Beranek's Coos Bay felling cut vs. Burnham's

  • Thread starter Thread starter Burnham
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 158
  • Views Views 30K
Same here on that gray pine. Limbs about 30 feet long horizontal. Coos bay triangle. Cut them about 7 feet from the bole so as not to smash a manzanita below them. Kerpow. Landed flat. Then chunked out the remains. No groundie needed till the deed was done. And popping them that far out kept them off the tail of my rope.
 
Last edited:
Seems like the triangle is different enough to warrant a different name(or vice versa depending on which came first).
 
Yo, I have a question despite reading the whole thread. Several of the older links in it aren't functional now, maybe they would have helped

Q1: the triangle mentioned above, I'm not sure how that works and what direction the cuts are placed.

Q2: the coos bay Gerry describes is apparently great for felling heavy headleaner trees-2 side kerfs one on either side of the tree and parallel with the head lean, and then a fast back cut. No face. So I get how that could work well with tree falling but several have mentioned using it to drop heavy horizontal limbs and they land flat. I don't understand that, I would think that would definitely make the limb tip downward as the butt holds on until finally ripping off, so the limb would land tips first.

Clear as mud?
 
This is slight modification of the triangle. Says it's from "Barberchair" here, but doesn't show up on the page; just in a duckduckgo image search...

dentCoos.JPG
 
Not so slight modification as the triangle cut is inverted compared to this one.
You cut two notches on the front's sides, under the lean, meeting at the middle, so the pointy part of the triangle left uncut indicates the falling direction (= the heavy lean here). Then the backcut, fast of course.
 
Last edited:
Would this be a variant of the CB? Please see picture

1- undercut until you feel the saw is starting to pinch
2&3- removing approximately 15-25% of total diameter per cut
4- cut like the dickens with pressure applied and don’t stop until total separation is achieved
 

Attachments

  • 10BE02A8-5478-40CE-B2A2-8DBF8721E971.jpeg
    10BE02A8-5478-40CE-B2A2-8DBF8721E971.jpeg
    1.9 MB · Views: 4
In your scheme, there's too much woood left in the midle. The global geometry after the preparing cuts is almost the same as the round trunk, too few gain to prevent the failure. Your cut 2 and 3 should be a good amount deeper than that for working as a CB, like less than 1/3 left.

In the triangle cut, there's a big mass of wood left too, but more at the back and it works differently than the cossbay.The pointy part collapses under the increasing load while the back cut gets deeper. The cut"s speed increases too. I"m not sure enougth to explain the mechanique in it preventing the trunk's failure. What I know is that I am not too tempted to try these cuts..
 
The point of the triangle is in the direction of fell favoring or direction of lean. Opposite of what that second drawing depicts. No boring. Come in the back fast and hard to the back cut. Makes the last leg of the triangle. No face.
The variation would of course, be making a shallow face for some directional control. Assuming you can ;)
 
What Marc describes is what I was taught how to fell a heavy leaning small tree that is too small for a bore cut.
I reckon if I had tried to bore those branches yesterday the bore would have pinched. Could be wrong but it's what my brain said when I sized it all up. Coos bay worked a treat for what was presented.
 
The problem with the undercut in any of these variations is thart it allows the tree (or lead) to bend down due to the compression side of the cut collapsing on itself. This puts more strain on the tension (top) side resulting in earlier tear out and less successful clean separation. If you guys are making an undercut then it isn't a Coos Bay.
 
That is the method I use on storm clean-up for trees that have not been knocked over but have been pushed into a severe lean.
No directional control at all, but it will save the log, which matters to me.
 
For heavy limbs, spars and leaners, with clear open drop zones... quick and easy. Next.


Just last week I was saying people use directional control too much.

Every situation didn't need a hinge, nor is it desirable...hinges to dump chunks and limbs onto ropes, for instance.
 
So Brian, if you don't do any cut at the front, don't you risk a massive tear and saw grab?
 
Not if you skinny it up by cutting the sides. Some species may tear still, but if there's only a couple inches between the bottoms of your side cuts then it's not going to be much of a tear. Again, as Jerry says, it goes against all logical and traditional thinking on making a proper cut.
 
I may make and undercut closer to the butt, well out of the plane of the CB.

Cut it with a big powerhead, sharp chain.

