# What to do - topping???



## Canyonbc (Dec 5, 2007)

What do you do in this situation. 

So today we are doing a removal on a English Walnut, and two small Oaks...good day every, and the neighbor show up hey, can you look at my tree...i need some work done. 

I love when this happens. 

So we walk over and he has a Maple (50 ft tall or so), he asks me to top it, at 15 ft....my stomach turns as i here him say. So i explain topping, what it does why its bad etc. 

So i go ok, why do you want it topped so bad...well its getting to tall and leaning towards the house. 

So this time, i draw him a picture to show it what topping does. 

He doesnt care what i am saying, just wants a price. 

I tell him sorry i dont top, wont top, but best of luck...


Did i do the right thing??? 

I hate passing up work...but i dont top. 

Canyon

Looking for your opinion. 

A. Did i do the right thing?
B. What would you have done???


----------



## BC WetCoast (Dec 5, 2007)

Follow your principles and personal integrity. 

You did well, young butterfly.


----------



## kennertree (Dec 5, 2007)

You could have offered him some correct pruning like reducing limbs prone to failure or made some reduction cuts to reduce weight on the side towards the house. Telling him you wouldnt top it is a good thing.


----------



## Canyonbc (Dec 5, 2007)

kennertree said:


> You could have offered him some correct pruning like reducing limbs prone to failure or made some reduction cuts to reduce weight on the side towards the house. Telling him you wouldnt top it is a good thing.



Ya i offered select pruning...

Canopy Reduction....

To be honest, looking at the tree...it could use a little pruning a few branches but to what he was thinking...i think he was out there..


----------



## Canyonbc (Dec 5, 2007)

Thanks for the responses....

I am 19, and dam it really need the money, but some things i just wont do. Thanks for reassuring that i am did the right thing. 

Canyon


----------



## treeseer (Dec 5, 2007)

Having some info with you like the ISA brochures on pruning and topping can save you a lot of time and trouble.


----------



## ATH (Dec 5, 2007)

Canyonbc said:


> Thanks for the responses....
> 
> I am 19, and dam it really need the money, but some things i just wont do. Thanks for reassuring that i am did the right thing.
> 
> Canyon


Here is another vote that you did the right thing  

The important question to ask yourself (from a business management standpoint):
Would you rather have a few dollars now our would you rather have the career-long opportunity to command a higher price that comes with a history of professional work?

Act like a hack, and people will always be willing to pay you accordingly - and you will be bidding against other hacks. If you wanted to go that route, operators in that 'market' are always willing to cut more corners than you are, so those guys will top trees for a lower price than you can even imagine. Set yourself apart with quality, and you'll find that you never really have to bid against those low-ballers.


----------



## clearance (Dec 5, 2007)

ATH said:


> Here is another vote that you did the right thing
> 
> The important question to ask yourself (from a business management standpoint):
> Would you rather have a few dollars now our would you rather have the career-long opportunity to command a higher price that comes with a history of professional work?
> ...



Here we go, name calling again. Hey ATH, I top trees under/beside major transmission lines because the people that own the property the r.o.w. is on want them to stay. Its top them or remove them, no other choice. So, I am a hack huh? Same trees get topped every few years, still alive, still growing. Nothing wrong with topping trees for an excellent reason like this, topping trees for a view....I try to talk people into windows. Topping trees cause people are scared...I try to talk them into spiral pruning to reduce windsail. Time and a place for topping trees, think about it before you label.


----------



## ropensaddle (Dec 5, 2007)

clearance said:


> Here we go, name calling again. Hey ATH, I top trees under/beside major transmission lines because the people that own the property the r.o.w. is on want them to stay. Its top them or remove them, no other choice. So, I am a hack huh? Same trees get topped every few years, still alive, still growing. Nothing wrong with topping trees for an excellent reason like this, topping trees for a view....I try to talk people into windows. Topping trees cause people are scared...I try to talk them into spiral pruning to reduce windsail. Time and a place for topping trees, think about it before you label.



No clearance that is not a hack you have no choice in line
clearance and I know you would rather cut those trees.


----------



## Canyonbc (Dec 5, 2007)

treeseer said:


> Having some info with you like the ISA brochures on pruning and topping can save you a lot of time and trouble.



Does ISA, have brochures....

And if so does any one have the URL to share???

I do agree, definetly save a lot of time.


----------



## Canyonbc (Dec 5, 2007)

ATH said:


> Here is another vote that you did the right thing
> 
> The important question to ask yourself (from a business management standpoint):
> Would you rather have a few dollars now our would you rather have the career-long opportunity to command a higher price that comes with a history of professional work?
> ...



That is what pushed me to running away...not literally but turning it down. I dont want to be a hack, and any ways...in the long run your gonna make more money doing it the long way.


----------



## Ekka (Dec 5, 2007)

Canyonbc

Now for scientific and psychological studies could you keep an eye on that tree and see if anyone else whacks it. And if they spur it to whack it.

Also, is there any protection orders on the tree, in other words repercussions for whacking it? Coz if there's no financial loss to the whacker then he too will like your decision.


----------



## reachtreeservi (Dec 5, 2007)

I hate to top a tree. If the customer asks me to top, I explain why it's bad, show them some brochures on pruning and topping , ask if they have Internet access and tell them the ISA URL.

Then if they still want it done, I top it.
3 reasons

1) It's their tree, they own it and can do what they want with it.
2) If I don't, they will still get someone to do it. You can not talk them out of it. 
3) The two main rules of business: (a) satisfy the customer (b) never turn down work unless there are safety concerns or there's no profit.

