Your recommendation?

This picture was actually taken in southern Iowa where I am working on a tree inventory for a municipality. I have to make a reccomendation to either prune the tree or replace it, and I really got stuck on this one.

I am leaning towards reccomending remove and replace. Mostly because silver maples are the second most frequent tree in the city, they account for about 12% of cities tree population, and maples in genral account for about 39% of the total population. The city needs to diversify its tree population, and would probably be better off replacing this tree with a different, more durable and tolerant, species. I left this info out on my original post because I thought it would make for better discusion.
 
[ QUOTE ]


That is why I say replace, even with silver maple if the homeowners want, with a structurally superior, bare-root tree, and it will out perform the current tree by leaps and bounds.



[/ QUOTE ]

This statement implies there is more wrong with this tree than a codom stem.

Im laughing my a$$ off here...... a 2" tree has a codom stem and you guys think the best option is to remove and replace the tree? Ive subordinated much much larger trees and within a few seasons you could not even tell it was a codom.

Chlorosis is a nutrient deficiency! It has nothing to do with the tree being codom or not, it has nothing to do with whether or not it is, or was a bare root planting.

Its entirely clear who in this thread has actual experience pruning young trees and who has nothing more than a few good book titles under their belt.
 
Yes, cut off one leader now, establish a central lead from the remaining topping cut, monitor. Replacement is always an option, but why not give this one a fighting chance.

How much is your/my/our time worth? How much time have we all spent on this tree already? Talk about a value added specimen, better fight to keep it now, hahahaha!
 
I would do what most are saying. Take part now and the rest next year or remove it all at once. Seems like more of a hassell to rip out and replant than to make a pole clip or hand saw cut. Just my opinion.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I am leaning towards reccomending remove and replace. Mostly because silver maples are the second most frequent tree in the city, they account for about 12% of cities tree population, ... I left this info out on my original post because I thought it would make for better discusion.

[/ QUOTE ]

The decision depends on the assignment. If you are told to aim at some % of species, that changes everything. If you are told to assess the trees and not the population, then leave those sketchy at best numbers out of the "equation". :-)

Most towns here have over 12% of some poor plants like defective bradfords and red maples, but removing and replacing would create holes in the treescape that would take years to fill. Species bias is seldom justified--bad silvers are due to bad mtc more than genetics.

How are the roots? I hope your assignment includes finding the flare, if reasonably possible.

"I would agree that rules can be broken given the right knowledge and experience but we need those rules to teach basic concepts."

"Rules are too strict for Mother Nature" A. Shigo

Concepts like "don't take off more than trees can tolerate" are better taught by reviewing a list of criteria rather than boxing the trainee's head into numerical rules. Once installed, these paradigms can rigidify and persist, limiting learning and giving every tree the same cookie-cutter treatments, much to their detriment.

"Rules are too strict for Mother Nature" A. Shigo

for reduction pruning, the 1/3 guideline is put in its place below:


1. Foundation. Cutting back to 100% sound wood is preferred. Some decay is tolerable if it is being walled off on the inside by black lines of wood preservative, and on the outside by callus—“scar”--tissue.
2. Vitality. Color, brightness, quality of buds, and growth rate show vitality.
3. Size of wound. The smaller, the sooner it will close and the less it will decay.
4. Thickness of “collar” at branch defense zone. The more incipient callus tissue there is, the sooner it will close.
5. Angle of attachment. A large lateral growing at a 90 degree angle may develop a “hollow elbow”, and not be very stable. Upright laterals make the best branches.
6. Angle of cut. Sloping cuts capture less spores, and shaded cuts are less likely to crack and decay.
7. Space to grow into and mature.
8. Size. One-third the diameter of the parent branch is a common guideline, sometimes exaggerated into “The One-Third Rule”, but size does not always matter more than the other criteria.

imho.
wink.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
Short answer...subordinate hard and schedule the removal of the remaining portion in maybe two seasons. It would take only seconds on each visit.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you will do a better service for the tree and the community if you practice as Tom suggests.

Proper Young tree training is and should be the right of passage for any arborist or tree man.

Go to Arboriculture Integrated Management of Landscape Trees, Shrubs and Vines Richard W. Harris Regents/Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey 07632.

I worked as the Town Forester for 5 yrs and broke the rules many times for any number of reasons as long as it lives and the wound is appropriate to the species and vigor, go for it, it will grow. Just remember every ones your boss when your on the streets and you will have to articulate the cut.
 
Guy i totally hear what you are saying but if you break the 25% rule and cut off half that tree it may produce epicormic shoots in response to an imbalance of root:shoot. If that happens, you're in the same situation re pruning visits as if you just subordinated half then removed in a subsequent visit.
I'm not trying to prove that i'm right, i'm discussing.

Although this tree offers some clear and simple options, the right answer depends totally on the municipality's budget and pruning schedule, if any.
 
I'm with Guy and Tophopper. I totally agree that A. Sacharinum can handle a reduction of the codom to the main stem. However I think that there is more to investigate. I too think that the basal area should be inspected before deciding to reduce the codom. If the tree was planted too deeply, the best recommendation is to replace with a properly planted specimen. Clearly the structural issues can be improved upon over time. However you want to avoid predicting future success for a tree doomed to failure. I really don't believe that I would recommend removal if the basal area looked "good" ie no girdling roots, not too deep with nice root flare, and with adequate space for the roots to mature within. I say prune it if it's worth it but it's really foolish to attempt to put lipstick on a pig.
pigfly.gif
 
" if you break the 25% rule

ok repeat after Alex,
"Rules are too strict for Mother Nature" A. Shigo
"Rules are too strict for Mother Nature" A. Shigo
"Rules are too strict for Mother Nature" A. Shigo

"it may produce epicormic shoots

true, it may.

" If that happens, you're in the same situation re pruning visits as if you just subordinated half then removed in a subsequent visit.

re the number of visits, yes. re tree structure, maybe the sooner the codom is all the way off the better.

"I'm not trying to prove that i'm right, i'm discussing.

me too.
smile.gif


"the right answer depends totally on the municipality's budget and pruning schedule, if any.

well not totally. Roots matter, as does the original assignment.

I find inventory work frustrating. It takes less time to prune the dam thing than to prescribe pruning, so...
 
Thanks for the great discussion. For the purpose of the inventory I decided that the tree should stay, and have one of the leaders removed.

As others have said, who ever planted the tree put the time and money into planting it, so why remove it and spend all of the money replanting another tree when this tree could easily be correctivly pruned.

Thanks again.
 

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom