Cat amongst the Pidgeons Time

[David Humphries]

 

I've been keeping an eye on this local Fagus for about 5 years, since i moved in to the neighbourhood.

 

OK, it's topped and most of you would probably not open up your reputations to this type of work.

No one is proclaiming that this is target pruned reduction here.

 

I went and knocked on the door today to get the history, so i could try to form a balanced opinion as to the retention of this state of Tree.

 

Firstly, i am not from the commercial sector, I 'm Local Authority. So, if i'm being honest with you my remit is the considered retention of tree stock based upon safety and ecological conditions.

Even though i keep stringent work records i probably have not got a clue on how many trees i have condemed and felled over the last 15 years, based on H&S grounds.

 

The guy who lives at this house has been there since 1958 and has brought up his children and grandkids there.

He told me of his great love of this Tree, especialy keen to describe its immense size when it used to tower over his roof.

 

He is a retired engineer, and his gut instinct persuaded him to start reducing the tree back in the late 70's.

Once the tree had reached roughly it's current size over the span of three or four reductions (toppings I here you scoff) he then decided to introduce a three year cyclicle prunning regime.

This he does himself, from ladders. At this point after admitting to myself my admiration for this game old retiree, I did suggest for the sake of his continued longevity he should employ someone if not proffessional then at least younger to carry out the work.

 

Im fascinated by the retention of this incredibly vital and trunk/root plate sound old tree.

Ofcourse there are decayed prunning wounds, but nothing to worry about in terms of the canopies overall health and stability.

I have not got any pictures of the tree in leaf but i can tell you that the canopy is dense in foliage after every pruning.

I will post a shot in late spring.

 

Having posted this, i have obviously opened myself to the potential criticism of you fellow Arbs, due to my desire to see this type of tree retained in this particular situation.

Feel free to assassinate or jump on board. :wave:

[Dean Lofthouse]

It doesn't look as bad IMO because it has been a staged reduction. When the only other option is loss of the tree then a staged reduction, imo is the way to go.

 

Lopping the tops off trees only produces ugly and far too vigorous epicormics.

 

Doing it in stages, produces a lot better looking tree with strong unions because you would be encouraging growths points and not epicormic.

 

Next.

[Bundle 2]

It opens that tinniest of cans of worms....quite apart from the fact that it looks like a dogs arse, reason enough to fell and replant with a more suitable species IMO...the real issue here is surely its proximity to the house. Too big a tree for its location...poor planning as I'd guess that the tree was there first! ( And they say you cant prune a big beech??!!....)

[Lee Winger]

I'll be posting a long winded response this weekend and of course I'll 'de-rail' the topic some what, stay tuned.........

[scotspine1]

He told me of his great love of this Tree, especialy keen to describe its immense size when it used to tower over his roof.

 

Sounds like he knows it looks ugly in it's present state. Engineers know best about forces, so in his engineering way he made it safe, and luckily the tree survived.

Dont see the point in pruning every 3 years though thats just ridiculous.

 

All things considered, it looks bloody hideous.

[David Humphries]

quite apart from the fact that it looks like a dogs arse, ( And they say you cant prune a big beech??!!....)

 

Is'nt the point here that the property owner does not see the tree as a Canine's Posterior.

I'm summising that he sees the continuing presence that the tree currently contributes to the location through its trunk size and foliage aesthetics, as well as his historical connection to the tree.

 

If, as in this case the tree is safe and not affecting the structure or foundations, then surely the decision to fell/replant should lie with the properties next owner who perhaps morally and historically does not share any connection to the tree. :wave:

[Bundle 2]

I would say that it probably has little or nothing to do with anyone else...unless it has been TPO'd.This comes around again Emergency TPO's get the law a bad name.If a tpo had been in place whilst the tree was still in its magnificence then professional arborists could have intervened and guided the pruning structure whether it be a sustained management regime of continual reduction or whatever. It depends on the value that the individual tree owner has for the thing but I might get a pissed off with the less than symbiotic relations of tree and house! Notwithstanding, as the owner you are dictated too as to what ultimately happens to the tree whilst all the time being liable. As the man grows older he presumably does not wish to be burdened with the worry of a huge tree. Making the problem smaller makes good sense. I have seen specimens like this retained and maintained.

I dont think it looks too good but hey man, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.Its not my tree and so I think we sometimes need to get off our high horse and accept ...It will no doubt paint the story in a new light to see it in full leaf? I think this tree was doomed when it was first allowed to become an issue with regards the apparent conflict of interests 'tween house and building.

[David Humphries]

I would say that it probably has little or nothing to do with anyone else... Making the problem smaller makes good sense. I have seen specimens like this retained and maintained.

I dont think it looks too good but hey man, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.Its not my tree and so I think we sometimes need to get off our high horse and accept ...It will no doubt paint the story in a new light to see it in full leaf? I think this tree was doomed when it was first allowed to become an issue with regards the apparent conflict of interests 'tween house and building.

 

Cor Blimey Guvnor !

 

I'm glad to see this subject is providing such considered opinion.

I know it's Friday night and you younger Arbs might not have kids to tuck in and baby sit,

but if you have not got a real life, lets hear your thoughts be it informed or reactionary. :wave:

[Amelanchier]

Hang on. Who's saying the tree was too close to the house?

[Mr Ed]

Tree looks great. Has a Tolkienesque look to it. Take a trip round europe and see millions of trees managed in the same way.

lets face it,If there was a different owner, or if a TPO had been in place, and an arbo had come along in the past 20 years, that tree would have been felled.