If someone wants to call me a hack, fine. 
But that doesn't change the reality of everyday tree work.

Everyone has to do what they think is right. 
Canyonbc, If you think not topping is the thing to do, I support your decision.
Personally, Once I inform the customer, then it's their tree and their choice.


----------



## Mitchell (Dec 6, 2007)

*lost an hour of my life today*

Ha ha I to lost an hour of my life talking to some Home owners who wanted their big leaf maple topped. I think I might have brought them around. 
things are slowing down for myself so I could use the work. However, after going around in circles over the same subject, like you did, chances are the folks would be a pita to work for anyways.


----------



## ATH (Dec 6, 2007)

Clearance,
Good point on the utility work. I was too narrowly focused in my reply. No offense intended!

I would blame that 'hacking' on the homeowner (who refueses to allow their tree to be removed) more than on the contractor -- assuming the contractor (or utility agency) informed the homeowner that topping isn't a great long-term solution.

However, I would still say you need to determine what market you are in/want to be in and stick with that. Personally, I have no interest in utility work. I know there is plenty of legitimate money to be had there, but I'll let somebody else chase that prize. No, I won't label you the hack in that situation...you are just the guy unfortunate enough to be stuck between a rock and hardplace.

Not that it has any bearing here, but just for kicks, the guys doing utility work around here for the local co-op just so happen to be really 'good' at topping when they do yard trees-no lines involved.

On the other hand, the crews working for the larger electric utility in the area do good work (which unfortunately does involve some pretty ugly looking jobs-but that is the nature of the line clearing beast, no?).


----------



## chucknduck (Dec 6, 2007)

I'm from a small town where there are only two official tree services, and we are very competative. I know that sometimes if the customer will have it no other way, then I will loose out and the other company will get the job if I decline to top. Now we both do top notch jobs on regular pruning,removals, etc. So, I will top if the price is right, because with only two tree services in town people will use you if you prune correctly on the other 98% of the jobs you do. Sometimes you just have to do what the 'Boss' wants to stay in business


----------



## ATH (Dec 6, 2007)

Ekka said:


> Now for scientific and psychological studies could you keep an eye on that tree and see if anyone else whacks it. And if they spur it to whack it.


I never know whether to laugh at or feel sorry for the folks who have been given the correct information and still go for the full-bore useless topping?


----------



## tree md (Dec 6, 2007)

Sorry if someone has already said this but I wouldn't have my name associated with a "hat racked" tree. If your in it for the long haul, you did the right thing IMHO...


----------



## Canyonbc (Dec 6, 2007)

Ekka said:


> Canyonbc
> 
> Now for scientific and psychological studies could you keep an eye on that tree and see if anyone else whacks it. And if they spur it to whack it.
> 
> Also, is there any protection orders on the tree, in other words repercussions for whacking it? Coz if there's no financial loss to the whacker then he too will like your decision.



Ya...i am def. going too...its 10 min or so from my house, have to drive by every couple weeks. I will report back if anyone does whack at it.


----------



## Canyonbc (Dec 6, 2007)

TreeCo said:


> http://secure.isa-arbor.com/store/Consumer-Information-Brochures-Package-P93C18.aspx
> 
> 
> http://secure.isa-arbor.com/store/Consumer-Education-C18.aspx
> Start on page six and go on up. I think they are in bundles of 100.



Thanks TreeCO

I a gonna go check it out now.


----------



## hornett22 (Dec 6, 2007)

*i need the money sometimes to.*

but i NEVER top trees.never.


----------



## ropensaddle (Dec 6, 2007)

TreeCo said:


> A good sign of a professional arborist.
> (ROW excluded, of course. Ditto for spiking.)


What about pollarding for view with a maintenance schedule 
I have some ask for view purposes and the poa allows topping
or pollarding but no removals can you say catch 22?


----------



## Canyonbc (Dec 6, 2007)

ropensaddle said:


> What about pollarding for view with a maintenance schedule
> I have some ask for view purposes and the poa allows topping
> or pollarding but no removals can you say catch 22?



POA...is this HOA...Home Owner Association.


----------



## ropensaddle (Dec 6, 2007)

Canyonbc said:


> POA...is this HOA...Home Owner Association.



Property owners association


----------



## Canyonbc (Dec 6, 2007)

Gotcha thanks for the clairfication... 

I agree a Catch 22...

Always can just walk away, and leave it to some body else. 

My question is what do you do..when you get a call top a tree that has already top.???


----------



## ropensaddle (Dec 6, 2007)

Canyonbc said:


> Gotcha thanks for the clairfication...
> 
> I agree a Catch 22...
> 
> ...



That would be another catch 22 and short of removing crossing
branches and weak attached branches you will probably end up
pollarding anyway!


----------



## ropensaddle (Dec 6, 2007)

The way I have looked into it is I document what I tell the
customer try to come up with the best solution and bottom
line I am in business and have bills.


----------



## Treetom (Dec 6, 2007)

*Take the whole tree out.*

I'd explain all the ramifications of topping and suggest removal for another fifty bucks.


----------



## OTG BOSTON (Dec 6, 2007)

hornett22 said:


> but i NEVER top trees.never.





TreeCo said:


> A good sign of a professional arborist.
> (ROW excluded, of course. Ditto for spiking.)



There are many exceptions. 

Too much of the "anti-topping" campaign is a bad thing. If you say you will never do it, you are limiting yourself as an arborist.

The tree in the foreground is over 200 years old, if this tree hadn't been reduced over the years it would have blown over a long time ago.


