Guy I think I got this
Sherwood7, good question.
First, I said something earlier and forgot a detail. Now I look ignorant. Regarding removals, raising, deadwooding, line clearing. I said this is not tree care and yet I practice it half the time, as people/client care. This doesn't benefit the tree, but if it's done on time (before the limb to be cut grows to 3 or 4 inches) and carefully, then at least it won't damage the tree significantly. Significantly, as in decay that leads to a shorter life AND long term risk. And I also spend a great amount of time educating clients that trees are alive and 6-12 inch cuts hurt them. Honestly, people don't know. And they have trouble trusting the alternative or accepting a few more leaves over their precious roof. A roof that is PRESERVED by the shade of leaves. Who knew, you can sell it cause it's true. Advocate for gutter guards while your at it. The canopy is the best shelter we ever get. Unless you spent your life inside.
And Guy, good point about cutting a nice one. As you know I don't need it to eat and that's not quite what I said. But the essence of what you said is right. Why do I 'need to? I need to, so I don't refuse a legal request...necessarily. Of course I quote high on ignorant removals and I often try talk people into the pruning option that is better, and most often, for the client too. This has lost me a lot of business and I don't care. It has also gained me a reputation as a conservation arborist. And guy you are right, I need to work on not cutting good ones even more. But the lack of laws, public awareness, and the numerous lumberjacks that agree with ignorant removals, for the sake of the easy buck (no pun intended) or because they don't know better.
sets up a scarey playing field for the preservation arborist.
Here's a few examples of what I mean.
Recently I quoted on a reduction of Linden over a driveway, requested as a removal. Not tree CARE in that it benefits the tree, but care in that it saves the tree. No by laws in place so I quoted the removal high. Educated the client and even sent them to a nearby site where I made clients and their neighbours happy by reducing a Linden over the driveway. Another company cut the tree and now I look bad to them because of my high price. I don't care though and from now on I think I might say with a smile that I cannot quote on removals like this.
Side note, or not? I literally just got a text from a friend who gets me a lot of work. "I have a client in...that wants a price on 2 removals". If I say no, then someone else will see them and say "sure, $2000" laughing all the way ha ha ha. I'd probably spend more time convincing them out of it, than I spent on this post. I've done it many times. Plus maybe I won't need to, because the location has a by law.
Another tree, sadly that I did cut, was for the sake of a tennis court. No by laws in place. Client is a personal friend. I did brush it off for almost a year and then the third time I was asked, I decided to save a friend and my reputation. Treat it like a vasectomy. some doctors require an educational visit and commitment before the date and on the date. Luckily the court is going in, because I'd hate to cut it for nothing. A beautiful fully crowned sugar though. These hands are guilty of murder, what can I say?
I don't recommend removal unless it's absolutely necessary.
This is where reduction Comes in. Borderline trees can be mitigated but remember to recommend annual assessment to observe advancements in decay. Sonic Tomography is somewhat useless initially, at least as a conclusive tool. It is a benchmark. An ST image produced years later, however, can be compared to the benchmark. Decay advancement vs wound wood advancement. This is not conclusive either but will certainly be in the perspective tool box,
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
