# Anti-Topping Laws



## ClimbinArbor (Feb 24, 2012)

I have tried everything i can think of to help eradicate this man-made blight. Ive organized training seminars, stop to talk to every crew i see, and educate every homeowner who answers the door.

Its not working...

There are 250 tree companies and "individuals" operating in the Wichita metro area alone, and 8 of us are arborists. When you open the phone book 90% of the ads list topping in big bold letters.

I would like to talk with and pick the brains of people responsible for bringing improper practice laws to fruition (no pun intended). My reasons should be obvious... 

I would also add that i am not looking to put my competition out of business, quite the opposite really. I work with as many of these guys that i can, but the worst offenders are the ones who dont want to hear it.


----------



## Grace Tree (Feb 24, 2012)

Del_ said:


> Don't worry about it.
> 
> In the long run it will work out.
> 
> People need to change, not laws.


Just continue to educate people where and when you can. If you think the world can't change that way, consider cigarette smoking. When I grew up it seemed liked everyone smoked everywhere. Now you're considered to be defective if you smoke. Don't give up.
Phil


----------



## arborjockey (Feb 24, 2012)

Only 8 arborist out of 250 sounds like your complaining:confused2:. I'd advertise that fact, keep my trap shut, and make a killing off the fact your a specialist in a field of no gooders.:hmm3grin2orange: Put a big ad in the paper for CROWN RESTORATION (DUE TO TOPPING)


----------



## swyman (Feb 24, 2012)

Was out bidding today and noticed a bunch of new trees in the area that have recently been topped. Grinds my az, just don't know how anyone can think it looks good. Also ran across a tree that was removed yesterday in town by one of the larger companies in the area and they managed to take the gutter off the house and the garage as well as a very big dent on the the steel siding. Wright is in town doing line clearance with a absolute army! 7 buckets and a tracked boom and one crew chipping. Only thing I seen that was somewhat of a problem was the Bandit 200XP. DId not have a down pressure cylinder on the feed rolls. They had 4 guys chipping and they happened to have been doing a pine when I pulled up and three of them stood around because the branches would not feed in and would have to reverse the rolls and back and forth for each person. It drove me nuts watching, but they are probably not in that much of a hurry anyway. Is it really that much more to get the down pressure option? They infeed shoot was very small to.


----------



## sgreanbeans (Feb 24, 2012)

ClimbinArbor said:


> I have tried everything i can think of to help eradicate this man-made blight. Ive organized training seminars, stop to talk to every crew i see, and educate every homeowner who answers the door.
> 
> Its not working...
> 
> ...



U have actually taken it further than me. I have talked with the mayors, park directors, public works, etc. They all agreee, but each year nothing happens. It puzzles me, they have actually called me to talk about "did you see that tree on Central" HELL YES, DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT! I have no problem putting these guys out of business, that do this work and I damn sure do not consider them my competition, they are a plague. They will actually go in depth to people, on why they "need to top their tree" Basically the reasons all are the same.............the tree is growing. Del is right, only through education will there be change, as long as the general public does not see it as a problem, nothing will happen. I have stopped trying to work the city, and take every chance I get to spread the gospel, when talking to the people. I still get calls to top trees, many times people are ignorant and will argue the point. I have talked with a couple guys, they know its wrong, they just plain don't care......at all. "DUDE ITS A F'ING TREE, WHO CARES" a guy yelled at me. He is in the phone book as a professional, is a member of the ISA and runs a decent sized show.


----------



## abureels4me (Feb 24, 2012)

So don't start a hate war toward me but what exactly is wrong with topping a tree? I have no opinion either way but I never even knew it ruffled any feathers until I got on this site. The only thing I see is if it is my tree on my land and I want it topped then why is it anyone else's business?


----------



## Grace Tree (Feb 24, 2012)

abureels4me said:


> So don't start a hate war toward me but what exactly is wrong with topping a tree? I have no opinion either way but I never even knew it ruffled any feathers until I got on this site. The only thing I see is if it is my tree on my land and I want it topped then why is it anyone else's business?



Topping; the practice of arbitrary cutting of branches to reduce tree size is bad tree work. Topping isn’t trimming or pruning. It’s the improper and extensive cutting of tree branches to stubs. It removes an excessive amount of food producing leaves and can actually send the tree into “survival mode” with rapidly growing, weakly attached “water sprout” shoots. Topping disfigures trees, makes them vulnerable to insects and disease and guarantees future problems. It’s just plain bad tree work.

The concern is that tree "professionals" who are topping trees are doing crap work. Much like a doctor cutting off your foot to fix a hangnail. Add to that the fact that most of the trees will be around longer than the homeowner and there's a general stewardship of nature that leads people to speak up.
Phil


----------



## Grace Tree (Feb 24, 2012)

Here's some more. Read on.
Trees Are Good - Tree Care Information


----------



## sawinredneck (Feb 24, 2012)

I'm sorry, I am VERY sorry! But I am responsible for a few of the trees topped in Wichita. I didn't want to do it, I tried to tell the HO's there were better ways, better means and we did the best we could, lateral cuts etc. as we went. But yes, I have done a few!
"I don't care, I want to see the sun!" "I don't care, I'm sick of these leaves in my gutters!" It goes on, and it's ALWAYS a silver Maple! I don't know what people think when they buy a house with a large silver Maple in the back yard, the damn tree isn't going to get smaller!
I've talked many into crown reductions to minimize the "self pruning" properties of these tree's, but can't sell all of them on it. But I damn sure try!
As I'm not the one doing the climbing any more, just ground work, I can't really say "yea or nae" on the job. I don't like it, I don't want to do it, but if you can't get the HO to understand the reality that it is going to kill the tree eventually, I can't do much more than that!
Again, sorry!


----------



## abureels4me (Feb 24, 2012)

Small Wood said:


> Topping; the practice of arbitrary cutting of branches to reduce tree size is bad tree work. Topping isn’t trimming or pruning. It’s the improper and extensive cutting of tree branches to stubs. It removes an excessive amount of food producing leaves and can actually send the tree into “survival mode” with rapidly growing, weakly attached “water sprout” shoots. Topping disfigures trees, makes them vulnerable to insects and disease and guarantees future problems. It’s just plain bad tree work.
> 
> The concern is that tree "professionals" who are topping trees are doing crap work. Much like a doctor cutting off your foot to fix a hangnail. Add to that the fact that most of the trees will be around longer than the homeowner and there's a general stewardship of nature that leads people to speak up.
> Phil



That makes sense, and I can understand not hacking a tree down to the trunk and 2-3 beams being the only thing left.


----------



## MarquisTree (Feb 24, 2012)

There is a company about 40 miles south of us "tree topping by billy", hard to imagine that this stuff still goes on everyday. We have customers ask us to top trees almost everyday. I tell them we can not for ethical, and liability reasons. I explain all the precedent in "tree law" about liability from negligent pruning practices. I then explain to them if they want a tree topped it should be removed. period. This almost always opens the discussion to what they are actually hoping to accomplish from the "topping" I would say 80% of the time we are able to completely talk them out of it. Many people think a tree being tall is a problem, its a lot of work and some times we lose jobs over it but it is our responsiblity as professionals to educate the customer and refuse to top trees.
I am all in favor of a law against topping...but it would be next to impossible to enforce and it raises all sorts of questions of what would be the standard that would be enforced? we all can picture flagrant topping but what about borderline cases of crown reduction? Trees that have defects where you attempts to prune out the defects but leave something that looks like some topping cuts? or storm damaged trees that should be removed but the owner wants to try and save them? It would be a very hard thing to enforce.


----------



## capetrees (Feb 25, 2012)

I'll play Joe Public on this one. 

A law against it? If it's my tree and I want it topped, I'll top it or find someone that will. It's mine and I'll do what I want. Will the tree look ugly? Will it die? Will it get infected or attacked by bugs? I'll take my chances. So have me sign a release of liability to the guy that topped it. I don't care. I want the view, I want the leaves out of my gutters, I want my house to be safe from falling branches yet at the same time, I want the lower part of the tree to continue to block my neighbor for privacy. Want to pass a law? Pass one on public property but leave mine trees to my own doing. MYOB


----------



## sgreanbeans (Feb 26, 2012)

capetrees said:


> I'll play Joe Public on this one.
> 
> A law against it? If it's my tree and I want it topped, I'll top it or find someone that will. It's mine and I'll do what I want. Will the tree look ugly? Will it die? Will it get infected or attacked by bugs? I'll take my chances. So have me sign a release of liability to the guy that topped it. I don't care. I want the view, I want the leaves out of my gutters, I want my house to be safe from falling branches yet at the same time, I want the lower part of the tree to continue to block my neighbor for privacy. Want to pass a law? Pass one on public property but leave mine trees to my own doing. MYOB



You cant make it illegal for the homeowner, well ya can, but would never happen, but ya can for the tree service operator. 

