Jump to content

Log in or register to remove this advert

Recommended Posts

Posted

I have just had a call from a woman who wants her tree topped. So i went round to have a look and as the title says the tree had previously been topped. The height and width werent affected as much as i had thought they may have been but still it must have looked like hell for a few years. Its recovered fairly nicely but the woman wants it done again. Iv tried to convince her to have it thinned rather than topped but she is set on having it cut right back again. What should i do? Its a 20-25 foot beech by the way.

Cheers all

Paul

Log in or register to remove this advert

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
I have just had a call from a woman who wants her tree topped. So i went round to have a look and as the title says the tree had previously been topped. The height and width werent affected as much as i had thought they may have been but still it must have looked like hell for a few years. Its recovered fairly nicely but the woman wants it done again. Iv tried to convince her to have it thinned rather than topped but she is set on having it cut right back again. What should i do? Its a 20-25 foot beech by the way.

Cheers all

Paul

 

 

Having explained the pro’s and con’s to allow the client to make an informed choice, do what the client wants and take the money

Posted

Whilst thinning is the preferred option over topping...I think once a tree has been topped hard previously its generally better to maintain this on subsequent visits. Thats just my opinion though

Posted

Forgot to say that the guys who did it before were local cowboys known in the area. They have ruined lots of tree in the area but are cheap so people keep using them over qualified and competent arborists.

Posted

This is it Paul, if you don't take the money someone will!

 

May as well do it and try and make the best of a bad job!

Posted
Forgot to say that the guys who did it before were local cowboys known in the area. They have ruined lots of tree in the area but are cheap so people keep using them over qualified and competent arborists.

 

All too common...

At 20-25 foot, minus the regrowth, they may be a reasonable height to maintain as a pollard?

Posted
Having explained the pro’s and con’s to allow the client to make an informed choice, do what the client wants and take the money

 

:thumbup1:

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  •  

About

Arbtalk.co.uk is a hub for the arboriculture industry in the UK.  
If you're just starting out and you need business, equipment, tech or training support you're in the right place.  If you've done it, made it, got a van load of oily t-shirts and have decided to give something back by sharing your knowledge or wisdom,  then you're welcome too.
If you would like to contribute to making this industry more effective and safe then welcome.
Just like a living tree, it'll always be a work in progress.
Please have a look around, sign up, share and contribute the best you have.

See you inside.

The Arbtalk Team

Follow us

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.