension, stored energy has to be considered in trees like this. My .02.


----------



## Soul Assassin (Dec 16, 2006)

No, but I would use rigging to get it manageable, then drop it if I could.


----------



## John464 (Dec 16, 2006)

I would bet I could break that tree at the point pictured with just a throw ball and zing it line.

bucket, every arborist needs one or should have a source that can provide usage/rental of one. If you attempt to climb trees _that_ dead you are out of your mind. Forget the percentages, they are not needed on this tree. You can see with your eyes it is not safe to climb. Nor is it safe to set line in another tree and rig the tree as a whole.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Dec 16, 2006)

DDM said:


> This tree is why some of us have Bucket trucks.Woodchuck where are you in SC?


The only problem with bucket trucks is the tree that needs work isn't always accessable, although this one certainly is.
Plus bucket trucks ruin good climbers.


----------



## JohN Dee (Dec 17, 2006)

Do you consider your life valued at the price of this job? If so climb, if not get an EWP to get you up there.


----------



## diltree (Dec 17, 2006)

My first response was obviously a joke.......I felt that this thread truly warranted a joke, sorely based on the fact that there are some that are considering this tree "safe to climb". I always respect others opinions in this forum, yet in this case I'm actually shocked there is a debate on whether or not this tree is safe to climb. My first impression was that woodchux was joking when he posted the picture and in fact the question was proposed in a sarcastic manner. 
With that said, my professional opinion is: " No do not climb this tree, under no circumstance should any one climb up this tree" . There are many other options; tie into another tree or use a bucket Truck, if there is no truck access or tie in points; rent a spider lift. If there is no access for a spider lift, perhaps cranes can be used. If you cant get a crane in, then Rent a helicopter designed for lifting and ride out with the pieces. Any unsafe tree can be done without the need to compromise your Life.


----------



## EngineerDude (Dec 17, 2006)

Mostly ignoring the question of whether I'd climb this tree or not (Personally I wouldn't. No way! Seeing that one picture of the defect, I just simply wouldn't feel safe on an emotional/intuitive level), I'll instead make some comments that might put the question of whether 10% wall thickness is "safe" or not into a different light. As Ekka noted, the TCIA reference mixes concepts here; diameter on the one hand, and wall thickness on the other. If you think about it, wall thickness really relates to radius of the tree, and so to be able to be compared to diameter on an apples to apples basis, this value must be doubled.

So this "10% wall thickness" is really 20% of diameter, and if you do the arithmetic of calculating the percentage of good wood associated with this remaining ring, it's 36% of the original total.

So what TCIA appears to really be saying is that with 36% of the wood remaining, you still have (nominally) 50% of the "strength" of the tree. (By the way, it's not completely clear exactly what they mean by "strength"; ability to withstand a bending moment, or ability to withstand a compressive load, or ...?)

Bypassing the question of what they mean by "strength", certainly it's more intuitively believable that 36% of the remaining wood could yield 50% strength than it is to say that "10% wall thickness" does so. Then, when you consider that in a bending scenario, the fibers of the outside of the tree are under the greatest stress (the ones on the side in the direction of the bend are in compression, and the ones on the opposite side are in tension), and these stresses decrease as you move to the center of the tree (the fiber at the geometric center is under neither tension nor compression), having the 36% of the tree being those fibers located in the areas where the stress is greatest renders this even more intuitively believable. That is, the fibers where the wood is good are in exactly the right location to do the most good.

So from an engineering mechanics and strength of materials viewpoint, I think this 10% wall thickness is probably a pretty good number. This assumes, that the tree is a nice uniform hollow cylinder, without major imperfections. All bets are off if the tree has major defects that compromise this critical load-handling capability of the outer fibers.

By the way, adkranger's point about hollow versus solid is valid. As stated above, the distribution of loads varies from maximum at the edges to zero in the center, so the presence of additional fibers beyond the 10% thick wall certainly helps, albeit to a decreasing extent as you move to the center.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Dec 17, 2006)

EngineerDude said:


> So this "10% wall thickness" is really 20% of diameter, and if you do the arithmetic of calculating the percentage of good wood associated with this remaining ring, it's 36% of the original total.


