Bent hickory

[wysiwyg]

The weather warmed up a little today and I was able to take a closer look at the situation with everyone's suggestions in mind. I have found a suitable tree nearby that I can secure a rope to and will attempt to straighten the hickory when the weather permits. The diameter is actually about 4" dbh and it doesn't seem like it will be too difficult to force it to straighten out. I'll post an update when I make the attempt.

I also just posted a followup picture in a different thread of a nearby pin oak which was damaged while felling a cottonwood three years ago and is doing fine today without any intervention.

 

[pdqdl]

You are counting on that same vigor to cause a response if you are wanting to train a new branch as a leader. We're really doing the same thing except I'm starting at the ground, you are starting higher up on the trunk. My reasoning is that the new trunk will be stronger without the defect from a relatively large wound and wonky growing branch coming out of it.

Ok. We are mostly agreeing, but I'm gonna sell you on my perspective! You ready?

The only advantage offered by topping the tree at the ground level is that it is materially easier. Both cuts are likely to form many sprouts, among which the arborist should maintain over time to eliminate split leaders. I'm sure you will agree, right?

What's the difference, then? Topping, as shown by Del's latest picture makes a much smaller wound, which will close and compartmentalize much sooner than the comparable injury at the ground. It is erroneous to think that just because the suckers at the ground are closer to the roots that somehow the stump doesn't need to form callous, compartmentalize against disease, and seal over to prevent future infection. I am certain that you will agree that a smaller wound "heals" quicker, right?

I will argue with you that the shoots coming off the topped trunk will not be any more or less wonky than the shoots coming off your stump. I can guarantee that the curvature inherently found in wonky shoots will be hidden quicker by the trunk growth on a 3" diameter cut than on a 6" diameter stump. True, you think?

Let us add that there is are branches remaining on the topped tree. This will continue to provide photosynthesis energy for the tree and well developed root system. Coppicing the tree does not include that benefit, right?

My final point: new shoots to a tree at the ground level are subject to destruction by deer, riding mowers, and string trimmers. None of these risks are shared by the shoots sprouting at the "topped" altitude.

Agree with me, yet?

 

[pdqdl]

A related tale to hidden defects by the expansion of a tree's diameter:

Many years ago, my company was asked to remove a splendid looking oak tree. It was as attractive and perfectly healthy a tree as I have ever cut down. At 3 foot in diameter, it was no tiny job, either.

When all the canopy had been removed, we felt safe in felling the trunk into the street and anticipated no further problems. Boy were we wrong!

Despite the picture-perfect bark of the tree, it held a four-inch diameter core of concrete from some previous arboricultural "cure". We tried cutting above, below, and all sides. MANY chains were trashed trying to cut that damn spar down. Having cut the entire tree diameter through and through, we ended up setting a chain around the trunk as high as we could, then attached it to my Ford Explorer (low range, front axle pulling full time) and rammed it time after time until I managed to break the hidden column of concrete.

The point of this story is that a rapidly growing tree will often conceal early damage to the trunk, and appear perfectly normal. With an early topping of this thread's tree, the injury is little more than a scratch. I've cut many branches off other trees that were larger than the part we are talking about, and they seldom fail to callous over and close. 20 years later, even a 6" diameter wound cannot usually be found on a tree.