Fixing an old mistake

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Hamons

New Member
Joined
May 30, 2003
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Location
Overalnd Park, KS
First, I am a landscaper who always refers arborist work to a good friend -- who is unfortuantely out of town for two weeks. So I thought I would try and get some advice from you guys.

I have a customer who just moved into a very nice home that has a beautiful 36" diameter maple tree in her front yard. ABout 5 foot up the tree someone has cut an 8" branch off. However they cut it off at an upward angle that is about 3 inches before the collar. What has happened over time is that he middle of this cut branch has rotted away and has formed a very large bowl that holds water. If I stick my hand into the bowl, there was easily 5" of water in there.

I'm concerend about this being a perfect site for disease, infection and insects to attack this strikingly beautiful tree. What do you think? Does something need to be done here or do we just call it a natural bird bath and go on with life?

Thanks for your advice,
jeff
 
Last thoughts I have heard and read is to leave it alone. The water in the 'bowl' is helping to keep air out of the area which will hamper the ability of aerobic bacteria to multiply and cause serious damage. If the area is drilled for drainage you may induce aerobic bacteria to come by and do their thing without any restraint at all possibly causing serious internal rot and decay to your tree.
 
Cut the stub back by making a proper collar cut. The tree will compartmentalize the wound relatively quickly, and greatly reduced in the long run.

Jimmy... what about ANaerobic bacteria?

Jeff, welcome to the site. We get a lil rowdy now and then, but you can pick up alot of good stuff.

Erik
[email protected]
www.netree.org:D
 
Arboriculture, 3rd edition (I know 4th is out, I haven't bought it yet) page 533:
Treating cavities:
"Installing drain tubes probably causes more harm than the water, particularly if sound wood is exposed (Shigo and Felix, 1980)"

So I figure water is better than air exposure personally, but as I reread the original post it sounds more like a branch stub that has a cavity, in which case removal of the stub may be a better solution. Keep in mind that you will be opening a new wound which the tree will have do deal with, which could be more problematic long term than the cavity you now have. More problematic by bringing the wound closer to the trunk and risking further decay of structure.
 
Originally posted by jimmyq
...but as I reread the original post it sounds more like a branch stub that has a cavity, in which case removal of the stub may be a better solution.

That was my take on it as well. If the reverse was true, you'd be correct- leave the hole alone.

You have to weigh alot of factors, not the least of which is the time it would take the tree to compartmentalize the wound. A proper cut, although it does MAKE a fresh wound, would comp. alot faster than the the rotted stub full of stagnant water that obviously isn't sealing over at all anyway. It sounds like the decay is already starting into the trunk. The faster you can get that wound closed, the better.

Whoever originally made that cut should be slapped... hard... and shown the error of his ways.:D

Erik
[email protected]
www.netree.org
 
The compartmentalization has probably alraedy occured in the stub so i would agree with Erik on cutting back to a proper collar cut so tat the tree can grow over cavity that has/will form.

If the collar is forming around the branch evenly, then there iprobably a good branch barrier in the wood farther in, allowing the tree to wall off any decay better.

If you lrave a little stub after the collar jsut to be cautious, that is not a bad thing.

It is far better to stub a little,
then to flush at all.
 
Originally posted by netree

Cut the stub back by making a proper collar cut. The tree will compartmentalize the wound relatively quickly, and greatly reduced in the long run.

Jimmy... what about ANaerobic bacteria?

Jeff, welcome to the site. We get a lil rowdy now and then, but you can pick up alot of good stuff.

Erik
[email protected]
www.netree.org:D


Not particularly picking on netree, but let me try to tidy up some of my observations about a few items in the thread:

Shigo talks about the preservation of the collar as not interrupting the vessel path from above that is diverted around a branch.

There are two continuities, or layers of vessels, to maintain when a living branch cylinder is joined to a larger living cylinder.

The trunk vessel system has to get around every branch to continue down to the roots. The branch vessel system has to come into the junction and re-arange itself so it too can continue down to the roots.

The branch bark collar is the location where these re-arrangements take place, and the collar is generally larger than the original branch because the collar also has trunk vessels added to the incoming branch vessels.

