Tree Topping in Nashville

ekka I didn't know that was the third page of a diatribe. How many people will click forward to all 3? The first two pages are rife with spelling errors, and you gotta shrink it to have the desired effect.

The link at the end was to PlantAmnesty which is good. If you want to link to that portion of my report it'd be nice to ask first. /forum/images/graemlins/banned.gif

I agree that Nathan's alibis sound a bit weak. You can't call a client "educated" if they choose topping a landscape tree. If they do not know about tree health, they are uneducated.

The horse is not dead.
 
I'm fixing to kill me a horse.
aaf_shifty.gif
 
"A horse is a horse of course, of course. And no-one can talk to a horse of course - that is of course unless the horse is the famous Mister Ed. Go right to the source and ask the horse - he'll give you the answer that you endorse. He's always in need of a short course - talk to Mister Ed!"
 
[ QUOTE ]
Hey ... come on, you didn't answer the BIG QUESTION, do you actually recommend or provide topping as an option? Like that other bloke did to the customer.


[/ QUOTE ]

Answer....NO, buuuuut it is a tool I keep in my tool bag for special cases. And there are special cases. Such as....

1. Wildlife - ants and fungus lead to birds and critter habitat.

2. It is the only option to keep a part of the tree. There are special cases like historically significant trees, the tree that grandpa planted....may not be permanent but it might buy another 2-20 yrs of enjoyment or quite possibly a living link to a loved one who is gone.

3. It what the educated customer wants and it is a crap tree. (I would never top a nice old oak or beech)

4. The customer wants some shade and lopping is the only way to make it safe so we lop it this year, use it as a nurse tree and plant a new one under/near it, then remove it in a year or two once the new tree is more established. (continuum of care problems possible)

It is not just when the customer wants it, but sometimes if they really want it, sure. I find that those customers with closed ears are usually the kind that have their ears and eyes closed to the phrase, "payment due upon reciept of invoice", etc. They are typically difficult to deal with so I usually disqualify them on the phone (qualifying leads is very important) or just let my high bid say no thanks.

I just hate this never say never attitude, throwing logic and reason out of the window along with important management tools. Tools that are important. Especially when you contract for a city, then at times, you have to manage for a community of trees as well as an urban ecosystem.

I am sure you can understand these valid reasons and special cases where it is a viable technique. What would hypothetically piss me off is if I employed this technique for a very valid reason (see above list)and then someone came along ranting and raving that I was a hack. /forum/images/graemlins/aaa.gif

/forum/images/graemlins/beerchug.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
I agree that Nathan's alibis sound a bit weak.

[/ QUOTE ]

They may sound weak, but they are valid


[ QUOTE ]
You can't call a client "educated" if they choose topping a landscape tree. If they do not know about tree health, they are uneducated.

The horse is not dead.

[/ QUOTE ]

This may be suprising, but sometimes, educated people do things that they know are bad. Smoking, lying, etc.
 
"The customer wants some shade and lopping is the only way to make it safe so we lop it"

I have never seen an urban tree that could be made safer only by lopping/topping; where it was a reasonable choice. If you call lopped trees "safe", you are wide open to liability when they fail.

Your reasons are still not valid; knowingly pandering to stupidity is neither smart nor professional. Just my opinion.
 
Yes Nathan

There are variances especially in govt jobs and city trees. There is management of those trees, you guys go back, landscapers put in new ones etc.

But in the urban back yard how often will the customer call you back? In 2 years time when the tree has to come out they decide on a new car and screw the tree, 10 years time when it's a huge mongrel they sell ... the new owner knows jack all and ends up with $5000 roof damage.

Even with the crappy job of palm cleaning ... they wait till the darn thing is disgusting then call ... like worse than the first day you saw it 2 years ago.

In an urban situation there is no guarantee of continuity of service, no control measures, you are snookered!

The counter agruments posed for the city is the cost of maintenance to subdue the hazard ... are the public truly aware of what is going on? Sure there may be historically significant trees etc that will slowly get pruned to the stump as they decline but is that just another example of human emotion above logic? The cost of that over the years would exceed the up front removal but it's easier to swallow a small pill than a big one.

I know from what you have said that consultants with resistographs make recs and reductions (sometimes severe)are prescribed as solutions for the balance between retention and removal. Sometimes those decisions are also made on cost and equipment too (like that cemetary lopping). That is most likely city trees where returns and follow up are in control but in urban settings you cant just force your way in, do the work and hand them a bill!

I agree where deviations are made for "valid" reasons a sign should be erected something like this ...

ATTENTION:- This tree has not been pruned in accordance with recognized safe standards (AS4373) as it is being retained for habitat purposes and will require regular maintence by city arborists, we advise careful consultation should be made with a qualified ethical arborist if you endeavour to prune your trees this way as serious hazards and liability issues may arise. By order, Mayor.

ATTENTION:- This tree has not been pruned in accordance with recognized safe standards (AS4373) as it is being retained for heritage reasons and managed over a 10 year period whilst it's replacement 10m away is growing. We advise careful consultation should be made with a qualified ethical arborist if you endeavour to prune your trees this way as serious hazards and liability issues may arise. By order, Mayor.

Now it wouldn't cost much to have them around would it? And it would certainly assist the education of the public.
 
Mate, they were valid reasons reserved for very special situations by a professional.

Rest assured nobody is advocating pandering to stupidty.

Enjoy the mental masturbation....and you know what they say aboot opinions.....
 
Do the Aussie standards define "lopping"? If so, maybe start off with that. At the end of that page you take space to attack the competition; does not look effective.

I like that sign idea.

Nathan sorry I overreacted to one phrase; in the field I'm sure we'd agree 90% of the time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom