Please comment on this work

[NORTREE]

To me that constitutes hack work. I can understand the desire to reduce loading on that tree, but you are doing the client no favors with your treatment. What will be the state in 3-6 years...10-15?

The tree is to be removed per the customer in 2-4 years. I recommended removal in a written letter.

The thing that keeps me from not walking from a customer like this is the other work (including this removal) we will be losing in the future if we tell him he is a ******* and won't do the work.

In the spring, we are going to crown clean and restore 3 maples in the rear that had been topped 5 years ago.

I suppose I am just a sell out. Or I just have problem convincing people in what is right and wrong.

I think you will find that in 2-4 years the customer will keep the tree as they obviously think topping is proper tree work.You mention they have topped trees in the back yard and that this tree was topped years ago(and they probably said then that in 3-4 years they will have it removed).
As we all know that tree is going to sucker out with fast growing weak attached wood which can be a liability to you.I know it's hard to walk away from work but sometimes you just have to.

 

[teamtree]

is that a snake skin?!!!!!!!!!!!!!

it is a plastic blow up snake.

 

[teamtree]

I think you will find that in 2-4 years the customer will keep the tree as they obviously think topping is proper tree work.You mention they have topped trees in the back yard and that this tree was topped years ago(and they probably said then that in 3-4 years they will have it removed).
As we all know that tree is going to sucker out with fast growing weak attached wood which can be a liability to you.I know it's hard to walk away from work but sometimes you just have to.

Not that it is the same, but I was reading an article the other day about storm damage restoration and the subject of cutting trees back to larger than recommended heading cuts was acceptable in many cases. I am not sure how the law works but if you are hired to do a specific task against your recommendation how can you become liable for the result. I know the answer so don't bother going there. But getting back to the restoration work after a storm. You go in and cut the broken limbs out of the tree as the customer does not want to remove the tree. It results in sucker growth which you recommend we come back and remove a portion of the suckers. But in 2 years you come back and they say the tree looks fine just let it go. Where does the liability end?

I try to keep things as simple as possible with my customer and i really hate all the legal hassles people go through to cover your ass. You can have a verbal contract. If you tell someone the tree needs to be removed why does it have to go any further than that. Again, I know the answers to all my questions I am just frustrated with not being able to do what I recommend because the customer thinks otherwise.

My new line now is....Do you tell your surgeon where to cut you and what to remove?

 

[(WLL)]

it is a plastic blow up snake.

hay team, when your done pumpin that cavity, please stop leaving your plastic blow up snakes in the trees! on a better note the tree looks like chit, topping is a poor practise, but its better than no tree at all.

 

[teamtree]

hay team, when your done pumpin that cavity, please stop leaving your plastic blow up snakes in the trees! on a better note the tree looks like chit, topping is a poor practise, but its better than no tree at all.

what is the recommeded filler? concrete or my personal favorite expanding foam

I usually tell people my artistic skills are lacking

 

[loveroftrees]

More people in this industry should worry about their work. You are not a hack if you take the time to consult about what you should do. Granted the tree looks pretty bad, but you have the right mind to do alot of good work. Hold your head up and go forward. Look if you recommended this type of work or did not see the long term affects YOU would be a hack. You are not. Good luck I'm sure their is alot of good work you have done and will do....bob

 

[treeseer]

Not that it is the same, but I was reading an article the other day about storm damage restoration and the subject of cutting trees back to larger than recommended heading cuts was acceptable in many cases. ..."

Here is a recent pub on that--pages 3-5. http://hort.ifas.ufl.edu/woody/documents/EP300.pdf

You go in and cut the broken limbs out of the tree as the customer does not want to remove the tree. It results in sucker growth which you recommend we come back and remove a portion of the suckers. But in 2 years you come back and they say the tree looks fine just let it go. Where does the liability end?... If you tell someone the tree needs to be removed why does it have to go any further than that.

Because one set of ears hears different than the other, but writing makes one version. See the attached for one tool you can adapt to your business.

 

[teamtree]

thanks treeser!

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

Too bad you did not stste the proposed removal cycle in the initial post.

I do not go for disclaimers, I just put tthe recomendation for removal in thee bidd and the notes on the invoice, then caall it a partial removal with a referance to the agreement fforr schedualling of complete removal and thet the client is responsible for ensuring that the schedule is adheard to.