Good catch on the math. A 50" cylinder with 5" wall thickness can be thought of as a 50" circle with a 40" hole, which leaves 36% sound wood.


----------



## ORclimber (Dec 17, 2006)

A solo climber died in Lake Oswego about a week ago. The top 10 feet of a decayed cottonwood broke out, and the guy fell 70 feet. OSHA said it was the climbers fault for not doing proper tree inspection.


----------



## Climb020 (Dec 17, 2006)

Ekka said:


> I checked the website and that pocket guide sells for $4 ... surely you'd take that into account as usually you get what you pay for. Go and read some real books.


Surely you are joking here. Are you implying that the price of the knowledge dictats how valueable it is? I mean all the info online is free (mostly), but if following your logic, that info has no value including videos posted by yourself. Right. it's free so it has no value. Ok, you can take your foot out of your mouth now.

I miss said about the 10%. What I meant and what I typed came across as 2 different things. I ment per side of the tree, so that if is is a 10" tree you need 1" on every side, so that way anyside of the tree has a 10% of good wood. When looked in a whole it is 20%, sorry if this was confusing.

2 floating false crotches for climbing and rigging, to get it done, that is if the pieces cannot get bombed.


----------



## EngineerDude (Dec 17, 2006)

One more thought on the strength aspect of this. The orientation of the defect strongly affects its impact on the strength of the tree. You really want to have fibers present in the parts of the tree that are in tension and compression. Translated into this scenario, you really want that hole to be rotated 90 degrees away from the direction of bend. The math gets really complex to quantify the strength reduction if the direction that the hole is pointing is coincident with the direction of the bend, more than I'm interested in pursuing, but suffice it to say that the impact is VERY significant (and this is is irrespective of whether it is on the tension side or the compression side).

Can't tell from the pics. Are they taken from the same location? And what is the direction of the lean?

Whatever the answer, I still personally wouldn't do it. But how strongly I'd advise against it depends on the orientation of the defect.


----------



## Blinky (Dec 17, 2006)

I wouldn't climb it, wouldn't even be tempted. Nobody can really judge whether it will stay together and if you mean to drop the top out of it, the dynamics would be really sketchy. 

I can't tell for sure from the pic but it looks like an expert faller could rope it and drop it safely it in one piece, if not, then some kind of lift equipment makes more sense.


----------



## adkranger (Dec 17, 2006)

EngineerDude said:


> Mostly ignoring the question of whether I'd climb this tree or not (Personally I wouldn't. No way! Seeing that one picture of the defect, I just simply wouldn't feel safe on an emotional/intuitive level), I'll instead make some comments that might put the question of whether 10% wall thickness is "safe" or not into a different light. As Ekka noted, the TCIA reference mixes concepts here; diameter on the one hand, and wall thickness on the other. If you think about it, wall thickness really relates to radius of the tree, and so to be able to be compared to diameter on an apples to apples basis, this value must be doubled.
> 
> So this "10% wall thickness" is really 20% of diameter, and if you do the arithmetic of calculating the percentage of good wood associated with this remaining ring, it's 36% of the original total.
> 
> ...



Good catch. Your AS name is indeed quite appropriate. Are you an engineer, tree guy or an engineering treeguy?:biggrinbounce2: All very intuitive, valid points, along your follow up post. Nothing is 100% trying to dope out a specific tree in a picture, but I think the consensous is correct in not climbing this in a traditional manner, if at all. Even with a secure, remote anchor I don't think I'd like to be tied to that stick swinging big pieces.


----------



## Magnum783 (Dec 18, 2006)

Forget that. I am just now recovering from a fall out of a pine that broke under my feet when I cut the top out. Not good, rent a bucket truck, call a crane, it is not worth it at all to get hurt. Plus the recovery really sucks. 
Jared


----------



## ROLLACOSTA (Dec 18, 2006)

Woodchux you should be able to answer the question yourself! if you can't decide if the tree is safe to climb or not, then imo you need more experience..

I hear a lot of you guys talking about being an ARBORIST,you don't or shouldn't need to be an arborist to decide if a tree is to dangerous to climb or not!!


