Cabling pricing

This one was fifteen hundred. A thousand for the tree; 200 cable materials; 300 cable labor. No charge for spinning my wheels buying 6' lag rod, or for dancing sugarplums in my head.

There is value of marketing by spreading the word that a more versatile palette of services is offered than competing arborists. Not to mention that a $400 hedge was thrown into the mix in the clients back yard. Never would have gotten that job unless the cabling service was offered.
Cabling keeps the mind sharp by forcing an arborist to think about future scenarios based on observations of present conditions. The client is relying on us to consider implications of modifying tree architecture.

One thing that may help is a standardized list of a matched set of materials for a particular job. Even the correct size drill bits could be sold in a kit of j-lag (or thru eyebolt, nut & washers), thimble, and spool of wire. Even tools like a Cable-Aid lag spinner, hand drill, bolt cutter, jackstrap, cable grab, and a bucket could be packaged up by retailers. I don't have any experience with Wire Guy hardware, but it seems vastly simpler as an elegant solution. I imagine the extra holding power isn't necessary when increasing the liklihood of spreading decay to the opposite side of the stem by drilling thru the trees defenses.

For example, this job used small hardware going into 3-6" diameter stems that are only about 30' long. The load on the hardware will be light for a few years because of the large amount of weight removed by pruning, so the hardware terminations are the smaller sized stuff.

The EHS cable is disproportionatly strong: it holds around 5,000 pounds, I believe.

The threads that are screwed into the wood are the weak link: Around a minimum of a half ton each, times 2 = 1 ton of lateral force capacity (including safety cushion). Love to hear your opinions about thread strength in various species of wood.

The lag increases in its holding power after a few years of wall 4 wood covering the head of the lag.

In my cable kit there was an old bent Irwin hand drill bit. This bend was caused by not being in a stable climbing position during an earlier job. Luckily there was a spare. Cost: $13 at Home Depot. My outlay: $26 (for both). Pricing schemes cannot leave out details like spare parts. How many folks go out on a tree job and use every saw in their truck?

Thimbles are an item that does come in light duty and heavy duty models. These things vary from 25 cents to a buck or more, so it pays to buy the good stuff. The cheap ones are made out of thin chrome plated metal. The wind jerking the tree around can cause the cable to momentarily go slack, which can allow the thimble to move within the confines of the j-lag head and get bent. This occasionally results in displacement of the thimble, leaving the eye of the dead end unprotected in the following years. The thicker gauge steel of the more expensive galvanized thimbles allow the dead end to seat better in a more stable, inertia-resistant position.

The quality thimble also controls one of the lifespan limitation factors of the installation better. As new wood is added around the stem and piles up around the head of the lag, it eventually reaches the thimble. When the thimble begins to be enveloped, it can be displaced during windstorms due to the motion being limited on one side or the other by this callus. As soon as the thimble pops off the cable end, it no longer protects from abrasion of metal on metal, and the dead end eventually breaks.

All of the costs must be adjusted upwards for the long runs described (by you folks earlier) due to repeated trips to the opposite side of the tree to retrieve cables, measure, etc. For example, when installing 2 cables on each stem of the box, I was able to reach across the tree with a 12' polesaw back to the other side of the tree to retrieve the loose half of the cable. In larger trees, this would involve attaching a routed line with a spare cable grab, which would be more expensive.

Hope this hijacking helps with understanding the cost factors. Without a description of what work is involved, quoting a price is preliminary.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I don't have any experience with Wire Guy hardware, but it seems vastly simpler as an elegant solution. I imagine the extra holding power isn't necessary when increasing the liklihood of spreading decay to the opposite side of the stem by drilling thru the trees defenses.

[/ QUOTE ]mike i do not understand this. i went to through-cabling years ago, even on hollow stems, because the risk and consequences of spreading rot seems low..
 
My cabling kits were setup in five gallon buckets.

The tools and materials that were needed were written on the outside with a felt tip marker. That made it an easy checklist to see if all of the bits and bobs were included.
 
"The threads that are screwed into the wood are the weak link: Around a minimum of a half ton each, times 2 = 1 ton of lateral force capacity"

Maybe I'm not understanding what you mean here. I think you're saying the tensile strength is doubled because you are screwed into the wood on both ends of the cable. This makes no sense. That's like saying a chain with 5 links (each link having a 200 lb tensile strength) has an overall breaking strength of 1000 lbs. No, the chain has a breaking strength of 200 lbs. Could you clarify? Maybe I'm missing it.

Also, I don't have a lot of cabling experience (a little though). I thought screwing hardware into the wood itself was very very weak. I'm under the impression that through bolting is the way to go.
 
Here's my kit. Top to bottom:

Drill bit
Hand drill
Tape Measure
Electrical Tape
Cable-Aid Lag Spinner
J-lag
Thimble
EHS Cable
Preform Dead End
Bolt Cutter
Jackstrap
Havens Grip Cable Grab
 

Attachments

  • 273233-ACableJobKit1.webp
    273233-ACableJobKit1.webp
    108.4 KB · Views: 78
[ QUOTE ]
I thought screwing hardware into the wood itself was very very weak. I'm under the impression that through bolting is the way to go.

[/ QUOTE ]

I say it is NOT weak.

one extreme situation years ago, when a bad leader failed (only one my my history that i had installed cables) what failed was the j-lags snapped off, they didn't even pull out. Two lags snapped off around the first thread next to the J, if i recall correctly.

my brothers did some pull tests with j-lags years ago, none pulled out. eventually with enough pull, they straightened out the J in the lag.

softwoods (and actually SOFT wooded trees) and hollow trees, or extreme pressure, use through bolting.

