Cabling... your opinion?

[Kneejerk Bombas]

Crown reduction is not rocket science either, I don't have to get any tools out to tell you that a 50% smaller crown on the same size trunk is less likely to fail ... these are all valid theories ... but I don't agree with the crown reduction theory. Afterall, isn't that lopping and what the "old school" used to do. I get quotes for every day, can you cut that gum tree in half to make it safer!

Absolutely, I hope I live long enough to see all this crown reduction BS pass, but I won't.
What these rocket scientists need to do is measure the tree's strength, reduce it, come back in ten years, and then measure it again.
Even showing that strength loss would be meaningless, unless there was an identical tree that was left alone and measured at the same times.

As Ekka points out, even a badly topped tree is stronger because of smaller wind sail, that's why topping has survived as a tree care method for hundreds of years. It is so clear to see what happens down the road to topped trees, yet many arborists don't see the same things with crown reduced trees.

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

There are strength coeffecients that have been established for all trees. The perfect tree would score 100%. Knowing how much of a load would cause that tree to fail in it's present status gives a bracket on the other end of the continum. Knowing how much the load can be changed by cabling or pruning makes the report much more scientific. How much crown reduction is needed, if any?

Again, the implication here is that every tree benefits from crown reduction.

If the tree scored 90%, a CR could bring it to 95%. If it scored 80%, a CR could bring it to 85%. Even ask a back hoe operator, a 2 foot high stump is harder to pull out than a 4 foot high stump. See my point?

 

[treeseer]

Mike, when Tom says, "How much crown reduction is needed, if any?", you say, "the implication here is that every tree benefits from crown reduction." ?????

Tom did not imply that at all--can't you read the "if any"?. CR is just another tool to have in the box; no one but you is saying that it is generally recommendable.

"It is so clear to see what happens down the road to topped trees, yet many arborists don't see the same things with crown reduced trees."

Could it be that a properly made reduction cuts seals over and does not sprout out of control? The same things do NOT happen as with topped trees (some of which do recover and grow on very well0. Comparing proper CR and topping are apples and kumquats; very different.

"On Monday two speakers, David Evans from England and Jill Pokorny from US." Ekka, I'd be interested in knowing Ms. Pokorny's take on managing decay. I talked to her a couple years ago while reviewing the Fungal Strategies book. As I recall at that time she was of the (common) opinion that a tree infected with a woodrotting fungus should be removed. Can you find out what her view is today?

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

Mike, when Tom says, "How much crown reduction is needed, if any?", you say, "the implication here is that every tree benefits from crown reduction." ?????

Tom did not imply that at all--can't you read the "if any"?. CR is just another tool to have in the box; no one but you is saying that it is generally recommendable. Comparing proper CR and topping are apples and kumquats; very different.

Tom wrote: "The plan for that tree was a three-legged Cobra system as well as some crown reduction to reduce lateral and wind loads."

Because of these totally incomplete stress tests (I say totally incomplete because it treats trees as structures and not living, growing, dynamic, biological, constantly changing organs), every tree who's strength is questioned, has to be crown reduced! This beautiful Basswood is a perfect example.

You can not tell me that a small crown reduction will have any long term effect on this tree's ability to survive wind loads (well, you could tell me but I'd disagree).

Unfortunately these load studies, by prominent figures, have changed the way arborists will treat any tree that gets "too big". This is what I'm getting at with my "implication" statements.
Even if a 90 foot tree is strong, it can be stronger by properly trimming it down to 85 feet.

 

[Pondracer]

Additional pics of other maples

Here are the other maples that were recommended for cabling. These are in the back corner of my lot, next to my shed. The trouble is, I want to park my boat underneath here in the summer. I know I can't have perfect, assured safety - I'm just looking for reasonable safety. I had the trees trimmed last September to remove all the dead branches.

Maples by my shed

Right Tree
First Pic - Right Tree
Second Pic - Right Tree
Third Pic - Right Tree

Left Tree
First Pic - Left Tree
Second Pic - Left Tree
Third Pic - Left Tree

 

[rubberducky]

If you can just cut some of the limbs off the top with a tractor if you have one. But if not just hook on to it about 12 or 15 feet after the tree vees out and use wedges while you cut it down.

 

[Tom Dunlap]

DAng...I had a long response written and it poofed off to the netherworld.

Ekka,

Say HI to Jill from me. I worked on a the Urban Tree Risk Manual with her. The cabling chapter is mine.

Mike,

You misunderstand what I'm saying about CR. It isn't something to be used all of the time. In this case, the measurements can be taken and the load difference calculated. Also, the tree will need routine monitoring and maintenance to track the loads.

In specific instances there are benefits for CR. But, like other new techniques there are practitioners that don't fully understand the goals of CR and the effect on the tree.

Yesterday I was going through some back issues of the Journal of Arboriculture. There were some articles on the strengths and safety factors in trees. If I had more time I'd re-read them. All of the studies do acknowledge that trees are dynamic. The whole issue of risk managment is very fluid and dynamic. Unless we follow the advice of the remove all trees crowd there will be trees that might fail.