----------



## ropensaddle (Dec 6, 2007)

OTG BOSTON said:


> There are many exceptions.
> 
> Too much of the "anti-topping" campaign is a bad thing. If you say you will never do it, you are limiting yourself as an arborist.
> 
> The tree in the foreground is over 200 years old, if this tree hadn't been reduced over the years it would have blown over a long time ago.



Agreed although arguments could be made in that high traffic
area may be better off without falling sucker growth!!!!!!!!


----------



## treesquirrel (Dec 6, 2007)

You absolutely did the right thing. I will not top either. I will suggest complete removal, crown reduction, or trimming off some weight on worrysome leads but will not top a tree.


----------



## OTG BOSTON (Dec 6, 2007)

ropensaddle said:


> Agreed although arguments could be made in that high traffic
> area may be better off without falling sucker growth!!!!!!!!




there isn't any "falling sucker growth". I am more concerned with the old cavity fills..........


----------



## ropensaddle (Dec 6, 2007)

OTG BOSTON said:


> there isn't any "falling sucker growth". I am more concerned with the old cavity fills..........



I would be more concerned with the way it looks and limbs
falling from weak attachments but thats me!


----------



## OTG BOSTON (Dec 6, 2007)

ropensaddle said:


> I would be more concerned with the way it looks and limbs
> falling from weak attachments but thats me!




Looks great in leaf, most people wouldn't know what they are looking at anyway. This is a high maintenance style of pruning and the trees need to be monitored carefully. My basic point is not all topping is bad, if you think it is you are sadly mistaken. There are no absolute rules when it comes to tree preservation!


----------



## ropensaddle (Dec 6, 2007)

OTG BOSTON said:


> Looks great in leaf, most people wouldn't know what they are looking at anyway. This is a high maintenance style of pruning and the trees need to be monitored carefully. My basic point is not all topping is bad, if you think it is you are sadly mistaken. There are no absolute rules when it comes to tree preservation!


I am just debating and yes a tree worker having only one card
is going to get left behind preservation is sometimes not the
best card to endure especially when comes to the beauty.
Historical trees however get much attention spent on prolonging
life of the tree rather than beauty of the trees! Maintenance of
those type are constant and costly so are out of the budget of 
average homeowner.


----------



## Slvrmple72 (Dec 6, 2007)

Good for you! Make every effort to educate the homeowner on the choices available to them with regards to tree care and stand your ground on the principle reason we do this for a living... the piles of money, oops! I mean the care and respect for trees. Boston and Clearance make good points that you can never say never. I have discovered that there is an exception to just about anything but it is the well-educated and much-experienced individual who knows when that exception needs to be utilized.


----------



## ropensaddle (Dec 6, 2007)

One of the easiest ways to think is what would I do if it were
my tree, of course you need to be armed with education and
many years experience to realistically make that judgment.
It is however a barometer I always go by in any customer
advise and all info must be used to come to the best solution
for your customer.


----------



## Thillmaine (Dec 6, 2007)

*Nice tree*

I know who "pruned" that tree. It does look awesome in full leaf.


----------



## Canyonbc (Dec 6, 2007)

TreeCo said:


> I think defending topping comparing these two circumstances is like comparing apples to asparagus. I think it's pretty safe to say never top. I wouldn't use the 'topping' word to describe reductions on a 200 year old tree just because it's such a bad word. 99.94 percent of the time topping is tree abuse.
> 
> No doubt we agree!



2nd that. 

"There are exceptions to every rule"


----------



## John464 (Dec 6, 2007)

I take tops out of trees all the time and they are usually dead. Is this wrong? I cut it down past the dead or diseased wood to a live upright or lateral branch. After that I check the root system and evaluate the tree to find the reasoning behind die off at the top. I have saved many of trees by topping.

I have a job we just did this week for a customer who had a red oak, perfectly healthy. Snapped directly in half at about 40ft. I inspected the breakage on the lady's smashed in two level deck and kitchen floor where it lay. No sign of any faults. A very healthy tall oak. The tree was snapped by 50mph gusts. The reason this tree failed is because the builder cleared the back yard but left a few trees. These trees that were once protected in the forest suddenly became standing tall with no barrier of other trees. In other words, they lived a long and healthy life in one place only to be taken out of their enviroment. Could this tree adjust to the need of being tall and skinny reaching for sunlight to now having plenty of sun and plenty wind? The answer was no, the tree failed. If this tree was grown in the enviroment it is now it would of been stronger, thicker and shorter naturally. Topping would of not been needed. However, topping would of saved this tree in this scenario. Also proper residential forestry management should of been consulted with me prior to the homeowner/builder selecting which trees were to stay before they built the house. That tree would either of been kept in a cluster of the others around it or removed completely.



After we cleaned up the storm damage I provided her with an evaluation of the rest of her property and we deciding on topping(I call it reducing) one non-dominant stem due to the lean hanging over her kids playset. If I removed the stem completely at the base on the dominant stem it would likely be an invitation for decay. So in this case, as some have mentioned, topping is sometimes needed in rare instances.


----------



## treeseer (Dec 6, 2007)

John464 said:


> we deciding on topping(I call it reducing) .



Topping cuts are often internodal and determined by human criteria, often the climber's convenience.

Reduction cuts are to laterals or other nodes, and determined by the tree's needs and longterm health. The difference is clear in ANSI, and most of the posters here seem to understand the difference.

OTG, I think those oaks would still be standing if they had been pruned more mildly, and with less decay. Notnetheless, it looks more like reduction than topping to me.