I think J-lags are great for everything else.

maybe 75% of the ones i do is J-lag (5/8" usaully) and 25% threaded through rods. sometimes 1/2" j-lags on smaller diameter stuff.
 
I can see each side would need to be able to support the full load. I wonder if there are tables that give load capacity of particular diameter lags in commonly available lengths?

The load on a cable termination is determined by weight, angle, and growth that causes increase in future leverage.

In properly designed tree support systems, there is no issue with holding power of a metal screw embedded in wood. Lag threads are perfectly capable of holding a limb to the rated capacity without needing to penetrate past the center of the limb.

Arborists who have difficulty calculating such loads may prefer thru bolting as a substitute to careful system design. The 'cushion' of the superior holding power of thru bolts can lure some folks into unnecessarily injuring the stem at the cables' point of attachment.

By jumping to the assumption that the additional holding power of a washer on a thru-bolt is needed, intrusive wounding is subjugated & 'determined' to be acceptable.

We encounter old jobs with failed cables because followup inspection, pruning, and hardware upgrading is ignored in the face of increased decay, or because of poor system design or installation in the first place.
 

Attachments

  • 273241-ACableJobAfter3.webp
    273241-ACableJobAfter3.webp
    124 KB · Views: 68
Part 2

What has changed in the 10 years since this was written?
 

Attachments

  • 273286-CablingArticleOxman2web.webp
    273286-CablingArticleOxman2web.webp
    131.6 KB · Views: 60
Mike, I agree with you and the current standards that pruning should always be done before cabling is done, but I do not understand how pruning needs can be clear without support already designed. It seems the specs for both would be written simultaneously.

If bad forks make a tree unstable, typically the tree is either pruned harder and not supported, or pruned a little and supported too.

How do you know where and what to cut, if you don't know if or how support will be installed? Sure, cable design may be tweaked after pruning; is that what you mean?

O and re 2011, through cabling is my preference, but other materials and methods work well too.
 
I also like Raven's question. Since I don't provide the service, I'd rather hear what others say...

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks,I did find the ANSI book on treestuff, added to cart. Wish there was more talk on the actual subject of the poat though., LOL
 
My proposition is that the pruning be done prior to deciding 'if' or 'how' cabling is to be done.

Lets take the term 'dynamic rigging design' when used in the context of removing large branches. Dynamic means we change our rigging points and load capacity as the various sections are worked on. Usually, this means we can take bigger pieces as the tree stiffens up when weight is removed.

Things are cut & dried on a removal, but on a heavy trim we can change how much is to be removed. The purpose of this discussion is to move beyond generalities, and examine how modifications are decided on.

The synthetic cable that was removed in this case spanned the 2 largest upright branches left remaining by the previous arborist, who worked on the tree over 11 years ago. To reduce weight & leverage, I removed both these tops, which were the tallest of all the 20 or so tops. These 2 11" cuts helped lessen the strain on the main forks significantly.

I had valued the holding power of the synthetic cable in previous years treatments, so the stems were left until it was decided that a new cable system would be installed. The age of the plastic rope was the deciding factor in replacement. Another reason they were left is because I also valued how they each allowed a separate high tie in point for climbing lines on 2 sides of this wide tree.

We didn't need to install new cables higher up, because the tree was topped lower.

We can intuitively sense that a weak-looking tree needs bracing. But this preliminary diagnosis should not necessarily lead to a treatment plan that is locked in.

Be willing to adjust the plan based on getting better information from a wise, old tree while pruning.
 
[ QUOTE ]
My proposition is that the pruning be done prior to deciding 'if' or 'how' cabling is to be done.

[/ QUOTE ]mmm ok i agree, if that pruning is only what is necessary, until the tree's tendencies are revealed.

Then, decide on support.

Then, finish the pruning, if any more is needed.

Then, install the support.

I'm totally with you on the tree showing the way. but why not hold off on heavy pruning until you are sure that more support will not spare the tree that trauma.

It's rare on our lil ol' trees to require an 11" reduction cut, except in severe decline. but you know that tree, not me.
 
11 inch is a huge cut

I talk customer ALL THE TIME out of me making any cut 8 inches or larger, on most species in my area.

most species will not close over the cut before decay sets in for diameter cuts over 8 inches.

many customers and other tree services in my area, try to just take off one or two big limbs to address clearance issues and things like that, instead of taking off many smaller limbs to get the desired outcome.

then, many years later, they have a decay issue in the main trunk due to the large cut they made years earlier.
 
Heavy pruning and large pruned limbs creates all kinds of problems on old trees that may leave you with a bunch of standing firewood and wasted metal and tree budget money.
 
[ QUOTE ]
11 inch is a huge cut

I talk customer ALL THE TIME out of me making any cut 8 inches or larger, on most species in my area.

most species will not close over the cut before decay sets in for diameter cuts over 8 inches.

many customers and other tree services in my area, try to just take off one or two big limbs to address clearance issues and things like that, instead of taking off many smaller limbs to get the desired outcome.

then, many years later, they have a decay issue in the main trunk due to the large cut they made years earlier.

[/ QUOTE ]

Better than most dave,
and I try to limit cuts on the main stem to 4".. that is supported by the research.. Reduction cuts can be larger as needed by conditions, because they do not threaten to destabilize the whole tree... and the decayed areas have far less weight to bear..
 

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom