Clearance Extreme--Cedar Lost?
- Thread starter treeseer
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
Kneejerk Bombas
ArboristSite King
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2001
- Messages
- 36,971
- Reaction score
- 9,983
Here's how I'da trimmed the tree. Accidently topped the cottonwood or whatever it is. 
Kneejerk Bombas
ArboristSite King
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2001
- Messages
- 36,971
- Reaction score
- 9,983
It isn't clear to me what you are saying Aussie.
"Less is more", were you talking about my picture, or the original trimming? Less tree left after trimming or less removed during trimming?
"pity someone else couldnt dazzle us with brilliance ", Are you saying I post too much, or what?
"Less is more", were you talking about my picture, or the original trimming? Less tree left after trimming or less removed during trimming?
"pity someone else couldnt dazzle us with brilliance ", Are you saying I post too much, or what?
i was hoping guy might dazzle me with brilliance,post as much as you feel it certainly wont worry me its all fun.with a bit of learning.
i think the trimmer took as little as possible in the circumstances-less is more.
i think the trimmer took as little as possible in the circumstances-less is more.
MasterBlaster
TreeHouse Elder
More to clean up!
Mike Cantolina
Addicted to ArboristSite
On a single phase I'd agree with Mike M. If they up it to a 3 phase I'd agree with Masterblaster and sidewall it or remove with permission.
Mike
Mike
John Paul Sanborn
Above average climber
IMO the tree was over pruned, though it depends on how the ROW easement was writen and past management practices throughout the electric plant. If you compare that with the ISA BMP you should be able to get something going.
My feeling from past communications with you is that NC is hard to get much done in this respect, and my cost more then the recompence. It would depend on how mad they are and if they want to help try to set president (SP?)
Contact Gopher, he workss for a util.co-op as a contract forester and has been addressing their past/new practice issues and ISA BMP compliance, along with co-op member concerns.
He has expert witness experiance and his rates pretty reasonable for phone conulting.
My feeling from past communications with you is that NC is hard to get much done in this respect, and my cost more then the recompence. It would depend on how mad they are and if they want to help try to set president (SP?
)Contact Gopher, he workss for a util.co-op as a contract forester and has been addressing their past/new practice issues and ISA BMP compliance, along with co-op member concerns.
He has expert witness experiance and his rates pretty reasonable for phone conulting.
Tree Wizard
ArboristSite Operative
"Was pruning excessive?" I would say yes.
"Is tree a total loss?" As a living tree entity it is not, however, as an aesthetic asset to the property it took a giant hit.
"How much if anything is the owner entitled to in damages?"
Appraising trees from pictures from a different geographical region of one's expertise probably shouldn't be done. That being said, in Wisconsin a red cedar does not have a very high species rating and from looking at the pics the location and placement ratings may not be very high either. Having worked on similar cases my experience is that utility companies (in SE WI at least) absolutely do not want complaints to the WI Public Service Commission and will bend over backwards to satisfy the homeowner.
"Is tree a total loss?" As a living tree entity it is not, however, as an aesthetic asset to the property it took a giant hit.
"How much if anything is the owner entitled to in damages?"
Appraising trees from pictures from a different geographical region of one's expertise probably shouldn't be done. That being said, in Wisconsin a red cedar does not have a very high species rating and from looking at the pics the location and placement ratings may not be very high either. Having worked on similar cases my experience is that utility companies (in SE WI at least) absolutely do not want complaints to the WI Public Service Commission and will bend over backwards to satisfy the homeowner.
Thanks to all for your thoughts; I agree with most of what most of you are saying. I voted for 4 tho my conclusions were 3+4: permanently hurt, loss >$5k. Aussie mb I don't see any way that amount removed was right, or that the tree will recover. moving the line was the best option, one the landowner would have helped pay for. Good tips about root damage and the PSC and yeah Gopher owes me but he's out of touch and I wanted to get this thing off my desk.
I expect that the owner and the utility will hammer out a settlement. A very sharp lawyer is standing by, but no one wants to go to court. I'd be glad to hear comments on the report:
ASSIGNMENT
June 4 2005 I met with. We reviewed pictures of an eastern redcedar, Juniperus virginiana tree, and a red maple tree, Acer rubrum, and discussed their history and the site at . The trees were pruned by Tree Service on behalf of in January 2005. I was assigned to report on the trees’ change in condition, value and prognosis for safe survival in the future. With a personal site visit and a thorough examination, I can revise this report into a document defensible in a court of law.