Have you read the proceedings book from the Tree Structure's and Mechanics workshop? That was THE BEST workshop/conference I have ever attended. There wasn't a minute that I wasn't learning about new tree topics. Sitting down to lunch with the prof from Australia, I can't recall his name right now, was so interesting. There are discoveries being made about trees that haven't been distributed to the masses. It's too bad that more people don't take the time to read the JA to stay current.

 

[treeseer]

It's too bad that more people don't take the time to read the JA to stay current.

And it's too bad that JA is not:

1. written in language that people can understand. The puffy prose is full of academese, for that "in" crowd. , Even though I'm fairly fluent in academese I hate they talk that way; many reqaders need an interpreter.

2. Fully accepting of submissions from non-university sources.

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

I have read every JOA for several years and find it just right. There are times when the "academese" can go over my head, but I'd rather be challenged than bored. There are also topics that I'm just not interested in, so the layout, with the summery at the end of each topic, is nice.

Tom,
I don't think I did misunderstand you. I realize that you don't think every tree needs CR, but look at this logically. You and Guy have taken the stand that CR reduces wind loads, CR does not hurt trees, wind loads do hurt trees. Therefore, any tree would then benefit from CR. Even if a tree is perfect, wouldn't it be nice to make it stronger?

How long after a CR are the effects completely gone because of regrowth?
How often can a certain percentage gain be made, doing a CR on the same tree?
What is the acceptable interval between repeated CRs?
How many times can a CR be done to a single tree before it needs removal?

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

Here are the other maples that were recommended for cabling. These are in the back corner of my lot, next to my shed. The trouble is, I want to park my boat underneath here in the summer. I know I can't have perfect, assured safety - I'm just looking for reasonable safety. I had the trees trimmed last September to remove all the dead branches.

Maples by my shed

Right Tree
First Pic - Right Tree
Second Pic - Right Tree
Third Pic - Right Tree

Left Tree
First Pic - Left Tree
Second Pic - Left Tree
Third Pic - Left Tree

I would think about cabling the tree on the right and forget about the tree on the left. Park your boat under the tree, if the tree hits the boat, your homeowners insurance should cover it.
The tree on the left really can't fall towards the shed, the right tree is in the way. The smallish stems on the left tree, don't look too weak at this point in time.
Frankly, the tree on the right looks like the right stem is strong, and the left stem is the one that might be weaker. Again, the left stem of that tree has nowhere to go, it's up against the left tree.
For just tree preservation, think about putting a strand in the right tree. It looks to be a good candidate for a cable.

 

[treeseer]

You and Guy have taken the stand that CR reduces wind loads, CR does not hurt trees ...

Mike, neither Tom nor I ever said that any pruning does not hurt rees. Pruning is wounding; that is why every cut needs a good reason.

How long after a CR are the effects completely gone because of regrowth?

Many years, often never on an old tree.

How often can a certain percentage gain be made, doing a CR on the same tree?

Indefinite.
What is the acceptable interval between repeated CRs?
How many times can a CR be done to a single tree before it needs removal?[/QUOTE]Interval? varies widely--seldom sooner than 3 years, by my experience. #times? As many as it takes, which is nowhere near as many as you may think. Once will do it for many specimens, since the regrowth is not all shooting off the wounds and up into the sky, but interior and lateral, which makes for a smaller, safer tree for the long run.

 

[Tom Dunlap]

I have read every JOA for several years and find it just right. There are times when the "academese" can go over my head, but I'd rather be challenged than bored. There are also topics that I'm just not interested in, so the layout, with the summery at the end of each topic, is nice.

*That's my approach too. I figured that you read the JA but too many arbos don't. There are topics in JA that are like trace elements or vitamins, we need little bits of a lot of things in order to function.

*Let me inject a few modifiers to what you've written. This will either make things more clear or completely %#&# things up

I realize that you don't think every tree needs CR, [Right, only in very specific cases]
You and Guy have taken the stand that CR reduces wind loads, [Everything that I've read supports this]
CR does not hurt trees, [Not true, we would be wounding the tree which is damage. Also, we're playing with the root/crown relationship. We're also forcing the tree to direct the growth where, we hope, it will benefit the tree. Sometimes the trees don'e cooperate.]
wind loads do hurt trees. [If the wind load is greater than the strength of the tree, something has to give. With our years of observational experience we can predict pretty well where a failure will take place. If we were given a tree and weather conditions, I'll bet that you, Guy and I would agree where we would expect that tree to fail. This would be just a more/less likely diagnosis, not with any kind of percentage chance, after all, we're not Vulcans.]
Therefore, any tree would then benefit from CR. [I don't jump to that conclusion, nor do I advocate that line of logic. I think that what you're saying is that some people will make that conclusion. I know that you're right. Since my Grandmother lived to be 83 and smoked heavily I could say that it proves that smoking isn't as bad as "they" say. Not logical, even for a non-Vulcan.]
Even if a tree is perfect, wouldn't it be nice to make it stronger? [I don't mess with perfection, that's a theological issue We can't make the tree stronger by pruning, all we can ever do is shuffle the deck.]