If a tree owner wanted me to whack a maple at 15', I would whip out my laser pointer and show him where I would make the cuts on the hardest reduction I could do and still look at the mirror, and the tree, in the morning.


----------



## hornett22 (Dec 6, 2007)

*as far as the state of corrupticut .............*



OTG BOSTON said:


> There are many exceptions.
> 
> Too much of the "anti-topping" campaign is a bad thing. If you say you will never do it, you are limiting yourself as an arborist.
> 
> The tree in the foreground is over 200 years old, if this tree hadn't been reduced over the years it would have blown over a long time ago.



i'm not an arborist.i do removals only.the state knows who is an arborist,we in the industry know who is an arborist.most customers don't know or care who is an arborist or what services the person they're hiring is supposed to be certified for.i still don't top trees.if they insist,i refer them to a certified arborist.that way i'm not to blame either way.


----------



## beastmaster (Dec 6, 2007)

Good decision, and a good start in your business ethics. From 50' to 15', why not just remove it and start with a smaller growing tree. I never hear people telling their gardeners how to mow their yards, but homeowners often inceses on butchering their trees, causing the vary problems they want to avoid. There's always other options.


----------



## Mitchell (Dec 6, 2007)

*to top or not*

THE DISCLAIMER: I am not advocating, lobbying or trying to pursued as I generally remain uncertian how bad topping is; I am trying to educate myself further. 

I have topped a fair number of trees. Mainly due to the area I work which has a lot of previously topped trees. I am faced with re topping and or cabling the 2 or 3 new tops. In the interest of tree health I have cabled a number of trees instead of topping them back. 

The question that nags me and I pose to you folks is this: *Is the tree health worth the [in my estimation] the huge increase in downstream liability when cabling?* After all, the tops are not going to come off if there not there.

Having said that... I find that folks who adamantly refuse to consider the literature are generally PITA customers and I have declined to do work for them based on that.


----------



## OTG BOSTON (Dec 7, 2007)

TreeCo said:


> No doubt we agree!




No doubt, I was just playing devils advocate:jester: 

TS, those are ELMS (the big one is called the "Hancock Elm", supposedly planted by the man himself)

THill, you know who used to prune those trees. Corporate sent a letter saying they want nothing to do with them anymore 

They were pruned again a few weeks ago, good sound wood, old cuts are callousing over, plenty of vigor. 

Keep in mind these trees have lived through some of the worst autrocities tree guys ever made, with cavity fills and toxic wound paint and the like.


----------



## jomoco (Dec 7, 2007)

It seems that an important component of this conversation is being overlooked.

The terms Topping and Pollarding are not the same in terms of tree maintenance over time.

The term Pollarding differs in that once the tree is topped or cut back to a certain point, it is maintained on a regular schedule by only removing the regrowth or suckers emanating from the original cut back point. Over time callous wood forms over the original wound and the arborist is very careful to only remove suckers at the bark branch ridge, this results in a mushroom like callous wood structure that grows bigger and bigger over the years forming a very distinctive elephants foot. This is very common in European countries as both a form of topiary art, as well as a means of maintaining a trees size and ability to withstand storms. This type of pruning has been practiced for centuries throughout the world and is markedly different from what we call topping in general with such disdain and contempt.

So in effect topping and pollarding are two distinctly different forms of tree maintenance, and should be recognized as such by all professional arborists, one is done by unprofessional or unknowing amateurs, the other is done in a very exacting manner by highly skilled professionals in which the outcome over time can be a striking, practical and very beautiful form of living arboricultural art.

jomoco


----------



## bushinspector (Dec 7, 2007)

*Rattling cages*

I am in the same camp as most people on this site.---Against topping----However, after you discuss all of the problems with topping with the home owner, and he still wants it hacked (topped) , we will do it. We try to give the clients what they want. If they really wants to top it, its their tree and they will get someone to cut it the way THEY want.

"You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink"


----------



## Canyonbc (Dec 7, 2007)

jomoco said:


> It seems that an important component of this conversation is being overlooked.
> 
> The terms Topping and Pollarding are not the same in terms of tree maintenance over time.
> 
> ...



I think that is very well put..and was a question i was going to ask, makes perfect sense...an i have seen it done. 

Thanks for more information


----------



## NickfromWI (Dec 8, 2007)

reachtreeservi said:


> 2) If I don't, they will still get someone to do it. You can not talk them out of it.



You don't know this. It does happen time and time again. But every once in a while, someone says to their neighbor, "that guy wouldn't cut my tree. How odd." Then the neighbor enlightens them. Then they learn.

They can't learn if you don't give them a good foundation to start with.

love
nick


----------



## pbtree (Dec 8, 2007)

Canyonbc said:


> Thanks for the responses....
> 
> I am 19, and dam it really need the money, but some things i just wont do. Thanks for reassuring that i am did the right thing.
> 
> Canyon



I thing you did just fine grasshopper!


----------



## yibida (Dec 8, 2007)

*Nice to see.*

Although our industry is still quite young in comparison with many other professions i applaud your ethics and hope that this is a more common reaction among younger Arborists. We have available the knowledge, tools and influence to promote our industry in a way that can educate and inform.

Stay true.


----------



## reachtreeservi (Dec 8, 2007)

NickfromWI said:


> You don't know this. It does happen time and time again. But every once in a while, someone says to their neighbor, "that guy wouldn't cut my tree. How odd." Then the neighbor enlightens them. Then they learn.
> 
> They can't learn if you don't give them a good foundation to start with.
> 
> ...



Hi Nick,
In the same post, you quote me as saying : If I don't top the tree per customer request, then they will just get someone else to do it.

