Topping Maple Trees

[Ekka]

Ekka, Look for kinks and fat spots in the limb.

Well I had a darn good look today, I had a good feel too. And about the only fat spot on that darn tree was me!

You know, I reckon there's no such thing. Well, not on the trees I've been up. Why aren't these nodes growing branches etc? What are they waiting for? And I hope you are not confusing them with epicormic shoots/buds.

I gotta see some pics, because if I were to prune like that here I'd be crucified, so I need evidence.

I can imagine, why did you leave that huge stub mate ... err, there's an invisible node ... I felt it!

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

How big a diameter limb can you guys see the nodes? To me, they disappear at about 2".
Once you get into limbs large enough to have heartwood, it's not so important where the node was.

 

[Mike Barcaskey]

comanche, if you're near the PGH Airport and want a 2nd bid, let me know

 

[Stumper]

It depends upon species and individual tree. They are identifiable on eight inch diameter stuff sometimes. Another thing to think about-anywhere a lateral used to be is a likely point for regrowth to occur-there are almost always latent buds waiting at the base of laterals. I think (hope) that Guy would agree that nodal cuts only have a couple of real applications. 1 being cuts on very small wood (as in restoring and or shaping/redirecting growth on a young tree) and the other the reason that Guy has written about -dealing with catastrophic damage. In most cases reducing to a good lateral that can assume Apical dominance is still the best course.

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

On an 8" diameter limb, how close to that identifiable node should you cut?

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

On that subject, I've taken to leaving stubs on trees on my clients revolving accounts.

Mostly this is on mature to declining oaks and ash where a large stub will not be unsightly.

We were doing it some the last two years, but after seeing Gillman show that compartmentalization can be better with leaf mass near the wound, it seems better to leave a stub that may sprout up or has some on it.

Or should this be broken off as a different thread?

 

[Ekka]

Nodes vs target pruning

Yeah

We need to get into this, break out a new thread.

I must admit, I have severe doubts about this, I have trouble finding nodes on branches etc greater than 1" to 2" dia.

If you did prune to nodes or like JPS pruned above, you are not pruning to the natural barrier zones provided by branch collars and co-dominant stems.

And, if you are pruning to nodes etc on limbs greater than say 4" dia it's going to take a long time for that callus wood to seal it.

JPS, on those stub cuts etc that you made was the regrowth epicormic or nodal?

 

[Stumper]

On an 8" diameter limb, how close to that identifiable node should you cut?

Duh, to the collar of course.

Honestly Mike. I don't know what the correct answer is. This has only come up rarely for me. I went with my gut. There was a spot that seemed right -as if a lateral already existed at the node and I was making a reduction cut to that lateral.

 

[Ekka]

There was a spot that seemed right -as if a lateral already existed at the node and I was making a reduction cut to that lateral.

May the force remain with you.

But for the rest of us, how do we go about visualising these nodes and laterals?

 

[Jim1NZ]

Theres no such thing as a rule for every tree, theres just too many variables.

Im sure everyone will agree.

What are youz on about a swelling node? Is it at the collar of branches or what? Dont think i have ever seen one...

 

[Jim1NZ]

I was enjoying that commentary Ekka! haha

 

[ROLLACOSTA]

OFF TOPIC BUT

Jeez lets face it unless a tree's crown is growing over a property or something else theres no real reason to crown reduce it at all [whats the point].Like iv'e posted before imo 90% of tree pruning is unnecessary ,but we all do it for the ca$h .Me i'm looking into other areas of Arboricultural work that will hopefully give me better work satisfaction.I get sick of selling pointless prunning, i'd rather sell TDs ,dead wooding etc any day at least i'm being honest with myself and my client's

I once heavily sold crown thinning to customers who complained that there tree was blocking out too much light , many crown thins latter i think the amount of dappled light that filtered through the trees i thinned was minimal ie it was all waste of time..