My response to Joe

"Joe, you called me, I believe because you wanted a pro, I don't top trees, there are many reasons why, google it, if you are determined to top it instead of pruning it or removing and replacing it, then I am not your guy, you don't want a pro, you want a hack, call this guy, he doesn't have any insurance, experience or teeth. He may hit your deck and that new vinyl fence, but hey, at least you will have your view"


----------



## sgreanbeans (Feb 26, 2012)

You guys can try and justify it all ya want, will never be enough. If you top, your a hack, end of story


----------



## treeman75 (Feb 26, 2012)

sawinredneck said:


> I'm sorry, I am VERY sorry! But I am responsible for a few of the trees topped in Wichita. I didn't want to do it, I tried to tell the HO's there were better ways, better means and we did the best we could, lateral cuts etc. as we went. But yes, I have done a few!
> "I don't care, I want to see the sun!" "I don't care, I'm sick of these leaves in my gutters!" It goes on, and it's ALWAYS a silver Maple! I don't know what people think when they buy a house with a large silver Maple in the back yard, the damn tree isn't going to get smaller!
> I've talked many into crown reductions to minimize the "self pruning" properties of these tree's, but can't sell all of them on it. But I damn sure try!
> As I'm not the one doing the climbing any more, just ground work, I can't really say "yea or nae" on the job. I don't like it, I don't want to do it, but if you can't get the HO to understand the reality that it is going to kill the tree eventually, I can't do much more than that!
> Again, sorry!



If you cant get the HO to understand walk away. Thats what I do I dont want my name on a topped tree.


----------



## treeclimber101 (Feb 26, 2012)

I know this is a guilty pleasure but I love to hack the hell outta Bradford Pears , I mean I will take one of them 30fters and hack her down to 18ft with a smile on my face , waving ang laughing to the passer byers , I mean they are a hateful tree ....


----------



## treeman75 (Feb 26, 2012)

A couple weeks ago I noticed a row of crab apples that where recently topped it was at catholic charities. I stopped and had to find out who did it the women said the lawn guys did it. I tried to explain to her why you dont top trees she said they do them every couple years. I pointed out the decay from where they had been topped before she pretty much said thats how they like them. It made me angry that she wouldnt even listen and I told her the lawn guys are idiots and hacks and they dont know what their doing. Im going to keep an eye out to see whos doing the mowing and tell them they need to stick to mowing!


----------



## treeclimber101 (Feb 26, 2012)

treeman75 said:


> A couple weeks ago I noticed a row of crab apples that where recently topped it was at catholic charities. I stopped and had to find out who did it the women said the lawn guys did it. I tried to explain to her why you dont top trees she said they do them every couple years. I pointed out the decay from where they had been topped before she pretty much said thats how they like them. It made me angry that she wouldnt even listen and I told her the lawn guys are idiots and hacks and they dont know what their doing. Im going to keep an eye out to see whos doing the mowing and tell them they need to stick to mowing!



I have a an old Italian neighbor who has 30year old plums , they should about 30fters , but he table tops them 2xs a years and they are not much taller then 12ft and they have 18" trunks and I gotta admit they are healthy trees , but he started hitting them like that 20 some years ago ....I mean trees react differently in each case ...


----------



## TEXA$TREE (Feb 26, 2012)

*Job Creation at the very least*

At the very very least I have always seen these butchered Trees as an opportunity for me as an employer to secure a work order which could extend for 10yrs (depending on plant response), could be 5 yrs. Message is each tree which has been incorrectly pruned due to ignorance does require acute care, to restore vigor and structural stability. Care can be administered throughout all seasons as we know and during dormancy or the "off season", we can stretch this work out to keep busy and fully restore the good health over time which is on our side in most cases. Furthermore, as mentioned above we can take the opportunity to educate masses of people, through newspaper editorials and public forums, internet blogs and local homeshows, to mention a few. Extra effort could be taken as well if we photograph our personal before and after work and most definetely keep accurate track of all work. Start a referral program which will spread better the "good word", people appreciate documentation I have learned. When I remember how noble of a trade Arboriculture is and the history attached to many Trees, I have no issue with alot of the non profit work I find myself doing with my Tree Care co. Yes a point well understood OP> the shear ignorance some people live their lives with, at the end of the day alot of us are only concerned with the bottomline. Often an entire community can appear wartorn almost, with retarded looking Trees because of the mental viral effect a big $Prune Job$ can have on a human being, meanwhile at the cost of our forefathers hard work and determination through study and association with many Noblemen throughout centuries. Building a city with shade for our horses and clean air and protection from the beating sun. Political parties have always been and is where we need to focus our modern attention, educating men and women alike with Authority. Some people in politics have not the slightest idea of how very very complicated incorporating new eco-systems can be, or even enhancing existing eco systems. Here in lies the ultimate opportunity fellow Arborists, I say this with condfidence as we are embarking on a new and exciting way of life, a life where I see the possibilities for an Arborist are endle$$, and a legal small fortune to made for mankind. Measure what you will when will away your measurement, as GREEN is our way and the world agrees now, that it is time for change, we are among the leaders.


----------



## arborjockey (Feb 26, 2012)

treeclimber101 said:


> I have a an old Italian neighbor who has 30year old plums , they should about 30fters , but he table tops them 2xs a years and they are not much taller then 12ft and they have 18" trunks and I gotta admit they are healthy trees , but he started hitting them like that 20 some years ago ....I mean trees react differently in each case ...



Table topping, crown reduction, crown thinning, lowering the canopy, heading back, let's see...topping, drop crotching, taking the sail out, wind thinning, and ummmm....vista prunning. I do them all per customer request . I let them know the hazards involved and other options they have. Then its up to them its their tree. Don't get me wrong I've turned down trees but a million dollar view supersedes the health of a tree. 
In the above statement i can see a well informed homeowner. What lots of ISA junkys don't understand is old English and ancient Japanese prunning techniques. A pollarded tree in someones eye may look ruined. In fact the tree has been managed like that for 400 years. People don't want trees topped yet in some situations its the best option. Large trees in urban areas sometimes need to be topped or we loose them all together.


----------



## ClimbMIT (Feb 27, 2012)

TEXA$TREE said:


> At the very very least I have always seen these butchered Trees as an opportunity for me as an employer to secure a work order which could extend for 10yrs (depending on plant response), could be 5 yrs. Message is each tree which has been incorrectly pruned due to ignorance does require acute care, to restore vigor and structural stability. Care can be administered throughout all seasons as we know and during dormancy or the "off season", we can stretch this work out to keep busy and fully restore the good health over time which is on our side in most cases. Furthermore, as mentioned above we can take the opportunity to educate masses of people, through newspaper editorials and public forums, internet blogs and local homeshows, to mention a few. Extra effort could be taken as well if we photograph our personal before and after work and most definetely keep accurate track of all work. Start a referral program which will spread better the "good word", people appreciate documentation I have learned. When I remember how noble of a trade Arboriculture is and the history attached to many Trees, I have no issue with alot of the non profit work I find myself doing with my Tree Care co. Yes a point well understood OP> the shear ignorance some people live their lives with, at the end of the day alot of us are only concerned with the bottomline. Often an entire community can appear wartorn almost, with retarded looking Trees because of the mental viral effect a big $Prune Job$ can have on a human being, meanwhile at the cost of our forefathers hard work and determination through study and association with many Noblemen throughout centuries. Building a city with shade for our horses and clean air and protection from the beating sun. Political parties have always been and is where we need to focus our modern attention, educating men and women alike with Authority. Some people in politics have not the slightest idea of how very very complicated incorporating new eco-systems can be, or even enhancing existing eco systems. Here in lies the ultimate opportunity fellow Arborists, I say this with condfidence as we are embarking on a new and exciting way of life, a life where I see the possibilities for an Arborist are endle$$, and a legal small fortune to made for mankind. Measure what you will when will away your measurement, as GREEN is our way and the world agrees now, that it is time for change, we are among the leaders.