Then you say: I don't know this ( meaning that I don't know someone else will top it if I don't)

Immediately afterward you say : "It does happen time and time again"...

Here is my response to your post:

There is no way for you to know what I do or don't know.
By your own admission , people who have been advised against topping get some else to top their tree "time and time again" 

Which would mean that I do know.

My policy about topping developed from first hand observation over many years. After refusing to top customers trees several hundred times and driving by at a later date and seeing the same trees topped by another tree company , I decided to top the tree if the customer couldn't be talked out of it. 

If you read the earlier post in this thread, I said this is what I do, if You want to call me a hack...fine, 
Then I said " everyone has to do what they feel is right, If canyonbc doesn't feel topping is right then I support his decision.

If you want to call me a hack Nick, then just say that.
But don't presume to tell me what I don't know.

If a customer can't learn from the literature and information I give them , Then I cut their tree and take their money. It's not my job to make people do the right thing with their property. Or to educate them if they don't want to be educated. My job is to cut trees and get paid. I'm not a tree hugger or an arborist, I own a tree service. 
I do what the customer wants done. And that feeds and clothes my family. And my employee's families. That's my foundation.


----------



## treejunkie13 (Dec 8, 2007)

Money makes the world go round. I have found my self advertising Height Reduction (lots of old school topping in my area) then when I get my foot in the door I explain the good and bad ethics. This is where the laser pointer is a priceless tool. I like to please the costumer and make money, but no way am I going to have my name on beauty tree that is now a coat rack.

Every tree is different, and some are in locations where topping is the option, the tree is to big and if were to uproot cause serious damage. And I can admire the owner wanting to not lose the hole tree but keep it around longer.I am guilty of topping many a conifers because of this. They provide low level privacy and the root structure is holding the ground but way to tall. I maintain the rule of 3rd's never removing more than a 3rd of the tree that is to stay and unless need be not affecting the lower limbs. The untrained eye does not look up. And I have found that most customers want the NOW decision and not the 5, 10, many year plan. Plus if down the road in time they decide to have the rest of the tree removed it's like getting paid twice for the tree. Flat out if what they ask me to do makes my hair stand I price high, then offer a deal on complete removal explaining how it would be easier. It all depends on the tree.


----------



## treeseer (Dec 8, 2007)

Talk alone seldom changes minds or educates. If you have the ANSI standards or the BMP's or other literature in your hand when you describe the results of topping vs. pruning, you will change many more minds. 

You will also continue your own evolution to arborist, which is a higher paying profession than tree cutter, and a whole lot more fun. The literature is cheap compared to the cost of staying stuck competing with the growing number of hacks out there.


----------



## treejunkie13 (Dec 8, 2007)

As a matter of fact my picture to the left is of a job the costumer wanted the trees topped. I gave my two cents. (YOU WANT ME TO DO WHAT!) He was a straight up old timer, (bull). Got in the truck and left thinking I just wasted an hour of my life. Couple weeks went by and the phone rang, I was in shock. The trees are now gone and he is one happy camper. Don't know what changed his mind, but he is passing my name on.


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Dec 8, 2007)

I tell people that if they can picture a trimmed shrub and how fast they grow they can visualize a plants response to the stress of loss of foliage. Sprouting is fast growing and weak and quite often will defeat the purpose of intended by the treatment because of the fast growing nature. Then there is the inherent decay from the cuts. 

It takes about 5 minutes and finished by a saying that i will either trim or remove a tree, never top.


----------



## Canyonbc (Dec 8, 2007)

John Paul Sanborn said:


> I tell people that if they can picture a trimmed shrub and how fast they grow they can visualize a plants response to the stress of loss of foliage. Sprouting is fast growing and weak and quite often will defeat the purpose of intended by the treatment because of the fast growing nature. Then there is the inherent decay from the cuts.
> 
> It takes about 5 minutes and finished by a saying that i will either trim or remove a tree, never top.



I think that is the best way i have ever heard to explain it to a customer. Its put it such simple terms. And not only does it put it simple terms the metaphor is something that a lot of customers understand. 

I like it. 

Canyon


----------



## Ekka (Dec 9, 2007)

What I love about this thread is the old vigour coming out on all sides.

Boston OTG, that was a reduction not a toppping and veteran tree management goes by almost any rules so long as the tree lives even if it means evacuating the area.

Here's the history channel AS style thread on similar but same topic.

http://www.arboristsite.com/showthread.php?t=21712

This post on gets interesting. Bit of a snippet for ya's.



Ekka said:


> Yes, you are right, there are better alternatives but the customer is not interested in them, and you have wasted your time, effort and breath on this one who just .... more


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Dec 9, 2007)

Canyonbc said:


> I think that is the best way i have ever heard to explain it to a customer. Its put it such simple terms. And not only does it put it simple terms the metaphor is something that a lot of customers understand.
> 
> I like it.
> 
> Canyon



I think analogy is more appropriate 

This is a part of selling, when you have an issue you "revisit" on a regular basis you should develop a boilerplate monologue for it that you use evrey time.

This way when they say "you said this" you can say,"no I said it this way, I know that because I say it that way all the time." Most often it will jog their memory there will be agreement. 

It also helps you sound knowledgeable and self assured when discussing or pitching. I'll do this for that reason and that for this reason and do not like doing the other thing because of this well documented fact based in university research.

I find that I can increase my closing rate at least 25-30% by doing a walk and talk with the prospective client.

Most people appreciate the whys and wherefores of what you propose, and quite often you can get the job from the low bidder who will just jot down "trim tree" on a bid sheet.

