While I'm Not A Newbie,... Why Is Using Spikes to "Prune Only" A Bad Thing?"

[treesmith]

Pressed button too early. The problem I see is that a lot of trees unsuitable even for street life get the topping/pollarding treatment and certainly not to the same standard as a properly pollarded lime/plane, I've had the pleasure of climbing topped euro Ash - Fraxinus Excelsior amongst others, a tree that can snap suddenly and climbing above the rotten attachments can be like Russian roulette, they flex so far and then Bang, add some snow, wind chill and a daytime temperature of -17°c (lived in Northern Scotland too) and you're asking for trouble, I wouldn't want that sort of tree anywhere near my house! I kind of agree that in certain positions for certain functions you can do whatever you want to a tree but is it still a tree? Hedge species can become trees but until they do they are a hedge, I've done topiary to beech, yew, laurel, espalier fruit trees etc, I've also worked alongside farmers who have a very functional view on trees and pruning. Take a tractor flail for example, they are vicious, don't leave nice cuts but I understand why they are used, most of the species in the hedge are capable of becoming trees but they're aren't, it's a hedge. Using a flail on a grown tree is just butchery. Yes, I've see it done and I was disgusted.
There was a line of lombardy(?) poplars (I think, tall skinny things) near West Malling research centre, a windbreak, they were topped pollarded to keep manageable and all it did was rot the stem from the top down and make them unstable. As others have said, there are better ways to prune trees for long term health and stability than pollarding/topping, pollarding can be an effective management technique on the right tree but that doesn't mean it is the best way and tends to be used now on previously pollarded trees only. I think it's far more important to put the right tree in the right place first time but that doesn't help with existing ones.
If those fruit trees I mentioned been one of many species capable of serious growth you'd now be looking at a tree with a large column of rot that is supporting all the regrowth above it, pretty standard for topped trees. **** like that can kill people. And it's ugly. Being from Sussex you should know about tree dignity, you should spend time in an old Beech/Oak wood and breathe it in, listen to them, maybe it's a respect thing.
BTW I wasn't referring to you when I said moron or muppet, that's reserved for people who knowingly hack trees without trying to find another way.

 

[treesmith]

Found this underneath a badly pruned cypress today, absolute proof that bad pruning is damaging not just to trees but faeries too

 

[La taupe]

East of me then,Horsham boy myself (rudgwick to be precise)
Just time before I set off to work to address the whole tree dignity stuff, yes I grew up in the woodlands of the Weald walking my dog, ferreting etc. that's the point you see, they are woods where trees can do their thing un hindered.
In gardens and the urban environment trees are there for our amenity, shade, sight screen, visual pleasure etc, and have been planted as such, if that means they cannot fulfill their potential size wise, so what? Trim them, if that means they don't live to be veterans so be it.
If a repeatedly trimmed pop lives to 60 (and provides shade or whatever for those years)rather than growing to 100 ft plus and falling to pieces after 90 years, which is not an option in a garden, well what's wrong with that?
All this talk about topped trees being dangerous to climb won't wash with me.
If you don't fancy it get a cherry picker.

 

[BC WetCoast]

Quite so.
There is a line of poplars near my old house in England, 20 or so of them 10 ft apart, now, to my knowledge they were "topped" literally cut in half about 25 years ago by a guy I know, so they must have been 25 to 30 years old minimum then, every single one of them came back strongly. Just before I moved out here (10 years ago)the owner got me to do it again, back to the old cuts, easy peasy. Now I was back last year and they are all as good as gold with strong regrowth.
Now at the moment they are maybe 55 years old and have another haircut or two ahead of them. Probably too big a time gap to be considered Pollarding but it's in the ballpark.
If they had been left to their own devices they would be far to big for their situation (both in regards to each other and the houses) so in other words they would have been felled and removed, and the owner would have lost his windbreak/screen. Perfectly good tree management. But considered hacking by some no matter the species, location or other factors.
Ps So tree smith knows something about Pollarding and coppicing any one else?

We have had a lot of natural black cottonwoods (a native poplar) topped around here in the past. You then get several new fast growing codom tops and a topping cut that rots very quickly. So now there are 40' codoms weakly attached to a top with significant rot. Can you say hazard tree? We have the same problem with alders and hemlocks.

