Real Nice Crown Reductions

Most look pretty good. Some of the first ones look a little overpruned. I realize they were all a bit overgrown, so I'd be interested in other's opinions on it.

Not too bad, though.
 
Nice job on that Beech. It appears anyway. In location of cuts and all.

I read in an earlier forum that the beech doesn't sprout/regenerate dependably from the region of the cut like a lot of other species.

Does the beach have only latent buds? That would explain a lot. But I don't know much about the species. None where I live. Pretty trees though.
 
It looks like he's selling that as a common service, not just doing it when it's absolutely necessary. Most of them look over pruned to me.

That being said, I have done similar work to keep an existing tree when a client will not accept anything else (Tree is too big, Need a view, etc...).

-Tom
 
I agree... he hit those trees way to hard... Yes maybe he did a nice job on reductions, if that was necessary... But he gutted those trees taking out WAY TOO much intereior growth and making far too many large cuts on the trunks... with most. The last one looked OK...

and one must wonder, does he sell this work to the clients as something that is "good for the trees", which it most certainly IS NOT...

Obviously pruning trees like that requires a tremendous amount of skill and climbing ability.. Take nothing away from him for that... BUT if those are examples of his standard pruning practices, then he's a butcher IMO. (Even if he's a skilled butcher).. Taking that much off any mature tree is going to be hard on it, and certain species, like that beech, are going to react very badly. He's weakened those trees and probably started a course of events leading to some of their demises..

One of the problems with showing pruining pics or video, is that when pruning is done well, its kind of hard to tell the differenece when looking at very small before and after pictures. When the differences are visible to that extreme in photos, its guarenteed that the trees have been hammered...

What percentage of green growth do you think he's taking off those trees? Looks like over 50% to me on some... I try to keep it under 10-15% on large mature trees like that, unless there are serious structural issues or the customer is putting a lot of pressure on me. As a matter of fact I try to keep it to 0%, most often telling customers to leave those trees alone..
 
I was holding out for others to give some constructive criticism before I said something.
smirk.gif


I've been holding back.

Na. I've got nothing really bad to say... But, I do see many heading cuts.

I believe the science and the art side of things need to meet in the middle for a nice crown reduction.

Here are my preferences with a crown reduction:

--First, we must keep in mind that we shouldn't take out more than 25%-30% of the leaf bearing crown in one growth season. That means, that we have to plan ahead on the ground and be patient with the results.

--I like to avoid heading cuts like the plague. (I prefer to never leave a heading cut). They stand out like a sore thumb.

--I also like to avoid 90° angled reduction cuts. They too stand out. And they compartmentalize poorly (if at all).

--I prefer to reduce back to a lateral that is 50% the diameter of the parent stem. I'll reduce down to 30% of the limb if the branch doesn't give me that obtion.

--I hate to see a reduction cut that is cut back to something that is smaller than 30% of the diameter of the parent stem and has a 90° angle. (IMO. You may as well top the dang thing).

If the following choices can't be done, then I'd rather eliminate the whole limb. If there can't be a cut made at that moment, then keep in mind that in the next trim cycle (2 or 3 years) you'll have a lateral branch large enough to reduce back to then.

Tree trimming is not a one time event. It may take 2 or 3 trim cycles to finally get the results you want. And that could be upwards to 9 years.

So, in light of the topic. I believe, a little more forethought could have been used to make the science mix with the art (presentation). Not bad, but not impressed.
 
Some good points there Jamin..

that said I HATE that ANSI standard of 25-30%... That is one of the worst things written in all the ANSIs that relate to treework. I wrote a strongly worded letter about that at the last public comment period. Then there is something so ambiguous about the actual percentage is to be adjusted based on the age, species, and condition of the tree. What does that mean?.. I know what it means and probably most here do, but what good is that to a lay person or a newbie...
Mature trees can handle far less pruning than young trees, and certain species are far more sensetive to over pruning than others..

25% of mature hardwoods is butchery, OLD SCHOOL big time... 10-15% is much safer... Best of all is leaving the tree alone in most cases, but we don't get paid for that huh?
 
[ QUOTE ]
25% of mature hardwoods is butchery, OLD SCHOOL big time

[/ QUOTE ]


PPPHhhhffftttttt OLD SCHOOL ha ha ha. 1/3rd (60%) was old school lion tail that thing. You have any backing to prove that 25% is harmful?????

Are you sure your not jealous???? cuase you sound like your jealous to me???? Anybody else think the neg posters are jealous????
 
A couple trees did look like they had been worked down before. Not all the best by far, but the ones that had the nodes where they counted turned out all right. And should grow back in fairly good form.
 
