Bracing without cabling

[evo]

I’m talking specifically about Pine and Spruce, and my experience with this technique. When topping will leave lasting damage and concern in the future, the thinning I’ve described can maintain the natural shape and stature of a tree while reducing potential for failure.

One thing I often point out to clients, which is bolstered by the study you’ve shared, is that removing a tree may very well leave a remaining adjacent tree much more susceptible to wind throw. That stand in numbers, and removing a front line surely affects the second line.

Personally error on the side of limb reduction vs thinning. I’m privy to all the current talk of windsail and what I have observed is that it might make a little difference, but I’ve also noticed where it makes the remainder limbs more likely to fracture as they have more sway and less ‘clash’. I’ve seen some horribly massacred upper crowns and some that appear quite natural.
I’ve also observed trees battered by the wind, to the point where they look lion tailed and wind sailed but these were nature pruned!
Response growth of reduced limb can stimulate growth and cause the tops to bush out, BUT this also changes the lever arm, and makes breaks of secondary laterals vs the whole limb. This can look quite natural as well, (mostly after a season or two) and simulates mature crown architecture.

 

[evo]

A crack is different than a bad inclusion.

Topping a conifer can be done blindfolded. A reduction accounts for the biology.

Reduction may need follow- up care after a few years. And then onward at greater intervals.




I'd vote for a 20'-ish reduction, bolts and cable.

If you can cable with 3" showing, consider a rod instead of the cable.

Reduction of height, aka sensitive topping is still topping. The tree will respond in the same manner, and throw out multiple tops. I’ve found these are rarely managed and while I do agree a smallish reduction avoiding exposure of as much heartwood as possible, coupled with shortening the whorls just below is the lesser of evils compared to hacking off a top. BUT this isn’t the only negative, the laterals aka limbs get super stimulated and I’m sure you know of the giant octopus limbs that come with auxin disruption in Doug’s..

 

[lumberjackson]

I would brace it according to BMP and add a cable as high as practical. Or, I might consider fewer through braces with a cable so the union has more ability to flex and continue developing reaction wood, but has the added support of the hardware.

Definitely not an advocate of reducing the dominant leader in this instance. I also typically resist thinning conifers, but you guys make some good arguments to support it in this case. Let us know what you and the customer decide on and take some photos of the result!

 

[southsoundtree]

Is topping not arbitrary, internodal cutting without regard to physiology/ biology?

 

[evo]

Is topping not arbitrary, internodal cutting without regard to physiology/ biology?

Yes, but amputation at the knee and amputation mid thigh is still amputation, and you have the same infection and healing risks…. (Insert multiple tops and decay/wall 4 cracks as you see fit)
Edit: conifers are not decurrent, Doug firs are not oaks nor maples….

 

[southsoundtree]

I agree.

I'd think mimicking a minor storm- break, but with a clean cut, to save the tree and/ or house, would be a job for a tree "surgeon" who cares, and would be a win over it all going away.

Cut off my whole hand if it saves my arm from gangrene.

 

[evo]

I agree.

I'd think mimicking a minor storm- break, but with a clean cut, to save the tree and/ or house, would be a job for a tree "surgeon" who cares, and would be a win over it all going away.

Cut off my whole hand if it saves my arm from gangrene.

I agree with the gang green analogy, but that is a rot that will advance into a systemic infection. This is quite likely a structural issue and not a pathology or a parasitic one.. I have no issue taking dead or dying tops out, nor do I have one broken hanging/imminent risk/failures... So in a sense, failure as is, in the next 5 years is possible (the tree has been like this for a long time), and the consequences = smooshed house (like pancake or hot dog, take your pick)... Can the risk be mitigated enough by bolts, or does it have to go on life support pruning? (yeah, I know its a reach.. The house was built half way under the drip line of a huge doug fir (shortish but chubby, 1/4" 3/8”+ open grown growth ring kinda tree)...

It's a rhetorical judgement call, and there is no wrong answer. It's a gamble and the outcome will outlast the owner one way or another....

 

[DSMc]

I think most tree workers are far too fearful of reducing tops. Many species in many different locations respond much better than we give them credit for. A quick look around the forest will confirm this ability and subsequent longevity even without the follow-up care we are capable of providing.