"You are the expert, do what you think best. Hey Jenny come here and meet My Tree Guy!"


----------



## Canyonbc (Dec 9, 2007)

John Paul Sanborn said:


> I think analogy is more appropriate
> 
> This is a part of selling, when you have an issue you "revisit" on a regular basis you should develop a boilerplate monologue for it that you use evrey time.
> 
> ...



Ya JPS, i agree i had just got home from work...analogy is the right word...i dont know why i wrote metaphor but thank you for correcting me.


----------



## chucknduck (Dec 9, 2007)

*put it in your contract*

I agree that topping is not good for trees. I will discuss with the customer exactly why it is not good, and still they insist on having it topped, I will read over my contract with them. I added a section in my contract last year after many a topping request. It says; contractor not liable for the death of the tree, any new growth breaking and causing propery damage, injury or death, any limbs that don't regrow, any parts of the tree infested with parasitic insects, including woodborers, or any fungal diseases associated with the tree after the top has been removed.. And believe it or not some people still want their tree topped!!


----------



## reachtreeservi (Dec 9, 2007)

chucknduck said:


> I agree that topping is not good for trees. I will discuss with the customer exactly why it is not good, and still they insist on having it topped, I will read over my contract with them. I added a section in my contract last year after many a topping request. It says; contractor not liable for the death of the tree, any new growth breaking and causing propery damage, injury or death, any limbs that don't regrow, any parts of the tree infested with parasitic insects, including woodborers, or any fungal diseases associated with the tree after the top has been removed.. And believe it or not some people still want their tree topped!!



That's a great idea, chucknduck. THX for the idea. The way the courts are now a days you can't be too careful.


----------



## ronnyb (Dec 9, 2007)

Good job walking away from the topping. Did you try to sell him on removing the tree? Sorry, didn't have time to read every post. Tree removal, stump grinding and clean up, and replanting an appropriate tree for the site. It all adds up fast, financially.


----------



## woodchux (Dec 9, 2007)

There are some species of trees that i have absolutely no problems topping out. Bradford Pears for one, IMO after they reach a certain size the best thing you could do for the tree is a severe reduction. Done on a 3 year cycle we have had pretty good results prolonging the life of the Bradford pears in our program.


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Dec 9, 2007)

woodchux said:


> There are some species of trees that i have absolutely no problems topping out. Bradford Pears for one, IMO after they reach a certain size the best thing you could do for the tree is a severe reduction. Done on a 3 year cycle we have had pretty good results prolonging the life of the Bradford pears in our program.



They are better with a dropcrotch, but if you are on a 3 year cycle, then a pollard would be much better.


----------



## woodchux (Dec 9, 2007)

Here are a couple of oaks that were basically turned into giant boxwoods.
I didnt hack these oaks. Oaks are one tree that never does well topped out.
Anyone want to climb around in them now?


----------



## Jon Denver (Dec 9, 2007)

"Here are a couple of oaks that were basically turned into giant boxwoods.
I didn't hack these oaks. Oaks are one tree that never does well topped out.
Anyone want to climb around in them now?"

Shure, I will. Start by a major thinning, select all the new branch leaders, then drop crotch those back or just hack back by 2/3. Let grow back for a few years, then repeat. Eventually you will get great taper and robust branch ramification in 10 years or so. You don't want to do anything this drastic on a few oaks however but these responded very well.

Most deciduous trees can be hacked back hard to stump in winter when all the tree's energy is in the root system. As spring arrives the tree will shoot out vigorous new suckers which are only weak if you let the tree go for along time without a yearly pruning plan. They always have to be short from now on. This can easily be achieved by cutting back the long suckers each year by 2/3 and thinning every 2 to 3 years until you have a very stout looking mini version of its full sized counterpart. I have been doing this for years on Birch, Liquid Ambar, Elm, and many others. But not all.

There is the risk of cavity in the first large cut and that is part of the reason that is critical the keep the tree stout, like a big landscape bonsai. That is what alot of people want anyway and if only the utility companys did this instead of the Max Headrom look.

I would never do this on most conifers and some broad leaf evergreens. The exception is Redwood because they send up vertical suckers that can be isolated into the new top over and over.It would need to be trained in this way from an early age. You just have to inform the homeowner that they need you back at least every other year to take the new leaders back by 2/3 to 1/2. Otherwise topping is bad.


----------



## zeke (Dec 9, 2007)

Here is my two cents. I don't top trees, ever. Drop crotch is not topping if done correctly. I know we all have to make a living but I want to do it and still like myself. I don't like how a topped tree looks, I don't like how a topped tree reacts, there is plenty of research and plenty of anecdotal evidence of what happens to topped trees. In my area, there are CAs who top when asked, how does that make us look as an industry? Yeah, someone will do it, but it won't be me or my company. If we can all get on the same page, we might change the public view of this practice. As in all things, there are exceptions, nothing is black and white but as a standard, we need to get away from these practices which have been proven detrimental to the trees.


----------



## beowulf343 (Dec 10, 2007)

treesquirrel said:


> You absolutely did the right thing. I will not top either. I will suggest complete removal, crown reduction, or trimming off some weight on worrysome leads but will not top a tree.



I thought real "arborists" don't promote complete removals either. 

Surprised no one has brought up storm damaged trees. I've probably topped hundreds of trees (alot of them in '98 alone.) The top gets damaged, i'll go up and blow it out. What's better, topped tree still alive, or a removed tree?