----------



## gumneck (Dec 18, 2006)

Magnum783 said:


> Forget that. I am just now recovering from a fall out of a pine that broke under my feet when I cut the top out. Not good, rent a bucket truck, call a crane, it is not worth it at all to get hurt. Plus the recovery really sucks.
> Jared



Jared 

Have you posted about your fall yet. If so, how about a link to the discussion. If not, how about talking about it for others to learn by. Maybe some pics of part of tree that broke, etc. 

Tks, hope your getting better. 
Tom


----------



## Magnum783 (Dec 18, 2006)

No, I will start a thread now.
Jared


----------



## ozy365 (Dec 18, 2006)

Towable boom lift can be pushed into a tight spot. We rent 46 feet with 2 knuckles and a jib for around $200/24 hours. Ought to be able to justify that in the bid and use the lift on something else in the afternoon. Biljax/ nifty lift, Genie lift etc. 2" ball to tow.


----------



## Treecareconcept (Dec 18, 2006)

I can't even immagine contemplating climbing this one. Sombody's joking right?



Mike Maas said:


> The 10% rule has me interested. I've heard of various thumb rules before, but that one sounds like a thumb up the a$$ rule. LOL!
> 
> It's not the thumb, but the head!


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Dec 18, 2006)

The scary thing is the original poster hasn't posted since the day after he started this thread, when Climb020 said if it has 10% of its wood, climb it.


----------



## woodchux (Dec 18, 2006)

The question was *"Would YOU Climb This one".....*
Not "should i climb this?"

Interesting replies...


----------



## woodchux (Dec 18, 2006)

Small Wood said:


> Is that left leader over the com wires?



Yes, slightly. There is also a service drop from the pole to the house.


----------



## woodchux (Dec 18, 2006)

Climb020 said:


> Need more info than that as well as more pics of that hollow. How high do you need to climb it? What are you intending to do to the tree? How much of the tree is hardwood at it's weakest point? A general rule of thumb is 10% of hardwood to be safe to climb but also differs by species as well as other things.


 Ill see if i can find some more pics.
The tree needs to be climbed high enough to piece the top out.
The hollow in the pic is actually the smaller of two large cavities.


----------



## woodchux (Dec 18, 2006)

Chucky said:


> No way you can safety into a nearby tree?


 No, not another suitable tree.


----------



## woodchux (Dec 18, 2006)

ggttp said:


> If you dont have a bucket work the price of a crane in your bid



Consider that the client is an elderly widow on a very limited income.


----------



## woodchux (Dec 19, 2006)

Mike Maas said:


> Unless Woodchux is a complete moron, the thread is a joke. Even with a safe tie in, there's no way this tree is safe to climb. It's ready to implode on itself just standing there. One good chomp from an ant and it's comming down.


 The thread is not a joke. I was curious who here would take the risk and who would side with safety. 
The cavity is actually worse than the the pictures show. However, The tree is not dead, and still had leaves a month before the pictures were taken.


----------



## clearance (Dec 19, 2006)

woodchux said:


> Consider that the client is an elderly widow on a very limited income.


Risk your life cause of that? If you really care about her funds and your butt you can get someone (like say Asplundh guys after/during work) with a bucket to come by and just rain it down. 15 minutes max, from arrival to gone, dial yourself right out of it, clean it up for a few bucks. Couple of cases of beer, whatever for the bucket slug, make it happen, be smart.


----------



## woodchux (Dec 19, 2006)

DDM said:


> This tree is why some of us have Bucket trucks.Woodchuck where are you in SC?


Almost over into Georgia. We work mostly around Anderson.


----------



## woodchux (Dec 19, 2006)

JohN Dee said:


> Do you consider your life valued at the price of this job? If so climb, if not get an EWP to get you up there.


I like the way you think


----------



## woodchux (Dec 19, 2006)

diltree said:


> Rent a helicopter designed for lifting and ride out with the pieces.


 I want to come to work with you guys!


----------



## woodchux (Dec 19, 2006)

ORclimber said:


> A solo climber died in Lake Oswego about a week ago. The top 10 feet of a decayed cottonwood broke out, and the guy fell 70 feet. OSHA said it was the climbers fault for not doing proper tree inspection.