Thumbs Up! I think education throughout the United States should be a must. Everyone is going green. What about us? We have a really big part in helping our environment. I know I would love for my great, great, great grand children to see one of the trees that my family and I planted. I don't want to take people's rights away. I just agree with Texas. We have an opportunity to make a profound impact on our ecosystem's future. If we convince just one person that it is unacceptable to top trees, then they in turn may convince another person about how harmful topping is. A Chain reaction starts because of Arborist like us spreading the word. Then in turn we make more $$$ because we are going to be better respected.IMO


----------



## imagineero (Feb 27, 2012)

I'm one of the 'not too fussed either way' ones. I'm licensed, and there are laws against it in aus and like most of the guys here I do educate and discourage customers. But if they're well aware and want to proceed then it might as well be money in my pocket. I'm a strong supporter of stewardship, but to me the big issue as stewards isn't maintenance of old trees but planting of new ones. 

Most of the laws in australia are geared towards retaining old trees with no laws about planting new and nothing to prevent you removing small trees. People talk about the creation and maintenance of urban forest and how it is everyones responsibility, but it isn't shared equally among land owners. If you have a lot of trees on your property, you're stuck with them. If you have none, you dont need to plant any. That's not what I'd call equitable. Due to laws getting tighter all the time, people are removing trees while they're small because they're worried about not being able to remove them in future. It's the equivalent of pursuing a healthcare policy of euthanasing children and spending all the money on senior citizens - no future there. I don't see tomorrows trees being planted, and we have to think in tree time here.

I don't think the topping, poor pruning, poisoning or removal of a single tree is significant, no matter how 'important' of a tree it is. Yeah bad work is counterproductive. It shortens the life of a tree and can creat hazards. But sometimes it is better than complete removal for the reasons that previous posters have mentioned. A big issue in aus at the moment is solar panels. You cant have a lot of trees and solar, which is more eco friendly? Should you top for solar?

Some species respond more favourably than others also. I don't think twice about topping out a row of cypress pines as a hedge. Some of those hedges are up at the 2 story building height or taller. Shouldn't do it, but its common practice.

Shaun


----------



## arborjockey (Feb 27, 2012)

imagineero said:


> I'm one of the 'not too fussed either way' ones. I'm licensed, and there are laws against it in aus and like most of the guys here I do educate and discourage customers. But if they're well aware and want to proceed then it might as well be money in my pocket. I'm a strong supporter of stewardship, but to me the big issue as stewards isn't maintenance of old trees but planting of new ones.
> 
> Most of the laws in australia are geared towards retaining old trees with no laws about planting new and nothing to prevent you removing small trees. People talk about the creation and maintenance of urban forest and how it is everyones responsibility, but it isn't shared equally among land owners. If you have a lot of trees on your property, you're stuck with them. If you have none, you dont need to plant any. That's not what I'd call equitable. Due to laws getting tighter all the time, people are removing trees while they're small because they're worried about not being able to remove them in future. It's the equivalent of pursuing a healthcare policy of euthanasing children and spending all the money on senior citizens - no future there. I don't see tomorrows trees being planted, and we have to think in tree time here.
> 
> ...



Mr.Freeman maybe? I'm sure theirs more then 1 Shuan from Aussie land? Regardless what in the world are you doing in the Blue Mt.s . Great place to visit. I agree completely with replanting. Get new ones going before the old ones die. Older trees are neat but not necessarily environmentally better then young trees(put out less oxygen and clean less air according to a new study. Also when breaking down emit lots of methane) At one time my thinking was, trees that are so old they start to tear themselves apart from core rot, over weighted branches, etc.. and dont have the vigor to help themselves should be cut down. I thought the disease they have could spread into healthy trees. Dont get me wrong Ive cabled and braced some huge historic oak trees back East. They will be around a lot longer but propping grandma up on her crutches only go's so far. The alternative is..... many home owners dont think a TOPPED tree looks that bad but what they do care about is the squirrel, raccoon, and birds that live in the old tree. New way of thinking, If they cant afford to maintain the tree then top it so it doesnt fall apart and start a couple of trees under it to take over. Japan has trees that were wind thrown 200 years ago. They put wood braces under them, cover the holes with tin, and wipe each pruning cut with bee's wax. Not everybody can afford this. I understand leaving a habitat tree in a back yard is a far cry from topping a mature row of historical trees but the LAW IS THE LAW and when put into effect thats it "no topping". If the giant fir trees in the Portland Or. dont get tip pruned 100's of them are going to blow over on houses in the next big storm. All the ISA guys who say dont tip them back are going to #$%^ when they see root balls everywhere. A woods tree that was previously in a stand cant be developed around(taking out all the other trees and put in houses) then be expected to fight the wind on its own. 

You guys who wine about costs havent a clue how crappy it is in other country's. Operation costs are through the roof. 90% of the guys who post here dont have the credentials to be in business in Australia. Australia is so over regulated you cant mow your own lawn without a hair folical, DNA, and fecie specimen on file. my opinion is No O.S.H.A, no oversight, no laws for topping trees. If the trees are that important put them on the registry. We have to get around this without regulations.


----------



## CJ-7 (Feb 27, 2012)

My suggestion to start the education against topping would be to hook up with a newspaper reporter, or better yet, a TV reporter and take them around, with a photographer/videographer and show them the good, the bad and the really ugly. Might even get a bit of free publicity out of it. 

One of the local tree services here has even bought billboard space to rail against Oak blight and even posted the date range to trim Oaks only when dormant. Maybe you could team up with the other Certified guys and pitch hiring only pros. Take the high road.


----------



## swyman (Feb 27, 2012)

CJ-7 said:


> My suggestion to start the education against topping would be to hook up with a newspaper reporter, or better yet, a TV reporter and take them around, with a photographer/videographer and show them the good, the bad and the really ugly. Might even get a bit of free publicity out of it.
> 
> One of the local tree services here has even bought billboard space to rail against Oak blight and even posted the date range to trim Oaks only when dormant. Maybe you could team up with the other Certified guys and pitch hiring only pros. Take the high road.



Like the background, see ya at the dunes!


----------



## peetar (Feb 27, 2012)

treeman75 said:


> A couple weeks ago I noticed a row of crab apples that where recently topped it was at catholic charities. I stopped and had to find out who did it the women said the lawn guys did it. I tried to explain to her why you dont top trees she said they do them every couple years. I pointed out the decay from where they had been topped before she pretty much said thats how they like them. It made me angry that she wouldnt even listen and I told her the lawn guys are idiots and hacks and they dont know what their doing. Im going to keep an eye out to see whos doing the mowing and tell them they need to stick to mowing!



Dude you have a problem.

You stopped in to the Chatholic Charities (you weren't asked to come out), and got angry at the lady and trash talked their lawn sevice. She told you that they do this every couple of years and thats how they like it..... ,so your going to stalk their lawn guys??

If not are able to spread your gosspel without a smile on your face, and be respectful to those that don't want to hear your gosspel, your doing more harm than good.

I'm sure you said you were an ISA certified arborist, and I'm sure the lady you talked to thinks ISA certified arborists are JERKS.


----------



## treeman75 (Feb 27, 2012)

peetar said:


> Dude you have a problem.
> 
> You stopped in to the Chatholic Charities (you weren't asked to come out), and got angry at the lady and trash talked their lawn sevice. She told you that they do this every couple of years and thats how they like it..... ,so your going to stalk their lawn guys??
> 
> ...



I didnt say anything about being certified and I stopped to see if a tree service did it. It is on a busy street so if I see the lawn guys I will stop and talk to them about it, I probably know the owner. And yes I will keep spreading my gosspel!


----------



## ClimbinArbor (Feb 27, 2012)

My company DOES NOT top trees. If we cant get a customer to understand we walk away. Not only is it a crime against nature, but it is professional suicide. If I got caught topping a tree, it would ruin my golf course and parks works.

I feel bad about taking down live trees let alone mutilating one and leaving it to stand.


Still looking for contacts to help me with the legal aspect of this, although im switching over to the political forum.

Keep up the good fight...


