Crown thinning verses Crown Reduction

[andy2]

Hi i got an assigment which i have to disscus the fores and agaist of Crown thinning v Crown reduction and was just woundering what your opions on it are (:

[Andrew B]

In my opinion crown reduction is alot harder on a tree. The amount of mateial that is lost means a large amount of stored suger and food making capability is lost making it ahrd for the tree to recover as well, especially in old trees.

 

Crown thinning is a good tool when you are worried about wind failure but dont want to go for the full reduction. Plus the tree look smore natural afterwards and neighbouring trees dont get instantly exposed to the full force of new wind.

 

Just my pennies worth. Feel free to criticise if you dont agree.

 

Andrew

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

I cant, I just cant, i shouldnt couldnt wouldnt get involved in another thin versus reduction debate!

[Mozza]

I cant, I just cant, i shouldnt couldnt wouldnt get involved in another thin versus reduction debate!

 

I dont think you've quite got your point across yet tho mate

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

I dont think you've quite got your point across yet tho mate

 

well i discovered for myself there was no point!

 

sticking to fungi and more rewarding subjects,

[dannyT]

a good crown reduction (where the tree is balanced and keeps its natural shape) is much harder to perform than a thin in my opinion. It takes a lot of experience before an arborist is proficient at crown reductions.

 

A lot of what i see past off as reductions are just trees which are "lopped and topped".

 

As said above trees dont react well to a severe reduction. I would always try and advise on a crown thin as opposed to a reduction, it looks visualy more "natural" and in general more beneficial for the tree.

 

Getting costomers and the general public to understand this however..........................

[john dawson]

reductions are ridiculously hard to do properly, and mostly cant be done properly.

 

its all about the planning.

 

put the right tree in the right place = very little work if none at all to be done!

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

it always makes me laugh, people who are good at it ar far and few between, I suspect it is this that causes its lack of favour, as a well reduced tree is a thing indeed, its an art, no ifs no buts.

 

thinning done right is almost indistinguishable from a reduction, in the sense that you really SHOULD be thinning the denser ends rather than the inner canopy as NEARLY all do, lazy darn toads, and i hate this practice with a vengance, it does nothing for the tree nor client IMO and the opinion of many others, especialy clients in general!

 

So that said, why argue over the differences, well cos everyone can thin!

 

mostly our work is a light issue, and you just cant compare the light and pure sky gains from thinning to a proper reduction.

 

Why even Lonsdale recomends that some reduction work is advisable if we are to alleviate wind loading!

[Dean O]

just to draw further on hama's point of reduction to aleviate windsail effect - a thin could indeed make wind an increased probleb by increasing lever arm effect on limbs where a "lazy thin" has been carried out - by this i meen removing laterals on a branch but leaving weight on the tips.

 

however i do generally find myself trying to steer clients away from reductions - particularly on certain species.

this is generally because i feel that their version of a reduction and mine often differ and they may not view my reduction as as good value for money as a good topping - despite how much i try to sell the arb reduction technique.

[alpamayo]

how about the difference in wind sail and loading between a proper thinning (done mostly on the outer third to two thirds of the canopy) to a crown reduction? that would be great data to see!

 

jp