OBSERVATIONS
Twenty-nine (29) images were reviewed, none of them taken before January 2005. They show a mature redcedar, twenty-two (22) inches in diameter. No problems are evident with the foliage and branches in the unpruned part of the tree, or the trunk. Approximately one quarter of the tree appears to be missing. Redcedars, especially older ones, lack the dormant buds enable other trees to “green up” after a severe pruning. Two pictures show a closeup of the cuts with broken ends, apparently less than one foot from the trunk. Some cut ends are jagged, and one broken branch hangs down, still attached to the tree. The bark of the trunk, formerly shaded, is newly exposed to sunlight for the first half of the day. Tire prints indicate that the bucket truck drove onto the root systems of the trees.
CONCLUSIONS
The pruning work was not done in accordance with utility industry standards. The redcedar now poses a much higher risk to the power lines, for two reasons. First, the newly exposed stem is susceptible to bark death caused by sunscald, caused by sudden exposure to sunlight. If the bark dies, decay will inevitably set in, and if the wind is from the west, the top will tend to fail in the direction of the lines and the house. Second, the sudden loss of branches has an effect on the roots. Because roots are stimulated to grow by hormones made in the branch tips, removing a lot of branches from an older tree reduces root function. Essential processes like growing thicker bark in response to sunlight and growing callus—“scar”—tissue around pruning wounds are likely to be impaired because the root growth is impaired.
The homesite has lost much of the contribution that the tree made in shade, wind control, dirt and dust absorption, noise attenuation, privacy screen, transpirational cooling, and wildlife values. I am not an expert on aesthetics, but most authorities that I’ve consulted with agree that the tree has gone from a sizeable asset to the property to a sizeable liability. The majority believe that the aesthetic quality is so poor, it is an irredeemable loss. Since the bottom portion of the tree is a viable asset in terms of screen and other functions, I cannot appraise it as a total loss, but I will appraise it before and after January 2005. This appraisal is a “shorthand” version, useable only for the purposes of this report since it was done without direct gathering of evidence on site:
APPRAISAL
The tree’s cross-sectional area is 380 square inches. The Basic Value approved by the Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers in 2001 was $48/square inch, x 380 = a starting figure of $18, 237.00
The Species is rated at 80%, Condition at 90%, and Location at 90%; with these adjustments the tree was worth $11, 817.00 before January 2005. (Coincidentally, this is close to the cost of delivering and installing a mature replacement tree.) After the branch removal, in my estimation the Condition Rating has dropped to 20%, yielding a present value of $2,626.00, a loss of $9,191.00 due to the branch removal.
Judging from the pictures, the red maple was farther away than the cedar’s trunk, but its branches were shortened. To restore the tree to the health and symmetry that it once had, the tree will have to be pruned once next winter and once three years later. Dying branch stubs must be reduced back to healthy side branches to restore health, and light reduction cuts on the opposite side of the tree will restore symmetry. This pruning should cost approximately $150 per visit for a total of $300.00.
APPRAISED LOSS: $9,491.00
This concludes my report. I am available to clarify any portions or answer any questions.
I expect that the owner and the utility will hammer out a settlement. A very sharp lawyer is standing by, but no one wants to go to court. I'd be glad to hear comments on the report:
ASSIGNMENT
June 4 2005 I met with. We reviewed pictures of an eastern redcedar, Juniperus virginiana tree, and a red maple tree, Acer rubrum, and discussed their history and the site at . The trees were pruned by Tree Service on behalf of in January 2005. I was assigned to report on the trees’ change in condition, value and prognosis for safe survival in the future. With a personal site visit and a thorough examination, I can revise this report into a document defensible in a court of law.
OBSERVATIONS
Twenty-nine (29) images were reviewed, none of them taken before January 2005. They show a mature redcedar, twenty-two (22) inches in diameter. No problems are evident with the foliage and branches in the unpruned part of the tree, or the trunk. Approximately one quarter of the tree appears to be missing. Redcedars, especially older ones, lack the dormant buds enable other trees to “green up” after a severe pruning. Two pictures show a closeup of the cuts with broken ends, apparently less than one foot from the trunk. Some cut ends are jagged, and one broken branch hangs down, still attached to the tree. The bark of the trunk, formerly shaded, is newly exposed to sunlight for the first half of the day. Tire prints indicate that the bucket truck drove onto the root systems of the trees.
CONCLUSIONS
The pruning work was not done in accordance with utility industry standards. The redcedar now poses a much higher risk to the power lines, for two reasons. First, the newly exposed stem is susceptible to bark death caused by sunscald, caused by sudden exposure to sunlight. If the bark dies, decay will inevitably set in, and if the wind is from the west, the top will tend to fail in the direction of the lines and the house. Second, the sudden loss of branches has an effect on the roots. Because roots are stimulated to grow by hormones made in the branch tips, removing a lot of branches from an older tree reduces root function. Essential processes like growing thicker bark in response to sunlight and growing callus—“scar”—tissue around pruning wounds are likely to be impaired because the root growth is impaired.