 

[treeseer]

OFF TOPIC BUT
I get sick of selling pointless prunning, i'd rather sell TDs ,dead wooding etc any day at least i'm being honest with myself and my client's
* Jeez Rolla slow down willya? Get some breakfast; you sound like Dunlap when he's off his feed.

many crown thins latter i think the amount of dappled light that filtered through the trees i thinned was minimal ie it was all waste of time..

Time? Whose time? Looking at it in harried human time, you don't see the results very easily, so you despair. Shade is hard for the eye to measure; we see so few wavelengths.

Looking at it in Tree Time, the response may be very positive. The tree doesn't need instant gratification; its health comes through in its own slow, quiet adaptation to your work.

 

[Tree Machine]

Tree time. Patient time. It's your privledge to help direct the healthiest course for near and long-term future. It's an awesome responsibility.

The tree doesn't need instant gratification; its health comes through in its own slow, quiet adaptation to your work.

That's poetic. That's what we do do for a living.

We're a bunch of lucky blokes , I guess.

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

Looking at it in Tree Time, the response may be very positive. The tree doesn't need instant gratification; its health comes through in its own slow, quiet adaptation to your work.

I think he meant that the thinning was not only bad for the tree, it really didn't let any more light through.

How does thinning gratify a tree? And adapt? What on earth are you advocating now?
We somewhat agreed to disagree on your crown reduction theories, do we have to fight a crown thinning battle?

 

[treeseer]

I think he meant that the thinning was not only bad for the tree, it really didn't let any more light through.

& Mike, what words in Rolla's post give you that idea? Right, there are none; so it must be coming from an anti-pruning bias.

We somewhat agreed to disagree on your crown reduction theories, do we have to fight a crown thinning battle?

There was the case of the pink boards where you conceded the point by dropping it. Last time I remember more agreement than dis-, but ok. Yes, we will have to, but I'll try to do it with pics, words take too long and despite our best efforts do not seem to be clear enough to penetrate our thick skulls..

 

[Ekka]

Is that DING DING, round 3

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

& Mike, what words in Rolla's post give you that idea? Right, there are none; so it must be coming from an anti-pruning bias.

That's a hard one Guy.
Let's see, could it be these comments:

"theres no real reason to crown reduce it at all "
"90% of tree pruning is unnecessary "
"i'm looking into other areas of Arboricultural work that will hopefully give me better work satisfaction"
"I get sick of selling pointless prunning,"
"i'd rather sell TDs ,dead wooding etc any day at least i'm being honest with myself and my client's"
"I once heavily sold crown thinning to customers who complained that there tree was blocking out too much light , many crown thins latter i think the amount of dappled light that filtered through the trees i thinned was minimal ie it was all waste of time.."

I can see how you missed the point of his post, Guy, he did hide his feelings pretty well. You really need to read between the lines to get it.

 

[treeseer]

OK I just hit the canvas, Round 3 ends, Maas wins with a KO.

 

[Tree Machine]

But wait, guy pops up to his feet. Tree Machine steps in. He takes the canvas.

If we consider literally billions of years of the evolution of trees into consideration, pure genetics, survival of the fittest, like HOW modern trees got here, they all have one thing in common. They can't move from the spot they're in.

Add to that another constant over time: A tree has limited response abilities, yet must respond to the environment to continue on in survival, and perpetuate it's specie.

One thing a tree can, and does do, in assuring it's own survival and best health is in amping up it's own growth in response to lost limbs. When there is damage to the tree, it compensates in other areas to replace that which was lost. more leaves as a result of lost leaves.

This is pure biology, consistent with Shigo's teachings. Wounding creates a hormonal shift, or redistribution, and the tree adapts physiologically to wounds.

Pruning is wounding.

Pruning is controlled wounding.

Zen pruning is controlled wounding, aligning with the tree's innate responses and harnessing those natural forces to allow the tree, naturally, what it wants to do, which is Thrive to the Fullest.

This is our ultimate objective, yes? Then pruning, done in the name of tree care and health, is good. Nature has been throwing pruning issues at trees throughout the course of history. Mother Nature's not often very nice about how she does her pruning.