Raise or reduce whats your beef?

[Ian Flatters]

Ok, so you have a tree which you could raise or reduce. Light is the key here and i know you can thin the crown but for this hypothetical question you cant thin it.

 

The tree is:

1) 70ft Eucalyptus tree.

2) 20ft spread to all cardinal points.

3) Medium density or foliage in the crown.

4) In a short narrow garden.

 

So, do you raise the tree thus not messing with its natural shape (less than a reduction) and aesthetics but still run the risk of creating a lever arm with the stem and crown sail.

 

Or,

 

Do you reduce the crown by X amount to reduce crown sail but changes the original trees shape? Also you then recommend to the client that it needs maintenance in X amount of years time.

 

Reason i ask this is i went to a Claus Mattheck seminar a few years back and he was saying that he thinks you should reduce trees rather than raise them. As from a structural point of view. There are pictures of raising equations/reductions + pictures in his book i think its the one with the hedgehog or Paulie the bear????

[Tom D]

Not being flippant, but what does the client want?

 

There is more to this than it seems, ask the client where they want the extra light. If they say all over then fell it, if they want the light near the base of the tree then raise it, if they want light towards the end of the shadow; reduce it.

I have often talked clients out of one course of action after considering the position of the sun at particular times of the day and where shadows will fall. There's nothing worse than doing something only to have a client say that its just the same and end up wanting more off and spoiling the job.

Its far easier to iron out all these issues at the survey stage and then the client knows exactly what to expect. I carry a compass for this purpose.

 

You still get the odd dickhead of course.

[Albedo]

Targettrees - Whats a 'Cardinal Point' ?

 

Just that I've never heard of it. My guess would be something like a suitable node to reduce to ?

[gingertreeninja]

old boss had the la contract over here and was told all trees on grass areas had to be raised to 3.4 meters to allow ride on mowers to get unders them. some of these trees were only 5-6 meters high so you can imagine what they looked like after he finished. not a fan of crown lifting, leaves wounds on the lower stem of a top heavy tree which over time become potential failure points

[Parker]

Depends on the situation/what the clients wants! If they want a lot more light in the garden then pollarding may be a solution. Regrowth can then be cut every 3-5years.

 

I would prefer a crown raise than crown reduce, although both have their right place.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Claus's view on this is well founded on tree mechanics and biology, if you lift and or thin what you do is increase lever arm and reduce carbohydrate distribution capacity.

 

Reduce down not thin up, simple as that, biologicaly and bio mechanicaly provable.

 

Short fat tree - good, tall thin tree - bad.

[Ian Flatters]

Targettrees - Whats a 'Cardinal Point' ?

 

Just that I've never heard of it. My guess would be something like a suitable node to reduce to ?

 

North, south, east and west.

[Albedo]

Cheers target. I thought it might be a new bit of terminology out of merist wood or the like.

[Mesterh]

from MY point of view I would recomend a lift since it is easier and requires less skill:thumbup1:

 

Plus with euc's if you reduce them a lot then they grow back with a vengeance and in this situation I doubt a light reduction would do nothing to help with much more light, and they aint easy to lightly reduce.Well not for me anyway:001_smile:

[Stephen Blair]

how wide is it at the base