----------



## Jon Denver (Dec 10, 2007)

Yes, and a most Acers respond very well to topping. I have topped many, especially Acer Pseudo-platanus or Sycamore maple. You just have to explain to the client the long term goals and that they have to have you out there every winter to cut back the adventitious shoots 2/3rds and thin, these will become the new branch scaffolding. In 10 years or so you create a real mini version of its full sized counterpart. There seems to be one tree service around here other than me that seems to acually think about the future and not just the short term because in the short term these topped trees look like crappola, but yes, it is the future we are looking at here. This practice has to happen alot here because from what I have observed most tree companys lion tail which causes more apical growth, which causes the limb to get longer whithout much gain in diamiter and pretty soon, snap! When I get there it is often to late to do anything other than top to stub (no good branch to cut back to). At this point it is better to go lower, like way low and basically start over. You have to check your species before doing this however. Do this on a pine and it will die and of course the right time of year.


----------



## treeseer (Dec 10, 2007)

Jon Denver said:


> You don't want to do anything this drastic on a few oaks however but these responded very well.
> There is the risk of cavity in the first large cut and that is part of the reason that is critical the keep the tree stout, like a big landscape bonsai. .


So let me get this straight. The stems will rot out from big wounds, but it will be ok as long as someone is there to prune it regularly and keep it short.

And when that stops happening because of a new owner or the arborist moving or retiring, what then?

O and topping as the logical response to liontailing, right. What else?

lots of new info on this site!:monkey: 

beowulf has it right on managing storm-damaged trees tho.


----------



## Ekka (Dec 11, 2007)

beowulf343 said:


> What's better, topped tree still alive, or a removed tree?





Jon Denver said:


> Yes, and a most Acers respond very well to topping. I have topped many, especially Acer Pseudo-platanus or Sycamore maple. You just have to explain to the client the long term goals and that they have to have you out there every winter to cut back the adventitious shoots 2/3rds and thin, these will become the new branch scaffolding. In 10 years or so you create a real mini version of its full sized counterpart. There seems to be one tree service around here other than me that seems to acually think about the future and not just the short term because in the short term these topped trees look like crappola, but yes, it is the future we are looking at here. This practice has to happen alot here because from what I have observed most tree companys lion tail which causes more apical growth, which causes the limb to get longer whithout much gain in diamiter and pretty soon, snap! When I get there it is often to late to do anything other than top to stub (no good branch to cut back to). At this point it is better to go lower, like way low and basically start over. You have to check your species before doing this however. Do this on a pine and it will die and of course the right time of year.





treeseer said:


> So let me get this straight. The stems will rot out from big wounds, but it will be ok as long as someone is there to prune it regularly and keep it short.
> 
> And when that stops happening because of a new owner or the arborist moving or retiring, what then?
> 
> ...


*
If it's OK for a storm damaged tree ... then why not prior to storm damage? Jon Denver contests with futuristic probability of failure, same end result? *:monkey: 

Why wait for the failure and the damage, wouldn't a professional foresee the inevitable Treeseer and manage in the same way as you propose?


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Dec 11, 2007)

treeseer said:


> beowulf has it right on managing storm-damaged trees tho.



I don't really know about that. It all depends on where he makes the cut. If he gaffs up there to make that cut, then that is just that much worse. Some of the worst old gaff wounds I've seen are on the oaks we worked on after that ice storm you guys had.

I can remember some discussions somewhere about nodal pruning. 

The part about preserving the existing tree I do agree with though.



> Why wait for the failure and the damage, wouldn't a professional foresee the inevitable Treeseer and manage in the same way as you propose?



What are you saying, the tree will break, so cut it down, or should all trees be on a 3 year topping cycle?

A professional will see the possible, such as large included unions that are prone to failure under unusual loading.




> You just have to explain to the client the long term goals and that they have to have you out there every winter to cut back the adventitious shoots 2/3rds and thin,



This sounds more like a pollarding cycle than a hatrack. At what diameter do you make the initial cuts?

IMO a fine thin in the tips is better then what I'm reading in your posts. Yeah, many uneducated companies sell a thining , but just do a raise and gut. No work is done on the ends so the moment of bend is moved out to wood that has not developed to take the load.


----------



## Jon Denver (Dec 11, 2007)

> "IMO a fine thin in the tips is better then what I'm reading in your posts. Yeah, many uneducated companies sell a thinning , but just do a raise and gut. No work is done on the ends so the moment of bend is moved out to wood that has not developed to take the load."



And that is the major problem, If the tree was thinned back on the tips from a young age the proper way you would never need to be this drastic, but sadly this is not always the case. The company does the easy thing to make it look good in the immediate and go home with their easy money. Then the branch grows real long in response and because their are no interior branches the trunk puts on less girth in that area, lots of leverage and these can break.



> "So let me get this straight. The stems will rot out from big wounds, but it will be ok as long as someone is there to prune it regularly and keep it short.
> 
> And when that stops happening because of a new owner or the arborist moving or retiring, what then?
> 
> O and topping as the logical response to liontailing, right. What else?"



The stems don't rot, the exposed heartwood can though. The stems expedite healing in this area. And this is not a pollard like you see on mulberry where you cut back to knuckles every time. What we are doing here is creating a new heavily ramified branch scaffolding through repetitive heading back of new seasons growth by 2/3 or so every year, not back to the original point every time. We want the tree to get bigger, but in a dwarf fashion like a fruit tree in a way. The big mistake would be after topping like this to just let the new whips soar to the sky and then in many years those points of attachment will be inherently weak.

If I move, the client knows what to do at this point and if the client moves than he can pass on the info to the new homeowner.

