Is reduction really the best way

[Dean Lofthouse]

I saw this Ash had been reduced last year, I pass it often so thought I would keep an eye on it's progress.

 

Not a drastic reduction by any standards, quite light really.

 

It was probably reduced on the because of the usual reasons of not enough light, it's getting too big etc etc.

 

As you can see, at the pruning cut site there is prolific epicormic growth, where there was one branch, there will now be ten and the crown will be far more dense than it was previously and this is after only 9 months or so.

 

I always try and persuade the customer away from reduction in favour of a thin or lift and maybe take the odd branch off that protrude way out of the canopy line.

 

What are other peoples thoughts on reductions

Edited November 19, 2008 by Dean Lofthouse

[josharb87]

great short term solution, to be worthwhile around %20 plus, then state future management-thin and/or reduce re growth

enjoyable work

[Ross Smith]

from my angle it looks like an attempted TOP rather than a crown reduction

[Pete Mctree]

Thinning is a waste of time in my books (but a very profitable one).

I can see little benifit other than asthetics as it's effectivness in sail reduction and light penetration are neglible if the work is carried out symathetically. I see too many attempted thins that are in reality lions-tailing, from which a tree cannot recover any natural growth habit. The etialated looking, tip heavy growth may be common in woodland trees, but in an urban enviroment it produces over extended limbs with little pruning options and if vigorous a mass of epicormic growth - yuck. Lionstailing is usually acompanied by the monsterous overlift, increasing the windloading on the scoffolds and increasing tip extention as a reaction to canopy loss. Again it's ireversable.

 

Reduction - even if the tree is crudley topped at least allows the tree to react, regrow and if managed a reasonable structure formed. Trees have developed to react to limb breakage and replace there canopy- (MonkeyD..........) so is this not a more natural form of tree management? We all know it's draw-backs but is it best to immitate nature and ignore our constraints of aesthetics placed upon us?

 

Maybe we should try mix and match more? reduce by thinning out the longest laterals? Instead of convential thinning how about punching some large holes in the canopy and leaving the rest alone? clown clean and go home even?

 

I do sell thinning and lifting work primarily, but i predominatly work in the private sector where appearance of the product is a huge issue and tree retention seldom prefered to felling.

 

My vote - Minor lift if needed, crown clean then leave the bloody things alone:001_cool:

[Dean Lofthouse]

Maybe we should try mix and match more? reduce by thinning out the longest laterals? Instead of convential thinning how about punching some large holes in the canopy and leaving the rest alone? clown clean and go home even?

 

 

Exactly what I try and do Pete, try and punch bigger blocks of light through rather than go for small thinning all over.

 

Lionstail thinning is the lazy way and not the right way . I try and get right to the tips and take out from there not in the middle of the tree

[MattyF]

sorry but that is a poor reduction ,the beach(if that what it is next to it) is worse.... the choice of cuts is shocking on both trees so no suprise to a water shoot burst.

what annoys me most about reductions is peoples ability to ruin them with a thin at the same time,if you take 20% of a crown and thin it what the hell do you think will happen the tree needs a leaf area to survive if you take it away it will put out more in responce...

Im not sayin reduction is the answer in many cases its not relating to tree maturity and vigour ash in particular will always put out water shoots as will lime.

I am trying to keep a photo graphic record of before and after pics of trees reduced properly with being thinned and so far i can see no problem,trees 5 years down the line some have only put on a couple of feet!

The problem i think is putting under experianced climbers on jobs and giving them short time scales to do the job,with a 3 man team its easyer to do more damage by taking more off than reaching targets that would surfice,heal and respond better to pruning.

[josharb87]

sorry but that is a poor reduction ,the beach(if that what it is next to it) is worse.... the choice of cuts is shocking on both trees so no suprise to a water shoot burst.

what annoys me most about reductions is peoples ability to ruin them with a thin at the same time,if you take 20% of a crown and thin it what the hell do you think will happen the tree needs a leaf area to survive if you take it away it will put out more in responce...

Im not sayin reduction is the answer in many cases its not relating to tree maturity and vigour ash in particular will always put out water shoots as will lime.

I am trying to keep a photo graphic record of before and after pics of trees reduced properly with being thinned and so far i can see no problem,trees 5 years down the line some have only put on a couple of feet!

The problem i think is putting under experianced climbers on jobs and giving them short time scales to do the job,with a 3 man team its easyer to do more damage by taking more off than reaching targets that would surfice,heal and respond better to pruning.