----------



## rootzone-pro (Feb 28, 2012)

*Laws against topping??*

I have read through every post in this thread. Happy to see there are a few reasonable people. First - to those who want laws against topping. How about laws as to what color pants you can wear, what your kitchen will look like, how many kids you can have, what your wife can paint on her toe nails? Get real. The home owner is just that - they own the property. Your job is to listen to their request, advise them of the consequences and if they insist on it - do your work or refer them to some one who will. Trees do not have rights, they do not speak and their opinion does not count. They are planted by either bird poop, humans or accident. Those that are in a persons yard are normally planted by that person for a specific reason. If they want it topped, it's their tree. Not your tree, not an ISA tree, not the city's tree. 
Second -I regularly top Leyand Cypress- by the acre. They are used as a windbreak/hedge. Your law would prohibit this (and normal hedgetrimming). I top huge Douglas Firs and Western Red Cedars that are in peoples views because there are covenants on the property that say they have to keep their neighbors view easement clear. Your way would have these people in court constantly, or would your law negate everyone else's rights? Why not, you have already taken their property rights. 
Thirdly - topping might not be your cup of tea but it is better (cleaner) than what happens naturally. It also creates repeat business because it has to be maintained in a large tree to avoid problems later. My customers are made aware of this. They are also told that I recommend removal and replacement over topping. If a tree service in this area did not top trees, the would not last a month. I do not consider myself a lesser human being because I will top a tree. I like my work, I like my trees but I do not worship them.
By the way, we have trees here, plenty of trees, big trees and big, big trees. Some idiots are wanting to bring in the same kind of laws where one has to get permission to remove a tree. Pay money and get a permit. Now what kind of country are we becoming?


----------



## imagineero (Feb 28, 2012)

+0.00025 on the above. 

laws have gone further in australia than just restrioction on topping, some plants are also banned and prohibited form sale. The council can order removal of some invasive species and legally you have to comply. It isn't too hard to see a future where planting of more invasive species is also illegal. I can't see it getting to the point where they regulate the height of cut grass, but who knows?

It's slightly ironic to see tree guys getting so upset about tree topping and wanting to regulate it, considering how anti-regulatory most guys are when it comes to laws regarding how they do their work. Tree climbing is the least regulated of all rope access disciplines, and if similar laws were brought in place in tree climbing as in other roped industries then many common practices would be illegal by workplace safety standards and not covered by insurance. There is a draft in place to bring tree climbing in line with industrial access in australia right now (full body fall arrest harnesses, no more friction hitches etc compulsory) which workplace health and safety is quietly trying to push through. How do you like the law now? 

Shaun


----------



## ROPECLIMBER (Feb 28, 2012)

Lots of cotraversy here San antonio requires a tree maintenace licenses, and you have to sign an affidavid stating that you wont "top" trees also commercial cutters are responsible to legally remove all incurred debris, the term for forest grown trees that have not formed suffecent ancohr roots and reaction wood is "edge trees" and an Arborist involved in the selection of the trees that should be removed or should remain before the construction site ever breaks ground, not after a 1/2 million dollar house is put in would solve alot. The problem with Idustry regulation is that it is not inforced, and if so not by people who understand trees, and with impunnity, trimming trees with out a license here is a $100 written citation, and there is only one arborist in charge of enforcing it. but if my grass is over 12" there are plenty of code compliance guys out to isue a $1200 per day fine that goes against the property taxes of the home owner, but have a hazard tree on a corner lot in a School zone thats OK. Our town is so out dated. While studying for the CA there were only 2-3 tree books all of which were 30-40 years out dated in the San Antonio Public Liabrary, I called the "City Arborist" about this and never recieved a return call.
With the price of the fees to be licensed, and to maintain ISA CA you would think that they (the fee takers) would do public Awareness Commercials , they do inforce new commercial development under tree preservation but not so under residential, just 15 ft above street and 8 feet above public walk, and thats all they enforce, here is a public tree narrow leaf cottonwod in Basalt Colorado that was storm damaged and they wanted to remove it but some didn't want to "Kill it" so they carved it, bushes out in spring and then scalped back not saying this was good, but considering the damage to the tree, and the absorpsion roots with the concrete and pavement the only tree that the remaining uncompacted soil would support is a bush, I think a lot of home owners should have bought a condo,in a high rise then they would be well away from any control over mutilating trees, 
Paul
View attachment 226511
carving View attachment 226514


----------



## ClimbinArbor (Feb 28, 2012)

the last three posts here have been good ones. i personally am very much against being regulated and told what to do. i am just as likely to not do what im told just to feel like im not the governments gimp... however... there are certain laws and regulations i agree with...

let me try this kinda like i do with HOs...

trees are living organisms, just like you, i, the crops and bunny rabbits. now think of trees as energy generating systems. without energy me you the crops and the unny rabbits all die. Trees get energy from leaves and young shoots, the more green mass you cut off a tree the less energy it has. without energy the tree will die. YES some trees at the right time of year have enough energy reserves to recupirate, but the after effects structurally are abhoring.

some people say "oh its just a tree". to which i respond... that tree is a living organism! what makes that life less valuable than that of me you the crops and the bunny rabbits...


Bottom line is this. Its unhealthy, for the tree and the landscape.
We NEED tree laws. Just like we NEED certain other laws. If people are not going to be responsible for themselves and their work then they need to be regulated. We dont let baby rapers walk the streets making money at what they do best... why would we let tree rapers?


----------



## sgreanbeans (Feb 28, 2012)

It never ceases to amaze me. Come to Arboristsite, argue on why its OK to top a tree. We got some champs here.
Hedge rows and wind breaks, trees planted for that purpose only, fine. The oak in the middle of the park, school yard, public place, back yard, font yard, etc, NO. To top a tree, because it is "repeat business" is pretty damn low. You are profiting by creating a public hazard, epic. 
I suppose making people put a fence around their pool is taking away there rights as well then.


----------



## Blakesmaster (Feb 28, 2012)

sgreanbeans said:


> It never ceases to amaze me. Come to Arboristsite, argue on why its OK to top a tree. We got some champs here.
> Hedge rows and wind breaks, trees planted for that purpose only, fine. The oak in the middle of the park, school yard, public place, back yard, font yard, etc, NO. To top a tree, because it is "repeat business" is pretty damn low. You are profiting by creating a public hazard, epic.
> I suppose making people put a fence around their pool is taking away there rights as well then.



Eek, Scott. The last thing we need are more regulations and rules because regulations and rules, moreover, their enforcement, cost money. And the last thing we have is money. I say let the consumer decide, if insurance companies deem a topped tree as risky as an unfenced pool they can force the consumer to deal with it by rate hikes or cancellation. I don't top trees, always find a way to educate the customer, or just walk away, but I don't like the idea of legislating people into compliance.


----------



## sgreanbeans (Feb 28, 2012)

Blakesmaster said:


> Eek, Scott. The last thing we need are more regulations and rules because regulations and rules, moreover, their enforcement, cost money. And the last thing we have is money. I say let the consumer decide, if insurance companies deem a topped tree as risky as an unfenced pool they can force the consumer to deal with it by rate hikes or cancellation. I don't top trees, always find a way to educate the customer, or just walk away, but I don't like the idea of legislating people into compliance.



Word homey
To be honest with ya, I really don't care if there is a law or not, I just want them to stop topping. I see it so much in my area, everywhere ya look, there's another one. After a few years, it becomes a monstrosity, epis turn into large, weakly attached branches that suddenly drop, with out any warning. The silver maples are the worst. Great big SOB's hangin over walks, streets, playgrounds, etc.There are so many that are a complete and total hazard here, it'll make yur head spin. As I said before, I don't think that they should impose a law like that on the HO, but on the tree service operator. A simple "code of ethics" signature along with your license app would probably work, top a tree, loose your licenses. If a HO wants to take on the challenge after he is told, by the professionals, that they cannot do the work or they will loose their license. If that doesn't convince them, change their view, then nothing will, and they can go ahead and try and do it themselves. Most realize that they cant, those that try, will try anyway. The problem then, as stated above, is enforcement. In a relatively small town like mine, it would be easy, big city, not so much. Hell, my city is all about it, but never does anything, as the issue is far, FAR back on the burner. I don't like regs either, some are pretty stupid, IMOA, but I think some are needed. If it is hard for bubba to operate, then maybe he will learn the way of the Jedi. Tree cutters, who know it is wrong, but still do it, IMO should be charged with fraud. They are scamming there clients by acting as a professional and lying about what will happen. To say they are "caring" for the tree when they are topping it..............
Like you and Del....and many others have said, it will only change with education, not only with the HO, but with the mis-informed tree cutters as well. The regs would be nice, would speed the education process up real quick.


----------



## treeclimber101 (Feb 28, 2012)

sgreanbeans said:


> You guys can try and justify it all ya want, will never be enough. If you top, your a hack, end of story



Is hacking half a bradford classify me as a Hacker cause if so then I am a dirty dirty tree hating hacker :hmm3grin2orange: I don't even care I would love to trim every one right to the ground right about mulch line LOL


----------



## Blakesmaster (Feb 28, 2012)

treeclimber101 said:


> Is hacking half a bradford classify me as a Hacker cause if so then I am a dirty dirty tree hating hacker :hmm3grin2orange: I don't even care I would love to trim every one right to the ground right about mulch line LOL



Stuff like this is kinda my point, Scott. I also have no problem hacking half off those freaks of nature, but a mature oak, one must handle differently. Relying on our gov't to decided which tree is cut, and how, is not the right approach. Just sayin.