Every cut removing a branch itself eliminates that whole branch vascular system as a contributor to the tree. There are no sugars available anymore to the cell maintenance of branch vessels or to the branch cambium that created the branch diameter. That loss is basic to the pruning of each and every branch we select to cut.

If the collar is left alone, the trunk vessels can continue to divert around the old branch location. The collar is the containment for that bypass and the flows of water up and sugars down is continued.

If the collar is cut as in a flush cut, the trunk bypass-the-branch paths are interrupted at the top and the bottom of the collar junction. There is no longer a direct path in that area around the branch and down to the roots. The flows of water up and sugars down, is ended.

The larger the branch diameter, the wider the area above and below the branch that is now out of the vascular system.

We agree that the loss of the branch means that half of the combined supply system that is re-arranged in the collar is gone forever.

If the collar stays intact in a Shigo cut, the above supply from the crown stays intact and is available to supply the surrounding cambium for closure of the wound.

Cut off the collar completely in a flush cut, and that last top half of the collar supply is is interrupted as well. The area below, as a width of the diameter, becomes a sort of "dead" zone and that's where epicormic growth generally appears to try to be replacemnts for the missing limb. The next avaialble supply sources are the unbroken trunk vessels immediately to each side of the flush cut wound. It is much less common to see that same growth response above the pruning wound.



Closure in a non-Shigo cut is slowed significantly mostly because there is now a smaller supply of sugars, and the diffusion of sugars from the side untouched vessels is small comparatively to the robust original configurations.

At the time these understandings were formulated, closure time was very important to Alex, and closure times were a subject of great debate.

I believe we should think in tree time; the time scales that trees have developed over their evolutions for different processes and functions. It may be very naive to think that we can alter them in line with our silly ideas of instant everything and satisfying our senses of convenience.

Chainsaw are a staggering new type of wounding to trees and CODIT. We create multiple unnatural wounds simultaneously, and wonder why closure isn't fixing them.

<hr>

If Hamons can reach into the branch stub and have his hand enter the trunk, that's a real clue that compartmentalization has not taken place sufficiently--it seems to have failed its original intention. Cutting the remaining stub any distance from the collar <u>is not</u> a fresh wound, <u>will not</u> initiate compartmentalization.

<u>CODIT was initiated when the 8" limb was first removed</u>. Closure is a rather independent process and should not be confused with CODIT proper. Closure also often hides the continuing decay from us and gives the false impression that any internal structural deterioration has ended.

Cutting a dead branch or shortening a dead stub is nor wounding in my book, and it doesn't start up CODIT bcause CODIT had already begun when the limb died--by saw or by other causes.

Jimmq is correct in saying drilling a drain hole will be a fresh wound in the already CODITed wood. That act puts at risk for decay, all the wood created from the original time of wounding up to the time of the drill wound. Not a good deal...

<hr>

Death and wounding initiate CODIT as a tree's best effort interrnally to anticipate and delay decay.

Wound closure does not signify the end of internal decay. Closure is presently misunderstood as an achievement in a tree's defense to continued deterioration internally. It is not.

Speeding closure is an interesting goal, but closure and its speed depends mostly on tree vigor and external conditions. It is more mathematical than anything else, and likely can never be faster than the division and maturation time for its cambium cells.

Tree paint won't accelerate closure; leaving the collar means the closing edges can come in from a fuller circle--which appears to be accelleration, but I consider it more as increased area coverage-- at rather the same rate.


Bob Wulkowicz
 
Last edited:
Is your concern for diseases and infestations to the tree or breeding ground for mosquitoes and such vermin? If so, I think that you have a valid concern. BUT!!! you have to consider that there are a lot of other tree holes with water sitting in them. Think of it like this, picking up litter on the ground is a good idea, and should be done, there is always more just around the corner.

Tom
 
Thnak you all

Thank you all for the great advice. It seems like if I asked twenty arborists I might get 21 different answers. Just like in landscaping.

Here are the oprions as I undersand them.

#1 -- leave it as it is. Keeps out insects and aerobic bacteria. Will not heal and may further decay.