 I hate to hear about incidents like that. I have to wonder what he was doing in the top 10 feet of a rotting cottonwood.


----------



## woodchux (Dec 19, 2006)

ROLLACOSTA said:


> Woodchux you should be able to answer the question yourself! if you can't decide if the tree is safe to climb or not, then imo you need more experience..
> 
> I hear a lot of you guys talking about being an ARBORIST,you don't or shouldn't need to be an arborist to decide if a tree is to dangerous to climb or not!!



I've got plenty of experience. I know what/how I would deal with the tree. My question was "would YOU climb it?"


----------



## Climb020 (Dec 19, 2006)

Yes I would climb it using floating false crotches. There looks like there is at least 2 objects in the same plain as the tree to work in. I have seen guys tie into chimneys on houses using false crotches to do what they had to. Great thing about this job is you can be so creative in both your climbing and your rigging.


----------



## Treeguy883 (Dec 19, 2006)

*Whoa......*

If you don't have a bucket truck, let this one go..... In our careers one mistake is all it takes. My rule of thumb is, if you can SEE through it, don't climb it (JUST KIDDING). Crane or bucket only. I don't know about you, but my life is worth more than a few hundred bucks.


----------



## JohN Dee (Dec 20, 2006)

Mike Maas said:


> The scary thing is the original poster hasn't posted since the day after he started this thread, when Climb020 said if it has 10% of its wood, climb it.



Lol, before i scrolled down and saw Woodchux's post I was "OMG he's(Mike) right" and started thinking the worst.

Whichever way you attack it mate, keep your safety number 1 priority, if you feel you can't do it, walk.


----------



## JayD (Dec 20, 2006)

*Climb or Not to Climb???*

After reading all the responses,some good others questionable,....Me...No!!
Merry Xmas to All


----------



## antigrassguy (Dec 20, 2006)

Nope on climbing this one for me. The risk is not worth the reward. According to Mike Mass "bucket trucks ruin good climbers". Just because an individual is physically capable of climbing a tree does not mean that every tree should be climbed. Climbers work from the inside of a tree out which is good for pruning/trimming. Buckets work from the outside in which I believe is great for removals. Testosterone often gets in the way with this occupation. It is my opinion that trees, like this, and big nuts will eventually ruin a physically good climber, permanently.


----------



## ROLLACOSTA (Dec 20, 2006)

woodchux said:


> I've got plenty of experience. I know what/how I would deal with the tree. My question was "would YOU climb it?"




what do you think?


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Dec 20, 2006)

woodchux said:


> The thread is not a joke. I was curious who here would take the risk and who would side with safety.
> The cavity is actually worse than the the pictures show. However, The tree is not dead, and still had leaves a month before the pictures were taken.



I could safely remove this tree without large machinery, but my first choice would be a bucket.
What I'd do is get ropes in it and pull on it to make sure it's strong enough. Then I'd guy the tree as high as I needed to climb, and use throw line to break the top apart.
Once it was down to a guyed spar, and no more could be broken off from the ground, I'd climb to where the cut needed to be, guy the tree again at that point and remove the upper guys and let the top go, climb down and drop it.
We'd probably charge about $175 to get it on the ground with a bucket (I think that's our minimum charge).
Without the bucket, the price would be at least double.


----------



## diltree (Dec 21, 2006)

woodchux said:


> I want to come to work with you guys!



You like the helicopter Idea, dont you?......Its been done


----------



## Climb020 (Dec 21, 2006)

diltree said:


> You like the helicopter Idea, dont you?......Its been done



Yeah, check out the helicopter logging video that Baileys has.


----------



## diltree (Dec 28, 2006)

Climb020 said:


> Yeah, check out the helicopter logging video that Baileys has.



