"Reverse Stump Shot"

Altissimus

TreeHouser
Joined
Jul 1, 2008
Messages
7,991
Location
southern Vermont
been Logging and had a few Push Trees with a Tractor , operator prefers the back cut below the hinge. One of the the choppers here no like this technique at all , I'm fine with it and see the utility. If backcut is conventional the stump shot keeps the tree from shooting backwards off the stump if the top hangs in other trees .... lower backcut keeps the butt from kicking off the stump in the direction of the push sending the tree over the Tractor. I see it works really good. Anyone use this ? Anyone opposed on principle ?
 
No argument with it. I just don't push with anything, really, I pull. Also, my tractor is too small to be pushing over any real trees. If I were to use my tractor, I'd definitely do reverse stump shot, just because my tractor is too small to risk it lolz.
 
I don't have any big equipment to push with, so I pull. When my bull rope is under the COG of an hard back leaner, I use the low back cut. If my rope is high enough, I cut level or with a conventional stump shot, depending.
 
Low backcuts work for the specific purpose you need. Smart thinking.

I've seen trees pushed and pulled off their stumps before. And watched people scatter like quail, too.

Typically when trying to pull limblocked trees apart with the rigging set to low. Thinning redwood sucker clumps is a classic scenario.

Kind of reminding of pulling vines apart. But you dealing with trees.
 
Yes, for same and different reasons. I was always a stump shot guy chasing hinge holding time. Finally it ocurred to me that hinges are not bending, they are pulling...I *think* (need to test) that a lower back cut pulls more fiber and holds longer.
 
I have to disagree with your conclusion, David. I base that opinion on my own observations, the USFS S-212 classwork, and on the words of Doug Dent.

Caveat: my trees in my climate :).
 
I have to disagree with your conclusion, David. I base that opinion on my own observations, the USFS S-212 classwork, and on the words of Doug Dent.

Caveat: my trees in my climate :).
I agree from the samples of pine and fir I have cut. Flexible. I have only low back cut one eucalyptus, and it hinged more than usual…but it was a different species than usual too, so more testing required.
 
I think that Doug fir has alternating hard and soft rings. Light and dark. The soft rings compress and allow the harder more flexible grains to bend and pull. Palms same to some extent. Foam with trimmer string in it. Euc and other hard brittle short grained trees have no soft grains…chair prone long grained trees seem to have flex but very poor adhesion between the fibers.
 
If hinges did not bend, it seems counterintuitive that a vertical bore under the hinge (what Stig calls a German cut), or a swizzy, would work. Yet they do generally work...I think that's because hingewood does bend before breaking.

I also think most pulling fiber happens at that point of breaking, not before. No real evidence I can point to, though.
 
Last edited:
I have to disagree with your conclusion, David. I base that opinion on my own observations, the USFS S-212 classwork, and on the words of Doug Dent.

Caveat: my trees in my climate :).
I'll second that.
 
I've seen quite a number of old-growth redwoods simply "pop" quite loudly too, clean and free of the hinge and go their own way, not pulling any fibers of hingewood. I can only assume that results from age and brittleness of the wood.

On the other hand young redwoods hinge more dependably. Showing tension fiber and compression breakage for the full length of the hinge. Indicating a fairly balanced tree.

Whereas side leaners most fiber pull occurs on the tension side of the stump, and less on the pressure side.

My observations with redwoods.
 
Back
Top