To far gone to cable, 10 year staged removal?

evo

Well-Known Member
#1
BA0D9415-3B64-4AF4-A71E-63903EC23DCE.jpeg 23181899-0934-4223-B5AD-06F39A9EEBE1.jpeg 18CC74A0-FABC-45A7-9955-E3615FA6B610.jpeg 4E3C3025-54B7-4B91-843F-2B2C289BE126.jpeg Hey boys, So I inspected this cedar today knowing it was pretty bad. But WOW! This tree is very important as it's within the critical area of a bluff. To top things off there are houses below, not that we'd want to impact for a landslide if there weren't..
I'm surprised how this tree is still together! My thoughts are to top it, yes top! then cable it together. Then plant 3 cedars around the drip line of this tree. I don't thing it would be too appealing for these lower limbs to reiterate, have the need for maintenance, but we could remove it in a cycle of a little every two years for the next 10-15 years? Ultimately just girdling the tree, and turning it into a snag. Durning the time we are slowly killing the tree the new plantings would be established and start replacing the lost root system, and help offest the evaprotransprotation lost by the parent.
Anyone have experience with removals over the course of a decade or more?
will post
 
Last edited:

evo

Well-Known Member
#4
ok, finally had a chance to put the babe down, eat dinner, drink a beer.. Photos are up and I don't do youtube, but there is a video on my instagram @ https://www.instagram.com/p/Bi5Yx1Qgt6B/?taken-by=arbordreamsllc

The site is hard to map out, and I don't have photo's that illustrates the orientation of the tree to targets. IF the lead to the west failed, the deck and house are well within 1:1 range. However it would likely fail with a glancing blow, or miss. Thinking of TOPPING that leader (east) (10-12" diameter), cabling to the west side lead, smaller reduction on the half leaning away from the house. In a few years, reduce the the regenerated tops. A few more, topping the west leader. Finally, girdling the tree or turn it into a snag, making sure that every thing is short enough it wouldn't reach the house.
 

evo

Well-Known Member
#5
The tree is vertical at present, right? It's stood up to everything that Nature threw at it, but now it faces an arborist in shock. Bad news.

Trees that stand despite impossible-seeming odds blow my mind too, but I've learned to give them some credit--and a chance!

Pics, please.
I hope your not the pilgarlic stuck up BMCA as I imagine your are, when this tripe dribbles out of your self righteous manhole.
 

guymayor

Well-Known Member
#6
Dear Sir, thank you for posting the vid clip. That crack, if it is spreading or has a high
potential to, could be managed with a drill and a brace rod. Mutilating the tree should not be on the table.

Thanks also for the etymological exercise; I had to look up Definition of pilgarlic - Originally: a bald head; a bald-headed person. In later use also: a pitiable, lowly, or foolish person; a shabby or unkempt person. "

Proposing mutilation of an asset one is trusted to manage, instead of simply supporting it, could be unkindly considered pitiable, lowly, and foolish. But let's be nice!
 

guymayor

Well-Known Member
#7
Pics reveal the opportunity to brace without trunk damage, by connecting branches from one trunk to branches from the other. If the bark is scraped off at points of contact, grafting might occur.

:)
 

evo

Well-Known Member
#8
Pics reveal the opportunity to brace without trunk damage, by connecting branches from one trunk to branches from the other. If the bark is scraped off at points of contact, grafting might occur.

:)
Now we are getting something useful. I had to use a thesaurus to be honest, my dyslexic mind makes written communication more challenging that it should.
Yes the limbs could be bolted where they cross. The shock was the wear points illustrated in the photos, mostly showing where it shifted. My guess is the November of 2016 storm. Bolting the limbs above the union makes me nervous as their orientation is less than ideal. I’ve also noted fixed limbs (rubbing but fixed from movement) stop putting on reaction wood due to their lack of movement.
Back to my original question, I can only assume you don’t have any experience with staged long term removal process. How can I believe otherwise when you haven’t spoken to it.
I will be nice, as long as your not condescending.
 

DSMc

Well-Known Member
#9
Evo, aside from the fact it is a large codominant tree, how does the rest of it look? Base and roots solid, healthy normal looking tops? If the only thing wrong is the separation of trunks I'm not seeing why cable and bracing would not be satisfactory in resolving that issue.
 

evo

Well-Known Member
#11
Ok, so what is not shown in the photos, is each stem bifurcates once more. The cable would need to be past that point for the 2/3rd rule.
Stem to the east, co-dom is in a west / east orentation
Stem to the west's co-dom is in a north to south orentation

The issue I see is that the cabling system would be too much for the North / South resulting in a book opening type failure (torsional). The other stem would simply need an additional cable.

Additionally the orientation of the tops shows no self correction.
 

evo

Well-Known Member
#12
Evo, aside from the fact it is a large codominant tree, how does the rest of it look? Base and roots solid, healthy normal looking tops? If the only thing wrong is the separation of trunks I'm not seeing why cable and bracing would not be satisfactory in resolving that issue.
I would expect a fairly thin shell wall. Very few cedars of this size are solid. The cracked union is about 10-12' (from where it originally was joined, to bark separation below. The spot where I stuck my handsaw into the crack is about 2/3 down from the union, and 20' off the ground. DBH is 40-42" (guessing), and the tree is about 75' tall. Which is very short and squat for our western reds. I have one which is about the same DBH shaded to the east, but full sun to the west, and it's pushing 160'
 

DSMc

Well-Known Member
#16
Well, you are the arborist on site and I am just looking at pictures so your judgment on this will have a better perspective. That said having the tree already short for the girth is good. Having all the limb structure that will limit lateral movement at the split is good. The callus growth is well developed, old and strong so that is good.
If it is like most cedars the wood above the split is probably sound enough to put cables in so you could skip the bracing and just go with that. You do not need to go 2/3's up, that is not a rule, it is a guideline. If it makes more sense to place it in another, stronger location, do so.
I am definitely not trying to talk you into doing something that you honestly feel won't work. Just pointing out some things from what I can see.
 

JD3000

Well-Known Member
#19
Damn. They dont exactly get big here. Not a fan of our drying winters and heavier soils more often than not. Pretty trees though.
 
Top