Reductions

[Olliebradbury]

Whatever happened to the "1/3" rule ??

[Mark Bolam]

Lightest of touches on a couple of limes.

 

 

 

Hope I have them the right way round otherwise you won't tell which is before and after:001_smile:

 

 

I personally think you've been just a touch harsh with the lower left limb on the tree on the left, but generally work I would be happy to call my own.

They look great from my house.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

Whatever happened to the "1/3" rule ??

 

Which one...of the 3? (BS3998 explicit & implicit)

 

1. Relating to the diameter of the selected secondary growth point against the parent branch or stem (most commonly applied one)

2. The total cross-sectional area not exceeding 1/3rd of the stem diameter (Table 1), or

3. Maximum proportion of foliage the tree will (okay, may) tolerate in a single hit, i.e. ideally not to exceed such

 

Either, either way, I thinks Mick's subtle reductions missed on al 3 accounts...albeit the customer is always king, or queen, of course (no cynicism meant here as I know that's often the over-riding factor.)

 

Cheers,

Paul

[Gary Prentice]

The remaining branches look like they're nearly 1/3 the diameter of the stem, does that count?

[Mark Bolam]

That's the way I've always interpreted it Gary.

Mick where is the best place to pick up a top-handled 660?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

[Mick Dempsey]

Joking aside, I have always been puzzled by the "one size fits all" attitude to reductions.

 

Why have the same directives in place for a lime as a beech?

They have very different responses to trimming.

I've seen reductions on here of eucalyptus where the climber has gone all out to go back to live growth when we all know the tree will throw out vigorous regrowth all over by the end of the week!

I think the dogma about size of cuts on reductions when no account is made of the type of tree makes a nonsense of it.

 

Mark, the way my wrists feel ATM I'd be lucky to be able to lift one-off the ground.

Edited December 12, 2016 by Mick Dempsey

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

Joking aside, I have always been puzzled by the "one size fits all" attitude to reductions.

 

Why have the same directives in place for a lime as a beech?

They have very different responses to trimming.

I've seen reductions on here of eucalyptus where the climber has gone all out to go back to live growth when we all know the tree will throw out vigorous regrowth all over by the end of the week!

I think the dogma about size of cuts on reductions when no account is made of the type of tree makes a nonsense of it.

 

Mark, the way my wrists feel ATM I'd be lucky to be able to lift one-off the ground.

 

Hi Mick, the BS3998 deemed "one-size fits all" approach is a start point, remembering the BS is 'general' guidance and recommendations not a specification (unlike other BSs.) It is to be interpreted and applied by the 'arbs' according to any given situation. Any deviance is expected to be justified.

 

This includes taking into account the "species factor", as you say, the age of the tree, its condition / vitality , previous management, situation, exposure etc. etc.

 

So, carry on leaving the branches 1/3rd of the length they previously were (v funny Gary)...when your wrist recovers of course, hopefully v soon, tc.

 

Cheers,

Paul

[Mick Dempsey]

Ok Paul, thanks for the clarification.

[JaySmith]

Medium 22m Oak reduction, 2d tree really as it has had growth suppression from the other trees in the background

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

[Mick Dempsey]

Usual nonsense.