Introduction Reduction

[Matt_Oldfield]

So after lurking for a little while on here its time I introduced myself! Im Matt, I'm 24 and I've been in the industry for 6 months now! I trained at Merrist Wood at the beginning of the year and I'm now working full time. I moved from landscaping to arboriculture, best move I've made yet! The Forum is awesome and I hope to contribute more as I learn more and develop more skills.

 

So, now to the secondary purpose of this thread!

 

When reducing, are you the guy who likes his tree to look perfectly shaped with no protruding branches, or of the natural persuasion, reducing by a set amount to leave the tree the same shape, only smaller?

 

Tread Steady,

 

Matt

[JLA Arborists]

It should look the same just smaller. You wouldn't be impressed if the hairdresser left bits protruding

[Mark Bolam]

Welcome Matt, and a good question to kick off with.

 

I'm a fan of the natural look. It's a great excuse for all the sticking out bits I miss, and gaping holes where I've snapped limbs with my fat old ass.

[Matt_Oldfield]

What I mean is, if the tree has naturally protruding branches, then they should still be protruding in the same way when you go for the 'natural look' rather than creating a perfectly smooth outline.

 

I know which I prefer, interested to see what the general preference is!

[treequip]

Do it the way your client wants

[TREE-SURGEON-ESSEX]

Most if not all customers ask for a reduction in size and to shape it. To me leaving natural branches extending beyond the rest of the crown is sloppy but thats just my perspective, plus my customers over the years have shown its not acceptable to leave bits sticking out.

 

Pick your height and reduce in line with the natural structure of the tree or species of tree.

 

Reducing each branch by a set length is much easier and requires not much more skill than being able to reach the branch being cut. The different method i use produces great shapes and i have been back over 8 years on reductions that have reacted in a good way, low epicormic branch growths and no snapped out branches etc.

 

Less is more from the trees perspective.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Most if not all customers ask for a reduction in size and to shape it. To me leaving natural branches extending beyond the rest of the crown is sloppy but thats just my perspective, plus my customers over the years have shown its not acceptable to leave bits sticking out.

 

Pick your height and reduce in line with the natural structure of the tree or species of tree.

 

Reducing each branch by a set length is much easier and requires not much more skill than being able to reach the branch being cut. The different method i use produces great shapes and i have been back over 8 years on reductions that have reacted in a good way, low epicormic branch growths and no snapped out branches etc.

 

Less is more from the trees perspective.

 

that will do for me:thumbup1:

[Craig Johnson]

Welcome Matt, and a good question to kick off with.

 

I'm a fan of the natural look. It's a great excuse for all the sticking out bits I miss, and gaping holes where I've snapped limbs with my fat old ass.

 

same :001_tt2:but less is more benefit

[Marc]

Most if not all customers ask for a reduction in size and to shape it. To me leaving natural branches extending beyond the rest of the crown is sloppy but thats just my perspective, plus my customers over the years have shown its not acceptable to leave bits sticking out.

 

Pick your height and reduce in line with the natural structure of the tree or species of tree.

 

Reducing each branch by a set length is much easier and requires not much more skill than being able to reach the branch being cut. The different method i use produces great shapes and i have been back over 8 years on reductions that have reacted in a good way, low epicormic branch growths and no snapped out branches etc.

 

Less is more from the trees perspective.

 

You say in one sentence leaving limbs protruding from the general crown profile is sloppy and unacceptable, then that you reduce each limb and equal amount.... Or am I getting confused?

 

I don't think there is a hard and fast rule, I'm a big fan of partial reductions by just tipping in over extended limbs to within the crown profile, this for me works best on trees like Cedar to help reduce those lever arms particularly in severe weather like heavy snow.

 

Sometimes I'll reduce and try to achieve a balanced and as close to symmetrical crown profile as possible.

 

And on other occasions I'll just reduce a tree equally so if one limbs sticks out it will still stick out as not all trees are perfectly shaped and symmetrical and this is what gives them character.

 

Most if my reductions have nothing to do with great shapes it's more duty of care and doing what I think is best even if I'm wrong. One thing is universal the customer is always wrong!

[Stubby]

Do it the way your client wants

 

Thats the one . You can leave growth points or do a " round over " most customers want the " round over "