- Location
- Pukalani, Hawaii
just wondering if the 1/3 rule has to apply to everything in the tree. for ex. only reduce 1/3 the branch length, 1/3 of the main height, cut back to a minimum of 1/3 the diameter of the main branch and so on and so forth.
1/3 rule
- Thread starter Maui Palm & Tree Care
- Start date
Frax
Participating member
It's not really a 'rule'. More like a guideline and it makes limited sense anyway. It may help beginners imagine some average starting point but...in my mind its nearly worthless as any rule or set of rules.
- Location
- Retired in Minneapolis
What we hear as the 'One Third Rule' applies to lots of things. i took a photography class and it applied to picture composition...the list goes on and on.
For trees...it is sorta mythical. All things equal and given a healthy tree...or limb...or twig...or root...or root system...or water demand...or...etc. the tree could theoretically suffer a loss of a third of one of those components of the system. BUT...take a third of too many parts and the whole system collapses...dies.
For trees...it is sorta mythical. All things equal and given a healthy tree...or limb...or twig...or root...or root system...or water demand...or...etc. the tree could theoretically suffer a loss of a third of one of those components of the system. BUT...take a third of too many parts and the whole system collapses...dies.
The_Archdruid
Participating member
1/3 of online post responses are superfluous and snarky.
- Location
- Retired in Minneapolis
[ QUOTE ]
1/3 of online post responses are superfluous and snarky.
[/ QUOTE ]
Add this to the on and on list
1/3 of online post responses are superfluous and snarky.
[/ QUOTE ]
Add this to the on and on list
guymayor
Branched out member
- Location
- East US, Earth
[ QUOTE ]
1/3 of online post responses are superfluous and snarky.
[/ QUOTE ]
If so, we need another so it's 2/6--not!
Yes it's a starting point in case we need one, never meant to be a Rule--"Rules are too Absolute for Mother Nature" A. Shigo.
I use it when considering how many sprouts to remove or reduce.
1/3 of online post responses are superfluous and snarky.
[/ QUOTE ]
If so, we need another so it's 2/6--not!
Yes it's a starting point in case we need one, never meant to be a Rule--"Rules are too Absolute for Mother Nature" A. Shigo.
I use it when considering how many sprouts to remove or reduce.
common sense and a knowledge of tree biology is more important.
- Location
- AZ
I use it when considering what diameter lateral is adequate to cut back to when reduction pruning.
- Location
- urbana, il.
Even better when there is a lateral 1/2 - 3/4 to cut back to (any bigger and I guess it's more of a thinning cut. 
- Location
- Longmont, CO
[ QUOTE ]
Even better when there is a lateral 1/2 - 3/4 to cut back to (any bigger and I guess it's more of a thinning cut.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree. For quicker Codit and much better aesthetics, I prefer to reduce back to something that is around 50% the diameter of the parent stem. If that option isn't there, or the tree is heavily in decline, I'll then reduce a limb back down to a lateral that is about 30% the diameter of the parent stem. If that isn't availble, I'll consider cutting out the whole limb. If, the tree is too far gone and pruning would leave too little leaf bearing crown, then I strongly push for a tree removal. It kills me in side to head back nearly every cut on a tree to appease a customer in denial about the eminent death of their tree.
I often see work in town where many people think you must reduce something back to a lateral that is about 30% the diameter of the parent stem. The problem I have with that interpretation, is they will typically reduce back to a lateral that comes off the parent stem at a 90° angle. Or, they will flat out get into making all of their cuts "heading cuts" or really close to it...
My thoughts...
Even better when there is a lateral 1/2 - 3/4 to cut back to (any bigger and I guess it's more of a thinning cut.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree. For quicker Codit and much better aesthetics, I prefer to reduce back to something that is around 50% the diameter of the parent stem. If that option isn't there, or the tree is heavily in decline, I'll then reduce a limb back down to a lateral that is about 30% the diameter of the parent stem. If that isn't availble, I'll consider cutting out the whole limb. If, the tree is too far gone and pruning would leave too little leaf bearing crown, then I strongly push for a tree removal. It kills me in side to head back nearly every cut on a tree to appease a customer in denial about the eminent death of their tree.