And finally topping is not always the response to lion tailing. If the tree is not threatening structure than who cares unless for aesthetics. I hate the way a lion tailed tree looks though. The worst is seeing this done to oaks because the tree climber was too scared to get way out there and tip it back instead.

Some of those broken ice trees I saw on the news this morning look like they were liontailed to much.


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Dec 11, 2007)

Jon Denver said:


> And finally topping is not always the response to lion tailing. If the tree is not threatening structure than who cares unless for aesthetics. I hate the way a lion tailed tree looks though. The worst is seeing this done to oaks because the tree climber was too scared to get way out there and tip it back instead.



We have something to agree about there.

I'm gettin a better idea as to what you are doing. I would still like to hear what diameter you start your cuts at.


----------



## Jon Denver (Dec 11, 2007)

Ideally the smaller diameter the better. Its always a race between healing and rot. It depends entirely on the situation like how the species heal (Ginko sucks in this department) or hazard to structures, Available branching, ultimate height of finished tree and many others. The lower the cut the larger the diameter and this has to be weight against all the pros and cons of taking it higher or lower with the rot factor. The biggest diameter would have to be a large Elm that a client wanted me to remove because they lost a large spar due to included bark. I talked them into taking it back from about 60 feet to 15, all the crotches above this point had steep angles of attachment and they did not want it to ever be that tall again. The largest diameter cut was probably 20 inches. These cuts have a good chance to cavity but the tree is highly unlikely to break again because of low leverage. Every winter they hire me to cut back the 10 foot long whips to a lower set of 2 buds for a "Y" these cuts are made low and are maby 3" diameter and 2 feet above the previous years cuts. The lower the more stout the tree will be. Rinse and repeat, The tree is starting to look like a hobbit tree and all big cuts are hidden from view from the ground for the most part by the new branching.:biggrinbounce2:


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Dec 11, 2007)

I've done similar treatments with 3 inc drop crotch, but a 20 inch wound on a 15 ft spar will probably never close and will become a cavity. Ive seen these large wounds "case hardened" on the dry outside and punky rot an inch under.

I'm in the crowd that hates the term heal, since the wound wood closes over the deadwood. 

Sounds like one could call the treatment sequential roundover or something  People do this around here with small ornimentals, like crabapple, to keep them to a given volume.

IMO a lot of this is job security on the practitioners part, vs removing and replacing with a better suited cvs. Though if the client is given the option and turns it down, thenI would rather a person do it who will do it with proper cuts then stubbed hack and slash. 

These types of treatment should be the exception, not the rule. 

Quite often we run into deadwooding that will lead to a defacto lionstailing. Pruning the tips in a manner that will reduce the leverage on the new moment of bend (which is caused by removing all the dampening mass of deadwood) can be very effective if it mimics the natural growth patterns. Then taking sprouts with a good angle of attachment and training them into new limbs....

The true arborist does look at the tree with an eye to the future, how will low limbs influence the rest of the crown. How are the major unions going to react to loading in the long term. How stems and limbs will interact with the landscape and buildings if allowed to grow unhindered....

To me your methods are a one size fits all treatment that... while not lazy in a physical sense, it is an awful lot of work...is lazy in a mental sense. There is no learning beyond your own practical experience.

This is what separates the true arborist (cert or no cert. I have none, though I am an ISA Life Member) from the tree trimmer who does whatever the client wants.


----------



## treeseer (Dec 11, 2007)

John Paul Sanborn said:


> Pruning the tips in a manner that will reduce the leverage on the new moment of bend (which is caused by removing all the dampening mass of deadwood) can be very effective if it mimics the natural growth patterns. Then taking sprouts with a good angle of attachment and training them into new limbs....
> 
> The true arborist does look at the tree with an eye to the future, how will low limbs influence the rest of the crown. How are the major unions going to react to loading in the long term. How stems and limbs will interact with the landscape and buildings if allowed to grow unhindered...



Unhindered, yeah. nO cut without a good reason.

:biggrinbounce2:


----------



## Unknown Cutter (Dec 20, 2007)

i used to work for a guy who would top trees and purposefully spike the crap out of them and scuff up the leads with his saw. he said it was to promote new limbs to grow in those spots :crazy1:


----------



## MonkeyMan_812 (Dec 28, 2007)

:monkey:


clearance said:


> Here we go, name calling again. Hey ATH, I top trees under/beside major transmission lines because the people that own the property the r.o.w. is on want them to stay. Its top them or remove them, no other choice. So, I am a hack huh? Same trees get topped every few years, still alive, still growing. Nothing wrong with topping trees for an excellent reason like this, topping trees for a view....I try to talk people into windows. Topping trees cause people are scared...I try to talk them into spiral pruning to reduce windsail. Time and a place for topping trees, think about it before you label.



I think you missed the conversation bud. They arent talking about topping trees for a good reason. They were talking about topping trees for no good reason. Topping in some cases is the practical thing to do , not so in other cases. The customer that we are speaking of was given multiple options but refused them all even though they were wise and practicle suggestions. The property owner wanted to top the trees just to top the trees. I am afraid you should understand what people are talking about before you comment.


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Dec 28, 2007)

Unknown Cutter said:


> he said it was to promote new limbs to grow in those spots :crazy1:



There is some science to support the wounding bark to support sprouting, though I do not think he really read any of it. You do not need to go into the xylem, just damage the cambium over a node.

Simply put, the wounding of the phloem (phloem is the downwards transport) interupts upstem auxin which inhibits downstem budding. This is used in orchards and nurseries.

I guess one could say he was misguided?


----------