----------



## abureels4me (Feb 28, 2012)

Now I know what they mean by "tree hugger":hmm3grin2orange: Seriously though, they are just trees. They are not on the verge of extinction. If they were they would outlaw fireplaces. Topped trees are ugly and some but surely not all will die, but to talk about them like they have feelings! Too much.


----------



## rootzone-pro (Feb 28, 2012)

*Tree Rape?*

"We NEED tree laws. Just like we NEED certain other laws. If people are not going to be responsible for themselves and their work then they need to be regulated. We dont let baby rapers walk the streets making money at what they do best... why would we let tree rapers?"

This is one of the reasons why you would not get my support for any regulation. To equate tree topping to the rape of babies is way out there. Yes, trees are living organisms, but they are at the bottom of the food chain. They serve many purposes. e.Coli is also a living organism, but I don't see anyone calling for their protection. How's that for a way out comparison? There has to be a balance and a dash of common sense.


----------



## computeruser (Feb 28, 2012)

Trees are not communal property; they belong to someone and and their owners can do with them as they see fit. Don't forget that, because it is a slippery slope once you start down the other path. 

Educate, don't legislate.


----------



## rootzone-pro (Feb 28, 2012)

sgreanbeans said:


> It never ceases to amaze me. Come to Arboristsite, argue on why its OK to top a tree. We got some champs here.
> Hedge rows and wind breaks, trees planted for that purpose only, fine. The oak in the middle of the park, school yard, public place, back yard, font yard, etc, NO. To top a tree, because it is "repeat business" is pretty damn low. You are profiting by creating a public hazard, epic.
> I suppose making people put a fence around their pool is taking away there rights as well then.



Actually forcing people to put a fence around there pool IS an intrusion on their rights. If they are dumb enough not to, their kids or their neighbors kids are at risk and they would be sued for negligence should something happen. That is the way it should work, not penalize everyone because there are a few dummies out there. 
Now tree topping is not a dummy act. Very seldom is. There are reasons (EVEN THOUGH YOU MAY NOT AGREE) for topping trees. You are talking about Oaks, we never top Oaks. I am talking about evergreens that grow just a little bigger than Oaks. You want a 150' tree next to your house with a blown out top - fine. Just don't ask me and my customers to follow your reasoning. You forget the basics - the tree does not belong to you, the house does not belong to you. The "hazard" you say we are creating is proving to be just the opposite to those customers. We never advise topping but when we do it, we do it right and we maintain it. Yes, I come to Arboristsite and argue why a tree can be topped.


----------



## arborjockey (Feb 28, 2012)

sgreanbeans said:


> You guys can try and justify it all ya want, will never be enough. If you top, your a hack, end of story




And the story continues....
Ive been to IOWA. Stacked some cell towers for a friend of mine in 2005 . We put a big ring of cell antenas on a water tower up in Waterloo too. Spent some time around Christmas up there at the Holiday Inn. Met Big Bad Voodoo Daddy and went to the xmas concert. Little cold. One morning temp with wind chill was -50. I assume the trees grow slow and don't callus well. High winds snap poorly attached branches. After heavy pruning the young shoots that emerge are prone to the heavy winter. They have more water and havent formed rigid tissue yet. They get black spots of dead tissue. The next year the bark is down to the inner wood. The list go's on and on why not to top 90% of the trees there. The issue of "TOPPING" isnt a black and white though. You have to consider where you are and what the specie is. Even in your climate zone you can hard prune a young tree and manage it for years to come if the client see's fit to spend the $. I've seen an a white oak that was topped hard in the 60's thats fine. The shoots were selectively pruned and maintained for the years to come. You cant tell anything has ever happened other then the trunk to canopy ratio is a little off. no open wounds. (Its a huge tree and was done in a control.) You guys who dont think Topping is good your right but you need to define it. Consider the Arborist who prunes the same trees for 60 years. The trees they top look good to me. Bloom every year right on time. They grow just so that they reach the old ladies 2nd strory lanai. She walks out smells the flowers looks at the Mt's. Consider old timers who remember the Columbus day storm in the N.W. back in the 60's. Trees went down everywhere. Which ones? All the big ones. You have to remember earthy people dig the animals in the big trees. Its a fact that large trees harbor twice the animals small one do. By slowly crippling the tree through topping it, you extend its life time. Smaller trees can be established underneath to take over. Conifers have been cut in half and lived 80 more years safely. If you let the same tree just have grow it would have blown over in 20 and went through the house. 


If its a long row of mature street trees, no you cant go through and make a bunch of hard ass cuts. Taking limbs back to the size of your thigh. It doesnt sound like it in my post but I scream at my boss over not topping trees.(he's telling me to do it and I say the tree cant take it). Everyone in the tropics thinks you can cut where ever because it will grow back. It does but like crap. Sometimes they die but its rare.

Here is what i deal with. These is are prized trees in kona and in the middle of down town. I take care of the owners estate. He had these guys come in from the other side of the island. Boy they showed me.


----------



## ClimbMIT (Feb 28, 2012)

Good debate! Some very good points Arborjockey! I am not for laws especially when on private property. Although It does really suck to see a neighbor butcher a 40 year old live oak. I don't like to label people but if I was to define a hack this woul be my definition:

Hack- man or woman with a saw that cuts trees for profit: with no knowledge of tree biology, and/or regard for tree health whom cuts or " hacks " limbs off of trees without consideration of long term effects, possible insect infestation, rot, and other diseases caused from poor pruning techniques due to lack of knowledge or training.


----------



## arborjockey (Feb 29, 2012)

I agree. Topping is topping but a hack has no reguard. Hard pruning a mature tree is going to kill it no doubt. It may be 25 to 50 years. When the homeowner says that sounds good lower the canopy and let it die. I lower the canopy. The idiot who said the tree is as important as me is completely lost. They don 't have ENERGY or a spirit. Here watch this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_JPcBwYGmo&feature=related

this is more my style http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BO0Hpo_6Uc


----------



## treeman75 (Feb 29, 2012)

View attachment 226739
View attachment 226740


----------



## swyman (Feb 29, 2012)

treeman75 said:


> View attachment 226739
> View attachment 226740



That's rude!


----------



## arborjockey (Feb 29, 2012)

opcorn: 



Downtown Kona. These Kiawe trees get hit every 2 years.


----------



## TEXA$TREE (Feb 29, 2012)

abureels4me said:


> Now I know what they mean by "tree hugger":hmm3grin2orange: Seriously though, they are just trees. They are not on the verge of extinction. If they were they would outlaw fireplaces. Topped trees are ugly and some but surely not all will die, but to talk about them like they have feelings! Too much.


 According to my observation trees are in fact sharing space here and therefore do have "tree" feelings, IMO. For instance, when we park our cars repeatedly in the root zone, soon enough we will see the result in crown dieback yah?, as Arborists we recognize the signs and this we know. If the wind is blowing hard against the tree, it bends. These are unique tree feelings. Simple and true, and to exact the problem as a whole, when you say they are not extinct yes this is true and correct. But think of some inner city eco systems that rely on shrubs and grass, its sick. Yes in some cities healthy trees are becoming extinct. On occasion we have had to remove one or two trees from a six or seven group, usually some other tree will show signs of stress, this I believe is a weeping feeling. Either the sun is too bright or the wind is bending as it blows directly in and onto the wood, agreeing as professionals is a good start, bringing this united front to a political ring is a stepping stone we will need to move toward. One group can achieve a tremendous momentum


----------



## treeman75 (Feb 29, 2012)

arborjockey said:


> opcorn:
> 
> 
> 
> Downtown Kona. These Kiawe trees get hit every 2 years.



Nice hat rack!


----------



## swyman (Feb 29, 2012)

Watch the movie Avatar, it explains it all:msp_biggrin:


----------



## rootzone-pro (Feb 29, 2012)

sgreanbeans said:


> Word homey
> Tree cutters, who know it is wrong, but still do it, IMO should be charged with fraud. They are scamming there clients by acting as a professional and lying about what will happen. To say they are "caring" for the tree when they are topping it..............
> Like you and Del....and many others have said, it will only change with education, not only with the HO, but with the mis-informed tree cutters as well. The regs would be nice, would speed the education process up real quick.



