Tree Spurs Damage Trees . . .

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

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

farmerdoug

ArboristSite Operative
Joined
Dec 9, 2007
Messages
283
Reaction score
153
Location
Northwest
I have been researching the process of limbing my Douglas firs. Do tree spurs cause quite a bit of damage to trees? I understand that if you take one down, then it doesn't matter.

After looking at spurless, I can see how a person could cut them selves out of a tree since the rope would easily be cut with a chainsaw.

Do any of you limb up trees without using spurs? Is it more difficult?

Thanks for your input. The arborists I have used in the past have always used spurs.
 
Spurs are commonly used, more often in the past than today. I suspect that the really big timber on the Pacific NW is seldom trimmed without them. Spurs are more highly frowned on in cities and on the east coast.

In general, it is strongly discouraged, but commonly done by many. ISA standards are specific about their limitated uses.

By the way, this post really belongs in Arborist 101 forum. This topic is often hotly debated here, so you may only be kicking a beehive with this post.
 
Yes it damages cambium but you can just as easily cut your rope with spurs on. In the past I have spurred countless trims that were also spurred many times before I trimmed the power line. I know it damages the cambium today so I refrain from their use.
 
I have been researching the process of limbing my Douglas firs. Do tree spurs cause quite a bit of damage to trees? I understand that if you take one down, then it doesn't matter.

After looking at spurless, I can see how a person could cut them selves out of a tree since the rope would easily be cut with a chainsaw.

Do any of you limb up trees without using spurs? Is it more difficult?

Thanks for your input. The arborists I have used in the past have always used spurs.

The damage that is caused to the trees is debated around here a bit. I will say someone inexperienced with spikes can tear up a tree quick. You need to learn the right technique or you will be gaffing around tearing up long strips of bark with every slip.

Actually, it's just as easy to cut yourself out of a tree with spikes as without them. That's why most guys use a two tie in method, even the spikers.

Is spikeless more difficult? Not if you practice it daily. I've spent most of my career on spikes but have no problem switching to spikeless if needed every now and then. The biggest thing for me is not having my feet secure when cutting, i do more standing on the spikes and cutting than sitting in the saddle and cutting. But that's something i'd get over if it was done every day
 
Is spikeless more difficult? Not if you practice it daily. I've spent most of my career on spikes but have no problem switching to spikeless if needed every now and then. The biggest thing for me is not having my feet secure when cutting, i do more standing on the spikes and cutting than sitting in the saddle and cutting. But that's something i'd get over if it was done every day

Think you can have your feet secure when cutting even without spikes, it's not one of the basic thing a tree climber is supposed to know and do ? IMHO . spikes only if the tree has to go.

M
 
Let's use a word to describe why so many rationalize the use of spikes is ok (not harmful, inconsequential).

Anthropomorphism!

This word means applying human attributes and functions to plants and creatures.

It is said that "trees heal".

This is a misnomer. Where ever the spike penetrates that space ceases to function for transport or storage permanently and never is put back to it's previous capacity (like human's healing process).
 
This was very helpful

Hey guys, thanks for this. I think I am going to develop my skills without spikes as I am not taking the trees down. I have 4 boys that will probably want to climb multiple times for fun and so it appears that spikeless doesn't harm the tree at all.

Thanks!
 
Let's use a word to describe why so many rationalize the use of spikes is ok (not harmful, inconsequential).

Anthropomorphism!

This word means applying human attributes and functions to plants and creatures.

It is said that "trees heal".

This is a misnomer. Where ever the spike penetrates that space ceases to function for transport or storage permanently and never is put back to it's previous capacity (like human's healing process).

Put a spike in your arm, you'll have a scar where the skin will never be the same but you won't be dead. Spiking occasionally will have no long term effect on trees. I am not promoting it, I just don't buy this "misnomer".
 
Last edited:
Put a spike in your arm, you'll have a scar where the skin will never be the same but you won't be dead. Spiking occasionally will have no long term effect on trees. I am not promoting it, I just don't buy this "misnomer".

Spikes are just bad for the tree. comparisons with human beings? If you got wounded in the Middle Ages they put a piece of red-hot iron to heal your wound........don't know if today they use the same technique in modern medicine :monkey: ..............spiking a tree if not for a removal is just a Middle Ages practice


M
 
Actually If the choice is put too me I would rather prune all day in my boots than work 4/5 hrs.on spurs my feet kill me right in front of my heel and my ankle and knee wear out when I am chunking wood or standing in one spot for more than five minutes ... I rather prune except after a rain cause than your slipping all over the place , as far as cutting yourself out of a tree : YEA DON'T DO THAT, the ground comes up and breaks your whole body....Maybe consider hiring someone if that seems something you worry about ....Most broken necks and head injuries from a fall happen within 9ft. of the ground thats about as high as a gutter on a rancher..
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Back
Top