comments and advice please..

[Rupe]

Not necessarily remove them, and you cant make folk do what they dont want anyway. But you need to discuss with them if possible pros and cons. Then decide on pollarding OR redcution. What you have done is neither one nor the other. Reduction would be way less off and plenty of growth left so they carry on growing, pollarding would ideally have left the trees with no growth and would be better to have less pollard points awswell and maybe a bit lower so future work is easier/cheaper.

 

I think I would have done more off the pops, so just a single stem pollard maybe and less off the Ash, but I wasnt there so cant say.

 

Problem is, all that growth left on will grow at 100mph and the pollard points will be left behind, it will look a mess quite soon.

 

 

Most important thing is are the customers happy? Have you been paid?

[kempo79]

the customer came up with the specs all they wanted/requested was that the trees were brought down to a safe height, they wasn't concerned with the future cost...

[Rupe]

What was unsafe with them to start with?

 

There future is going to be way unsafer than it was before you got up them, but if the customer doesnt mind repeat work/cost then no worries. I might have left them as is if its just a safety issue though.

[Mozza]

They were already at a safe height before you worked on them!

[Pedroski]

Those poplars look 'topped' to me. I've got a client who wanted some pops significantly reduced in height, but rather than 'topping', which opens the tree up to infection through wounds that can't heal, and also causes a huge abundance of new growth, they're being properly 'pollarded' instead (single stem with neat crotch at top, and just a short side branch or two). The good fella doing it is leaving them in a condition that will make it easy and safe for them to be climbed by the next climber who will have to go up with a Silky to maintain the pollard.

Edited March 13, 2012 by Pedroski

[Rupe]

They were already at a safe height before you worked on them!

 

 

Thats what I was getting at!

 

If they wanted more light, better view etc, then something could be done but you would have to take into account the veiw of the trees now is worse than the veiw it might open up (if that makes sense) so a different spec would still be needed.

 

In the first pic it looks as though the ones on the very left hand side have been treat in a similar way in the not so distant past, They would have made a good example of why not to do the work. How safe do you think those trees are now, and how safe do you think they would be to work on now?

 

My point about pollarding was if its going to be done it should be lower so future work is safer (and cheaper too) and redcution could have been achieved in a much better way.

[Stephen Blair]

yes stephen it is, what would you have done different?

 

If I was going to do the lolipop Bart Simpson hairdo I would of kept them more symetrical.

 

I would of offered a fell for £50 less just so no one would have to look at them

 

I am not judging these by good practice, because I don't think that comes into private tree care much, I am looking at it from a climbers eye, and the work looks lazy.

[kempo79]

haha..yes got paid. i'am aware that its inbetween pollard/reduction. was rushing to get them done, maybe i'll go back and finish to pollard at a loss. thank rupe.

[Rupe]

Those poplars look 'topped' to me. I've got a client who wanted some pops significantly reduced in height, but rather than 'topping', which opens the tree up to infection through wounds that can't heal, and also causes a huge abundance of new growth, they're being properly 'pollarded' instead. The good fella doing it is leaving them in a condition that will make it easy and safe for them to be climbed by the next climber who will have to go up with a Silky to maintain the pollard.

 

Thats about right!

[born2trot]

I'm hearing of drought problems down south aswell which is always a danger sign regarding whether to pollard or not.