Proper Branch Removal Question

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

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

JTinaTree

ArboristSite Operative
Joined
Nov 7, 2006
Messages
293
Reaction score
23
Location
Henderson,NC
Planning on working in a Willow Oak in a week or so, Lots Of them here in NC.. They seem to grow long arching branches that fork toward the end.. My question is, if removing the end of the branch because infringing over the neighbors driveway, I would have to cut back to where there are no more terminal role branches.. Would the right thing to do be to just leave a stub, and let it shoot sprouts? Or remove it back to the trunk and make proper pruning cut and let the tree close it over?

I can't stand to see stubs in a tree but want to do what's best, Im some what of a perfectionest.. Thanks for your help...
 
What size is the limb as it enters the trunk? I mostly prefer to bring it back to the trunk if there are no laterals.

Can it be reduced in steps over a period of years to possibly allow a lateral to develop to cut back to?

If you leave a stub at the property line, you'll have sprouts growing into the driveway again, and they'll be more weakly attached than the original branch.
 
What size is the limb as it enters the trunk?

This is important, one can cause more problems then solved with proper collar cuts leaving large wounds. How many decades will the tree be standing after you cut the limb?

Willow oak sprouts readily from even inter nodal wood, I did a lot of them working with Guy after that big ice storm. I saw many stubs from previous hurricanes that had vigorous sprouting supporting the limb.

Lateral branching is not the end of proper prunning, a bulge that is a node can be cut back to and the limb will survive well.
 
Lateral branching is not the end of proper prunning, a bulge that is a node can be cut back to and the limb will survive well.

Agreed, but
If you leave a stub at the property line, you'll have sprouts growing into the driveway again
 
There are many factors involved in making this decision. Tree anatomy and morphology are both important in making the proper one. Here are a couple of things to consider.

1. What is the size of the limb in relation to the parent stem? Will the cut heal over properly? Is the tree a strong compartmentalizer? If you feel that the limb is too large to remove to not have a negative effect on the trunk, it might be best to simply head back the branch and deal with the sprouts at a later time.

2. If the branch is totally removed, are there branches above it to maintain the shape of the crown. Try to maintain a symmetrical crown and not leave a big hole.
 
There are many factors involved in making this decision. Tree anatomy and morphology are both important in making the proper one. Here are a couple of things to consider.

1. What is the size of the limb in relation to the parent stem? Will the cut heal over properly? Is the tree a strong compartmentalizer? If you feel that the limb is too large to remove to not have a negative effect on the trunk, it might be best to simply head back the branch and deal with the sprouts at a later time.

2. If the branch is totally removed, are there branches above it to maintain the shape of the crown. Try to maintain a symmetrical crown and not leave a big hole.

I would say the branch is 1/3 of the parent stem.. The branch where it enters the stem is around 12 inches.. As far as the shape that will be left after the possible removal of the entire branch, I will have to look again.
The pruning cut should cover if removed entirely according to wound closure on others i have seen..... I know for a fact that Willow Oaks Sprout massively after stubs are left, You can look at all the hack jobs In town and see that..

If a stub is left at the property line, How long does it usually take to shape a good leader from the sprouts??
 
I would say the branch is 1/3 of the parent stem.. The branch where it enters the stem is around 12 inches.. As far as the shape that will be left after the possible removal of the entire branch, I will have to look again.
The pruning cut should cover if removed entirely according to wound closure on others i have seen..... I know for a fact that Willow Oaks Sprout massively after stubs are left, You can look at all the hack jobs In town and see that..

If a stub is left at the property line, How long does it usually take to shape a good leader from the sprouts??

I'm sorry to say that I'm not familiar with this species. I will need to defer to someone else as to the trees response. I would think that a 12-inch limb that is 1/3 the size of the parent limb is too large to remove without causing long-term damage/decay. I might suggest looking at another option than removing the entire limb.
 
I would think that a 12-inch limb that is 1/3 the size of the parent limb is too large to remove without causing long-term damage/decay

Willow oaks are somewhat fast at creating callous tissue, however, I share BCMA's opinion.

If a stub is left at the property line, How long does it usually take to shape a good leader from the sprouts??

If you cut back to a node now, sprouts will start to grow in the spring. Next fall, you should be able to thin back to the two or so most viable sprouts with the best attachment. From then on, it will take a little bit of maintenance to reform a nice scaffold limb (reduce length of sprouts, remove redundancies, etc.), but in 5 or so years, there should be a sizeable limb with good structure there. The most important part is making sue you cut back to a node, and then only keep the sprouts with the best attachments.
 