How long after a CR are the effects completely gone because of regrowth? [Too many variables. Since the tree would have concentrated new growth lower in the canopy there would be more bulk and diameter, don't you agree? When I took the week seminar from Shigo around 15 years ago he pointed out to us the value of reduction cuts. That was an eye-opener. I distinctly remember the tree he talked about. A locust with a co-dom. By slowing down the growth of one leader buy making well-placed reduction cuts that side would 'freeze-frame' and the other would grow larger. Soon, the pruned stem would become a branch instead. Gilman has championed this too.]
How often can a certain percentage gain be made, doing a CR on the same tree?
What is the acceptable interval between repeated CRs? [can't say...too many variables.]
How many times can a CR be done to a single tree before it needs removal? [Look at the ancient tree forum in the UK. There are many trees that have been properly pollarded and are still sound. The picture is of a chestnut in "One Tree Hill Park" at the Greenwich Observatory in London. The tree is over 300 years old. There is a whole allee of trees in the same condition.]

I'm having a problem posting so I'll put up the pics later.

 

[clearance]

Pondracer-do you really like your boat? There are other opinions beside the ones from the tree hugging self admiration society. No matter what you have been led to believe it is o.k. to cut down trees, you will not go to hell for it. Say you get your tree cabled or fagged out by some arborist, when a big storm comes up and the wind starts, you will worry a bit.

 

[NickfromWI]

Pondracer-do you really like your boat? There are other opinions beside the ones from the tree hugging self admiration society. No matter what you have been led to believe it is o.k. to cut down trees, you will not go to hell for it. Say you get your tree cabled or fagged out by some arborist, when a big storm comes up and the wind starts, you will worry a bit.

Yes, and your neighbors may be out to get you, so you should move, or get them first. And when you're driving down the street, those other cars could swerve into your lane, so I wouldn't drive if I were you. The telephone poles could fall on your head, so don't walk on the sidewalk. If you have children, you will always have to worry if they'll make it home on safe and on time, so I would recommend you don't have kids, either.

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

Pondracer-do you really like your boat? There are other opinions beside the ones from the tree hugging self admiration society. No matter what you have been led to believe it is o.k. to cut down trees, you will not go to hell for it. Say you get your tree cabled or fagged out by some arborist, when a big storm comes up and the wind starts, you will worry a bit.

Hey Clearance, this poster is a member at The Morton Arboretum. He also said he bought the property because of the trees. So far you have insulted not only people who care for trees, but people who value trees in general.
I can only conclude that you are either a troll, or very, very ignorant.

 

[clearance]

Mike-people like you on this site have called me ignorant, uneducated, a dinosaur, clown, lazy and of course a hack. The worst I have handed out is treehugger ( which is a bad insult, but some here take it as a compliment), I can take it, I just play the duck. At work snivelling, whining treehuggers are often in my face, giving me a hard time for cutting down trees that they do not own or have any legal say in. I'll take the "ignorant" insult for now, thanks. I don't care what arboretum he is a member of, b.f.d., like I said when the storm comes he will be thinking tree or boat, tree or boat. Sure hope it is a mass produced boat that can easily be replaced. And, how do you figure that I insulted this guy or anyone else that value trees? All I said was cut it down.

 

[Old Monkey]

This is me, almost ignoring clearance.

I'm more interested in the tree debate going on. I am not as well read as you gentlemen about arborculture, so bear with me. I have considered that one of the advantages to a deciduous tree is that by shedding its leaves it reduces not only its wind resistance but its surface area. So in a winter rain, less water weight is added to the tree that has shed its leaves. I have been to many emergency tree removals that occurred after a late season storm after the tree leafed out. Could reduced surface area to hold water weight be a significant factor in the benefit of a crown reduction?

 

[treeseer]

pondracer, thanks for posting the pics. They do show some defective forks with included bark--the left one shows more than the right--, but since each trunk moves as part of the grove, and target rating is low, I would not cable either. I would shorten some branches that are sprawling,to lessen strain on those defects, but it would be better to do nothing than to give this job to someone inexperienced.

Could reduced surface area to hold water weight be a significant factor in the benefit of a crown reduction?

Perhaps so, but there is no reason to prescribe overall crown reduction on any trees that do not have a condition compelling enough to override the loss of foodmaking, and the wounding.

I agree with Clearance--when storm winds blow, tree owners will worry. So will flower owners, homeowners, parents, etc. no one wants to lose their assets or their loved ones.

Mike and Clearance seem to have a lot in common--Clearance rails at "fagging out" a tree (and I wish he would tell us what he means), Mike rails against reduction pruning as a step in removal. Sounds similar, doesn't it? Are they twins, separated at birth?

Now you two be nice :angel: to your brother.

 

[Old Monkey]

Clearance rails at "fagging out" a tree (and I wish he would tell us what he means)

I have said it before, clearance work is important work that is mostly underappreciated. However, I think that I have spent the better part of 8 years "fagging out" trees. Silly me.

 

[clearance]

Guys "fagging out" is a term used when a tree is worked on when it should have been cut down. I have fagged out trees myself cause that is what the municipal arborists wanted me to do. It is no reflection on anyones preferance, I like women and I hope you guys do also. It is just a term that conveys dissapointment in not being able to do a proper job.