It's a bit of a stretch to paint everyone with the same brush. You 'know' and others are committing fraud.? Every situation is different and unless you know what the details are you should keep your mouth shut about that case! Not everyone goes out and tops every tree. My points are -
A: Anti-topping laws without the possibilty of exceptions will be deemed unconstitutional, so why bother. I don't want envirogeeks running my world and trees don't vote. 
B: Funny thing happened on the way to the Forum. While dropping a 170' Spruce into the river today, I had a discussion with the Forestry (you know USDA) guy about this discussion and we are in complete agreement on all aspects. Topping in general is bad, but there are a lot of instances where it is OK and sometimes even called for, and the trees can be maintained. So I feel good. 
C. If a top blows out of a tree, you don't believe in cleaning up that top and allowing the tree to carry on living? You would rather take it out? This is topping, my friend. We ensure that only one top continues, rather than several, and that the top is on the side of the tree away from the house. Personally I think that is a heck of a lot smarter than most of the alternatives.
D: Some people have their heads stuffed so far up you know where that they would rather cry 'Bad Topper" or 'Whack Job' or all the other epithets used than actually practice tree husbandry. Look up those words, the meaning might surprise you.


----------



## TEXA$TREE (Feb 29, 2012)

*Trees do not vote*



rootzone-pro said:


> It's a bit of a stretch to paint everyone with the same brush. You 'know' and others are committing fraud.? Every situation is different and unless you know what the details are you should keep your mouth shut about that case! Not everyone goes out and tops every tree. My points are -
> A: Anti-topping laws without the possibilty of exceptions will be deemed unconstitutional, so why bother. I don't want envirogeeks running my world and trees don't vote.
> B: Funny thing happened on the way to the Forum. While dropping a 170' Spruce into the river today, I had a discussion with the Forestry (you know USDA) guy about this discussion and we are in complete agreement on all aspects. Topping in general is bad, but there are a lot of instances where it is OK and sometimes even called for, and the trees can be maintained. So I feel good.
> C. If a top blows out of a tree, you don't believe in cleaning up that top and allowing the tree to carry on living? You would rather take it out? This is topping, my friend. We ensure that only one top continues, rather than several, and that the top is on the side of the tree away from the house. Personally I think that is a heck of a lot smarter than most of the alternatives.
> D: Some people have their heads stuffed so far up you know where that they would rather cry 'Bad Topper" or 'Whack Job' or all the other epithets used than actually practice tree husbandry. Look up those words, the meaning might surprise you.



_ everytime we touch a tree, the potential is there for more._


----------



## arborjockey (Mar 1, 2012)

TEXA$TREE said:


> According to my observation trees are in fact sharing space here and therefore do have "tree" feelings, IMO. For instance, when we park our cars repeatedly in the root zone, soon enough we will see the result in crown dieback yah?, as Arborists we recognize the signs and this we know. If the wind is blowing hard against the tree, it bends. These are unique tree feelings. Simple and true, and to exact the problem as a whole, when you say they are not extinct yes this is true and correct. But think of some inner city eco systems that rely on shrubs and grass, its sick. Yes in some cities healthy trees are becoming extinct. On occasion we have had to remove one or two trees from a six or seven group, usually some other tree will show signs of stress, this I believe is a weeping feeling. Either the sun is too bright or the wind is bending as it blows directly in and onto the wood, agreeing as professionals is a good start, bringing this united front to a political ring is a stepping stone we will need to move toward. One group can achieve a tremendous momentum



What are you talking about? I feel a movement coming on alright. A conscious subjective experience of emotion is not the same as a natural reaction to mechanical damage. :confused2:


----------



## sgreanbeans (Mar 1, 2012)

rootzone-pro said:


> It's a bit of a stretch to paint everyone with the same brush. You 'know' and others are committing fraud.? Every situation is different and unless you know what the details are you should keep your mouth shut about that case! Not everyone goes out and tops every tree. My points are -
> A: Anti-topping laws without the possibilty of exceptions will be deemed unconstitutional, so why bother. I don't want envirogeeks running my world and trees don't vote.
> B: Funny thing happened on the way to the Forum. While dropping a 170' Spruce into the river today, I had a discussion with the Forestry (you know USDA) guy about this discussion and we are in complete agreement on all aspects. Topping in general is bad, but there are a lot of instances where it is OK and sometimes even called for, and the trees can be maintained. So I feel good.
> C. If a top blows out of a tree, you don't believe in cleaning up that top and allowing the tree to carry on living? You would rather take it out? This is topping, my friend. We ensure that only one top continues, rather than several, and that the top is on the side of the tree away from the house. Personally I think that is a heck of a lot smarter than most of the alternatives.
> D: Some people have their heads stuffed so far up you know where that they would rather cry 'Bad Topper" or 'Whack Job' or all the other epithets used than actually practice tree husbandry. Look up those words, the meaning might surprise you.



Yeah thanks for the lesson,LOL As if it where needed. No matter how you want to justify it, its just an excuse, sure there are some situations that call for it, never said there wasn't. Again, I'm not talking about trees out in a forest or a tree that had the top blown out. To go to a perfectly healthy tree in the middle of someones front yard and top it, for the purpose of .....topping it, because it is growing, to say that there are circumstances that justify that!, well it is what it is, wrong. Now I will give you some homework, get me what you said in writing, where its is a proven Arboriculture practice, where there is any benefit to the tree. I would like to see it. Then go to Google Images, type tree topping, is that the work that you think is mislabeled! If it is, then we know you. If it isn't, then why are you talking. Ask around, I am the last person to keep my mouth shut on this. When getting paid to care for a tree, and then you top it, while claiming you are caring, that is fraud. I wont go into the law, I am not a lawyer, but mine did, and anyone who does it, is liable. Fact.


----------



## tree md (Mar 1, 2012)

I really would not be in support of any legislation that tells a property owner what they can or cannot do with the vegetation growing on their own property. I wouldn't be against legislation that makes the person doing the topping explain what they are doing to the tree or even be educated to the facts before they go selling "tree care"...

That being said, I have been hitting a lot of neighborhoods lately and seeing a ####load of freshly topped trees... I just have to wonder, what kind of an idiot HO would believe that these trees look good or that this is good work?


----------



## juststumps (Mar 1, 2012)

ClimbinArbor said:


> the last three posts here have been good ones. i personally am very much against being regulated and told what to do. i am just as likely to not do what im told just to feel like im not the governments gimp... however... there are certain laws and regulations i agree with...
> 
> let me try this kinda like i do with HOs...
> 
> ...



I just ate some living organisms this week . CHICKEN , BEEF , PORK , ONIONS , POTATOES , CARROTS , CELERY , BROCCOLI , and BEER . Haven't had BUNNY in a few years , but it was good . Tastes like trees .


----------



## ClimbMIT (Mar 1, 2012)

tree md said:


> I really would not be in support of any legislation that tells a property owner what they can or cannot do with the vegetation growing on their own property. I wouldn't be against legislation that makes the person doing the topping explain what they are doing to the tree or even be educated to the facts before they go selling "tree care"...
> 
> That being said, I have been hitting a lot of neighborhoods lately and seeing a ####load of freshly topped trees... I just have to wonder, what kind of an idiot HO would believe that these trees look good or that this is good work?



I agree, that sounds like working toward a solution. The pictures above look like plain stupidity. Maybe weekend warrior or the kid next door with a chainsaw? The only solution for me is stop by introduce myself. Explain to the HO how this will hurt their tree. Some or most won't care! Then I just move on. I Dont let them ruin my day If we get one HO every now and then that will take the time to listen and do it right. Then we are one more step closer to our goal. It's easy to get upset and loose your cool when you care about trees.I know most of us do care. If i decide to not let my emotions take control I can leave their feeling good. I planted a seed and that's a good start. Just my thoughts


----------



## juststumps (Mar 1, 2012)

tree md said:


> I really would not be in support of any legislation that tells a property owner what they can or cannot do with the vegetation growing on their own property. I wouldn't be against legislation that makes the person doing the topping explain what they are doing to the tree or even be educated to the facts before they go selling "tree care"...
> 
> That being said, I have been hitting a lot of neighborhoods lately and seeing a ####load of freshly topped trees... I just have to wonder, what kind of an idiot HO would believe that these trees look good or that this is good work?



The first 3 pics ? Was the tree topped ? Or was it dead wooded back to a green shoot ????