Willow oaks are somewhat fast at creating callous tissue, however, I share BCMA's opinion.

I agree too, the problem is that no tree can close such a large wound fast enough to fully compartmentalize. The wound will probably not be close enough to any green mass to support fast growth either.

Another problem is that a this limb to stem ratio tells me that the limb probably originated from a lateral bud subordinate to the terminal as a young tree. The branch/stem pith then conjoin so the decay court has a higher probability of filling the entire tree.

Gillman calls it codominance, physiologically this is correct, due to the branch and stem originating from the same node, but IMO it confuses because it uses a term for a different structural characteristic.

I prefer to think of it as primary and secondary branching. Primary is where the buds originate from the same node and pith conjoins, and secondary is the more common, where the branch came from a younger bud.

The biggest reason for the differentiation is that there is no collar with primary branching, or branch protection zone

http://www.treelink.org/joa/2002/march/06Eisner.pdf
Branches constitute a point of weakness to the health of trees, as the primary points of infection for trunk decay(Toole 1961; Shigo 1975). The importance of the branch protection zone (BPZ) in limiting trunk infection after branch injury or removal has been demonstrated
(Aufsess 1975, 1984; Shigo 1985). BPZs are generally
recognized as cone-shaped areas of discolored wood at
the base of dead branches. The xylem within these BPZs
is occluded with decay-resistant compounds

Newer definitions of the BPZ include the physiology of the connections of xylem between the stem and branch, there is a fold, or truncation that limits fluid transfer. So the BPZ is a woody structure and the discoloration is a reaction zone formed in it. Since the primary branching lacks this structure, the reaction zone is weaker.

If you cut back to a node now, sprouts will start to grow in the spring. Next fall, you should be able to thin back to the two or so most viable sprouts with the best attachment. From then on, it will take a little bit of maintenance to reform a nice scaffold limb (reduce length of sprouts, remove redundancies, etc.), but in 5 or so years, there should be a sizable limb with good structure there. The most important part is making sure you cut back to a node, and then only keep the sprouts with the best attachments.

I would wait two years, maybe three before beginning the restoration thinning, the more green there is, the less energy the tree needs to pull from it's sinks to make the reaction zones. Reaction zones are chemical changes, which require energy use.

Gillman has shown that there is a direct relationship with effectiveness of compartmentalization and proximity to green (dynamic) mass.
 
... I would have to cut back to where there are no more terminal role branches.. .
What does this mean?

Reduction is most successful where there is adequate light.

if the goal is to clear the neibs driveway, look beyond that lower branch. The limbs above should also be reduced, the downward nd horizntal branches pruned back to upright or otherwise desirable laterals. Basic directional pruning, to allow the lower growth more light and space.

These cuts are bet made with an extension pole pruner; few can climb out to these proper, small diameter cuts.

Gotta camera?
 
Last edited:
What does this mean?

Reduction is most successful where there is adequate light.

if the goal is to clear the neibs driveway, look beyond that lower branch. The limbs above should also be reduced, the downward nd horizntal branches pruned back to upright or otherwise desirable laterals. Basic directional pruning, to allow the lower growth more light and space.

These cuts are bet made with an extension pole pruner; few can climb out to these proper, small diameter cuts.

Gotta camera?

Treeseer,It means once the end of the branch is removed, there are no more limbs on there to cut back to, that are big enough to support the terminal role..

I hope I siad that right? As`far as the rest of the limbs above, That branch is the only one that hangs over the drive so I wont be doing any more cutting.. I will try and post a picture but my camera is not the best..
 
Treeseer,It means once the end of the branch is removed, there are no more limbs on there to cut back to, that are big enough to support the terminal role.
This is the common standard but imo it needs to be changed. If there is enough foliage left to support the branch it does not matter if there is one lateral >1/3 or whtever that "can be the new branch end". After all we see many unpruned branches that have more than one end don't we?
 
treeseer, What you are saying is true but.... willow oaks in this case seem to have the majority of the growth towards the end of the branch.. So you dont have many if any branches to choose from to support the terminal role..
 
This is the common standard but imo it needs to be changed. If there is enough foliage left to support the branch it does not matter if there is one lateral >1/3 or whtever that "can be the new branch end". After all we see many unpruned branches that have more than one end don't we?

