Setting all books aside and looking at a tree as a living organism - one might conclude after observing it over the years that it is a survivor. Not knowing the biology or defense mechanisms of this tree the observer could still deduce that it has the capability to recover from the loss of a limb no matter where it is attached. Furthermore, that the tree recovers from smaller wounds more readily than larger ones. Transferring this to pruning circumstances it would seem to suggest that the preferred cut would be the smaller cut.
Picking up that book now, it tells us that the cuts at the trunk are preferred…(I don’t think I need to explain that these are, more often then not, larger diameter cuts.) It makes sense that the science points to these cuts reacting faster as they are on the super-highway of flow and the further out the smaller and more remote you get. What needs to be clear is that just because a cut reacts quicker does not mean it will s(h)eal quicker. Take to two identical trees and cut a particular branch off at the trunk on tree ‘A’ and make a reduction cut on tree ‘B’ same respective branch…Come back a few years later and the reduction cut will have seals before the thinning cut at the trunk.
Now the big factor in all of this is that we are dealing with human needs when pruning a tree. Like an orchard tree is pruned severely to produce a certain outcome for human needs, it’s not what is best for the tree. A tree is aesthetically pruned for the beauty of the landscape, but the aesthetics usually comes down to thinning cuts, whereas structure and safety are advantages of reduction cuts. Each tree needs its own considerations, each species react in different ways. We cannot simply have a single statement in a book provide the necessary instructions for pruning all the varieties of trees. An oak is pruned very differently than lets say an arborvitae. You might top an arborvitae, but would not consider it wise to top an oak or beech for that matter.
Explaining this in the Study Guide is advisable and I think they do to a degree, but trying to explain this in a video that is less than 3 min. and intended for the homeowner is less important. The homeowner will get that topping is bad from this video, but they will not get the specifics. They will see if they don’t understand how to prune their tree they should get a trained arborist to make the right cuts – With a STIHL chainsaw, and clean up with a STIHL blower, and they must be wearing a STIHL hard hat.
What I’m saying, and I understand where you all are coming from, is that this video is sweet! It has its faults, which even Melissa and Mark have both admitted, but the really important message of not topping your tree comes through and is well explained. I agree that we need to be clear in our industry of this crucial point that has been brought up. Thank you for reading through this all. I am just sharing my thoughts and I can understand if you think I should not have, but what is Tree Buzz for if not to discuss these points until we all understand where the other is coming from. I don’t even know which side I’m on.
And Tony, RIGHT ON ->
“Plenty of good trees and tree work here too however! But I agree, the amount of topping is shocking and groups of people, without electricity or television will never see any video no matter the message!”
