What would you do for this Cedar?

[misfit]

By any chance, is that Ted Harbourt or Murv Alleman?

No, it was George Bofinger. But it is funny that you should mention those names. I know Ted, but I have not spoken with him in 2 or 3 years now. I see he is no longer maintaining his ISA certification, so I suspect he is retired now. And Murv's name just came up in a different context recently. I tried to contact him via Facebook Messenger, but he never saw that message. What's your connection?

 

[Seth McPherson]

Thanks to all who commented here with their recommendations. My local arborist (TCIA and ISA certified and TRAQ certified) came by today, and his recommendation is to cut off the top third of the long limb. He showed me exactly where he would cut it. His primary concern was the leverage the wind would have on that portion of the limb, and high winds during hurricane season are definitely a concern here. His view is that the risk of leaving the limb as it is is much higher than any unexpected risk that may arise from cutting it. He has seen many cedars here put out long, unbalanced limbs like this. He did not recommend cabling/bracing though I failed to get his reasoning for that. I suspect he just didn't think it was necessary. He will be out in a couple weeks to do the deed. In the meantime, if anyone thinks this is a bad plan, I hope you will say so and explain why. I appreciate all your feedback.

Very little is known about the effects of reduction pruning. Anyone who claims otherwise is speaking in decades at the very most. For most species, that’s a shorter section of their life and a speck in their overall existence. In reducing that limb by 1/3, you are drastically changing (in one day) how it has adapted to grow over the past couple decades. Every branch, including its top, acts as a shock absorber in wind events. Limb up a conifer and tell me it doesn’t get increasingly more wobbly as you strip its limbs and top. I say there’s no structures so I definitely wouldn’t cut anything, you’re just introducing a weakened area and poorly attached new, and potentially vigorous, growth. Throw a cable up there and call it a day.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tom Dunlap]

What's your connection?

Both are friends of mine for many years.

The arbo family is large. Unfortunately we are spread far and wide so we don't get to be together very often.

 

[Daniel]

So do I.

me 3

 

[oldoakman]

Both are friends of mine for many years.

The arbo family is large. Unfortunately we are spread far and wide so we don't get to be together very often.

Both friends of mine also.

 

[DSMc]

Very little is known about the effects of reduction pruning. Anyone who claims otherwise is speaking in decades at the very most...

I say there’s no structures so I definitely wouldn’t cut anything, you’re just introducing a weakened area and poorly attached new, and potentially vigorous, growth...

@Seth McPherson, where did these thoughts come from? Are they yours from years of observing various species response to end weight reduction, or are they products of lessons learned in a classroom type setting? The contradiction and opposing points in the two statements I quoted shows a strong bias against tip weight reduction. I'm curious as to how you came to this line of thinking.

 

[Seth McPherson]

@Seth McPherson, where did these thoughts come from? Are they yours from years of observing various species response to end weight reduction, or are they products of lessons learned in a classroom type setting? The contradiction and opposing points in the two statements I quoted shows a strong bias against tip weight reduction. I'm curious as to how you came to this line of thinking.

I think that was mostly my point, that years or even decades of observing the effects of reduction pruning is not nearly adequate, in my opinion. I’m of the mindset that trees know best how to be trees, they’ve been doing it for an extremely long time. For the most part, I don’t think trees need arborists - people need arborists. I’m not saying that reduction pruning doesn’t have its place when we are talking about structures or prized trees and landscape underneath but I think reduction pruning satisfies a short term goal. You’ve made the limb "safe" for 10 years at the most and you’ve compromised it in terms of the overall life of the tree. Sometimes reduction pruning is a necessary "evil" (in my mind) but here I don’t think it calls for it. I’d be very curious to hear how it responds to the next hurricane if they go ahead with the 1/3 reduction.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Mick Dempsey]

Jeebus!
Look at the second picture, that is going to split out when it gets heavy enough or receives enough wind, and when it does it’ll rip a strip out of the trunk right down to the earth, then it really is bolloxed.
All this ‘trees know best‘ nonsense.
Taking the weight off the rogue limb will considerably reduce the chances of that happening.

 

[Daniel]

I don’t believe there is any hard evidence that weight reduction prevents or stops a failure. Taking the top off that limb will reduce the amount of load experienced at the questionable union but it will also force that limb to move in an entirely new way with high wind, potentially not able to dissipate wind loads as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ya.. that's nonsense... the effects from removing weight from the most leveraged point, the branch tips, is going to far outweigh any ill effects from the way the branch "dissipates wind loads".

I’ve seen plenty of “reduction” pruning that resulted in a poor response of weakly attached branches.

No amount of reduction pruning will address the defects of that limb to preserve it on its own.

More nonsense... weakly attached new branches are not going to be a problem in the forseeable future and can be managed effectively with follow up pruning. And if thet ever shold fail the damage to the tree is negligible, whereas if the entire limbs rips down the trunk, the tree is "bolloxed"

And yes absolutely you can protect the tree from failure at the defective branch union by taking weight off the end of that limb. How much weight you take depends on how bad the union is and how much damage would be done if the limb failed at the branch union.