The point here is that any < 1/3 branch may do if there is plenty of other foliage left otherwise to help support the branch.

I tend to make these decisions quite often when I'm left with little to work with > 1/3 when I don't want to take it back clear to the tree.

The 1/3 rule is good, but not completely necessary.
 
The point here is that any < 1/3 branch may do if there is plenty of other foliage left otherwise to help support the branch.

I tend to make these decisions quite often when I'm left with little to work with > 1/3 when I don't want to take it back clear to the tree.

The 1/3 rule is good, but not completely necessary.

Make sense.

JT yes, sometimes willow oaks don't have many interior laterals.

Find a camera yet?
 
Make sense.

JT yes, sometimes willow oaks don't have many interior laterals.

Find a camera yet?

Are you asking/telling me to make sense, or are you saying that what I said makes sense?

I quoted your post and tried to help convey the point you were making because I see it so often that I know what you are saying. I often times leave a small interior lateral, less than one third the size of the branch, to take the terminal role...provided I have seemingly more than enough foliage to support the branch.

I'd rather not most of the time, but otherwise I feel I'm taking too much unnecessarily, and it is better than going too far in many cases. Oak trees being a first class example here.

Not to mention that I've seen the successful evidence of this practice from earlier trimming cycles....and perhaps some failures.
 
JPS hit it just right with his discussion of the BPZ. I've been doing quite a bit of reading up on the science behind this discussion. And it is encouraging to hear all the good perspectives shared here.

A 12" cut on the trunk, even with a "proper" target cut, will not compartmentalize and is therefore surely a death sentence. Though it may take many decades to become unstable if it is a good compartmentalizer.

I look at limbs like that as if they were storm damaged. The end has to come off becasue the cutomer demands it (even if you argued hard for them to just take some weight off the tips). How is that any different than a storm damaged branch with a broken end. Cut it back as far as needed to keep the customer happy, but no farther. If they don't like the look of the stub, explain how important to the tree's health it is and lobby hard for them to keep it, even if only for a few years.

Hopefully it lives and can be re-pruned for structure. If not it can be removed as a large dry limb some time later, leaving the tree as much time as possible to start forming a big collar around the dead limb. this not only makes the final cut easy to see, greatly lessening the chances of cutting into the living tissue of the trunk, it also leaves the tree more time to put a chemical barrier in place. At worst this buys time, at best it saves the tree..

Guy's point about thining higher limbs to allow the reduced limb enough light to stay a live is a good one. I hadn't thought of that and it makes a lot of sense. The tree has to think it is worth it to keep that branch alive and put on some new growth. His other point about needing a pole saw to reach branch tips is a cop-out IMO... My teacher always said, if you want to get better you have to challenge yourself. Leave the pole saw (and often the chainsaw) on the ground and figure out a way to climb to those tips with a hand saw. Plan your route, set a very high TIPoint and climb with more confidence.

At 48, I usually go 3-6 months without asking for the pole in the tree. Of course a light saddle, tri-cut handsaw, spliced eye climbing line, advanced friction hitch and micro-pulley sure make it a lot easier to get out to those tips, than an old weaver saddle that weighs a ton and a tautline hitch... Try it sometime (again) Guy.. Poe saws make really sloppy cuts... ;)
 
"A 12" cut on the trunk, even with a "proper" target cut, will not compartmentalize and is therefore surely a death sentence."

Sometimes, over time, but that is a bit exaggerated.

"Guy's point about thining higher limbs to allow the reduced limb enough light to stay a live is a good one. I hadn't thought of that and it makes a lot of sense. The tree has to think it is worth it to keep that branch alive and put on some new growth."

Yes the need to prune above was brought about by seeing too many reduced lower branches die. Shigo warned about 'tipping", and he was right.

" His other point about needing a pole saw to reach branch tips is a cop-out IMO.....Try it sometime (again) Guy.. Pole saws make really sloppy cuts."

Practice makes perfect, Dan--if you can use your vaunted climbing skills to get the right angle to make an undercut, a polesaw can make a perfect cut. Just practice.

O and I got a new battenseat saddle thanks and it will extend my climbing career. As for the knot, nothing compels me to change over from the prusik, but i'll be glad to have you show me your way again, if I can show you the Way of the Pole. :)
 

Latest posts

Back
Top