 

[diltree]

I don't think its worth placing your good name and reputation on the line. When you prune a tree you put your name on it..............You guys seem to be operating a reputable company that exceeds professionalism, why compromise your image on one job?

 

[teamtree]

To be honest, I live in a rather rural area and I do not have the luxury of having enough work from my "good" customers that I can turn down everything that is not "totally acceptable". We try to travel to some of the larger cities about 60-70 miles away but with gas prices being what they are it is hard to be competitive and/or johnny on the spot.

A lack of well educated competition is another problem.
In a 60-70 mile radius of my area there are about 4 "working" Certified Arborists the rest of the competition is pretty pathetic when it comes to having a quality product. I have spoke with many of them and they just don't seem to care (or know right from wrong). They care more about the customer paying the bill. I ask them why they do this or why they do that and they give all kinds of answers. I really think most of them don't care what anybody thinks. Some probably don't realize what they are doing. I admit I looked up to the local tree pros when I first started and they taught me how to butcher trees. I wanted more and I joined the ISA and TCIA and started to educate myself. I found out the people I looked up to were frauds. I have been trying to make amends ever since but I do have my lapses and do what the customer wants.

For instance, I was talking with a customer about a prune job on a red maple. He was building a garage and want the tree cut back. I explained that is not necessary. We just need to do some pruning and cutting back some of the limbs that are going to cause problems with the new construction. He said you know what to do so go do it. I spent two hours on the tree doing a thorough job of pruning only to get out and have the customer chew me out for not "trimming" his tree. I should have walked with out a check and been done that is where I made the mistake. I said I will go up and have him indicate the height he wanted the tree to be. I went about 3/4 of the way up and he said lower and I came down to about 1/2 and he said trim it there. So 20 minutes later he had his "trimmed" tree.

I want to make the customer happy and I want educate them at the same time. I would say on trim calls, 50-75% of the calls for request for estimates are for "topping" or "trimming" in which they want shorter trees. We go out and educate them but they don't care. They see what happens in 2 years....the trees have bushed out and they "like" it. In the past I have topped several trees and the customers are so happy it is not even funny. I flat out butchered their trees and they are happy.

I am not making any excuses for myself. I know I am doing wrong and I do not like it but I want to stay in business and work hard to educate the next person that calls and do a "real professional" job for them.

I appreciate you guys listening to me and offering advice.

 

[treeseer]

I explained that is not necessary. We just need to do some pruning and cutting back some of the limbs that are going to cause problems with the new construction. He said you know what to do so go do it. I spent two hours on the tree doing a thorough job of pruning only to get out and have the customer chew me out for not "trimming" his tree. .

Save some branch sections that were hollow and with torn ends due to topping to show customers. They MAY understand if they see the rot caused by topping.

Why Topping Hurts Trees

Topping is perhaps the most harmful tree pruning practice known. Yet, despite more than 25 years of literature and seminars explaining its harmful effects, topping remains a common practice. This brochure explains why topping is not an acceptable pruning technique and offers better alternatives.

What is Topping?

Topping is the indiscriminate cutting of tree branches to stubs or lateral branches that are not large enough to assume the terminal role. Other names for topping include “heading,” “tipping,” “hat-racking,” and “rounding over.”

The most common reason given for topping is to reduce the size of a tree. Home owners often feel that their trees have become too large for their property. People fear that tall trees may pose a hazard. Topping, however, is not a viable method of height reduction and certainly does not reduce the hazard. In fact, topping will make a tree more hazardous in the long term.

Topping Stresses Trees

Topping often removes 50 to 100 percent of the leaf-bearing crown of a tree. Because leaves are the food factories of a tree, removing them can temporarily starve a tree. The severity of the pruning triggers a sort of survival mechanism. The tree activates latent buds, forcing the rapid growth of multiple shoots below each cut. The tree needs to put out a new crop of leaves as soon as possible. If a tree does not have the stored energy reserves to do so, it will be seriously weakened and may die.

A stressed tree is more vulnerable to insect and disease infestations. Large, open pruning wounds expose the sapwood and heartwood to attacks. The tree may lack sufficient energy to chemically defend the wounds against invasion, and some insects are actually attracted to the chemical signals trees release.

