Topping

[Toddppm]

For the record I'm against topping, got the stickers to prove it
On my truck, even in my advertising.

But.

Does the no topping in your opinion carry over into evergreens?
I've always felt that most evergreens can handle it no problem and they are usually used as an ornamental shrub or tree in the yard. Like Leylands, Arbos, Cedars, Spruce even Hollies. Where does it cross the line?

Did a bid this morning where the woman wanted to top some cedars that she has along her property line because she lost a few that uprooted already and she wants to prevent the others from toppling. Told her it's possible they might die but they're tough and will probably make it but could be a problem later.
Where do you draw the line? Should I change my advertising to footnote, we don't top trees except evergreens

 

[jamie]

cypress

we do top cypresses but only when they are a hedge, had some large hedges though

for the record a hedge is a line of trees intended as a screen. as i know someone will slate me for that comment

jamie

 

[blue]

cypruss hedges

don't ya just love 'em

 

[jamie]

love em

love em when they are big, look nice, hate em when we get them as jobs as intermediate trees when they become a 'problem'.

hate the extra heavy velcro like properties

jamie

 

[Guy Meilleur]

Originally posted by Toddppm
Should I change my advertising to footnote, we don't top trees except evergreens

My website reads, "We don't top trees, but we do reduce them when necessary." A leyland with a defective root system--and that's most of them--is typically reduced to broaden the crown and avoid windthrow. I like to do it in early December; the top makes a nice holiday tree.

I advocate redcedars for some spots under powerlines because they are so amenable to reduction. Most hollies are easily reduced, most pines not.

ANSI is clear on the difference: Topping is cutting back to a PREDETERMINED crown limit, that means determined arbitrarily by man or machine. Reduction is SELECTIVE pruning, because the cuts are selected according to the tree's own biological criteria.

Any rabid anti-toppers who want to , please read ANSI A300 standards before and speak in that language.
Thank You. :angel:

 

[Gord]

we don't top trees except evergreens

erm...if i saw that on a truck around here i would immediately know that they're hacks. we have far far too many topped 'evergreens' around here as it is. if topped conifers almost invariably will grow a number (a dozen is not too uncommon) of codominant tops, all of which will be weakly attatched. not to mention it is very likely the topping site will rot and cause the tops to be more hazardous. the new tops will also make the tree more top heavy and increase the sail effect making it much more susceptible to windthrow.

 

[Toddppm]

I don't mean all evergreens.
Pines won't take it, Spruce I'd try to avoid doing it too. The ones I looked at today were Red cedars in a poorly planted site which I forgot to mention to the woman, not enough sun. If in ideal situation they can handle it but not as good as most thicker evergreens.

 

[JJackson]

Signed up a dozen trees, mostly pine and lomb. poplar to be topped, though they were directly under the 21KV lines. In both cases I had talked to the customers and tried to convice them otherwise, no luck...even offered free voucher for a 5gal replacement tree that is suitable to plant under the lines. I would never recommend topping in any other situation. We do it out of neccesity not because we want to.

 

[Stumper]

Mike, what are we calling "hazard"? My own 'study' Has shown that topped trees are more likely to shed limbs after 5 or more years have passed since the butchery. Most people consider limb shedding a hazard so I have little problem explaining that topping increases risk in the long term. :angel:

 

[ORclimber]

Topping arb hedges is what I bought a power pruner for. PITA doing double rows at 12-16' with a chainsaw. They get mangled by the snow and ice if let go. Not the most glamorous work, but topping them is the right thing to do for keeping them long term. Everyone and their dog has arbs here, probably because codes prohibit fences over 6'.

 

[jamie]

papers

someone do a study, 2 lines of trees and top one lot and leave the other, monitor the progress and at the end of it take a cross section of the topped 'wound' to assess the dmage, then submit it to a journal and viola...

jamie

 

[Guy Meilleur]

Re: Re: Re: Topping

Originally posted by Mike Maas
So if you selectively prune back to a predetermined crown limit, you have... crown re-topped, right?
Mike, the way I understand it is..."predetermined" means the cuts are made at a certain height, internodal, horizontal, large diameter, or whatever. "selective" means at nodes and not internodal, slanted not flat, smallest diameter possible, each cut selected according to the tree's projected response.

Does it only depend on why he's doing it, how he's doing it, or a combination of the two? Perhaps it's the percentage of the tree being removed?
The 'why" is irrelevant; intent is in the mind of the actor. the "how" is everything, ANSI states: "Consideration shall be given to the ability of a species to tolerate this(reduction) type of pruning...Location of parts to be removed and clearance should be specified...Size range of parts should be specified."

Topping ignores all these factors. Mike you can argue all day long that all reduction is topping, and I agree that the distinction is fuzzy in some places (as most distinctions are), but there are clear differences between reduction and topping, as noted above.

In JJackson's case, the lombardies are not very tolerant and may well be more hazardous after any sort of reduction, no matter how well the cuts are made. The data is all around us, as Stumper and jamie point out; lack of formal research doesn't weaken the anti-topping argument much imo.

I've seen pines tolerate reduction pretty well here--good sealing of wounds, decent shape. If I was the property owner in Jackson's case, I'd have the lombardies cut to the ground and train the sprouts (or accept the 5-gal. replacement if they don't resprout), and have the pines reduced. But that's just me.

ORClimber, are the "arbs" you'r etalking about arborvitae, some kind of Chamaecyparis? What's their mature height if unpruned?

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

i think that it is only logical that topped and non topped would not be equivalent. Even at the median range between the 2 of selectively pruning; one will have to be superior?

Part of the distinction betwen topping and selective pruning would be the responding growth or dieback each incites. Once again picking the target end and figuring backwards.

i think it is the differance between a machine clear cutting at a certain setting irrespective of tree conditions. Or a person trying to harmonize selectively between different needs and wants; but respective of the tree.

Kinda the differance between select or automatic fire?

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

One is fufilling the clients needs with art and science, the other is cutting wood for money.

ROW work often requires the latter, I've seldom found residiential situations where it was needed over the former.

 

[treebender]

reduction pruning at it's worst, has the net effect of topping. in my opinion, the gradient values are impact on apical dominance, compartmentalization, and vigor. negatively affect any or all of these, and to that extent you have topped.


the key element so often disregarded when qualifying proper pruning,(reduction or otherwise) is that it is progressive. substantial reductions in canopy height, spread and density requires incremental efforts. the standard 1/3 lateral practice, when applied aggresively to your average urban tree of most any species, elicits sprouting and requires the closure of substantial wounds. at the same time, it reduces stored energy and the structures needed to create and store it.

branch collars, and newly dominant stems can be encouraged, and even caused to develop from scratch with careful progressive cuts over time.

certainly this requires a certain mindset, and can be a hard sell to many clients.

bad reduction pruning may be bad, but is not topping, at least in practice. there are obvious diiferences between a silver maple that has been hatracked and one that was overzealously reduced.

in my book, hedges, trees confined to the life of shrubs and bradford pears are all fair game for topping by saw, pruner or shears.

john paul, i hope this does not make you think i am gay, but here in the u.s., it is all cutting wood for money. only some of it involves art and science.