You say you read at college. You must have read as much as the basketball players at the Univ of Kansas.

 

[La taupe]

So re-top 'em. Below the rot if you like, then reassess in 5 or 10 years.
End of hazard.

 

[treesmith]

Sorry, started a long winded rambling answer, too busy. If you did that in Australia you'd be fined heavily, only the council and utility are allowed to ruin trees here.

 

[treesmith]

So re-top 'em. Below the rot if you like, then reassess in 5 or 10 years.
End of hazard.

What if the homeowner has better things to do then waste money getting someone in? I helped on a massive poplar fresh out of college, 20' stem with IIRC 80'-90' multi stemmed regrowth, hollow at the bottom with two tree sized stems over gardens, nobody came back for that one and it was on council ground in a public space

 

[La taupe]

What if the homeowner has better things to do then waste money getting someone in? I helped on a massive poplar fresh out of college, 20' stem with IIRC 80'-90' multi stemmed regrowth, hollow at the bottom with two tree sized stems over gardens, nobody came back for that one and it was on council ground in a public space

Well in a way it shows that regrowth is not as weak as some would suggest!
Whose to say what would have become of the tree had it have been left to its own devices.
We had a big storm here a few months back, cleared a lot of hung up and wind blown, made a few quid, mostly ash and pop, here's a few pics of a 25 to 30 mtr wind throw Pop I had to do, never been touched by human hand. Point is reduction in height, reduction in sail effect, less likely to end up on the deck. Sure, a management plan has to be in place, if it's done once it has to be done again.

 

[La taupe]

Sorry, started a long winded rambling answer, too busy. If you did that in Australia you'd be fined heavily, only the council and utility are allowed to ruin trees here.

They'd already been done. What would you suggest?

 

[La taupe]

Here's a weeping willow I saw next door today, old guy scalps himself every 3 years or so. Left alone not only would it become too big for its situation, the limbs would become so heavy it would start to break itself to bits.

 

[SecondGenMonkey]

Now it would, but with proper care and not being hat racked that could have been a beautiful tree

sent using logic and reason from a device forged of witchcraft.

 

[La taupe]

Now it would, but with proper care and not being hat racked that could have been a beautiful tree

sent using logic and reason from a device forged of witchcraft.

I'm curious, what would you describe as proper care to a weeping willow, next to a stream in a situation where you don't want it to dominate the garden, ie you want it to remain at approximately the size shown in the photo?

 

[SecondGenMonkey]

Was it a preexisting tree? Or did the homeowner plant it?

sent using logic and reason from a device forged of witchcraft.

 

[La taupe]

Let's assume he planted it for the sake of this exercise.

 

[SecondGenMonkey]

Plant a different tree, LOL.
Jk.
Yearly reduction via proper cuts by up to 50% for the first ten years with a focus on preventing a lean toward the water. If codominate leads must be established encourage a wide spread between them using trimming and bracing methods (being careful to watch the braces so they don't become incorporated). Once a desired height is reached use a drop crotch method to maintain it and thin by 25-30% for the next 20-30 year's reducing the amount of canopy removal to about 15-20% once the tree is truly mature.
A weekly raising by a gardener with hand snips or (shudder) hedge trimmers can keep the vista and allow for access to flower beds without impacting the tree greatly.
It will eventually get pretty big, but remain maintainable and with thinning allow plenty of undergrowth.

sent using logic and reason from a device forged of witchcraft.

 

[treesmith]

