Wilsons line of site questions

[Wilson_tree]

I'm working a job later this week where the customer wants 2 hemlocks and 2 beechs topped to open the view. Two of the trees are on a very steep slope and keeping them to stabilize the slope makes sense, but will look like crap. The other two are just on the edge of the slope so their contribution to stabilizing things isn't so great. Do I recommend just cutting them down instead of taking the top off? No matter how carefull I am or whether you call it topping or crown reduction, it's going to take off 30-40% of the green mass of the trees to get the view he's after, but he wants the trees and the view. I've been putting this job off for a while because I'm still not settled on what's the right thing to do. Any ideas?

 

[Guy Meilleur]

Originally posted by Wilson_tree
customer wants 2 hemlocks and 2 beechs topped to open the view. I'm still not settled on what's the right thing to do. Any ideas?

Idea #1, Explore compromise. Which trees can be opened up or "windowed" to allow view through them, the beeches? If he'll agree to look through them and the hemlocks are too dense, then reduce the hemlocks.

ANSI says--and I believe-- it's not topping if cutrs are not made to a predetermined height but instead you look for the locations and angles that will leave the most natural form and least decay while achieving the client's goals. A similar situation in the Smokies with white pines and maples; I cut the pines short but thinned and reduced the maples. Client eventually accepted the "look" with the maple crowns in his viewscape.

It took some selling of a more subtle, less dramatic view, and it was the wife who was most receptive to that angle so I showed her pictures of similar viewscapes with Oriental-looking open trees. I went back once to redo them; the maples looked very good to all and in good health despite losing 40-50% the first pruning; the white pines were hollowing despite being capped, but actually were rounding out on top with many little uprights.

If you can "cut" a deal with the client on view vs. biology all can win. If you fail and must shorten them all, be as kind as possible to the trees and do it.:angel: btw I tried to suggest clearing the slope and planting apples but failed due to cost.

 

[NeTree]

Write a disclaimer on the invoice saying you're not responsible for il effects to tree health


or something

 

[Guy Meilleur]

Originally posted by John Paul Sanborn
In these situations I feel I'm maintaining a stand of trees.
Yes we need to avoid fretting like crazy about the treatment of a single tree, and making fatal projections about a reduced tree's future that may or may not come true. It is one individual when in fact we are maintaining a grove for the owner.

stack all brush in perpendicular to the slope so that it is dense and no more the 2-3 feet high. Sometines lacing it in amongst the stumps of small trees.
THis is SOP on less formal landscapes. From twigs to logs, recycling on site rebuilds the soil and saves client money. Many buy into this "Erosion Control", which also helps save arborists' backs.

btw TreeCo, I'm w jps and won't rape a whole line of trees, good golly. I never said "Hack it for the $." I've walked away from several where a compromise between the owner's lust for a commanding view and the arborist's sensitivity toward tree value and health could not be made. But compromise can happen if you figure out their motivations, and analyze your own sense of ethics.

 

[Wilson_tree]

This discussion is very helpful. I have been treating this as a stand of trees. I have been leaving stumps, piling brush to help with erosion and to leave organic material inplace, and making sure that small trees are left alone to grow and that the owner understands the importance of future trees. I have also conveyed to him that topping these trees will require more maintainence in the long run. I guess I got so scared of being a hack for what I'm doing here that I lost site of the overall picture. The idea of a handline to go up and down the slope is an excellent one. I think one of the beechs might be a candidate for trimming a window for the view. The customer has already listened to my advice and ideas in spite of how I might have portrayed it so far. Thanks all.

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

just putting this to the top after splitting it from the "Photo's" thread

 

[Crispin Hoar]

I worked with a government crew improving views along a coastal highway with some spectacular views. Tourists kept saying the trail was beutiful but the trees obscured the views. We would prune the trees to improve the view. We would remove some taller trees in the view plain, leave smaller trees to hide the stumps and side prune others. This created a green frame around the view. The overall finished product was natural looking and complimented the view. I have done this on residention work to improve a view. You may not get the unobscured view the customer wanted, but you may give them an improved one.

 

[ramanujan]

For this view we fell about 25 mature red alders and 5 or 6 Bigleaf maples, leaving high stumps and many small trees that are not visible below the bank. Did I feel bad? No. The same thing had been done thirty years ago with no ill effects.

The view is on a golf course in Vancouver looking out over the ocean towards Washington and Vancouver Island. Absolutely stunning and well worth the money they spent on it.

Note this bank was steep enough to warrant us rappeling down and spending a lot of time tied in. No sloughing has occured to my knowledge.

ps-the largest of the visible trees is a grand fir... about 130' i would think. i wanted to deadwood it but... no budget for things like that.