Jump to content

Log in or register to remove this advert

Hamas big reduction/pruning thread!


Recommended Posts

Tony,

Looking back I can't see any personal digs worthy of a moan on this thread.

 

I would only say that you set yourself up for negative replies when you start a thread like this. Your first post said it all.

Unless you are really upset about the comments regarding reductions???

 

It is a good thread and interesting to see what people think about reductions,

put if you will stick your neck out over researched, learned and generally accepted ideas on pruning, don't be suprised when some throw comments at you, on topic of course.

 

if you had bothered to read it through youll see where it got personal!

 

as for researched learned and generaly accepted ideas on pruning I am listening, for I know of NO such evidence on which to base such a negative stance on pruning properly.

 

I welcome such debate and input, its the WHOLE reason I started it!

 

so tell me more about this learned stuff, because i am all ears

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Log in or register to remove this advert

if you had bothered to read it through youll see where it got personal!

 

as for researched learned and generaly accepted ideas on pruning I am listening, for I know of NO such evidence on which to base such a negative stance on pruning properly.

 

I welcome such debate and input, its the WHOLE reason I started it!

 

so tell me more about this learned stuff, because i am all ears

 

Ok,

It is generally accepted that to almost defoliate a tree in it's growing season or to remove large amounts of branch wood can and will cause dysfunction leaving the tree open to other problems.

I would put some of your pictured reductions at between 30-40%.

We only do that if the tree is specifically asked not to be felled by the client and there is a basal decay issue with the tree, and usually they look rubbish after a few years after they have tried to recover leaf cover all over the stem or die back.

Your pruning ignores this and as well as the work is carried out, the work is floored because the end result will be no benefit to the tree or the client.

It is well structured topping and lopping!

There, no personal attacks, on topic and critical. The tone of your last post was a bit aggressive but I will cope Tony:001_tt2:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's one I did today. It was as tall as the sycamores next to it and well over the fences on its sides. Did part of it with a saw one morning but it was tipping down so couldn't work properly and finally finished it this morning. You can tell the difference between chainsaw and silky work (gap on one side, whoops :/) This tree was a pain to climb around, no decent scaffold branch work with a ton of inner branches that made it very thick. Bit like climbing through a shrub! Spec was just a reduce and crown lift. Not a thin.

 

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1343762491.543201.jpg.662f796505a0f0baceee1899dbcc22e4.jpg

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1343762580.469535.jpg.5a79acaa057f301ce0a76419f0828370.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok,

It is generally accepted that to almost defoliate a tree in it's growing season or to remove large amounts of branch wood can and will cause dysfunction leaving the tree open to other problems.

I would put some of your pictured reductions at between 30-40%.

We only do that if the tree is specifically asked not to be felled by the client and there is a basal decay issue with the tree, and usually they look rubbish after a few years after they have tried to recover leaf cover all over the stem or die back.

Your pruning ignores this and as well as the work is carried out, the work is floored because the end result will be no benefit to the tree or the client.

It is well structured topping and lopping!

There, no personal attacks, on topic and critical. The tone of your last post was a bit aggressive but I will cope Tony:001_tt2:

 

The tone of my last post was aggressive? it wasnt meant to be.

 

WHY is it generally accepted? based on what science? Shigo's energy balance is about the only reference I can think of.

 

I wont deny the levels on these reductions as you state 30-40% in some cases more, but suggesting that these trees will suffer and or die, or will look rubbish is assumption what is the basis of this assumption, what science, whos work, what paper?

 

How would you resolve the issues of conflicts with tree owners who want to achieve more light etc other than reduction?

 

Hw do you explain the huge contradiction that is seen between the "pruned to death" perception, and a healthy viable urban tree stock of heavily pruned and repeated pruning at that?

 

what about the fact that our oldest longest lived trees are in MOST cases ones that have been worked by man?

 

what about pollarding and coppicing?

 

the real life scenario and ecological side of things does not indicate any such stance as of merit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's one I did today. It was as tall as the sycamores next to it and well over the fences on its sides. Did part of it with a saw one morning but it was tipping down so couldn't work properly and finally finished it this morning. You can tell the difference between chainsaw and silky work (gap on one side, whoops :/) This tree was a pain to climb around, no decent scaffold branch work with a ton of inner branches that made it very thick. Bit like climbing through a shrub! Spec was just a reduce and crown lift. Not a thin.

 

[ATTACH]97667[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]97668[/ATTACH]

 

Nice:thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The tone of my last post was aggressive? it wasnt meant to be.

 

WHY is it generally accepted? based on what science? Shigo's energy balance is about the only reference I can think of.