A smaller tree, as SGM said, can be controlled, it can be made into anything you want. My point above was that if the owner has a mature tree extensively chopped(which was all too common) a large percentage then tend to leave it until it HAS to be done. If it's in a farmers field far away from the public then whatever, chopping off trees halfway is a farmers speciality. If it's in a public place around people then it can become a very real problem. I have taken down more than my share of topped/badly pruned trees around houses, some belonging to farmers, some to people with no money, some to whom trees are just a nuisance. The tree has been topped and left for however many years until it becomes properly dangerous to the climber and whatever is underneath it. This year we turned up to remove a fractured Liquidamber, the owners had lived there only a few months, their 5ish year old daughters were on the trampoline. They decided to leave earlier than planned to go somewhere, within 5 minutes a neighbour phoned them in panic, their previously topped tree had decided to shed 40' of it's top straight through the trampoline, exactly where the children should still have been. Any tree near people needs to be pruned in a way that doesn't cause it to become dangerous if left. If a council with a properly organised tree department can leave a tree to become dangerous to the public then how can private owners with less money and less knowledge be expected to do better? Advertising spike pruning, flush cuts and topping on an international arborist 101 forum and then arguing about it, especially as we all know first hand that these practices can cause big problems just seems a little naive and silly, deliberate even. Think you've spent too much time in France. If one of your trees fails and kills someone because of the way you pruned it, however far in the future then it's your fault and you are liable. I don't think "it was already like it" will cut much slack.
In certain places with certain trees you can do whatever you want, but please do not call yourself an arborist.

 

[La taupe]

Plant a different tree, LOL.
Jk.
Yearly reduction via proper cuts by up to 50% for the first ten years with a focus on preventing a lean toward the water. If codominate leads must be established encourage a wide spread between them using trimming and bracing methods (being careful to watch the braces so they don't become incorporated). Once a desired height is reached use a drop crotch method to maintain it and thin by 25-30% for the next 20-30 year's reducing the amount of canopy removal to about 15-20% once the tree is truly mature.
A weekly raising by a gardener with hand snips or (shudder) hedge trimmers can keep the vista and allow for access to flower beds without impacting the tree greatly.
It will eventually get pretty big, but remain maintainable and with thinning allow plenty of undergrowth.

sent using logic and reason from a device forged of witchcraft.

Firstly, and most importantly that won't work, clearly you have no idea now a willow like this grows next to water. It simply cannot be controlled like that.
Secondly, let's say this tree is 35 years old, your saying yearly work, formative pruning, the reductions,costing say 400 bucks plus bracing you say? So we are talking about around 90000 bucks to do a tree that the homeowner does to his perfect satisfaction at no cost every 3 years.
Plant a different tree? He wanted a weeping willow.

 

[treesmith]

He honestly likes looking at a hairy stick? I'd prefer looking at a tree. He's a homeowner not an arborist. Why not plant a root grafted hybrid with smaller overall form instead of a fast growing large fragile split prone rot prone shoot forming water hog in the wrong place and then try to control it. What happens if he moves/dies and it doesn't get pruned for thirty years, then a young family buy it. Everyone loves picnics under a willow...

 

[SecondGenMonkey]

Firstly, and most importantly that won't work, clearly you have no idea now a willow like this grows next to water. It simply cannot be controlled like that.
Secondly, let's say this tree is 35 years old, your saying yearly work, formative pruning, the reductions,costing say 400 bucks plus bracing you say? So we are talking about around 90000 bucks to do a tree that the homeowner does to his perfect satisfaction at no cost every 3 years.
Plant a different tree? He wanted a weeping willow.

I did not mean yearly for the full life of the tree, just the first ten years, when the trim should take an hour or less (about 250usd) and bracing only if needed to help prevent the initial leader growth from forming dangerously close together. After that I forgot to mention that the trims should be bi-annual, but I figured that was a given.
I assume it will grow at a similar rate to a comparable tree down here where our water table is about six to eight feet below surface in most places.
Insisting on planting a willow that you know will be expensive to maintain over the course of 35-50 years and hacking it into a troll doll is like buying a Ferrari and running it on low grade fuel and oil and having a spray can paint job. Congratulations, you own a 100,000usd car that has constant problems and runs like crap. The nature of the tree needs to be taken into account at the time of planting.

Like I said, it WILL get big. That's just the way the species is, hacking it won't change that. And if that pic is of 2-3 years worth of hat rack growth I don't see it growing any faster with proper pruning.

sent using logic and reason from a device forged of witchcraft.

 

[sgreanbeans]

Guys, do not feed the troll. You do not need to explain it to him, he knows he is wrong. I let him go until now, so that way he could say his spill. Now that he has, and it is clear of what he is. A hacker, with hacker arguments and clearly no real understanding of how trees grow and how to care for them.