Hazard from ROW trimming.

[John Paul Sanborn]

I looked at a honeylocust a few weeks ago that was V-gutted around primaries repeatedly. The nectria related dieback and large limb cankers in the area of repeated ROW trimming had created several areas of hazard. There appeared to be a large number of heading cuts involved also.

The electric forestry rep refused to remove the deadwood resulting from their treatment, offering to remove all to within 10 ft per their standard.

The client turned down an offer for a report stating that the hazard was a direct result of the ROW work, all she wanted were bids on hazard mitigation deadwood, and removal of remainder. (which would have been a small yard PITA over 5 structures, limited rig-points, old fences, raised bed, pole w/ transformer and distribution....)

Needles to say I bid high and did not get the job

WOuld nay of you who consult on hazard have offered a report to try to get the electric company to mitigate the hazard that resulted from their treatment?

 

[clearance]

That tree was once what we call "slash", and as such should have been cut down years ago, when it was little, and chipped. The utility should just cut it down now and stop the whining.

 

[joesawer]

Yes, I would have recomended trying to have the utility remove or trim the tree. I would have even offered to bid on removal after the utility trimmed their 10' clearance.

 

[treeseer]

Such a report may do some good but may not. Depends on the juridiction and the established standard of care. If the utility violated that then a report may persuade them to revisit the tree.:monkey:

 

[Bigus Termitius]

That tree was once what we call "slash", and as such should have been cut down years ago, when it was little, and chipped. The utility should just cut it down now and stop the whining.

Amen!

 

[ropensaddle]

This is age old problem of customers telling professionals
what they can do to their trees! I used to get ticked at the
one that when I recommended taking a tree out said oh no
way are you cutting my tree and I could understand if the
tree was desirable but roundovers and vees are not and
cost everyone on higher rates of electricity! The truth is
cut all fast growers with a base closer than 15 foot and
the remaining trims will look more natural be healthy and
line cost will be lower!I suggested an idea at the coop
I last worked at, plant a tree dogwood or crape for
removing a tree homeowner doesn't want cut sure
made my job easier and lines looking better as well as
trees. Too close look terrible base 20 feet away can
be trimmed to look nice almost untouched!

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

That tree was once what we call "slash", and as such should have been cut down years ago, when it was little, and chipped. The utility should just cut it down now and stop the whining.

Very often I see trees around here that I wonder why they did not just cut it the F down. But they just headed the begeebers out of it.

This tree is 33 in dbh (was?)

If you use an estimate of 1/2 inch diameter growth per year on average (very generous, but the basal flair is beautiful) it would be ~66 y/o

1/4dia" per year is 132 which averages 99 years.

It could easily predate the installation of primaries in the neighborhood. The V-gut had been going on for a very long time too.

Shoulda coulda woulda can be yammered about as much as any other point of view. This lady could easily be the 4th or 5th owner of the property ( 66th and North Guy, in Tosa)

1. the power company will not remove the tree en toto
2. the power company will not remediate the hazard created by their treatment

Do you think the current owner (who is willing to let WEPCO take the tree down) be liable for mitigation of the hazard?

 

[Themadd1]

I was driving to see family for the holiday and saw more ugly topped trees than ever before from the last year. Almost every tree in Johnstown, OH was topped. These trees dont fail because they are cut so short. They just lose large limbers.

Ever since I have been doing this job I cant help but look up and cringe at utility "prunings" if you can call them that. Anyway, if the homeowner doesnt want it why get yourself worked up over it. Our job as salesmen/women is to educate the homeowner. If we know our stuff and discuss the potential hazards then we can walk away without guilt. You did the right thing by offering your expertise and report. Above that you are going to fight an uphill battle trying to persuade a homeowner into spending the time, and money. By all means its what homeowners insurance is for. Situations like this.

If you gave all the information and bid the job correctly than the customer will call you back after they have had a chance to think it over, or else they will just have to eat crow when the tree falls over or loses a large limb onto their property.

It is the hard part of the business, most of us have good intentions about caring for trees. Unfortunately, you cant "save them all"

Cheers

Themadd1

 

[beowulf343]

Very often I see trees around here that I wonder why they did not just cut it the F down. But they just headed the begeebers out of it.

Because honestly, the homeowner will throw a fit if you even think about taking their tree down. Working row in backyards was horrible in this regard. There were hundreds of trees that should have been taken right down. But because some pos tree had "sentimental value," we could only rape it on the trim. I've had people who would rather we topped the tree than take it right down. And as to educating the homeowner-you ever try telling someone who is already mad at you for being in their yard that they are wrong?

The electric forestry rep refused to remove the deadwood resulting from their treatment, offering to remove all to within 10 ft per their standard.

Would any of you who consult on hazard have offered a report to try to get the electric company to mitigate the hazard that resulted from their treatment?

It would do no good. The utility cares about keeping the power on. They will remove within ten feet then not even worry about it-they got what they need.

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

It would do no good. The utility cares about keeping the power on. They will remove within ten feet then not even worry about it-they got what they need.

Not entirely true, there have been cases where the homeowner has prevailed against the utility.

I must not be expressing myself well. I am not worked up about the removal either way. The hazard could be mitigated, for years to come, with some judicious pruning. It would result in some big wounds, but the species tolerates it better then most.

With location and condition, I would not be adverse to the removal of the tree.

Either way the job was a PITA, and the primary contractor I was acting as sales agent/consultant/whatever for would not have been able to have competed on price with the. I also know he hates that type of work, because he can make better money on more straight forward jobs. As I said, I bid high, not expecting to get the job (we didnot)

A picture would have helped the discussion to, at least on condition...

My intent here was to see how many people would have offered to advocate for the landowner.

IMO if the ROW trimming company would have exceeded standards there the problem would have developed (collar cuts vs heading cuts on sprout branches).

 

[ropensaddle]

Not entirely true, there have been cases where the homeowner has prevailed against the utility.

I must not be expressing myself well. I am not worked up about the removal either way. The hazard could be mitigated, for years to come, with some judicious pruning. It would result in some big wounds, but the species tolerates it better then most.

With location and condition, I would not be adverse to the removal of the tree.

Either way the job was a PITA, and the primary contractor I was acting as sales agent/consultant/whatever for would not have been able to have competed on price with the. I also know he hates that type of work, because he can make better money on more straight forward jobs. As I said, I bid high, not expecting to get the job (we didnot)

A picture would have helped the discussion to, at least on condition...

My intent here was to see how many people would have offered to advocate for the landowner.

IMO if the ROW trimming company would have exceeded standards there the problem would have developed (collar cuts vs heading cuts on sprout branches).

The main reason clearance trimmers and utility's get a bad
rep is cause homeowners on distribution seem to call the
shots. I have worked in many states and cities all the same
noooo you are not cutting my tree, bottom line ; tree too
close = look terrible as clearance is the main objective on
power lines and those same people cause a more dangerous
job the next trim cycle! I once had a customer saying nooooo
I refused to trim as was instructed by our management and
sent certified letter stating the tree was a hazard under lines
that should have been removed. Weeks later it was blowing the
fuses and company sent me to trim I get the tree headed back
as had been done for years and found a tonka toy up in a crotch
which I showed to the customer. I save a lot of lawyers the hassle
that day and cut the tree down before any minds changed.