2 Fungi + 1 Crack + Lean + Target =?

[treeseer]

I just got the below note and pics. What can I say?

" I am glad to see there is someone out there who has a risk tolerance for trees like I do. At least we call it a risk tolerance, for lack of a better word. Anyway, it is getting harder and harder not to condemn trees in today's litigious world. I have a tree I would like your opinion on:
Facts about the tree:

1. severe lean toward structures 15 to 20 degrees
2. presence of 2 fungi: Laetiporus sulphureus and Ganoderma lucidum
3. proximity to structures
4. structural sheer crack along center of trunk due to lean
5. over 40 inch dbh Quercu Robur.
6. Aggressive growth in both trunk diameter and crown expansion.
7. Overall health of tree is very good.
8. The things holding the tree up appear to be in great shape (root buttresses especially and I was glad to see that.
9. Response wood around decay area by Ganoderma conk was also very good.

When I put my report together for them I want to include remedial options of crown reduction through retrenchment over a period of time and then a removal cost will be included simply because they asked for it. In the report I include the facts above and would love to retain the tree.
My concerns are:
Failure is most likely to happen at trunk base and would be immediate causing a maximum amount of damage ( practically flatening the house it is next to.)
The fact that the health of the tree is in such good shape is concerning for me because of the presence of decay fungi and their notoriosity for aggressive progression of decay.
I wound not want to drill the tree to get measurements of decay. I would just be spreading the decay fungi and causing more good than harm.
I feel this is a tree most people would say is a clear removal. For me a clear removal tree is only one kind. The one that has failed and is laying on the house.
My question to you is how to I make a good argument to retain the tree? What are your thoughts. What would you recommend?
I know it is hard with just a few pics, but any input would be greatly appreciated."

 

[Pelorus]

"Failure is most likely to happen at trunk base and would be immediate causing a maximum amount of damage ( practically flatening the house it is next to.)...I feel this is a tree most people would say is a clear removal. For me a clear removal tree is only one kind. The one that has failed and is laying on the house"

This thread reminds me of the Monty Python skit with the delusional black knight.
King Arthur: "Look you stupid bastard you got no arms left"
The black knight replies: "I'm invincible"

 

[Zale]

How do you determine "aggressive growth in both trunk diameter and crown expansion"? Given what you have listed, I would suggest removal. How much risk is the homeowner willing to accept?

 

[tree MDS]

I'd recommend removal and maybe a flower pot on the stump. Lol.

 

[treeseer]

You determine "aggressive growth in both trunk diameter and crown expansion" by response growth in the buttresses (flaring) and twig extension and leaf condition up high. Pretty straightforward.
How much risk is the homeowner willing to accept? Sounds like they are asking for an estimate to remove, so it seems less than before.

The Monty Python quote re limb loss is actually relevant to this tree, but not as Pel intended...

 

[Zale]

You determine "aggressive growth in both trunk diameter and crown expansion" by response growth in the buttresses (flaring) and twig extension and leaf condition up high. Pretty straightforward.


I don't see how you can determine "aggressive" growth solely through a visual examination. Did you climb the tree to determine the twig extension?

 

[treeclimber101]

And let's not forget that the tree is growing on a slope . Like you said failure would mean basically flattening the house , would you feel comfortable sleeping under it after say 2/3 days of a drenching rain followed by some steady 50/60 mph winds ? If so then I guess you feel comfortable enough with your assessment .

 

[jefflovstrom]

You determine "aggressive growth in both trunk diameter and crown expansion" by response growth in the buttresses (flaring) and twig extension and leaf condition up high. Pretty straightforward.
How much risk is the homeowner willing to accept? Sounds like they are asking for an estimate to remove, so it seems less than before.

The Monty Python quote re limb loss is actually relevant to this tree, but not as Pel intended...

Why would you argue with the client about his decision to remove it, especially with targets that you admit? Are you willing to take responsibility of a failure?
You can't save every tree, bless your heart,,,,,
Jeff

 

[treeseer]

Zale, twigs are easy to see with binoculars. Yes an aerial assessment would be ideal, but it's not my tree, I've never seen it, don't know where it is. "I just got the below note and pics. What can I say?"

Jeff I would not argue but simply give specs and proposal for care. If I think removal is a bad idea I still might bid on it, with a couple zeroes added, and refer Bartlett or someone else high-priced.

A half-day's work could make this a low-risk tree.

6 comments and only 3 votes in the poll. ?

 

[HuskStihl]

Do you have a Ford Ranger available?

 

[Zale]

Treeseer- you must have a great set of binoculars if you can determine the amount of internode twig growth. Like I said, take it down.

 

[imagineero]

I'd be wanting to know the history of the lean. It looks like the leaders haven't tried to correct the lean which they generally will over time if the tree starts out growing at a lean. Was there a large tree behind it that was removed, which originally caused the tree to grow in suppression? If yes, I'd be concerned that the oak hadn't had enough exposure to wind loading which increases the risk. If not then it's likely the tree has subsided, and fairly recently too (last 5 years). I'd be looking for raised soil on the upside indicating root pull. If by some unlikely chance the tree has always had that entire space to itself and has grown that way its whole life and not subsided then I wouldn't be especially worried about the crack. If it met any of the previous criteria (subsiding, previous suppression by a larger tree, root pull, torsion bar) then it would be clear case removal for sure.