Topping Causes Decay

The preferred location to make a pruning cut is just beyond the branch collar at the branch’s point of attachment. The tree is biologically equipped to close such a wound, provided the tree is healthy enough and the wound is not too large. Cuts made along a limb between lateral branches create stubs with wounds that the tree may not be able to close. The exposed wood tissues begin to decay. Normally, a tree will “wall off,” or compartmentalize, the decaying tissues, but few trees can defend the multiple severe wounds caused by topping. The decay organisms are given a free path to move down through the branches.

Topping Can Lead to Sunburn

Branches within a tree’s crown produce thousands of leaves to absorb sunlight. When the leaves are removed, the remaining branches and trunk are suddenly exposed to high levels of light and heat. The result may be sunburn of the tissues beneath the bark, which can lead to cankers, bark splitting, and death of some branches.

Topping Creates Hazards

The survival mechanism that causes a tree to produce multiple shoots below each topping cut comes at great expense to the tree. These shoots develop from buds near the surface of the old branches. Unlike normal branches that develop in a socket of overlapping wood tissues, these new shoots are anchored only in the outermost layers of the parent branches.

The new shoots grow quickly, as much as 20 feet in one year, in some species. Unfortunately, the shoots are prone to breaking, especially during windy conditions. The irony is that while the goal was to reduce the tree’s height to make it safer, it has been made more hazardous than before.

Topping Makes Trees Ugly

The natural branching structure of a tree is a biological wonder. Trees form a variety of shapes and growth habits, all with the same goal of presenting their leaves to the sun. Topping removes the ends of the branches, often leaving ugly stubs. Topping destroys the natural form of a tree.

Without leaves (up to 6 months of the year in temperate climates), a topped tree appears disfigured and mutilated. With leaves, it is a dense ball of foliage, lacking its simple grace. A tree that has been topped can never fully regain its natural form.

Topping Is Expensive

The cost of topping a tree is not limited to what the perpetrator is paid. If the tree survives, it will require pruning again within a few years. It will either need to be reduced again or storm damage will have to be cleaned up. If the tree dies, it will have to be removed.

Topping is a high-maintenance pruning practice, with some hidden costs. One is the reduction in property value. Healthy, well-maintained trees can add 10 to 20 percent to the value of a property. Disfigured, topped trees are considered an impending expense.

Another possible cost of topped trees is potential liability. Topped trees are prone to breaking and can be hazardous. Because topping is considered an unacceptable pruning practice, any damage caused by branch failure of a topped tree may lead to a finding of negligence in a court of law.

Alternatives to Topping

Sometimes a tree must be reduced in height or spread. Providing clearance for utility lines is an example. There are recommended techniques for doing so. If practical, branches should be removed back to their point of origin. If a branch must be shortened, it should be cut back to a lateral that is large enough to assume the terminal role. A rule of thumb is to cut back to a lateral that is at least one-third the diameter of the limb being removed.

This method of branch reduction helps to preserve the natural form of the tree. However, if large cuts are involved, the tree may not be able to close over and compartmentalize the wounds. Sometimes the best solution is to remove the tree and replace it with a species that is more appropriate for the site.

Hiring an Arborist

Pruning large trees can be dangerous. If pruning involves working above the ground or using power equipment, it is best to hire a professional arborist. An arborist can determine the type of pruning that is necessary to improve the health, appearance, and safety of your trees. A professional arborist can provide the services of a trained crew, with all of the required safety equipment and liability insurance.

When selecting an arborist,

* check for membership in professional organizations such as the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA), the Tree Care Industry Association (TCIA), or the American Society of Consulting Arborists (ASCA). Such membership demonstrates a willingness on the part of the arborist to stay up to date on the latest techniques and information.
* check for ISA arborist certification. Certified Arborists are experienced professionals who have passed an extensive examination covering all aspects of tree care.
* ask for proof of insurance.
* ask for a list of references, and don’t hesitate to check them.
* avoid using the services of any tree company that
o advertises topping as a service provided. Knowledgeable arborists know that topping is harmful to trees and is not an accepted practice.
o uses tree climbing spikes to climb trees that are being pruned. Climbing spikes can damage trees, and their use should be limited to trees that are being removed.

