Where would YOU cut this branch?

[treelooker]

In the US, 'heading cut' has 2 definitions. One is 'internodal' the other is 'to a lateral <1/3 the diameter of the parent.' Confusion is inevitable, but the 'heading cut' concept remains prominent in training materials. So if the objective is to reduce the branch to reduce its growth relative to other branches, maintaining long-term health and safety with minimal maintenance, many US arborists are trained to obey a '1/3 Rule', and make the cut at the red line.

In the UK, this term is not used. So if the objective is the same, where would you make the cuts?

Attached is some research that seems to indicate that red cut might not be the best.

 

[brendonv]

I'd go blue, leaves something left and right, looks better. I hate cutting back to one branch, favoring one direction (red).

 

[MasterBlaster]

Blue!

 

[Pelorus]

The last sentence in your link states:
"The data suggest that reduction cuts can be made back to lateral branches as small as one-third the diameter of the removed stem."

That sounds like a good general guideline.

 

[Evan Sussman]

I wouldn't be so strict as to make the lower cut just because the others aren't 1/3 diameter of parent branch. It may just be my own concoction and not reality, but sometimes I figure, hey I've got a handful of branches at a higher, better(similar logic as your diagram.) cut, and their total diameter is around 1/3 diameter, so I cut it there.

It would have a lot to do with what direction I wanted the branch to grow, and other factors that don't come to mind.

Edit: I'd go blue, but I wasn't planning on taking the lower right blue, I didn't pay full attention to the diagram until I reviewed it. hmm. I think it depends on the rest of the tree, is it an issue to leave the lower blue. If it's overall weight reduction, then sure go ahead.

 

[Mick!]

It's always a mystery to me why these guidelines don't take into account different species.
Why would one apply the same rules to a veteran beech as a willow in its prime next to a stream?

 

[Adam_P]

Blue on the main limb, or maybe even a little further out to where it says Option 2. On the smaller lateral, blue too.

 

[Jomo]

None of the above, and leave the poor branch alone?

Shoulda been an option brothers,,,,

Jomo

 

[stig]

As a logger, I'm missing the " At ground level" option, too

 

[pete mctree]

Depends on objective. Red if I have to hit it hard, blue for more sensitive

 

[rskybiz]

Blue above the red. Goin by the term heading cut and just the picture.
Guy as a side note: cellon oak had a large lead breakout and cracked lower limb that rested on the ground. It was braced and the lightning protection still has not been fixed.

 

[flushcut]

It depends.

 

[Mick!]

It depends.[/QUOTE

Best answer so far.

 

[ClimbMIT]

Personally I never care for heading cuts but I recently have found muself using them more. Mainly I use them when shaping small trees or large shrubs. In the past I would almost always remove entire limbs if the customer wanted it cut back. I try to do what is best for the tree's structural stability, health, and what the customer is willing to pay for. I will walk away from a job if a customer wants me to butcher a tree leaving stubs. Anyway I voted blue or beyond.

 

[rumination]

As a logger, I'm missing the " At ground level" option, too

Stig, I believe the technical term for that is "basal pruning".

I voted blue, but species, condition, and pruning objectives will be deciding factors.

 

[treelooker]

I voted blue, but species, condition, and pruning objectives will be deciding factors.

Jon, Leon, "the objective is to reduce the branch to reduce its growth relative to other branches, maintaining long-term health and safety with minimal maintenance". right there in black and white. Is more detail needed there?

For what species in what condition do you think the red cut would be the right one? Any?? Waffling is okay, unless it's a cop-out.

The 1/3 guideline was weakened in 2001, and again in 2008, but it's still often the first (and too often the major) consideration. Tests may have these 'rules of thumb', but they are not meant to be cast in stone.

'Leave it alone' is clearly not an option; get with the program, Heuch!

 

[rumination]

Sorry Guy, I was skimming through quickly and missed the objectives. My answer remains pretty much the same though. I vote blue, although species and condition would be variable factors.

And who is this Heuch that you are talking to?

 

[treelooker]

Jomo aka Jomoco is Jon Heuch; now outed!

O and if you want variability, why did you vote blue?

 

[rumination]

Cuz in some situations I might go red, and there's no options for red and blue. Most of the time blue would be my choice, though.

 

[CurSedVoyce]

I also like the "Option" point. Depending on species, elevation and wind factors, I would do that or wander toward blue.
I also prefer a less is more approach

 

[DMc]

These yellow lines would be another option.

 

[CurSedVoyce]

YUP!

 

[treelooker]

These yellow lines would be another option.

Then you must have voted for "Blue lines or beyond" which provides many options. a guy at arbtalk used purple, and proposed 5 cuts, further out than yours.

But yes indeedy yall got the same idea. the red cut is definitely wrong for the reasons listed. Diameter is a misguiding criterion, more often than not, imo.