That's the primary thing I'd be looking at, though from the data and photos it seems a pretty clear case for removal. If it had always grown that way I'd be probing/drilling with a long thin drill around the fungus area to see what the wood situation is like. If it wasn't too bad (less than 15%) and the owner was keen on keeping the tree, and it had passed the earlier subsidence/suppression test then initially I'd consider it as a fairly severe weight reduction/thinning on the low side up to 30% of foliage and possibly light thinning on the upside depending on the structure of the tree with a follow up in 12 months, again very dependant on the tree structure and what the owner was hoping to achieve.

We do quite a bit of council work on public trees, and they are absolutely pro tree retention. Some of the work is heartbreaking, the reductions are just a delayed death sentence in many cases. The tree gets retained for a longer period of time though.... but at a greater overall cost. Any tree can have the risk reduced and the tree retained, but the result is often not aesthetically pleasing.

 

[imagineero]

I'd be curious about the follow up, and especially about the idea of replacing soil. Soils was never my strong point at school and I never really got my head around it so it just remains a mystery to me beyond the basics. My gut impression (based on nothing) is that replacing soil is a bad thing. Changing drainage is probably a good thing though. It's purely academic for me anyhow since we just don't do that kind of work.

I should post up some photos/case studies for input. A lot of the work we do falls far outside of best practice, but we have no say in it. I think we started in on a thread like that last year about the issue of removing major leaders, and whether collar cuts were necessarily a good thing or not and some interesting discussion got started but it was around the time the site was pretty flakey and before it went anywhere all those threads just got lost, then they were restarted and lost again and nobody had the energy to kick start it not knowing if the site was stable or not. If I have time and remember to I'll go take some pics of work and post them up.

 

[sac-climber]

Tomography time! That shear crack has nice wound wood though. Big tree with a major target, I would proceed with trepidation in this situation. Removal would be in my rec as a CYA even it weren't my first choice.

I'm with imagineero on the lean. If that's developed in say, the past 5 years, I'd call this is a clear case for removal.


BTW I voted for measure first.

 

[treeseer]

Tomography time! That shear crack has nice wound wood though. Big tree with a major target, I would proceed with trepidation in this situation. Removal would be in my rec as a CYA even it weren't my first choice.

Recommendations are not the best thing to put in the assignment. Listing management options is more objective, and less likely to push previously rational arborists into fear and CYA.

O and yes tomo would be useful but none available. Maybe 'measuring' by ear is good enough.

 

[sac-climber]

I tend to use the terms reccomendationss and management options interchangeably.

 

[Pelorus]

Mentioning that removal of urban trees as a management option is / can be irrational and inspired by fear is hardly objective.
Viewing tree preservation as a non-negotiable seems rigid, inflexible and intolerant.

 

[BC WetCoast]

Not being familiar with these species of fungus, I had to look them up. From the UNC website -

"Blow-down during rainstorms or windy periods is often the first and only indication of root rot. Sparse foliage with limb dieback also may be symptomatic of root rot but are not consistently associated with the disease prior to blow-down."

I would give the
-likelihood of failure - medium to high
-target - high
- size of part - whole tree - high
Therefore, the risk associated with this tree in it's current state to be high to extreme.

Now can you reduce the risk through pruning (weight reduction). I don't know without really looking at the tree. Also, I read where these fungi are very aggressive, with the Laetiporus sulphureus being a brown cubicle rot, which breaks down the cellulose of the heart wood. Given this, even if you can reduce the risk, you are extending the safety of the tree by only a few years, not decades.

Additionally, this tree does not appear to have an aesthetically dominating place in the landscape, that it isn't the dominating tree on the front lawn.

In my opinion, taking these factors into account, I would recommend removal and replacement.

 

[BC WetCoast]

Not being familiar with these species of fungus, I had to look them up. From the UNC website -

"Blow-down during rainstorms or windy periods is often the first and only indication of root rot. Sparse foliage with limb dieback also may be symptomatic of root rot but are not consistently associated with the disease prior to blow-down."

I would give the
-likelihood of failure - medium to high
-target - high
- size of part - whole tree - high
Therefore, the risk associated with this tree in it's current state to be high to extreme.

Now can you reduce the risk through pruning (weight reduction). I don't know without really looking at the tree. Also, I read where these fungi are very aggressive, with the Laetiporus sulphureus being a brown cubicle rot, which breaks down the cellulose of the heart wood. Given this, even if you can reduce the risk, you are extending the safety of the tree by only a few years, not decades.

Additionally, this tree does not appear to have an aesthetically dominating place in the landscape, that it isn't the dominating tree on the front lawn.

In my opinion, taking these factors into account, I would recommend removal and replacement.

 

[ATH]

I didn't vote for anything...because I can only say "I need to see in person to make a reasonable assessment."

I am less concerned about the lean than others: the root flare on the back side is certainly disproportionately large compared to the others indicating the tree has reacted to the lean decades ago.

Based on these pictures, are we sure we can call that a structural shear crack? Is it an old wound?

Finally: Nobody has pointed out the irony of the reasoning: "I am ready to remove the tree, but I don't want to drill a 3/16" diameter hole into the tree because it might speed spread of decay."

EDIT: I will vote for "punt"...I guess that is what I described!