The homesite has lost much of the contribution that the tree made in shade, wind control, dirt and dust absorption, noise attenuation, privacy screen, transpirational cooling, and wildlife values. I am not an expert on aesthetics, but most authorities that I’ve consulted with agree that the tree has gone from a sizeable asset to the property to a sizeable liability. The majority believe that the aesthetic quality is so poor, it is an irredeemable loss. Since the bottom portion of the tree is a viable asset in terms of screen and other functions, I cannot appraise it as a total loss, but I will appraise it before and after January 2005. This appraisal is a “shorthand” version, useable only for the purposes of this report since it was done without direct gathering of evidence on site:
APPRAISAL
The tree’s cross-sectional area is 380 square inches. The Basic Value approved by the Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers in 2001 was $48/square inch, x 380 = a starting figure of $18, 237.00
The Species is rated at 80%, Condition at 90%, and Location at 90%; with these adjustments the tree was worth $11, 817.00 before January 2005. (Coincidentally, this is close to the cost of delivering and installing a mature replacement tree.) After the branch removal, in my estimation the Condition Rating has dropped to 20%, yielding a present value of $2,626.00, a loss of $9,191.00 due to the branch removal.
Judging from the pictures, the red maple was farther away than the cedar’s trunk, but its branches were shortened. To restore the tree to the health and symmetry that it once had, the tree will have to be pruned once next winter and once three years later. Dying branch stubs must be reduced back to healthy side branches to restore health, and light reduction cuts on the opposite side of the tree will restore symmetry. This pruning should cost approximately $150 per visit for a total of $300.00.
APPRAISED LOSS: $9,491.00
This concludes my report. I am available to clarify any portions or answer any questions.
Lumberjack
Banned
I find appraising very interesting. Thanks Guy. I voted the tree was harmed, but would recover.
Stumper
One Man Band
Guy, it's a nice report for the angry Homeowner. The Council of Tree and landscape Appraisers offer an "interesting" (fantasy?) of tree value. Your appraised value approximating the cost of replacement was a happy coincidence. I find those values hard to defend-There is no way that the tree adds over $10k to the actual value of the property. Perhaps I should get more involved in appraising but I'd have to find some standard that didn't violate my conscience. That tree might actually be worth 2000-3000 dollars in the landscape-but I doubt it could make even that much difference in the sale price of the property.On the other hand being made whole is important and actual replacement value probably figures in somewhere. What got me was the estimated value-- if it were perfectly placed---was higher that the cost of perfectly replacing it! That is too screwey.
MasterBlaster
TreeHouse Elder
Stumper said:
I wonder how much the angry homeowner paid for that report.
I bet they used 'lectricity to call Guy!
mb that was a cheapie--I spent one hour reviewing the pics with him incl 2 phone calls, and 2 hours writing the report (incl a little time here w this thread ), so I only charged 3 hrs time, same rate as onsite consultations. That came out to about half what most appraisers charge for any report on their letterhead. From now on I'm adopting that minimum rate; the training and experience does not come cheap, and my sliding scale slides down too often for my own good. . Just like some other climbers who say they won't get into a tree for <$100, you gotta think of your overhead.
Justin I know what you mean. Change of RE value is one thing, replacement of lost tree value is another. I don't want to be part of a scam either, but if it takes $X to replace what was lost/taken/damaged, the owner's entitled to $X plus expenses, imo, despite RE value.
), so I only charged 3 hrs time, same rate as onsite consultations. That came out to about half what most appraisers charge for any report on their letterhead. From now on I'm adopting that minimum rate; the training and experience does not come cheap, and my sliding scale slides down too often for my own good. . Just like some other climbers who say they won't get into a tree for <$100, you gotta think of your overhead.Justin I know what you mean. Change of RE value is one thing, replacement of lost tree value is another. I don't want to be part of a scam either, but if it takes $X to replace what was lost/taken/damaged, the owner's entitled to $X plus expenses, imo, despite RE value.
MasterBlaster
TreeHouse Elder
Strip it all the way down, and let it recover.
What was that Shigo rule/ratio thing he said about trimming trees around pwr lines?
What was that Shigo rule/ratio thing he said about trimming trees around pwr lines?
Mike Cantolina
Addicted to ArboristSite
Another thought.........I can't tell from the pics but was there enough interior foliage in order to trim properly. I've seen many cedar with little or no interior foliage.
Mike
Mike
Treeman14
Addicted to ArboristSite
MasterBlaster said:
Do you mean 90-3-90?
" 90% of the time
3 branches can be removed to provide
90% of the clearance "
I'm not sure how well that would apply to a cedar tree.
Regarding the value: I think most appraisers tend to overestimate the REAL value of trees in the landscape.
MasterBlaster
TreeHouse Elder
Yes sir, Mr. Sir. That's the rule.
