to remove now or prune and remove later?

[murphy4trees]

I looked at this 100' red oak a couple days ago... I think you all are going to say remove based on the pictures... The customer said he really hates to remove trees and this one is pretty far from the house and leaning away and surrounded by other tall oaks...

There is a colum of decay, probably originally caused by scortch from a burn pile... then 8 years ago another tree service suggested removing the lower two limbs, because they "had decay", which is probably the worst thing he could have done..
There is also a sizeable bird hole about 15' from the tips and some tip die back... The tree is a hazard, but I suggested the option of removing a lot of weight as a first step towards removal, which should be done in no more than three years....

I think he'll go for that over the removal, which I also quoted...
I also suggested bringing in a CA to write a report.... And told customer I'd start this thread....

Here are the pics

 

[murphy4trees]

more pics

 

[murphy4trees]

another pic

 

[Stumper]

Those calls are never any fun. Brian helped me while he was here in the Butchering (reduction )of a Catalpa with decay problems. I advised removal then did reduction including complete removal of the secondary lead over the house because the lady of the house wanted to keep the tree. Danger is mitigated for now but longterm it will get worse. C'est la vi'. See how bad it makes me feel-I'm uttering Frog language.)

 

[NeTree]

I've seen worse- much worse.

More pictures would help, but that tree looks pretty saveable to me.

Did you get to measure the thickness of the remaining wood?

I would start with epoxy on that large wound.

A hazard tree isn't defined by the condition of the tree alone; risk of failure, potential targets, probable direction of failure all come into play.

 

[NeTree]

Originally posted by TreeCo
Put in writing what you are going to do and why and don't make any promises. The tree needs regular inspections and the client needs to call you once per year for the appoitment.


Dan

Excellent point. The same holds true for cabling/bracing installations; we may reduce the risk, but never eliminate it.

 

[ORclimber]

Are you going to try to get a positive ID on the fungus so you know what your dealing with?

 

[Dadatwins]

Have to agree that decay does not look that bad from my chair, but I can't see in the wound or the growth on top. Have seen much worse decay columns than that with a healthy top. Agree that if there really is no target ' tree is leaning away from the house' why is a hazard tree? Hard to say with out seeing the whole picture but might be a prune and save job.

 

[Grigory]

Old oak

We just have finished work on restoration of an old oak, which was in a very bad condition, than what on your photo. I think your oak it is necessary to leave. Thick wound wood testifies to good thickness of a wall sound wood. This trunk can have safety factor >100 % If there is no opportunity to investigate thickness of a wall on all length of a trunk, Guing to three anchors on ground will solve a problem.

 

[ROLLACOSTA]

nice work Grigory ,but why did you not reduce the crown??

 

[MasterBlaster]

Grigory! Where ya been? I thought you ran off to Siberia, or something.
Did you ever get that videoemail I sent you? Probably not.
Welcome back! Don't be a stranger, eh?

Have ya ever got yourself a proper handsaw yet?

 

[ROLLACOSTA]

i have to agree with most of the above posts ,i have worked on ,inspected and seen oaks with a lot more decay than that [going by the pic] has.. i would moniter it once every 2 - 3 years .. and may be get an internal decay test carried out .ie by a resistograph or picus so that you can see just how far gone the tree is

one other point i do not beleive has been mentioned why is the tree decaying whats the cause???..this could be a major factor in later years when deciding if the tree has to get the chop

 

[Guy Meilleur]

Originally posted by Mike Maas
Please don't remove any more living parts, the previous tree service has done too much already.

"Let me speak for Guy.....How about some crown reduction to reduce weigh and wind loads?"

Whoa cowboy, I'm with Maas (except I'd check every year not every 3) and Erik on this one. I do not see a defect that calls for reduction. Whacking the lower 2 limbs was unfortunate, but if that's 8 years of callus, that indicates fairly low tree vigor(at least it would be in NC). Murph, how big is the hollow? How much holding wood is there?

If you haven't even measured it, how can you call it "bad"? Judgments like that with no data do not sound like the words of the administrator of a tree university.

"I also suggested bringing in a CA to write a report"

Why? Risk assessments and the use of strength loss formulae are not covered in the CA exam, at least they were not in '92. Any arborist who is rendering judgments should be familiar with this stuff; it is not rocket surgery. I don't think anyone who calls themselves an arborist should be estimating removal with no basis for that judgment, especially when the owner does not want it removed.

Thanks for posting this and listening.

 

[BigJohn]

You can have 75 percent wood loss and it still be safe. I would feel safe rocking he11 out of that tree but not side loading it of course. The trees around here aren't exactly good canidates for crown reduction cause there never really is any crown or foliage to begin with. I say leave it but if they are going to eventually want it down then get rid of the sucker before it does become a hazzard.

 

[Grigory]

To ROLLACOSTA

At breadth of Moscow there is a border northern natural habitat of oaks in Russia. Therefore all our oaks are in a weak physiological and bad mechanical condition. Practically all oaks are struck inside trunk with decay. Leaves are struck fungi with disease. In the spring young shoots suffer from light morning/night frost.
We made the crown reduce. Have removed the top part of a trunk with two large branches. The top part of a trunk was in a very bad condition and we not could it keep. To delete still part of a crone it was already impossible.

 

[ROLLACOSTA]

bigjohn ..i think its 66% wood loss or in other words 2 thirds wood loss before it becomes a hazzard correct me if im wrong out there im going on mattecks studies

 

[ROLLACOSTA]

Grigory LONDON and MOSCOW are at the same height ,but you get much colder winters than we do ,yet we now have 50 % of our oaks in the same condition as yours , trunk decay ,poor growth etc ,yet we have a milder climate

could there be another reason why our RUSSIAN and ENGLISH oaks are dieing i wonder

 

[BigJohn]

66 you say? Maybe someone has updated that. I heard this in a class about 4 years ago.

 

[ROLLACOSTA]

BIGJOHN either way it's a heck of a lot

 

[Grigory]

To MasterBlaster

Hi Butch.

It is a lot of work. I took holiday to the detriment of work and has made travel an island of Sakhalin. It almost Siberia. 6000 miles from Moscow, plane fly 8 hours. In 1860 here to condemn to penal servitude. And I have arrived voluntary
Videoemail unfortunately I did not receive.