By the looks of the big stubs , . Looks to me , it was cut back to a live sucker . 

Last pic looks like a POLLARD , just saying.


----------



## banshee67 (Mar 1, 2012)

there should be laws against cutting down trees period
at least with topping they have a fighting chance to survive a bit longer and live a more fulfilling life
when you do a full removal, you permanently remove one of god's creations from this earth, think about that next time you go to sink the teeth of one of your death machines into a beautiful living being.


----------



## sgreanbeans (Mar 2, 2012)

tree md said:


> I really would not be in support of any legislation that tells a property owner what they can or cannot do with the vegetation growing on their own property. I wouldn't be against legislation that makes the person doing the topping explain what they are doing to the tree or even be educated to the facts before they go selling "tree care"...
> 
> That being said, I have been hitting a lot of neighborhoods lately and seeing a ####load of freshly topped trees... I just have to wonder, what kind of an idiot HO would believe that these trees look good or that this is good work?



Amen Larry, you can avoid the HO altogether by restricting the operator, make them sign the Code of Ethics when he get his business license, he tops, he looses his license, simple. It boggles me too, why you would want something like that in your yard.

Those trees were all topped. A tree that has been topped, then the epis cleared all the time is not pollarding, it is bad tree work. I just seen a local hacks website, he has "certified" on his add, certified in what? But then also has "Professional Topping" and "Expert Tree Care" in the same add, cracks me up! Then has a pic of him in a bucket, no PPE, has like a 066 or bigger with like a 4' bar, cutting a 12" spar! AWESOME!


----------



## ClimbMIT (Mar 2, 2012)

Sounds like that should have been pic of the year! LMAO


----------



## ClimbinArbor (Mar 2, 2012)

We all agree that topping is wrong, and yes there are exceptions (utility, storm damage and pollarding to name a few).

But the subject of legislation seems to be split down the middle. Even the people saying they are against legislation agree that something needs to be done.... But What?
How can I personally educate 1 million HOs? Ive tried HO seminars, but the ones that attend are the ones that are allready well enough into arboriculture that they knew better.
How can I personally educate tree trimmers? Ive tried seminars for tree workers, again the ones that want to learn are allready ahead of the curve.

Every door that I knock on gets information about the care of their trees, and that helps. I cant count the number of homeowners Ive educated. But ultimatly it is the tree companies owners and trimmers that are responsible for the work they perform, and Ive only helped ONE tree company! They just wont listen! So what do I do?

Ive said several times in this thread that the thought of taking legislative steps churns my stomach, but im running out of options.

AND it DOES seem to be working in some locations, when done right.....


----------



## treeclimber101 (Mar 2, 2012)

treeman75 said:


> Nice hat rack!



Hatracks , at this point I think there just bumpers so no one backs into the building or to hang MISSING DOG AND CAT POSTERS


----------



## RavenFeather (Mar 2, 2012)

*Up north*

Up in my hometown, there's a law preventing municipal trees from being topped.
Chapter 3.04.08 Urban Forestry Program Law #13

"Tree topping. It shall be unlawful as a normal practice for any person, firm, or City department to top any street tree, park tree, or other tree on public property. "Topping" is defined as the severe cutting back of limbs to stubs larger than three inches in diameter within the tree's crown to such a degree so as to remove the normal canopy and disfigure the tree. Trees severely damaged by storms or other causes, or certain trees under utility wires or other obstructions where other pruning practices are impractical may be exempted from this ordinance at the determination of the City Tree Advisory Committee."


----------



## rootzone-pro (Mar 2, 2012)

RavenFeather said:


> Up in my hometown, there's a law preventing municipal trees from being topped.
> Chapter 3.04.08 Urban Forestry Program Law #13
> 
> "Tree topping. It shall be unlawful as a normal practice for any person, firm, or City department to top any street tree, park tree, or other tree on public property. "Topping" is defined as the severe cutting back of limbs to stubs larger than three inches in diameter within the tree's crown to such a degree so as to remove the normal canopy and disfigure the tree. Trees severely damaged by storms or other causes, or certain trees under utility wires or other obstructions where other pruning practices are impractical may be exempted from this ordinance at the determination of the City Tree Advisory Committee."



I notice it refers to street trees, park trees and trees on public property. Does not refer to trees on private property. I am OK with that even though that is the start of a very slippery slope/


----------



## arborjockey (Mar 5, 2012)

*what about the cowboys*

Are we actually asking our government to step in and regulate us. That is the stupidest thing I've heard in a looooong time. Everything they touch increases year after year. The tape gets thicker to cut through to get the job done. Soon the only work done will be a select few if not one big company and more then likely over 15-25 years the city will be doing all their own trees. The $ good and then they wont have to deal with us. :bang:
The county (who does all park and rec. That's from the beaches to city streets) is the biggest butcher in town. They hat rack exclusively. They have ruined more trees then katrina and now I look for them to regulate? Who sets the standard? The local union thugs ISA. Take a joke of a test then pay your union dews. Ok your qualified. The ISA is a good starting point for climbers. Its also a great place to reseach but don't get caught up with their political agenda of making everyone a certified arborist. I can get a diploma off the e-net all day long doesn't mean im qualified. 

If the city has trees to protect put them on the registry and protect them. Your not loosing work to hacks your loosing work because your roots in the community aren't deep enough or you can't sell the job. Sell yourself and the good job you do. The $ is the last thing. 

Every out of work contractor with a 1/2 ton truck and a craftsmen saw is a tree guy now days. If he gets your job tell the customer good luck with that. You get what you pay for. 

The oldest consulting arborist in Oregon has passed away. He would pull up on a job and start yelling at idiot butchers. Man up stop by in the middle of the job and tell them it looks like #### and their hacks. 

Scroll back through this thread and look at the 1st photo I put of a racked tree. Im going this morning to meet with the owner of the hotel. Then im calling that tree service to let them know I refused the work like 5 other company's did. Why would he drive in from 2 countys away to ruin our city trees. Big Hawaiian or not im gunna chew his ass out.


----------



## ClimbinArbor (Mar 5, 2012)

arborjockey said:


> Are we actually asking our government to step in and regulate us. That is the stupidest thing I've heard in a looooong time.
> 
> Who sets the standard? The local union thugs ISA. Take a joke of a test then pay your union dews. Ok your qualified.
> 
> The oldest consulting arborist in Oregon has passed away. He would pull up on a job and start yelling at idiot butchers. Man up stop by in the middle of the job and tell them it looks like #### and their hacks.



I butchered your quote a lil...

Amen to all three...


While I have agreed the whole time here that having a government intervention is an appalling idea, there must be a way to stop the hacks without intervening further into our rights. Why cant we just take a few ANSI regs, test over them, you pass you get a license. have a few volunteer arborists out doing license and work checks. If you hack, you lose your license. If you dont have a license its a $500 fine. i think a one time warning would be in order...


----------



## rootzone-pro (Mar 5, 2012)

arborjockey said:


> Are we actually asking our government to step in and regulate us. That is the stupidest thing I've heard in a looooong time. Everything they touch increases year after year. The tape gets thicker to cut through to get the job done. Soon the only work done will be a select few if not one big company and more then likely over 15-25 years the city will be doing all their own trees. The $ good and then they wont have to deal with us. :bang:
> The county (who does all park and rec. That's from the beaches to city streets) is the biggest butcher in town. They hat rack exclusively. They have ruined more trees then katrina and now I look for them to regulate? Who sets the standard? The local union thugs ISA. Take a joke of a test then pay your union dews. Ok you're qualified. The ISA is a good starting point for climbers. Its also a great place to research but don't get caught up with their political agenda of making everyone a certified arborist.
> 
> I also butchered the quote a bit. Who sets the standard is the key. Is it the Huggers or the Hackers? I consider myself neither. Trees are a renewable resource, not gods to worship. I drove by an orchard yesterday that had been freshly pruned. I thought to myself that half the people on here would be in tears if they saw a commercial fruit operation. I can hear it now - Topping! Hacking! Butchers! This proves that even severe pruning can do good. They sure produce fruit.
> If you saw a Eucalyptus we worked on you would probably have a fit. The tree was 95% dead with a capital D. The woman loved the tree and did not want us to take it out, she wanted us to fix it. Her late husband had planted it and he loved the tree. It was either going to stay there and complete the dying process or we had to 'fix it'. I tried to explain, but no deal. I proposed to her that we would cut away all the dead and obviously dying areas and see what happens. We could always complete the removal later. She agreed, that was nearly two years ago. I drive by that tree often and enjoy seeing it thrive and slowly produce more and more healthy foliage. Now if I was some know it all, obnoxious arborist who wanted to run everyone else's business, I would have insisted the tree come down, or it be left to die. I would have had one sad old lady to whom I did not offer my best effort and a dead tree. Sorry guys, I like my way better and will do all I can to ensure that you NEVER get the power over private trees that you want.