 

[Daniel]

Jeebus!
Look at the second picture, that is going to split out when it gets heavy enough or receives enough wind, and when it does it’ll rip a strip out of the trunk right down to the earth, then it really is bolloxed.
All this ‘trees know best‘ nonsense.
Taking the weight off the rogue limb will considerably reduce the chances of that happening.

That's all completely obvious.... and well put...

 

[misfit]

@Seth McPherson, thank you for your comments. I am receptive to any counter-argument that can stand up to scrutiny, and I especially appreciate your long-term perspective of this tree. That is important to me too, and I intended to ask my arborist about this, but we got to talking about all kinds of things and I failed to come back to that. I wanted to ask him how the tree should be expected to respond to trimming 1/3 off this limb in the near term and long term, and what maintenance would be required in the future. I am expecting epicormic growth which will, of course, be weakly attached, but I don't know how much and how big and how it should, or should not, be pruned in the future and how often.

Please don't misinterpret my questions and comments as criticism of your perspective. I am not fighting you; I am examining your argument. I am the ignorant one here, and I asked what you experts would do because I don't know what is best for this tree. But to understand this, I need to turn your concerns back around to you regarding your advice to cable the limb and leave it as is. Using your words, that, too, would seem to drastically change, in one day, its shock-absorbing ability. And what would this tree look like in the long term assuming the cabling preserves the limb? Will that limb simply grow to the ridiculous point of dominating the whole tree as it seems to be doing now? I don't know. I'm just trying to picture how the tree and that limb will look 30 years from now, and how much more cabling it will need, or if the cabling will be effective, and what maintenance will be needed. I will be long dead and gone then, but I still want to give the tree its best chance at a healthy life beyond me.

By the way, everyone assumes there are no targets here, but there could be depending on timing. The tree is next to a driveway and near a sidewalk. There could be a car parked in the driveway, and the sidewalk is used by neighbors and several students who walk to/from the two schools one block away. The chances of hitting a target are small but possible.

 

[Basswood]

Ya.. that's nonsense... the effects from removing weight from the most leveraged point, the branch tips, is going to far outweigh any ill effects from the way the branch "dissipates wind loads".

More nonsense... weakly attached new branches are not going to be a problem in the forseeable future and can be managed effectively with follow up pruning. And if thet ever shold fail the damage to the tree is negligible, whereas if the entire limbs rips down the trunk, the tree is "bolloxed"

And yes absolutely you can protect the tree from failure at the defective branch union by taking weight off the end of that limb. How much weight you take depends on how bad the union is and how much damage would be done if the limb failed at the branch union.

You can mitigate those risks of failure but you can not “cure it”. There are too many variables that are impossible to measure or predict. Any load can fail under environmental stresses, defects the risk goes up significantly depending on the defect. And that risk only increases over time, even if pruned.

The OG image has included bark, even with bracing, cables and pruning you are mitigating that risk of failure.

 

[Neill]

@Seth McPherson, thank you for your comments. I am receptive to any counter-argument that can stand up to scrutiny, and I especially appreciate your long-term perspective of this tree. That is important to me too, and I intended to ask my arborist about this, but we got to talking about all kinds of things and I failed to come back to that. I wanted to ask him how the tree should be expected to respond to trimming 1/3 off this limb in the near term and long term, and what maintenance would be required in the future. I am expecting epicormic growth which will, of course, be weakly attached, but I don't know how much and how big and how it should, or should not, be pruned in the future and how often.

Please don't misinterpret my questions and comments as criticism of your perspective. I am not fighting you; I am examining your argument. I am the ignorant one here, and I asked what you experts would do because I don't know what is best for this tree. But to understand this, I need to turn your concerns back around to you regarding your advice to cable the limb and leave it as is. Using your words, that, too, would seem to drastically change, in one day, its shock-absorbing ability. And what would this tree look like in the long term assuming the cabling preserves the limb? Will that limb simply grow to the ridiculous point of dominating the whole tree as it seems to be doing now? I don't know. I'm just trying to picture how the tree and that limb will look 30 years from now, and how much more cabling it will need, or if the cabling will be effective, and what maintenance will be needed. I will be long dead and gone then, but I still want to give the tree its best chance at a healthy life beyond me.

By the way, everyone assumes there are no targets here, but there could be depending on timing. The tree is next to a driveway and near a sidewalk. There could be a car parked in the driveway, and the sidewalk is used by neighbors and several students who walk to/from the two schools one block away. The chances of hitting a target are small but possible.

In my experience, eastern red cedar is not a prolific sprouter. I’d wager it will put out zero epicormic growth

 

[DSMc]

I think that was mostly my point, that years or even decades of observing the effects of reduction pruning is not nearly adequate, in my opinion...

You’ve made the limb "safe" for 10 years at the most and you’ve compromised it in terms of the overall life of the tree...

Not only did you not answer my question, you again reiterated that you don't believe there has been enough research to quantify predicting a long term outcome while a few sentences later you do just that.

Again, how did you arrive at this conclusion? What research can you share that supports your views.