This brochure is one in a series published by the International Society of Arboriculture as part of its Consumer Information Program. You may have additional interest in the following titles currently in the series:


E-mail inquiries: [email protected]

 

[Ekka]

The fact that 25 years of ranting and raving makes no difference is proof in itself that education doesn't work.

What does work is fines and legislation. If that city had preservation orders and tree people had to be licenced then you'd have a very different result. However that tree trunk certainly looks like it's on council land or part of it ... co-owned tree perhaps, did you check?

In effect how much money and HOOHAA would be saved if that was simply the case, educated frauds working on trees would also be abated.

 

[treeseer]

So Eric, we should stop sharing information and start lobbying? Unlike you aussies, We have an an anti-British approach to govt, so regulation doe snot come easy.

Sure it's good to work on regs but we can't stop showing them the effects of topping.

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

The fact that 25 years of ranting and raving makes no difference is proof in itself that education doesn't work.

IMO it iss that the profesional orgs have been preaching to the choir.

We are just starting to see the mainstream shows have arborists taalk aabout trees, vs a gardener or ccontractor.

 

[Scottscape]

I would've tried my best to upsell them for a full removal. I wouldn't have put my name out there like that as said. If I was hurting for work, I would've done it alittle cheaper other than topping that tree. Atleast it wouldn't make me look bad but it seems like most home owners don't know how bad topping is. I had 5 calls this past week alone from home owners that wanted there trees topped, I sold 3 of them on a crown reduction along with safety pruning to assure that if something would happen, larger limbs wouldn't be on top of there house.

 

[teamtree]

The fact that 25 years of ranting and raving makes no difference is proof in itself that education doesn't work.

What does work is fines and legislation. If that city had preservation orders and tree people had to be licenced then you'd have a very different result. However that tree trunk certainly looks like it's on council land or part of it ... co-owned tree perhaps, did you check?

In effect how much money and HOOHAA would be saved if that was simply the case, educated frauds working on trees would also be abated.

The city does not take ownership of the trees. I have checked in the past and work closely with the street commisioner. We have a committee formed to try to first educate and hopefully get some momentum on the political side but if the mayor tops his trees I doubt if we get much done on the law side.

 

[teamtree]

I carry all the printouts on topping and a few pictures to show the effects of topping. Waste of paper if you ask me.

 

[teamtree]

I would've tried my best to upsell them for a full removal. I wouldn't have put my name out there like that as said. If I was hurting for work, I would've done it alittle cheaper other than topping that tree. Atleast it wouldn't make me look bad but it seems like most home owners don't know how bad topping is. I had 5 calls this past week alone from home owners that wanted there trees topped, I sold 3 of them on a crown reduction along with safety pruning to assure that if something would happen, larger limbs wouldn't be on top of there house.

Please provide before and after pics.

I offered to do the removal for the same price as the trimming on this job.

Unfortunately, it only looks bad in my eyes (and my peers) as the customer is satisfied. Got two calls to do removals on the same street.

 

[Ekka]

If the Mayor tops his own trees that pretty much says it all.

We do have problems like that here, standards ARE NOT LAWS, standards are to a degree voluntary to work to.

Preaching to the choir is well said and precise.

I'm sure many LGA's in many places have pretty well stamped the practice out, I can see that here, where there's no regs it's hack away and where there is regs it's rarely seen.

Treeseer, it's got nothing to do with politics or your ideas of what govts about.

So Eric, we should stop sharing information and start lobbying?

Why cant you do both? As a funded org and predominantly the only one with the large numbers surely it would be wise to lobby.

Take a look at tree care where regs are, works much better doesn't it? Regs are common all over the world pertaining to trees and has a big fat bugger all to do with anti British or otherwise conjured political mentalities like you possess.

Now here you go, this is a real picture taken October 2007, I have put it up elsewhere with contact details ... I bet no-one gave crap and did anything about it. Whilst I've done more than my fair share of investigating these things and getting flak for it!

Here's a close up of the sign, very fitting isn't it? So who takes on this case and fight? Where do we report it? Oh, report what, that's right, no regs in that town so they can do what they want.