----------



## arborjockey (Mar 5, 2012)

I agree to chase down the offender. On thebig island we have the outdoor circle which is a organization who donate time and resources to help make the island a better place with trees and plants. With a huge ficus tree in question The president went out to see what type of prune would go on. The ISA Arborist said he would be taking 25% out. Blah blah blah. As soon as the president left the owner said " its my tree rack it " and it got racked. Terrible but what do you do. Who do you get to inforce it. 85% of the companies here top trees. Those monkeys will go ape#### if you try to pass a law of no topping of all trees. Pick some to save as historical and then call it good. You try to save all the trees and your going to starve good tree guys. 



RavenFeather said:


> "Topping" is defined as the severe cutting back of limbs to stubs larger than three inches in diameter within the tree's crown to such a degree so as to remove the normal canopy and disfigure the tree. Trees severely damaged by storms or other causes, or certain trees under utility wires or other obstructions where other pruning practices are impractical may be exempted from this ordinance at the determination of the City Tree Advisory Committee."



This is a good start for a city with mature trees but there's so much gray area. The above statement can be torn to pieces in court by a veteran consulting arborist. Send this to homeowners and businesses(that own the property). Then try to fine them and see what happens.

Did the estimate for uncle billy the land barren and he wanted to know why it was so high. I told him the crown restoration would take 15-17 years.


----------



## sgreanbeans (Mar 5, 2012)

*Its all clear to me now*

People who top trees are not good tree guys. This is getting comical. The ISA a union!, are u for real? lol...wow.
Wheres my card and bennies?


----------



## sgreanbeans (Mar 5, 2012)

rootzone-pro said:


> arborjockey said:
> 
> 
> > Are we actually asking our government to step in and regulate us. That is the stupidest thing I've heard in a looooong time. Everything they touch increases year after year. The tape gets thicker to cut through to get the job done. Soon the only work done will be a select few if not one big company and more then likely over 15-25 years the city will be doing all their own trees. The $ good and then they wont have to deal with us. :bang:
> ...


----------



## rootzone-pro (Mar 5, 2012)

*1984*

I guess the thought police are out - my replies to posts get approved by a moderator all of a sudden. Good way to keep your own philosophy on top.:msp_wink:


----------



## arborjockey (Mar 5, 2012)

sgreanbeans said:


> People who top trees are not good tree guys. This is getting comical. The ISA a union!, are u for real? lol...wow.
> Wheres my card and bennies?



I didtnt say that people who " Hat rack" healthy trees, on a routine basis are good tree guys. I said you would run good tree guys out of town. Lots of good tree guys dont work in certain areas because of the paperwork and costs. Yet yuppies with deep pockets and fancy equipment pay the fees but miss the boat on proper pruning.

The ISA issues a card with your membership. Its official with your own #. That # gets you back door access at the website. Your discounts on books, dvd's, and tests are your BENNIES. Put that Big sticker on your truck to advertise that your CERTIFIED. But know this if my last boss ran one ad in the paper his phone would melt from the influx of calls. Thats what doing knowledgeable tree work, in the same area, on the same trees for 40 years will do. No certification needed. Trees (firs, pines, birchs etc) that have been so called topped, have been now managed for over 85 years. His grandfather topped them because the root system had been compromised or they were just to big for the area. Lots and lots of factors. They certainly would have either blown over or apart by now. AGAIN when trees have heart/core rot the cables, bracing,etc all work to a certain degree but at a certain point the overhead mass has to be removed. The tree will die but having a 7' x 50' trunk thats full of habitat in your yard for 25-100 years is an option. Its not a black and white issue. Go after the offender but know what your talking about.:msp_wink:


----------



## rootzone-pro (Mar 5, 2012)

arborjockey said:


> I didtnt say that people who " Hat rack" healthy trees, on a routine basis are good tree guys. I said you would run good tree guys out of town. Lots of good tree guys dont work in certain areas because of the paperwork and costs. Yet yuppies with deep pockets and fancy equipment pay the fees but miss the boat on proper pruning.
> 
> The ISA issues a card with your membership. Its official with your own #. That # gets you back door access at the website. Your discounts on books, dvd's, and tests are your BENNIES. Put that Big sticker on your truck to advertise that your CERTIFIED. But know this if my last boss ran one ad in the paper his phone would melt from the influx of calls. Thats what doing knowledgeable tree work, in the same area, on the same trees for 40 years will do. No certification needed. Trees (firs, pines, birchs etc) that have been so called topped, have been now managed for over 85 years. His grandfather topped them because the root system had been compromised or they were just to big for the area. Lots and lots of factors. They certainly would have either blown over or apart by now. AGAIN when trees have heart/core rot the cables, bracing,etc all work to a certain degree but at a certain point the overhead mass has to be removed. The tree will die but having a 7' x 50' trunk thats full of habitat in your yard for 25-100 years is an option. Its not a black and white issue. Go after the offender but know what your talking about.:msp_wink:



I am not going to select from this post to quote because it all deserves to be said twice at least. It appears that the further west you get, the more real the tree guys are - and Hawaii is waaay west:msp_biggrin:


----------



## arborjockey (Mar 5, 2012)

Little off the top. say 25% N.W. style:msp_scared: 
pic care of alternative forest operations .....Alternative Forest Operations 

Thanks Mr. kemmler!:msp_wink:

For those who dont know these guys are the real deal.



View attachment 227537


----------



## mattfr12 (Mar 5, 2012)

rootzone-pro said:


> I am not going to select from this post to quote because it all deserves to be said twice at least. It appears that the further west you get, the more real the tree guys are - and Hawaii is waaay west:msp_biggrin:



Three times. People that see pushing for more regulations in there business might end up putting themselves out of business. 90% of the things that happen in the world revolve around money. I'm not for topping trees but when the regulations start the question you have to ask yourself is, are your pockets deep enough to handle the profit the government is gonna expect to gain from this. 

It's already harder than hell to not loose half your money in taxes and other fees. 100 grand is more like 60 once you get clubbed and bent over a few times by state and federal. I pay taxes twice on every dollar I get to spend. I get taxed for my company earning it then when you pay yourself a wage you get hit again. It's stupid.

Think about selling a Car that changes hands four or five times. Sooner or later the government almost gets the value of the car.


----------



## rootzone-pro (Mar 5, 2012)

arborjockey said:


> Little off the top. say 25% N.W. style:msp_scared:
> pic care of alternative forest operations .....Alternative Forest Operations
> 
> Thanks Mr. kemmler!:msp_wink:
> ...



Hey man, you must be from the NW. I knew there was something right about you! Here is 100% off the top. 170' Spruce 10'6" DBH. co-dom stem had already hit house. 

View attachment 227548


----------



## VA-Sawyer (Mar 5, 2012)

mattfr12 said:


> I pay taxes twice on every dollar I get to spend. I get taxed for my company earning it then when you pay yourself a wage you get hit again. It's stupid.



Sorry, but that isn't true. The company pays taxes on the profit it makes, not the gross income. The wages you pay to yourself are deducted from the profit as an expense. YOU pay taxes on those wages as income to you. It only gets taxed once, but it still hurts.
Rick


----------



## arborjockey (Mar 6, 2012)

rootzone-pro said:


> Hey man, you must be from the NW. I knew there was something right about you! Here is 100% off the top. 170' Spruce 10'6" DBH. co-dom stem had already hit house.
> 
> View attachment 227548



big ol tree. where was the house? oh maybe the house boat? looks like salmon habitat better call fish and game have them give an assessment. see if they cant get you a removal permit.


----------



## rootzone-pro (Mar 6, 2012)

arborjockey said:


> big ol tree. where was the house? oh maybe the house boat? looks like salmon habitat better call fish and game have them give an assessment. see if they cant get you a removal permit.



Fish and Game and Forestry were there - wanted the tree in the river. Picture was taken from house 60' away. Even had permission from County.


----------



## jrider (Mar 6, 2012)

Yeah, more laws on what I am allowed to do on the property I own and pay taxes on, just what is needed. 

Trace Adkins song comes to mind "This is my piece of dirt, your rambling don't bother me"...can't think of the title at the moment though.


----------

