Before & After Tree Care

  • Thread starter Thread starter bonner1040
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 751
  • Views Views 75K
Oh, they will have to do it all over, I had a talk with the management:lol:
 
Oh, they will have to do it all over, I had a talk with the management:lol:
Good you did; all those stubs back to the knuckle now, if you please!

Here's a tickle taken out of a liriodendron with a Humongous Hole (~50% circ., >80% hollow)mid-stem. All cuts to nodes that presently have laterals. left 2 lower limbs alone--not much impact on stability, and they nourish the woundwood around the canker.
Plus the limbs were over the neighbors' yard and essentially their problem. :001_rolleyes:

Lightens the load, c u in 3 years to restore. Prognosis: sprouting at cuts 1-2'/year, able to take off 1/3 next time to mitigate crowding and bad forks.
 

Attachments

  • 255.jpg
    255.jpg
    101.9 KB · Views: 60
  • 257.jpg
    257.jpg
    90.8 KB · Views: 60
I think that poplars make for shitty city trees.
Even when pollarded, the regrowth is too vigorous to keep maintained.
Yearly maintenance is too costly, so you end up in Andrews situation, having to deal with really big regrown tops.

The only other way I can think of to deal with those trees is to remove them and plant something else, but with the climate in St. Petersburg there is not many options.
I imagine with the economy being the way it is, it would be hard to convince the people in charge of the streets of ST. Petersburg to thow much money after new trees to line their streets.

IMO Andrew is doing the best he can, in a near impossible situation.

Also I get a little ( just a tiny bit, mind you) tired of the American " Shigo is God" mentality.

There is the perfect way to treat trees and then there are many others, dictated by tradition or the necessity of keeping cost down.

But those holier than thou, Shigo worshippers, will only accept perfection. So anybody that doesn't live up to their expectations get jumped. Gets a bit tiresome.

Did you see those topped and repollarded lindens I posted elsewhere?
 
Last edited:
Good you did; all those stubs back to the knuckle now, if you please!

Here's a tickle taken out of a liriodendron with a Humongous Hole (~50% circ., >80% hollow)mid-stem. All cuts to nodes that presently have laterals. left 2 lower limbs alone--not much impact on stability, and they nourish the woundwood around the canker.
Plus the limbs were over the neighbors' yard and essentially their problem. :001_rolleyes:

Lightens the load, c u in 3 years to restore. Prognosis: sprouting at cuts 1-2'/year, able to take off 1/3 next time to mitigate crowding and bad forks.

So, the lesson learned here is that if the client wants you to turn their tree into a hat rack, as long as you are a BCMA, you can disregard ANSI A-300 5.6.2.2. ...."not more than 25 percent of the crown should be removed within n annul growing season"
 
So, the lesson learned here is that if the client wants you to turn their tree into a hat rack, as long as you are a BCMA, you can disregard ANSI A-300 5.6.2.2. ...."not more than 25 percent of the crown should be removed within n annul growing season"
1. Get the 2008 version; it's still a "should", which as you accurately point out can definitely be disregarded by anyone, especially if they read and apply the whole subclause: "...The percentage and distribution...*shall* be adjusted...species, age, health and site." Shalls are requirements, shoulds are not.

Blindly implementing 25% as a Rule is just about as um ill-advised as calling a collar cut a "Shigo Cut". Shigo never said that was the only way to prune: "Reduction cuts are made at nodes or crotches" is what he did say, but the less attentive arborists skip the complicated stuff, and mythologize the easy-to-remember "rules of thumb" stuff. re the pops in st. pete, sprouting would be more manageable if reduction was done to nodes; see AS above.
 

Attachments

Shoulds are shoulds because they are Best Management Practices. If one is under no onus to follow them, then perhaps they *should* be omitted altogether. I fail to see how solving one potential problem for your client's tree is justified by creating additional problems. Shoot / root imbalances, reduction in photosynthesis, heartwood exposures, etc.

My mom got diagnosed a couple of years ago with advanced stage Ovarian cancer, to which she rapidly succumbed. The quality of her life was diminished by electing to take Chemo which produced terrible nausea. I doubt it extended her life by one day. Unless that cavity was caused by the impact of a meteriorite, I fail to see why that tree has not had lots of years to create CODIT boundaries, and form reaction wood.

So please tell me why you felt it was necessary to aggressively prune this poor tree in one fell swoop? Did you acquiesce to the client's wishes against your better judgement?
 
Shoulds are shoulds because they are Best Management Practices. If one is under no onus to follow them, then perhaps they *should* be omitted altogether. I fail to see how solving one potential problem for your client's tree is justified by creating additional problems. Shoot / root imbalances, reduction in photosynthesis, heartwood exposures, etc.

My mom got diagnosed a couple of years ago with advanced stage Ovarian cancer, to which she rapidly succumbed. The quality of her life was diminished by electing to take Chemo which produced terrible nausea. I doubt it extended her life by one day. Unless that cavity was caused by the impact of a meteriorite, I fail to see why that tree has not had lots of years to create CODIT boundaries, and form reaction wood.

So please tell me why you felt it was necessary to aggressively prune this poor tree in one fell swoop? Did you acquiesce to the client's wishes against your better judgement?
Of course I am trying offer more reasonable options, but "the customer is always right ..." If I refuse to do this work, it will make other ...P.S. Tomorrow I'll to do a photo of those tree, which I have reduced in one... P.S. Tomorrow I'll to do a photo of those tree, which I have reduced in one fell swoop ... :)
 
I'd go right ahead and do it.

After trying my best to convince the customer that it is an unsound practice.

If it was a onetime deal, I'd pass on it, since I hate working with concrete, but if one of my major accounts asked for it and was insistent about it, that is what they would get.

Some of us have to make a living.
 
To each his own, but I'm trying to leave a different legacy then be remembered as a hack.

I have killed more than 100000 trees, that will be my legacy.

If that makes me a hack in your eues, I can live with that.:)
 
I have killed more than 100000 trees, that will be my legacy.

If that makes me a hack in your eues, I can live with that.:)


The hackerry aspect comes into play when one of us decides to perform substandard tree work that has a negative impact on it's health. Been there; done that. No holier-than-thou attitude here, bud. But I'm trying to do my best, and keep learning. You gotta keep learning.

btw, 90% or more of my work consist of removals, and I have been playing this game a long time. Have never kept a tally on all my victims, lol
 
I look forward to seeing a tree that has been Maximalistized. :cry:

Then just read the thread; no secrets here, we post our work with before-and-after pics. do you have any After shots that are not stumps?

ps on the liriodendron, client wanted more off; i said enough was enough. when you see the canker you can judge.
 
We were two climbers. Took us half a day.

Really funny tree to climb. Only had to pay attention not to make too many holes in the greenhouse. ;)
 
Yup.

And about clean up...they had a nice chipper.
Even if lately cleanin up has never been an issue ...just because I'm not doing it.
I'm working for other companies most of the time so i just leave a mess and go :D
 
Back
Top