I often see work in town where many people think you must reduce something back to a lateral that is about 30% the diameter of the parent stem. The problem I have with that interpretation, is they will typically reduce back to a lateral that comes off the parent stem at a 90° angle. Or, they will flat out get into making all of their cuts "heading cuts" or really close to it...
My thoughts...
guymayor
Branched out member
- Location
- East US, Earth
[ QUOTE ]
For quicker Codit and much better aesthetics, I prefer to reduce back to something that is around 50% the diameter of the parent stem. If that option isn't there, or the tree is heavily in decline, I'll then reduce a limb back down to a lateral that is about 30% the diameter of the parent stem. If that isn't availble, I'll consider cutting out the whole limb. If, the tree is too far gone and pruning would leave too little leaf bearing crown, then I strongly push for a tree removal. It kills me in side to head back nearly every cut on a tree to appease a customer in denial about the eminent death of their tree.
[/ QUOTE ]
Re aesthetics yes cutting back to a smaller lateral or even a bud is ANSI A300-compliant, but it may look weird at first. If you visualize in tree time you will see that sprouts become branches so a few years down the road it will look good.
It kills me inside to see trees removed because neither owner or arborist could look ahead with patience and do retrenchment pruning to keep valuable trees.
that puts me to mulling over this common Freudian Slip: If someone predicts that a tree's death is nigh aka inevitable, unavoidable, and soon, death is being literally called 'imminent'.
But this guess of death is often expressed as 'eminent', which means most important, dominant, or leading. The Slip comes in when this is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If the arborists do nothing for the bottom half of the tree, they vastly improve the odds of its imminent death.
The dominance of tree death in our industry has been slipping, as viewed by the slipping dominance of iron on the expo trade show floor.
but it's still commonly what people in this market think we mostly do: "you're an arborist--so you cut trees, huh?"
not pickin on ya, Jamin--i hear it a lot. Lots of companies stop at the top half, and that does not seem to work out too well for trees in general.
one opinion!
For quicker Codit and much better aesthetics, I prefer to reduce back to something that is around 50% the diameter of the parent stem. If that option isn't there, or the tree is heavily in decline, I'll then reduce a limb back down to a lateral that is about 30% the diameter of the parent stem. If that isn't availble, I'll consider cutting out the whole limb. If, the tree is too far gone and pruning would leave too little leaf bearing crown, then I strongly push for a tree removal. It kills me in side to head back nearly every cut on a tree to appease a customer in denial about the eminent death of their tree.
[/ QUOTE ]
Re aesthetics yes cutting back to a smaller lateral or even a bud is ANSI A300-compliant, but it may look weird at first. If you visualize in tree time you will see that sprouts become branches so a few years down the road it will look good.
It kills me inside to see trees removed because neither owner or arborist could look ahead with patience and do retrenchment pruning to keep valuable trees.
that puts me to mulling over this common Freudian Slip: If someone predicts that a tree's death is nigh aka inevitable, unavoidable, and soon, death is being literally called 'imminent'.
But this guess of death is often expressed as 'eminent', which means most important, dominant, or leading. The Slip comes in when this is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If the arborists do nothing for the bottom half of the tree, they vastly improve the odds of its imminent death.
The dominance of tree death in our industry has been slipping, as viewed by the slipping dominance of iron on the expo trade show floor.
not pickin on ya, Jamin--i hear it a lot. Lots of companies stop at the top half, and that does not seem to work out too well for trees in general.
one opinion!
Gerald_Beranek
New member
- Location
- Ft. Bragg, Ca.
The one third rule has long worked best for young and vigorous trees. Older trees on the other hand, and especially those in decline, require a more discerning and experienced approach with the teaching.
And with this one's experience with their local species weighs a lot in the decision process.
And with this one's experience with their local species weighs a lot in the decision process.
- Location
- Seattle WA
[ QUOTE ]
It kills me inside to see trees removed because neither owner or arborist could look ahead with patience and do retrenchment pruning to keep valuable trees.
[/ QUOTE ]
just what i was thinkin..
It kills me inside to see trees removed because neither owner or arborist could look ahead with patience and do retrenchment pruning to keep valuable trees.
[/ QUOTE ]
just what i was thinkin..
New threads New posts
-
test
-
-
-
Fruit tree holding on by a thread, client wants to get another year out of it. Thoughts?- Started by climbingmonkey24
- Replies: 49
-
-
-