Some interesting opinions here, any climber whose worked in trees for over 10 years knows that all the trees in the vid will be fine (apart from the spruce!). Surprised some of you US East Coast treeguys didn't recognise the two Tilias and weeping Salix, which we all know could be hacked back to ground level and still form a tree a couple of years later.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Some interesting opinions here, any climber whose worked in trees for over 10 years knows that all the trees in the vid will be fine (apart from the spruce!). Surprised some of you US East Coast treeguys didn't recognise the two Tilias and weeping Salix, which we all know could be hacked back to ground level and still form a tree a couple of years later.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree
 
[ QUOTE ]
...which we all know could be hacked back to ground level and still form a tree a couple of years later.

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably true but that doesn't make it good tree care.

I think of myself as a mediator between trees and humans living together. With that in mind, I take as little foliage as possible to achieve the customer's goals. Sometimes that's more than I'm comfortable with but usually the customer listens to my reasoning and understands... everybody gets to be happy.

I can't comment on the pics without knowing the customer's goals other than to say they look acceptable to me. It's not hack work... not compared to what I see around here every day.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Some interesting opinions here, any climber whose worked in trees for over 10 years knows that all the trees in the vid will be fine (apart from the spruce!). Surprised some of you US East Coast treeguys didn't recognise the two Tilias and weeping Salix, which we all know could be hacked back to ground level and still form a tree a couple of years later.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree

[/ QUOTE ] I disagree with Grover #1 but agree with Grover #2.(gotta love thems multiple personalities!)
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
...which we all know could be hacked back to ground level and still form a tree a couple of years later.

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably true but that doesn't make it good tree care.

I think of myself as a mediator between trees and humans living together. With that in mind, I take as little foliage as possible to achieve the customer's goals. Sometimes that's more than I'm comfortable with but usually the customer listens to my reasoning and understands... everybody gets to be happy.

I can't comment on the pics without knowing the customer's goals other than to say they look acceptable to me. It's not hack work... not compared to what I see around here every day.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey I agreed with Blinky! Please ddon't take it personally.
 
[ QUOTE ]
any climber whose worked in trees for over 10 years knows that all the trees in the vid will be fine

[/ QUOTE ]

Not sure what you mean, Grover(s). How does working in trees for 10 years equal knowing what is good for them? I know plenty of "arborists" who have 10+ years that have radically differing opinions on tree biology/reaction to pruning, etc, some still have no clue.

Personally, I have been paying close attention in my 18 years in trees, and what I see in those videos are some hurting trees that have been compromised, especially the beech. Yes, they will resprout, but like Blinky said, just because they'll regrow & compartmentalize those wounds doesn't mean it's good for them. It's just 'less bad' than doing it to a species that can't.

-Tom
 
Having done thousands of similar reductions over a 15 year period & seen the results I really dont think there is a great concern of long term detriment to their health. I pretty much follow Jamins principles to a "T"! In follow up of them i have observed that most return to similar volumes of foliage in 12 months, but on a reduced framework, or you could say a re-engineered structure less prone to failure due to reduced leveraged loading of branches & stems.

Yes, for the most part from the trees perspective they could happily be left alone at 0%. And when large parts fail thats OK. There is no target present & the parts can lay on the ground at the base of the tree & decompose.

But that is not the real world for the urban arborist.

As arborists we are ususally working on trees to help a tree fit in with human needs, desires, values & most often, fears-founded or not.

Of all the Crown Reduction Pruning I have done, only a handful have enquired asking for it.

Most are converted topping or removal requests, usually founded on the fear of failure of large trees with fairly good structure-eg. not major defects.

So if a 15,20,25 or even 30% reduction from the tips inwards (not interior) helps to reduce major & secondary lateral branch or leading stem failures, and ease the concerns of the customer, and prevent the next guy from coming along & topping it or talking them into removal because thats all they're good at, then i think a 25% crown reduced tree is quite an ok option. Better than 100% to ground level.

Managing trees is a fine balance between health & structure.

If you focus too hard on one, you'll likely jepodize the other.

5% is gonna do stuff all to improve a trees structure & help prevent failure.

50% is gonna detract from the trees health. But that is also not to say that there can be cases where in the trade off of heath vs structure it could still be the best thing to do to save a tree from removal, in some cases.

Vigor of the species in general & the individual specimen need to be taken into account.

Sure on a stressed veteran tree little more than large deadwood might be the right dose.

But on the otherhand, a heavily over-loaded, over-extended major scaffold branch may be lost all together to failure equalling a greater % loss than had it been pruned enough to prevent the failure. There is also the potential for that failure to tear out at the union & make a massive irrepairable wound to the piece it was attached, resulting in that needing to be removed too.

It does take skill to both sell & perform this type of work compared to the alternatives.

I don't know about you, but i'd have a hard time running a profitable tree service if i ran around doing 60 estimates a week and told them all that they should just leave their trees alone & not worry about it because their tree knows best and it really doesn't need us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom