light reductions

[David Humphries]

What about this for a little tickle then:001_tt2:

 

Coz that's just what we do!!

 

Sent from my Galaxy S2

 

 

 

No comment

 

 

 

 

.

[treeseer]

David, on re-visits I wonder if climbers notice new sprouts at nodes/laterals. On both q alba and rubra we have seen strong sprouting responses to reduction. this growth may be the definition and proof of "retrenchment". proposals to include the term/process in the u.s. pruning standard are met with "where is the data" so it is good to see these accounts of such fine pruning/mgt. work.

[David Humphries]

Guy,

not been that many revisits/next phase reductions on the trees at Hampstead as of yet, but on the old 'beech' pollards of Burnham that we get a chance to work on there certainly is evidence of re sprouts after first/second phase retrenchment.

 

Will try and get some images when we're back there working in the next couple of weeks.

 

 

 

.

[David Humphries]

managing the weight & leverage on these heavy limbs over a pathway by light end reduction.

 

We keep meaning to use a clinometer before (whilst in leaf) and again after prunning to record any specific change in branch orientatation.

 

 

.

[David Humphries]

managing the weight & leverage on these heavy limbs over a pathway by light end reduction.

 

They have a habit of popping off, like here on the one of the above trees neighbours from a few years ago.

 

 

 

.

[Gary Prentice]

They have a habit of popping off, like here on the one of the above trees neighbours from a few years ago.

 

 

 

.

 

But is a natural failure such a bad thing? Sorry David, but what with reading the QTRA thread and some other posts in other threads, I'm just starting to question some of the recommendations and specifications that I'm seeing! Do we sometimes do work for the sake of doing something?

 

I'm probably just that way out tonight.

[David Humphries]

But is a natural failure such a bad thing? Sorry David, but what with reading the QTRA thread and some other posts in other threads, I'm just starting to question some of the recommendations and specifications that I'm seeing! Do we sometimes do work for the sake of doing something?

 

I'm probably just that way out tonight.

 

Natural failures (probably fungal induced like in the instance of the failure above) often lead to a tree suffering in the wake of losing a large percentage of photosynthetic material. The tree with Grifola on the trunk in the shot above has declined (vitality wise) since that large branch detachment.

 

I spec'd the work on the oak for the safety of the pedestrians and vehicle movement below but equally (which is perhaps debatable) for the trees benefit.

 

The reduction reduces the leverage which reduces the chance of it failing.

 

 

.

[Gary Prentice]

Thanks David for the quick reply.

 

I'm just reaching a bit of a personal crossroads, questioning my own personal decisions on some of the specifications I write for clients. I'm struggling a bit to find a balance between risk management, natural habitat and ecological niches and commercial gain.

 

Maybe a little bit of knowledge, on my part, is a bad thing:blushing:

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

managing the weight & leverage on these heavy limbs over a pathway by light end reduction.

 

We keep meaning to use a clinometer before (whilst in leaf) and again after prunning to record any specific change in branch orientatation.

 

 

.

 

or just try a throwline over the branch test before and after, hang the bag inches of the ground:thumbup1:

[treeseer]

"I spec'd the work on the oak for the safety of the pedestrians and vehicle movement below but equally (which is perhaps debatable) for the trees benefit.

 

No debate here. Trees failing uncontrolled near people cannot be taken as a good thing. Also, the value of trees near people to people adds to the potential consequence of failure.

 

"The reduction reduces the leverage which reduces the chance of it failing.

 

It really is that simple.

 

Re a little knowledge, when new trends come out it is easy to overreact. I wonder if the pendulum will swing back, from the value of saproxylics to the value of tree contributions.

 

On another note, in the op of this thread, the Merip conks seem associated with stem/root-girding roots. i've seen this often enough to suspect it's not coincidence.