 

I wont deny the levels on these reductions as you state 30-40% in some cases more, but suggesting that these trees will suffer and or die, or will look rubbish is assumption what is the basis of this assumption, what science, whos work, what paper?

 

How would you resolve the issues of conflicts with tree owners who want to achieve more light etc other than reduction?

 

Hw do you explain the huge contradiction that is seen between the "pruned to death" perception, and a healthy viable urban tree stock of heavily pruned and repeated pruning at that?

 

what about the fact that our oldest longest lived trees are in MOST cases ones that have been worked by man?

 

what about pollarding and coppicing?

 

the real life scenario and ecological side of things does not indicate any such stance as of merit.

 

The trees that have been pollarded or coppiced have been done from an early age. The tree has adapted.

To remove vast amounts of foliage in one growing season after many years of continued growth is not a natural process.

 

We try to retain trees every time. I have walked away from work where we cannot agree on the outcome.

We can discuss this to death but the proof is in the future progress of the trees we prune. Time will tell.

 

As for the written word. BS3998, AA guides to pruning amenity trees. I am about to pop to the office to list the books, dates etc......

Apart from this, when has it ever not been a good idea to work with the trees biology instead of against it. Anything else is pure ego!

That was a general dig, nothing personal!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The trees that have been pollarded or coppiced have been done from an early age. The tree has adapted.

To remove vast amounts of foliage in one growing season after many years of continued growth is not a natural process.

 

We try to retain trees every time. I have walked away from work where we cannot agree on the outcome.

We can discuss this to death but the proof is in the future progress of the trees we prune. Time will tell.

 

As for the written word. BS3998, AA guides to pruning amenity trees. I am about to pop to the office to list the books, dates etc......

Apart from this, when has it ever not been a good idea to work with the trees biology instead of against it. Anything else is pure ego!

That was a general dig, nothing personal!

 

General dig taken in good humour, as for the bs 3998 Shall we sit down and go through it together and discuss both of our interpretations?

 

and what is not natural about pollarding a mature tree?

Edited by Tony Croft aka hamadryad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

About the 30-40% reductions you and ness seem to be in discussion about, in my opinion no attack on anyone blah blah blah. It is basic chemical biology(well as basic as chemical biology can get) that removal of huge amount of foliage from a tree at any one time is bad news and yes trees have an amazing ability to recover and live on but Surely large pruning cuts and loss of foliage is not a good thing for the tree and most likely swerves more to what the customer wants then whats best for the tree. This debate however is very healthy Arb is young and its important to push for the correct answers in what seems to be a grey area for many. But to be seen as the profession we all want arb to be seen as we need to be more consistant with what we tell our customers I also realise we are all in a business and need to earn money, but i will stick to my morals and what I believe is right. Like ness says only time will tell..............when all Tonys trees die...Joke!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I often see mature trees shaking all there limbs off at once. Im up for a sit down chat about BS3998 info shared is knowledge gained in my opinion.

 

There are very few arbs that take the time to truly study the nature of over mature trees, I always appreciate sarcasm, so had a little giggle at trees shaking their limbs off!

 

One thing we can be assured of is that nature does not tell lies, people on the other hand both tell lies (for whatever reasons of which there are many) and also and most often just failed to actualy go out and find the truth for themselves choosing dogma and or information provided for them.

 

I know trees and woodlands as well as anyone, and if there is one thing I am not going to do it is to listen or to take to much notice of information that contradicts natural process.

 

Trees are shedding organisms, shedding and regenerating organisms, there is no argument against this fact, it is of all the "facts" about trees the least arguable of them all. So given that most basic of information what possible basis do we have for believing that trees are not perfectly adapted to occasional loss of photosynthetic area?

 

There is often this argument about dysfunction, yet the reality is that its really only the sapwood that is the tree we are all concerend about, inside it is the old tree, it is largely irrelevent it is the then tree not the now tree.

 

if that statement was not true, veteran trees would simply not occur, or rather continue to exist, they survive adversity because they only really need roots and shoots and active cambium to live.

 

For many species of tree, mostly broad leaf natives of which European species are most adapted, the loss of significant portions of the canopy and limb structure, even main stems is part of their ageing process, no more is man an unnatural force in the life of trees as are storms or fungi.

 

Even the supposedly fragile and reputably un pruneable Fagus sylvatica is as robust a survivor as our native oaks, not as long in cycle agreed, but its all relative, the birch or the sorbus is shorter of cycle still. What i think is needed here is a species specific mentality, for some trees do react badly to pruning of any sort, but they are far and few between because trees simply would not become ancients without the capacity for overcoming extreme a biotic or biotic forces, they cant run away like animals, but they can live for thousands of years all the same.

 

As for BS 3998 fire away:thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
 Share


  •  

  • Featured Adverts

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.