Another Cable ? with video

[Daniel]

Re: Another Cable ?

on that particular tree, none or very little..
I like to take the weight of branch tips on large broad leaf trees before cabling, but recognize the trade off.. pruning a tree is hurting it.. if many small cuts can be made on branch tips at the top and far reaching large limbs, then that is hurting it a lot less than a few large cuts on the main trunk, while reducing the weight, where it counts the most, due to leverage. That is getting the most bang for the least harm..

In this case the weight removed from pruning would be less valuable than the damage caused by it. Unless the tree has other structural issues or its just super heavy and threatening a very valuable object. Even then I'd rather just put the cable in high, again for the leverage, rather than hit the tree too hard..

AND YOU?????

 

[Daniel]

Re: Another Cable ?

All the talk about cabling got me looking for this video that was shot in early spring. Just finished the editing. It shows a medium sized Norway Maple that had a bad cable and failed. Very self explanatory lots of talking.. not much action.. 9 minutes if you want to sit through it...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9WlFPfBQEk

also posted it on the video forum

 

[RopeShield]

Re: Another Cable ?

Pruning hurting a tree?
Please explain.
That goes against everything we know.

More growth
Effeciency in transport
Increase vigor
etc etc.

 

[Daniel]

Re: Another Cable ?

pruning is wounding... and removing part of the trees ability to feed itself...

apparently "we" have a lot to learn... (see signature below)

 

[guymayor]

Re: Another Cable ?

well going by a pic is tough but it looks like that right lead-of-concern is mighty thick. and the left lead is sparse. Maybe speccing 10% off the right with thinning and removal cuts would improve balance, light levels to the interior to maintain foliage there, and lessen load, and lessen the likelihood of torsion or other failure, even with the cable.

Pruning is always wounding yes but not always damaging, if the result is a more stable tree with no significant loss in photosynthesis. It seems that careful thinning could increase energy production, or at least cause no net loss. It's not the amount of leaf surface that matters, it's the amount of sunlight synthesized.

Also the other trees around that left lead could be reduced to maintain sun exposure and health. Maybe look to the earth and the roots to further explain the difference in appearance of the 2 trunks, then improve the rootzone conditions.

removing the tree for safety's sake seems way radical.
one opinion.

 

[Daniel]

Re: Another Cable ?

Why does that tree need "balance"???? That is all in your mind... Cable keeps tree from falling apart.. you're fooling yourself if you think that tree some how "needs" pruning.. I know you really care Guy, and we all gotta eat, BUT this tree is better left cabled/no pruning... IMO

 

[guymayor]

Re: Another Cable ?

hey daniel i can get by on beans; i aint selling pruning for me but for the tree. if you look at that heavy solid wall of foliage on the right trunk and call it hunkydory well suit yourself but i humbly suggest it might be better off 10% lighter and thinner.

as for the sun needs and troubling sparseness of the other trunk; no comment? too busy hoisting your petard/tilting your lance at the windmill of "balance", which one PhD also points to as a sign of ignorance but dumb me i think symmetrical or at least less lopsided is preferable, structurally speaking.

"Balance" is a legitimate objective, and specs to improve it might fit this tree, or at least my view of it on this little screen here...orr maybe the structural imperfections can all be fixed with your little wire--or is that all in YOUR mind?

 

[Daniel]

Re: Another Cable ?

LOL Guy,
Black or pinto?...............................

Balance certainly may be a legitimate objective, but not becasue the tree needs it... it may improve the look of the tree to the human eye.. and that is a fine reason to do the work, if the customer wants to buy it..

When you say: "symmetrical or at least less lopsided is preferable, structurally speaking"

What do you mean... what is it about a tree's structure that is to be improved????

 

[guymayor]

Re: Another Cable ?

Murph that spruce does not look like a pristine undisturbed forest tree that it would be sacrilege to interfere with. It has spread toward the opening made when they built the house, putting it out of both structural and aesthetic balance, as viewed from this screen.

10% off the right with thinning and removal cuts would improve balance, light levels to the interior to maintain foliage there, and lessen load, and lessen the likelihood of torsion or other failure, even with the cable.

Pruning is always wounding yes but not always damaging, if the result is a more stable tree with no significant loss in photosynthesis. It seems that careful thinning could increase energy production, or at least cause no net loss.

It's not the amount of leaf surface that matters, it's the amount of sunlight synthesized. Also the other trees around that left lead could be reduced to maintain sun exposure and health.

 

[Daniel]

Re: Another Cable ?

OK,
I can see pruning helping that tree, both aesthetically and structurally..

I do use this point to sell pruning: trees are genetically wired to reach for the sun, because they are naturally found primarily in a wooded setting , where there is great competition for sunlight. So in suburban settings, where the tree has access to open sky, it will tend to keep reaching for the sun in a way that can cause it to get too big to hold itself up. Generally more a broad leaf thing around here, though white pines will grow long limbs that are subject to snow damage.