treevet
Branched out member
- Location
- Cincinnati, Ohio
A subject that maybe deserves a little more discussion is that of leaning trees. In the last week with saturated soils we have removed 2 huge trees that had seemingly inconsequencial leans. The pictured one was actually hanging over the house and the ho's bedroom and daughter's adjacent bedroom and somehow by the grace of God....turned sideways and missed the house.
This tree was about 120 feet tall measured and 48" measured dbh. People likely would have died in bed if the tree had not turned sideways.
Yesterday I looked at a 90 plus foot leaning sugar maple with a large part of the house in it's target sights. This tree had no signs of recent soil disruption or root plate movement. But with additional weight put on over the years to make this situation more dangerous, judiciousness is in order. It is a new homeowner with no knowledge of the history of the tree.
I am not going to remove the tree but put a "guage" on it that I often use where I put a stake in the ground and put a mark on the stem and monitor it for movement of these 2 relative points. Another method is to hang a weight from a limb and monitor the distance from the ground to the weight periodically.
In this link it is said "A leaning tree may or may not be a substantial hazard. (By Mattheck and Broeler 1994 in a study of 800 broken and standing trees). Natural lean and Unnatural lean (recent root plate upheaval or soil movement) are discussed as well as 15 degree or 45 degree thresholds. Reaction wood ofcourse enters into the discussion as well.
"Trees that develop naturally with a lean may be as strong and stable as upright trees ..." (Eval of Hazard Trees...Matheny/Clark). But IMO with more and more mass in the lean hazard a stable situation with accompanying soil saturation and root suffocation can lead to a increase in risk.
I recall study decades ago at Rutgers U. in Tree Maint./Pirone...where roots on leaners were exposed with heavy pressure hydraulic units and found much larger and higher quantity root mass on the opposite side of a lean.
http://www.forestpathology.org/hazard.html
This tree was about 120 feet tall measured and 48" measured dbh. People likely would have died in bed if the tree had not turned sideways.
Yesterday I looked at a 90 plus foot leaning sugar maple with a large part of the house in it's target sights. This tree had no signs of recent soil disruption or root plate movement. But with additional weight put on over the years to make this situation more dangerous, judiciousness is in order. It is a new homeowner with no knowledge of the history of the tree.
I am not going to remove the tree but put a "guage" on it that I often use where I put a stake in the ground and put a mark on the stem and monitor it for movement of these 2 relative points. Another method is to hang a weight from a limb and monitor the distance from the ground to the weight periodically.
In this link it is said "A leaning tree may or may not be a substantial hazard. (By Mattheck and Broeler 1994 in a study of 800 broken and standing trees). Natural lean and Unnatural lean (recent root plate upheaval or soil movement) are discussed as well as 15 degree or 45 degree thresholds. Reaction wood ofcourse enters into the discussion as well.
"Trees that develop naturally with a lean may be as strong and stable as upright trees ..." (Eval of Hazard Trees...Matheny/Clark). But IMO with more and more mass in the lean hazard a stable situation with accompanying soil saturation and root suffocation can lead to a increase in risk.
I recall study decades ago at Rutgers U. in Tree Maint./Pirone...where roots on leaners were exposed with heavy pressure hydraulic units and found much larger and higher quantity root mass on the opposite side of a lean.
http://www.forestpathology.org/hazard.html
The other will be the pattern of my favorite rope at the time. Right now it would be Tachyon.
