Co-Dominent stems on large Sycamore. Opinions please?

[Amelanchier]

I am guessing at the majority of them, there seems to be an awful lot arround the UK

 

Jonny

 

Big ones too. In exposed locations on the coast round here with worse unions than that shown in the OP.

 

I'd also quietly challenge the idea that a bit of a level change is going to be a problem. Sycamore is hardly a fragile species in my experience and I doubt many healthy trees (multistemmed or not) would suffer from anything less than 250mm of loose fill.

 

I think the main issue with pruning them is finding an aesthetically pleasing final cut when removing the central leader of a branch back to two opposite and equal laterals. On young to semi-mature trees it can look very odd. Even more so when too much has been taken off and you end up with vertical regrowth as well...

[JonnyVine]

Big ones too. In exposed locations on the coast round here with worse unions than that shown in the OP.

 

I'd also quietly challenge the idea that a bit of a level change is going to be a problem. Sycamore is hardly a fragile species in my experience and I doubt many healthy trees (multistemmed or not) would suffer from anything less than 250mm of loose fill.

 

..

 

I couldn' agree more, there are some pretty decrepit examples around that just seem to go on and on regardless of infill, compaction etc, their achilees heel however appears to be the loss of a decent sized limb, especially when its been shabbily removed

[likeitorlumpit]

Are we saying the customer was right and that a wee bit of thinning would suffice. Or even leaving alone. Heaven forbid.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

I'd also quietly challenge the idea that a bit of a level change is going to be a problem. Sycamore is hardly a fragile species in my experience and I doubt many healthy trees (multistemmed or not) would suffer from anything less than 250mm of loose fill.

 

 

Thats almost a foot , and your very wordy with adding "loose fill" is that a caveat for the reality of adding nigh on a foot of soil to the root plate and collar?

 

Im surprised to hear you of all folk supporting such depths of fill.

[Paul Cleaver]

I wouldnt say GOT to, sounds like over management to me.

 

 

sounds like sound management to me:001_tt2:

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

I wouldnt say GOT to, sounds like over management to me.

 

 

sounds like sound management to me:001_tt2:

 

lol, half the time im just having fun.

 

sycamores belong in open fields/parklands, not back gardens.

[bob]

Not sure why they asked you to look if they did not listen to your advice.

Included unions at the base worry me a lot less than higher up.

I am not a fan of bracing as basically you change all the mechanics and from a liability issue you have admitted there is a fault.

Personally I would not spend time and money bracing a sycamore tree in a small garden

[Jesse]

Not sure why they asked you to look if they did not listen to your advice.

Included unions at the base worry me a lot less than higher up.

I am not a fan of bracing as basically you change all the mechanics and from a liability issue you have admitted there is a fault.

Personally I would not spend time and money bracing a sycamore tree in a small garden

 

Totally agree regarding any bracing at all on any tree, its a complete un measurable recommendation, all you are doing is admitting the presence of a defect and guessing the correct prognosis to resolve the issue, as you indicate the 'mechanics' need to be precise and only an engineer could calculate such a system. Its ok on man made structures when they have a calculable ingredient but not woody natural growth of an undetermined and unknown strength. A shake test is not the answer.

[Amelanchier]

Thats almost a foot , and your very wordy with adding "loose fill" is that a caveat for the reality of adding nigh on a foot of soil to the root plate and collar?

 

Im surprised to hear you of all folk supporting such depths of fill.

 

No it's an acknowledgement that soil density is of critical importance. A 200mm loose uncompacted layer is less of a problem than 100mm compacted. The 'wordiness' sometimes has a point!

 

You're right about the collar though, any fill would need to kept clear of direct contact.

Edited March 16, 2013 by Amelanchier

[Rick2517]

Not sure why they asked you to look if they did not listen to your advice.

Included unions at the base worry me a lot less than higher up.

I am not a fan of bracing as basically you change all the mechanics and from a liability issue you have admitted there is a fault.

Personally I would not spend time and money bracing a sycamore tree in a small garden

 

Couldn't agree more, there is another compression fork higher up at about 2m, I did not take pictures as I was not planning on postin a thread at the time.

Allot of what we do is a compromise of what should be done and what the customer wants! I know it's a case of wrong tree wrong place and the structure be it safe or not shouldn't really come into it, however the customer loves the tree and simply will not fell, she wants a crown reduction and wether we do it or somebody els does it, that is what she will get. At the time I felt cobra bracing may have been the way to go as it does not support the tree but acts as a backup if things where to go wrong. I even felt so strongly for the need for it that I was prepared to instal it at a parts only cost!

 

From the feedback of this thread my understanding of compression forks have changed and I am now happy with carrying out a crown reduction as the customer wishes.

I get paid, customer gets a smaller tree, tree doesn't get felled(yet)