 

good points matt

[conkers]

Thinning is a waste of time in my books (but a very profitable one).

I can see little benifit other than asthetics as it's effectivness in sail reduction and light penetration are neglible if the work is carried out symathetically. I see too many attempted thins that are in reality lions-tailing, from which a tree cannot recover any natural growth habit. The etialated looking, tip heavy growth may be common in woodland trees, but in an urban enviroment it produces over extended limbs with little pruning options and if vigorous a mass of epicormic growth - yuck. Lionstailing is usually acompanied by the monsterous overlift, increasing the windloading on the scoffolds and increasing tip extention as a reaction to canopy loss. Again it's ireversable.

 

Reduction - even if the tree is crudley topped at least allows the tree to react, regrow and if managed a reasonable structure formed. Trees have developed to react to limb breakage and replace there canopy- (MonkeyD..........) so is this not a more natural form of tree management? We all know it's draw-backs but is it best to immitate nature and ignore our constraints of aesthetics placed upon us?

 

Maybe we should try mix and match more? reduce by thinning out the longest laterals? Instead of convential thinning how about punching some large holes in the canopy and leaving the rest alone? clown clean and go home even?

 

I do sell thinning and lifting work primarily, but i predominatly work in the private sector where appearance of the product is a huge issue and tree retention seldom prefered to felling.

 

My vote - Minor lift if needed, crown clean then leave the bloody things alone:001_cool:

 

Tree pruning is rarely done correctly. Even with the right methods and motives.

 

Mainly due to generalising methods- thin, lift reduce. It takes a good appreciation of trees to do properly and then you have to take the customers wishes into consideration.

 

As you say, to mix various appoaches can give the best result but long term health of the tree can be reduced if the tree is under stress.

 

The only answer is to plant thousands of the right trees in the right places all over the country. Bring back mixed commercial growing on a huge scale and then the future would be rosey even if the current over pruned, over compacted, over concreted, root severed town trees died.

Having said all that- I too lift thin and reduce, as best I can but still get it wrong from time to time.

[Dean Lofthouse]

The problem i think is putting under experianced climbers on jobs and giving them short time scales to do the job,with a 3 man team its easyer to do more damage by taking more off than reaching targets that would surfice,heal and respond better to pruning.

 

I think you've hit the nail on the head Matty, profit motivation without pride in your work or possibly just lack of knowledge

[treemeup]

Thinning is a waste of time in my books (but a very profitable one).

I can see little benifit other than asthetics as it's effectivness in sail reduction and light penetration are neglible if the work is carried out symathetically. I see too many attempted thins that are in reality lions-tailing, from which a tree cannot recover any natural growth habit. The etialated looking, tip heavy growth may be common in woodland trees, but in an urban enviroment it produces over extended limbs with little pruning options and if vigorous a mass of epicormic growth - yuck. Lionstailing is usually acompanied by the monsterous overlift, increasing the windloading on the scoffolds and increasing tip extention as a reaction to canopy loss. Again it's ireversable.

 

Reduction - even if the tree is crudley topped at least allows the tree to react, regrow and if managed a reasonable structure formed. Trees have developed to react to limb breakage and replace there canopy- (MonkeyD..........) so is this not a more natural form of tree management? We all know it's draw-backs but is it best to immitate nature and ignore our constraints of aesthetics placed upon us?

 

Maybe we should try mix and match more? reduce by thinning out the longest laterals? Instead of convential thinning how about punching some large holes in the canopy and leaving the rest alone? clown clean and go home even?

 

I do sell thinning and lifting work primarily, but i predominatly work in the private sector where appearance of the product is a huge issue and tree retention seldom prefered to felling.

 

My vote - Minor lift if needed, crown clean then leave the bloody things alone:001_cool:

 

I thought that the dead smaller branches inside the crown have died due to natural selection by way of light not penetrating through the outer canopy, therefore removal of some(not all & not lions tailing) will allow the energy that would have been wasted on these doomed growths to be transfered to the outer canopy as per nature but without this waste.

 

I think that a 10% - 20% thin can usually be found in weak future unions, crossing branches, overextended growth and the occasional leader/secondary leader at the tips to allow light/wind to pass through the canopy. When a crown raise is also included we hit 30% and the maximum we should really remove from a healthy tree in one pop.

If this had been the spec for street trees over the last 50yrs surely our cities would now have many many specimen trees which would require less work. some of the larger trees i see near lines/lamp posts seem to have got used to being cut away from target and have almost given up growing near to it(spookily like they know), or grown higher and are no longer blocking eg street light from the street.