"The tradeoff for high strength CODIT boundary in the BPZ vs the smaller cut with dormant buds that may eventually support the CODIT process."
Hmm gotta dig up molre pics here, but the nodes with the buds support codit very well right away
"I convinced him to just trim the broken ends and try doing remediation several years out. He took it farther and reread the literature- all along it has said that pruning to a node is part of Shigo's Natural Target Pruning."
True, although we both looked at the trees and saw that taking a lot more off would not be reasonable. The books and the science confirm that. No one needed convincing, except one other climber. He came around shortly
as i recall.
Here's chat from other feedback fwiw, & is me:
“Common guidelines are to remove no more than 5 percent to 30 percent of the vegetative buds…”
I haven’t heard it phrased like that. “Live crown” “live foliage” are the general common terms. Why have you chosen “vegetative buds”.
&because those other terms are more vague and less relevant. Plus, buds are what make crown and foliage possible. Plus, foliage does not always apply in winter. Plus, does “foliage mean number or spread of leaves—is a shade leaf worth more than a sun leaf just because it is bigger? Plus, repeating general common terms tends to rigidify the concept and cost it accuracy, and they are boring. Plus, it puts the attention where it belongs—in the bud.
“Had the original pruning been to the nodes, with regard…it might have been defendable.”
If the original trim job had been done properly, reducing to laterals, restoration pruning wouldn’t have been the issue. No pruning would have been needed to be done for the typical 3 to 5 year cycle of maintenance, other than storm damage or deadwood.
&well maybe so; depends on the response.
Criteria for locating reduction cuts (inset)
“3. Foundation….Wall 4 is visible as a black line, walling off the discolored tissue”
Not always “black” but “darkened” and Shigo states sometimes not visible. Many people seem to confuse the black line, zone lines, produced by some fungal diseases with Wall 4. (This is just a side comment, not a criticism of content.)
&It’s one that fools me sometimes; would’ve been good to mention more detail on that key point. I sent in a pic of that bvut it was left out.
“8. Orientation of cut. Shaded cuts may crack and decay less when exposed to the sun”.
Well, they will crack when exposed to the sun. Perhaps Guy meant “less than those exposed to the sun.” &good grief a typo. That sux.
An added comment on the orientation of cuts. The tree itself dictates how pruning cuts are made and the subsequent orientation. &Largely but when you have a choice (and you always do), choose shade, was my approach.
We agree with his observation that sometimes sacrifice of accuracy can be made if the only option is going to be having to remove too much. &Thank you.
“9. Size of remaining lateral branch”.
Guy has expressed a dislike of the 1/3 rule on the forums. And I understand his concern as people get locked into “general rules” to the point where everything becomes black and white to them with no gray allowed. I argued this point before the City Council of Hamilton when another tree service performed heading cuts on a portion of a tree which had experienced storm damage. He was lambasted in the local newspaper by the mayor and a third arborist. This third arborist claimed that if no lateral 1/3 the size of the stem was available then the whole limb should have come off. I stated that would have removed half of the tree leaving huge wounds. His reply was that then the tree should have been taken out. I disagree.
&yes that’s what I’m talking about
However, with all that said, it cannot be argued that the larger the lateral that is left, the greater chance for its survival and, therefore, of the branch or stem to which it is attached. Therefore, I support the premise behind this “rule”.
&cannot be argued hahaha. Generally true yes but can it be isolated and made a law or rule; not sure. Is an 8” wound at a 6” upright better than a 4” wound at a 1” upright? Depends on the branch.
“Three dukes can replace one king”…Interesting analogy, however, sounds like an invitation to civil war.
&Wars are fought, treaties are made, lines are drawn, and life goes on.
The position of the BPZ. These are located in relation to branches….not the main stem.
& No comprende. They are located in relation to buds, especially where the terminal node was set. I’m working on finer microscopy.
So they inhibit decay going from a lateral branch down into the main stem. How does target pruning to a node on a main stem with no lateral help here?
& It helps by locating the wound where there are preformed (dormant, latent, suppressed) buds, because as they release and grow they nourish the process of closure. Nodes are also where the tree’s anatomy—tighter, twisted grain, and physiology—chemical resources for codit—favor a potitive response. The wound closes quicker, and also leaves no sugar-stick stub.
“FEMA removals are paid…”
Guy, is there specific nomenclature in place for this that arborists should be aware of for billing purposes? &dunno.
Or are you saying that we need to be proactive in approaching FEMA on a case-by-case basis? &I would think so yes.
Or that the need still exists to educate FEMA on retention vs removal? & A huge need, for them and the other agents involved.
“Discoloration and decay”
For some reason people always use these terms together. It might as well have become hyphenated. Discoloration is not necessarily decay. But the constant reference together gives people that impression. Discoloration is important in timber species where it degrades the wood monetarily for harvest. It is of no importance to the average homeowner who never sees the inside of their tree made into wall paneling and lumber. I realize this may not be an important point to many, but if we are talking about misconceptions and rhetoric, I wish someone would simply utilize the word that is most appropriate for the topic at hand. In residential/urban arboricultural, decay is of much more importance than discoloration.
&I agree 100%. I did not mean to imply a causal link there, and like you I have issues with research that does, if supporting facts are not made clear. This extends to interpretations of resistance drilling; sometimes any off-peak reading is considered rotten when a formula is applied.
“..bands of orange tissue forming reaction wood..”
Are we talking about the tension wood in angiosperms and compression wood in gymnosperms here? & and much more—includes buttress formation and any reinforcing growth outside the normal increments. Of course gymnosperms form tension wood too, and vice versa.
If so, then that would be going down to the xylem. Or are you referring to the coloration often seen as the old phellem splits and furrows showing progressively deeper layers of the rhytidome (old phelloderm, old phloem and phellem)? Many species out here have orange secondary cortex under the outer periderm. As the bark becomes older and furrows, you can see the orange tissue, however, this is not limited to the tension side of angiosperms or compression side of gymnosperms. You can also see this on limbs where the upper side is smoother and the lower side furrowed as periderm is put down in differing quantities. On both angiosperms and gymnosperms you will see the orange secondary cortex on the underside of the limbs. (Thank you, Kim Coder, for the defining terms. :/)
&Yes,exactly. ”Reaction wood” includes that old tension/compression paradigm we all learned. It also includes any wood formed in response to mechanical forces (at least that was in the draft ANSI doc). The observation was that this is a good thing. Gravity being a mechanical force, the secondary cortex is made visible (in large part) due to gravity.
