The Topping / Reduction / Pruning Thread

[Marc]

Only just caught up with the posts on here by Telhol, skyhuck and Tony, funny as, nearly spat my coffee all over my laptop especially when Dr g hessayon was bought up as reference, I think my Hessayon books ended up in landfill (sory Doc).

 

I admire your conviction Telhol, it takes a quite a bit of confidence in your opinions, and respect to you for that.

 

Its what I love so much about a forum.

 

And there was me trying to be diplomatic and not slag someone else's work. I was a horticulturist for 5 years and arborist for 3, but I reckon i'll need another 10 years of experience before I can say I have a good indepth knowledge.

 

Anyway here is a pic of my favourite type of reduction, its the one in the middle that does'nt look like its been reduced, the one on the right was butchered in my opinion, especially as none had any outward signs of weakness other than bledding canker, in which case reduction is probably the worse thing to do.

[skyhuck]

nice job, i totally agree!

[MattyF]

i dont think any of them have been butchered in my opinion,but i can see what your saying the one on the right is a bit harsh,maybe it had big cavities? ...bleeding canker aint a good reason to reduce though...although this year ive seen the infection settle down a bit...this time last year i thought it would be the chesnut epitaph now

[Marc]

i dont think any of them have been butchered in my opinion,but i can see what your saying the one on the right is a bit harsh,maybe it had big cavities? ...bleeding canker aint a good reason to reduce though...although this year ive seen the infection settle down a bit...this time last year i thought it would be the chesnut epitaph now

 

Missed your post Matt, all I can say is looking at all 3 trees including Ash I could not see much wrong with them, not to say that I may of missed something. And I don't really mean to slag people off or call them butchers, I have my way of doing things and other climbers have there's.

I just prefer the less is more approach to pruning if possible, and I should of expressed that with other words than butcher.

[telhol]

Only just caught up with the posts on here by Telhol, skyhuck and Tony, funny as, nearly spat my coffee all over my laptop especially when Dr g hessayon was bought up as reference, I think my Hessayon books ended up in landfill (sory Doc).

 

I admire your conviction Telhol, it takes a quite a bit of confidence in your opinions, and respect to you for that.

 

Its what I love so much about a forum.

 

And there was me trying to be diplomatic and not slag someone else's work. I was a horticulturist for 5 years and arborist for 3, but I reckon i'll need another 10 years of experience before I can say I have a good indepth knowledge.

 

Anyway here is a pic of my favourite type of reduction, its the one in the middle that does'nt look like its been reduced, the one on the right was butchered in my opinion, especially as none had any outward signs of weakness other than bledding canker, in which case reduction is probably the worse thing to do.

 

Dont think the one book i stated as the only book i have my man i have a shed load but it is one of the best in terms of information. I got books from treeworker stantons climbers AA guide etc.

 

I was just rattling his cage lol. All i will say is i always get called back and lots of the big firms like getting me in. And in my opinion my way of pruning is not the best but i preferr it and until there is scientific proof saying its bad ill not change.

 

Shaping is expected where i work you cant just reduce by 30% eg. They expect a reduction to include shaping horses for courses.

[Marc]

Dont think the one book i stated as the only book i have my man i have a shed load but it is one of the best in terms of information. I got books from treeworker stantons climbers AA guide etc.

 

I was just rattling his cage lol. All i will say is i always get called back and lots of the big firms like getting me in. And in my opinion my way of pruning is not the best but i preferr it and until there is scientific proof saying its bad ill not change.

 

Shaping is expected where i work you cant just reduce by 30% eg. They expect a reduction to include shaping horses for courses.

 

Its all cool Telhol, but I will say this there is plenty of proof that heavy pruning is bad, I have observed trees that have been pruned like your method, and trees that have been pruned by my prefered method.

 

With my method the tree can often carry on growing at its normal rate and pattern without shoving up a ton of adventious regrowth, and is far easier to reprune in 5 years time.

 

Like you say though its horse for courses, and we don't live in an ideal world of idealistic pruning, whatever the **** that means.

[telhol]

Too true my freind i only took 30% off and followed natural shape just smoothed out any bits sticking out.

 

You will always get epicormic growth on every cut thats just in the trees biology all we can do is limit it.

 

I do like my way of pruning in my unique opinion i work within regs and all but i will always give a tree a good shape.

 

My methods are taken from AA books and good practice i guess each climber will always have there own preferred style.

 

But life is one big learning curve.

[Marc]

Too true my freind i only took 30% off and followed natural shape just smoothed out any bits sticking out.

 

You will always get epicormic growth on every cut thats just in the trees biology all we can do is limit it.

 

I do like my way of pruning in my unique opinion i work within regs and all but i will always give a tree a good shape.

 

My methods are taken from AA books and good practice i guess each climber will always have there own preferred style.

 

But life is one big learning curve.

 

I don't want you to think i'm ragging on you here, but a couple of points.

 

If you prune to appropiate points you will not always get epicormic, in fact hardly ever. Usually in other parts of the crown due to more light now hitting it, I guess?

 

I have'nt seen appropiate pruning techniques shown in AA books? Seen some in Shigo's book (now thats one worth reading)

But am aware of BS3998 which states drop crotching down to stems of equal or no less than 1/3 diameter, so NO wispy growth points.

 

Shapes are not important, prune the tree to its structure and it will always come out looking good and natural.

 

Take a look at this link, especially the first part about symplast and apoplast, the trees stored energy and why its important to leave in the smaller frame work around the outside of the tree if possible and not shape it back to big wood.

 

http://www.treedictionary.com/DICT2003/shigo/

[Marc]

Driving past a reduction I did last year and thought i'd take a picture, there is also another pic of some of the other reduced lime's, all were between 25-30% reductions

[telhol]

I don't want you to think i'm ragging on you here, but a couple of points.

 

If you prune to appropiate points you will not always get epicormic, in fact hardly ever. Usually in other parts of the crown due to more light now hitting it, I guess?

 

I have'nt seen appropiate pruning techniques shown in AA books? Seen some in Shigo's book (now thats one worth reading)

But am aware of BS3998 which states drop crotching down to stems of equal or no less than 1/3 diameter, so NO wispy growth points.

 

Shapes are not important, prune the tree to its structure and it will always come out looking good and natural.

 

Take a look at this link, especially the first part about symplast and apoplast, the trees stored energy and why its important to leave in the smaller frame work around the outside of the tree if possible and not shape it back to big wood.

 

http://www.treedictionary.com/DICT2003/shigo/

 

An interesting read which only complimtents what i already said about tree biology ie trees have genetic programming and repsond to the enviroment in a preset mannor. This is not a definative read tho.

 

Also epicormic growth occurs at every cut as part of the trees self preservation mechanism. So thanks for the post i enjoyed the read and it confirms many of what i belived to be correct.

 

Also the tree i showed was pruned within 1/3 of the branch diameter. The tree was cut in a way which allowed the tree to continue flowing energy to the extremities thus reducing the need for a programmed response ie epicormic growth at each cut.

 

The whole idea of leaving growth shoots and not flush cutting it to allow the tree to hold as much energy as possible also allowing the contiunation of its own system flow reducing infections and disturbances which cause stresses.

 

This is only a snap of what im saying

 

cheers