Is there a link to check out that video...I could not find it myself


----------



## Climb020 (Dec 28, 2006)

They have a whole set of logging videos but you can buy just the ones you want.
http://store.baileys-online.com/cgi-bin/baileys/scan/arg=%22/fi=products/st=db/tf=sortorder%2cdescription/co=yes/sf=category/se=10169/op=eq/ml=5.html


----------



## juststumps (Dec 29, 2006)

clearance said:


> Risk your life cause of that? If you really care about her funds and your butt you can get someone (like say Asplundh guys after/during work) with a bucket to come by and just rain it down. 15 minutes max, from arrival to gone, dial yourself right out of it, clean it up for a few bucks. Couple of cases of beer, whatever for the bucket slug, make it happen, be smart.



BUCKET SLUG!!! I like that!!!!! has a nice ring to it... better than bucket baby!!!!!! the three "BEES" bucket truck, bomb the tree, beer when your done... works for me....no clean up????? dream job for a slug like me!!! LOL

climb, hows the new gig???


----------



## clearance (Dec 29, 2006)

juststumps said:


> BUCKET SLUG!!! I like that!!!!! has a nice ring to it... better than bucket baby!!!!!! the three "BEES" bucket truck, bomb the tree, beer when your done... works for me....no clean up????? dream job for a slug like me!!! LOL



I remember people calling guys in the bucket "bucket slugs", easy to say till you have ran a trim saw all day, flipping out hangers, avoiding lines, etc. It ain't as easy as it looks. Anyways, good idea or what?


----------



## doggonetrees (Dec 30, 2006)

I would set a pull line with a throw rope, and break out top with rope come-a-long or GRCS. If this is not an option, then use a bucket to bring it down. If service is in the way- get service dropped. If the owner is retired/ disabled/ elderly then work out payment plan- I know I would- even 5.00 a week would have me sleeping better.


----------



## Climb020 (Dec 30, 2006)

juststumps said:


> climb, hows the new gig???



Going pretty good. Did lightning system Wed., some ROW work on THursay then a little bit of everything yesterday. Took down a pretty big silver maple. Mark took a pic. of it, so I'll send you it as soon as he gets it to me. Let Pepper know I'll bring in clothes on the first rain day and just send my check by mail. Have a nice trip???


----------



## juststumps (Dec 30, 2006)

will do on the pepper thing... trip was ok.. nice to see everyone....gonna start flying again....these 12 hour road trips are killing my back....airports have become such a pain in the a$$...but, i think thats the way to go in the future!!! talk to you later!!!


----------



## rbtree (Dec 30, 2006)

doggone, you are on the right track, if there's no bucket access. No way would any sane person climb that tree if there's no suitable tree or trees to work out of. Mike, guying is always good, but will do no good if the tree were to collapse underneath you, now would it?


----------



## (WLL) (Dec 31, 2006)

by the look of the pics id tie in to the phone line if i had 2. im thinking crane/bucket/lift if you can get 1 or the other in. if not i would not take the job and let some hero do it.lol. o ever hear of a sky hook or maby a 40ft ladder. yeah right lol lol lol


----------



## Robert Rizzuto (Apr 2, 2017)

I bid a cottonwood removal the other day and have since been tossing the correct (safest) way for removal. At once it was a multi stem all but the remaining have been removed the removed bases have rotted out the center of the stem left. At the base of the tree you can see where it is starting to buckle. There are no signs of decline in the tree other than obvious buckle and rot. Could I spike it and piece the tree down or should I err on the side of caution and just get a lift?


----------



## BC WetCoast (Apr 2, 2017)

How big? Pics?
You're the one who's seen it. How do you feel about it?
A lift will be a way faster


----------



## jefflovstrom (Apr 3, 2017)

BC WetCoast said:


> How big? Pics?
> You're the one who's seen it. How do you feel about it?
> A lift will be a way faster



I think after 11 years the job is done,?
Jeff


----------



## BC WetCoast (Apr 4, 2017)

I was answering Mr Rizzuto, who posted yesterday.


----------



## jefflovstrom (Apr 4, 2017)

BC WetCoast said:


> I was answering Mr Rizzuto, who posted yesterday.



Ah, I see now,
Jeff


----------



## Robert Rizzuto (Apr 7, 2017)

Decided to just rent a lift. If it's questionable better safe than sorry. Thanks


----------



## no tree to big (Apr 7, 2017)

Curious minds want to know! Might help someone in the future... post pics of the cottonwood in question! 

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk


----------

