Pruning out a natural brace in a tree may be unwise....

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

I was thinking about this the last week whilst pruning a beech tree.

If I had taken out all of the rubbing branches it would have thinned the tree by nearly 50%.

So I left the larger two rubbing stems and pruned out the worst of the rest.

The customer had complained that the tree creaked a lot so hopefully this should help, or maybe I should have just oiled each crosser!

TBH I didn't think about the fact that the ones I did remove could be natural braces, but most were long branches rubbing further out.

If I do remove a branch that has been rubbing I try to remove some weight from the one that I leave.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

 

 

I've already had an attempted argument against a TPO app based upon these theories.

 

The risk could be that a new theory arrives on the scene and everyone wants to quote it to demonstrate how up to date they are... without actually applying real world basics.

 

Seriously, what structural bracing can an unfused crossing/rubbing branch provide? It moves!!

 

TPO app was approved after a brief discussion!

[Will Heal]

I've already had an attempted argument against a TPO app based upon these theories.

 

The risk could be that a new theory arrives on the scene and everyone wants to quote it to demonstrate how up to date they are... without actually applying real world basics.

 

Seriously, what structural bracing can an unfused crossing/rubbing branch provide? It moves!!

 

TPO app was approved after a brief discussion!

 

 

It does move yes but it may limit the movement slightly.

But removing the rubbing branches can stop the ribbing branch getting worse and start to strengthen with a bit of woeght reduction should be finr

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

[Mark J]

Like most things, further research is needed. I think the point of the article was to make arborists aware that 'Standard' practice when working on trees isn't set in stone.

 

Slater's research with Ennos assessing the movement of bifurcations in hazel has yielded techniques that, when refined, could allow arborists in the field to detect the extent of movement within a union and base their decisions on that.

 

Interesting stuff.

Edited April 23, 2017 by Mark J

[Gary Prentice]

I've already had an attempted argument against a TPO app based upon these theories.

 

The risk could be that a new theory arrives on the scene and everyone wants to quote it to demonstrate how up to date they are... without actually applying real world basics.

 

Seriously, what structural bracing can an unfused crossing/rubbing branch provide? It moves!!

 

TPO app was approved after a brief discussion!

 

But, it's often the case that it limits movement to a below critical extent. I suppose that, as is usually the case, every situation has to be considered on its own merits.

 

Some of pictures of natural braces that I've seen at various presentations/seminars and publications are, IMO, unlikely to survive for trees lifespan. This then becomes another consideration in their retention or removal.

[David Humphries]

.........Some of pictures of natural braces that I've seen at various presentations/seminars and publications are, IMO, unlikely to survive for trees lifespan. This then becomes another consideration in their retention or removal.

 

 

Perhaps some of these presenters haven't been 'watching' individual braces for long enough.

 

This ones been developing for over 70 years (original image is from the 50's) and is still an integral part of the trees structural stability........that is of course until the day it fails and the whole thing comes collapsing down

 

 

 

Edited April 23, 2017 by David Humphries

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

Like most things, further research is needed. I think the point of the article was to make arborists aware that 'Standard' practice when working on trees isn't set in stone.

 

Slater's research with Ennos assessing the movement of bifurcations in hazel has yielded techniques that, when refined, could allow arborists in the field to detect the extent of movement within a union and base their decisions on that.

 

Interesting stuff.

 

 

Agreed, interesting...

 

I read the passage "....It's clear to me that both our pruning standards and the training we give to our arborists need to change - to take into account the effects of natural braces. Ultimately, we need to make our arborists aware that tree work like this can leave a tree more dangerous after pruning than beforehand...."

 

As being the "purpose" / "output" of the article?

 

If that assumption on my part is anywhere near accurate, I'm not at all sure I'd agree (fully) since for the thesis to be supportable, it can only be applied / justified where several coincidental circumstances exist - crossing (fused or otherwise) branches AND an included union (or other such feature as might be deriving some degree of support from the assumed brace) AND a target that might be exposed to assumed increased risk of failure of the feature that was possibly being supported by the brace.

 

And of course, it might be better to target the proposed training to the surveyors writing the spec rather than the arborist (define arborist!) doing the cutting. Especially, as exampled in the article, utility cutting.

 

How common are the circumstances described in the article? I'd suggest they would need to be actively sought rather than being commonplace. I'd have some difficulty reconciling a recommendation for broad reaching changes to pruning standards and arborist training off the back of (a) such a specific (and (assumed) not so common issue) and (b) from the example of utility cutting in the article, perhaps surveyors rather than cutters would be the better target audience and © if there exists a sufficiently significant hazard feature, perhaps felling should also be in the equation?

 

Then....

 

Assuming a surveyor correctly identified an included union (possible hazard feature) but recommended no pruning of potential bracing limbs, then the main hazard feature failed leading to damage / harm...

 

All "what-ifs" of course and each tree, target area, amenity assessment and surveyor tendencies to their own specific circumstance.

 

Will have to look out for the forthcoming workshop series!!

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

But, it's often the case that it limits movement to a below critical extent. I suppose that, as is usually the case, every situation has to be considered on its own merits.

 

 

 

👍🏻

 

Some of pictures of natural braces that I've seen at various presentations/seminars and publications are, IMO, unlikely to survive for trees lifespan. This then becomes another consideration in their retention or removal.

 

 

👍🏻

 

Perhaps some of these presenters haven't been 'watching' individual braces for long enough.

 

 

 

This ones been developing for over 70 years (original image is from the 50's) and is still an integral part of the trees structural stability........that is of course until the day it fails and the whole thing comes collapsing down

 

 

 

[ATTACH]219084[/ATTACH]

 

[ATTACH]219085[/ATTACH]

 

[ATTACH]219086[/ATTACH]

 

 

 

[ATTACH]219087[/ATTACH]

 

 

 

[ATTACH]219088[/ATTACH]

 

 

Awesome picture set!

 

Pulled my thoughts in a different direction too....

 

I'd been focussing my thoughts on smaller scale crown braces rather than main stem...!

 

👍🏻

[Gary Prentice]

Perhaps some of these presenters haven't been 'watching' individual braces for long enough.

 

This ones been developing for over 70 years (original image is from the 50's) and is still an integral part of the trees structural stability........that is of course until the day it fails and the whole thing comes collapsing down

 

70 years? I thought you were younger than that:biggrin:

 

I've read hundreds of research articles over the last few years and it's apparent that the results of most are very limited, because of the longevity of trees. In your pictures David, we will just never know what the tree would be like today should someone have pruned that limb off. We can make lots of educated 'guesses', but truth to be told, we will simply never know.

[David Humphries]

70 years? I thought you were younger than that:biggrin:

 

I've read hundreds of research articles over the last few years and it's apparent that the results of most are very limited, because of the longevity of trees. In your pictures David, we will just never know what the tree would be like today should someone have pruned that limb off. We can make lots of educated 'guesses', but truth to be told, we will simply never know.

 

I'm like Doctor Who Gary, phasing in and out time zones across the universe in search of interesting tree mechanics

 

I'm at work today, I'll nip out with a saw and pop the brace, then we can categorically state whether or not the 'held' section will fail or not.........be back in a mo !

 

 

 

.

[Gary Prentice]

 

Will have to look out for the forthcoming workshop series!!

 

Do you know if these workshops are a repeat of last years seminars, or something new again? I've seen them advertised and assumed that 'due to popular demand' they were the same.

 

The seminar/workshop at Myerscough was very interesting and raised food for thought.