 

[oceans]

Back to tree biology, and the idea that prolonged care may be possible, I would save the reduction cuts for the laterals, and make thinning cuts along the central leader. I’d far rather climb the result of this than the result of topping the central leader and leaving the laterals alone.

 

[DSMc]

@oceans, Eric, thinning heavy, long-limbed Douglas fir tops for reducing wind sail is not particularly successful as the previously interlocked limbs developed a codependent relationship and become very prone to snow and wind loading damage as a result.

 

[oceans]

@oceans, Eric, thinning heavy, long-limbed Douglas fir tops for reducing wind sail is not particularly successful as the previously interlocked limbs developed a codependent relationship and become very prone to snow and wind loading damage as a result.

Just over a couple decades ago, I was commercial fishing with my father. One of the issues he had to grapple with was the water resistance of particular trap mesh sizes and rope diameters. There is a trap mesh small enough that water will see it as a solid object rather than a permeable surface. In dealing with rope, if the water is deep enough, a thinner diameter rope properly rated for the application will actually allow grapple weights to reach the ocean floor, whereas thicker ropes have so much resistance that the grapple will never reach bottom.

From a young age, these concepts and considerations have been a part of my thinking. I appreciate the information about Douglas Firs, and I can imagine this effect would hold true on a number of other species. I’ve seen Norway Spruce, Beech, Maples and Oaks with limbs resting upon other limbs. I completely understand the result of removing a branch’s support and leaving it hanging in the breeze.

I am not prescribing one pruning technique alone, but a wholistic approach. Again, working with any tree’s biology, I’d prefer to keep auxin in check. I’ve never seen reducing a lateral result in the formation of an upright fractal. If I’m thinning the number of branches on a central leader, you can bet it’s done in conjunction with the reduction of any lateral exposed to damage, or generating excessive force on the central leader.

While this suddenly seems hard to concisely put into words, the proof is in the pudding with all the trees I’ve pruned with this in mind. Some over a decade ago.

 

[evo]

Just over a couple decades ago, I was commercial fishing with my father. One of the issues he had to grapple with was the water resistance of particular trap mesh sizes and rope diameters. There is a trap mesh small enough that water will see it as a solid object rather than a permeable surface. In dealing with rope, if the water is deep enough, a thinner diameter rope properly rated for the application will actually allow grapple weights to reach the ocean floor, whereas thicker ropes have so much resistance that the grapple will never reach bottom.

From a young age, these concepts and considerations have been a part of my thinking. I appreciate the information about Douglas Firs, and I can imagine this effect would hold true on a number of other species. I’ve seen Norway Spruce, Beech, Maples and Oaks with limbs resting upon other limbs. I completely understand the result of removing a branch’s support and leaving it hanging in the breeze.

I am not prescribing one pruning technique alone, but a wholistic approach. Again, working with any tree’s biology, I’d prefer to keep auxin in check. I’ve never seen reducing a lateral result in the formation of an upright fractal. If I’m thinning the number of branches on a central leader, you can bet it’s done in conjunction with the reduction of any lateral exposed to damage, or generating excessive force on the central leader.

While this suddenly seems hard to concisely put into words, the proof is in the pudding with all the trees I’ve pruned with this in mind. Some over a decade ago.

This analogy does make total sense and I do advocate for in favor of crown reduction on the central stem minus two details. Research I’m privy to shows thinning the extremities a very close second in efficacy to crown reduction. This can be tips of limbs or tippy tops.
Now for the two details.
1) I generally avoid the tippy tops due to bark beetles seeking these areas causing tops to die back. And then it’s effectively topped.
2) it’s still dependent on the tree. I’m rarely worried for the ‘whippy’ youngish Doug fir (which this tree is). As is the growth response in a auxin challenged Doug, it’s everything (limbs below) the cause of the auxin disruption that bushes out, and grows super long, easily managed with reduction/thinning.
This doesn’t dismiss other species nor some of the Doug furs. Remember I’m working second and third growth exclusively, it’s not uncommon for a 50 year old 120’ Doug.. nor a 130 year old 160+‘ tall Doug. Old growth in my area top out at 140’ and are a entirely different animal, up to 470 years old