A triangle ( point-down) cut ( variation on the theme) seems like it would have less chance of a tear out ( maybe none).
 
I may make and undercut closer to the butt, well out of the plane of the CB.

Cut it with a big powerhead, sharp chain.

A triangle ( point-down) cut ( variation on the theme) seems like it would have less chance of a tear out ( maybe none).
As long as the bottom point of your triangle doesn't collapse, you're right. The heavier the lead, the more likely it will start to fold down before breaking free.
 
"The problem with the undercut in any of these variations is that it allows the tree (or lead) to bend down due to the compression side of the cut collapsing on itself. This puts more strain on the tension (top) side resulting in earlier tear out and less successful clean separation. If you guys are making an undercut then it isn't a Coos Bay."

What Brian said is spot on.

Undercuts just increase the pressure and tension forces in the stem. The idea of the Coos Bay is to work around those forces and circumvent the potential consequences they present.

The Coos Bay is accomplished in 3 cuts. Side cut, side cut, top cut.

Triangular cut? Hold on to that thought.

First, always remember this... when attempting to cut a heavy limb, spare or tree, no matter what method you use, there's strong potential of rip roaring consequences and TOTAL LOSS OF CONTROL. It's the nature of the beast. Cutting any heavy stems is serious business.

Using the Coos bay there's no need for an undercut. Not at all.

Instead place a side cut into the stem a quarter to third of the way in, either the right or left side. Why you might chose right or left side depends if there is any side favor in the work. Side favor, in excess, can cause the work to twist off the cut instead of popping off clean. Foiling any cut.

In lesser cases I always place the first side cut on the side of any favor. I have learned that saves on stuck saw scenarios.

So go ahead, place the first side cut square... up to a third of the way into the stem. and while making the cut observe the stem for any movement. Generally speaking, if the stem is sound and balanced it will not move appreciably. Up to half of the way in!

Next, place another side cut into the stem, opposite the first, about a third of the way in also.

If nothing unexpected or bad has happened at this point consider yourself a savvy sawyer.

I declare, up to two thirds of the wood fiber in the stem of a heavy limb, spar or tree can be severed without any rip roaring consequences.

No conventional cut can sever as much wood fiber in a heavy limb, spar or tree without some consequence. Once again it is the beauty of the Coos Bay cut.

At which point, with proper warnings to all around, execute the Coos Bay by severing the tension wood.
A savvy sawyer can expect 80 to 90 percent success rates using the Coos Bay cut.

Success rates are equivalent to ones skill and knowledge of predicted outcomes.

I'm here to tell, cutting heavy limbs, spars and trees is the Treeman's nemesis. Be aware. Stepping into any such scenario holds sure and certain risks.

If you don't feel sure or certain about the situation don't be a fool, use an approach you know will guarantee the results you seek. Good decisions in this work have far less consequences.

The Coos Bay is just one one method of many in the Treeman's tool box.

Be wise, be smart, be safe and prosper.
 
Gerry's post wins the internet.
I especially like this phrase:

First, always remember this... when attempting to cut a heavy limb, spar or tree, no matter what method you use, there's strong potential of rip roaring consequences and TOTAL LOSS OF CONTROL. It's the nature of the beast. Cutting any heavy stems is serious business.
closely followed by:
If you don't feel sure or certain about the situation don't be a fool, use an approach you know will guarantee the results you seek. Good decisions in this work have far less consequences.

This completely summarizes what I said to the contractor on Thursday, that if I got it wrong the result could be catastrophic. My decision was to come back with a 60' bucket truck.
 
Confession time. Although I've heard the term Coo's Bay for many years, I never bothered to look into what it was or how to do it until Gerry's recent description a few posts back. I just figured it was West Coast faller thing and didn't apply to my type of work. Turns out I've been using it for most of my arboriculture career. I "discovered" it early on as an ideal solution for those long heavy horizontal limbs that would either pinch the bar if I used an undercut or have "rip roaring consequences" with a top cut. I never knew there was a name for it, just always called them ear cuts.
 
You can also deal with heavy stems, quite safely too, just by undermining the pressure side, deeper and deeper, until they collapse.

It's damn slow on big stems, and there is risk of getting stuck still, but if you're careful it does work pretty well.

Brian, I recall, has used the method before. I think.
 
Back
Top