#2 -- Drill a drain hole. Wil drain the water but almost certainly speed decay

#3 - Flush cut -- may help tree heal its wounds, but may cause further damage to tree and causea alarge wound which opens itself to further problems. Impairs the tree's vascualr system.

------------------

#3 seems like the best solution. It doesn't seem like in my naievity that it would be enough to cause cause vascualar problems to the tree cince it is less than 20% of it's circumfrence -- maybe less. I'm afraid if I tell the homeowner this though they will go out and cut it themselves. That would be like putting bandaid on with a baseball bat.


Again -- thank you for your comments -- I think this has spurred good discussion. I know that I am learning something.
 
Hamons, We may have a semantics problem rather than a misunderstanding but for what it is worth.....I don't think that anyone was advocating a "flush cut". In our parlance that would mean cutting inside the branch collar all the way back to the trunk/"parent branch" tissue. What is being suggested is to cut back to the collar. As JPS and BW have pointed out this does not cause a new wound since only already dead tissue is affected.

Bob keeps challenging our reasoning about "proper" cuts because: A. He really enjoys being a pain in the butt.:p B. A lot of what we "know" is incomplete and possibly incorrect. For several generations we made flush cuts in North America. The trees did not all die. In many cases the larger wound of a flush cut will close faster than a collar cut. However, the research of Shigo and others revealed a greater incidence of structural flaws and more failures of compartmentalization when flush cuts were compared to collar cuts. Now all us edycated tree whackers make collar cuts. We get good results. The theories and reasoning behind them are logical. As Bob keeps nagging though- much of the "care" we give trees is more concerned with manipulating tree growth for human ends rather than a pure pursuit of tree health. I think that tree manipulation is ethical and reasonable. It allows us to enjoy our landscapes and in some cases preserves a tree that would otherwise be summarily executed. It IS good to remind ourselves now and then that ,frequently, our wounding of trees "for their own good" is questionable.;)
 
Re: Thnak you all

Originally posted by Hamons

Thank you all for the great advice. It seems like if I asked twenty arborists I might get 21 different answers. Just like in landscaping.

Here are the oprions as I undersand them.

#1 -- leave it as it is. Keeps out insects and aerobic bacteria. Will not heal and may further decay.



If you get 21 different answers, you should run away.

The decay is going to continue almost regardless of what you do. If there's a concern about mosquitos, pour in some vegetable oil to plug the breathing tubes of the larvae, There will be no "disease" because the center wood of that tree is already dead,




#2 -- Drill a drain hole. Wil drain the water but almost certainly speed decay


No, you will introduce new decay in the new wood that the tree has built since the pruning job that took off the 8" limb. That small wound can deceptive as to the the trouble it can cause




#3 - Flush cut -- may help tree heal its wounds, but may cause further damage to tree and causea alarge wound which opens itself to further problems. Impairs the tree's vascualr system.

------------------

#3 seems like the best solution. It doesn't seem like in my naievity that it would be enough to cause cause vascualar problems to the tree cince it is less than 20% of it's circumfrence -- maybe less. I'm afraid if I tell the homeowner this though they will go out and cut it themselves. That would be like putting bandaid on with a baseball bat.



Absolutely no for a flush cut. Would you let someone take out your kidneys because they were less than 3% of your body weight? Numbers and percentages aren't relevant here; we must respect how the tree handles its own problems.

The flush cut is almost a guarantee to give the tree additional difficulties.If you all think the tree is beautiful, leave the cavity alone and concentrate on mulch and water as important aids to keeping it healthy.

If the hole is truly distturbing, blot out most of the water inside with some rags you can stuff in and then remove, then use expanding foam to the top of the collar. The tree will continue to close over and the cavity will disappear eventually. Please don't anyone do any more cutting.



Again -- thank you for your comments -- I think this has spurred good discussion. I know that I am learning something.


<hr>


Stumper wrote in while I was adding a few more pounds of words again. I was recognozed by the ISA recently as being the biggest pain in the ass they had ever seen. Donations are being accepted to send me to a country that doesn't know English or have the Internet. First class, please...


BoB :)
 

Latest posts

Back
Top