Another reduction!

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

As you say you had to take off more than you would have liked = "best of a bad job" (NOT to infer it's a bad job just quite 'heavy', partic. on the r'/hand stem for some reason.)

 

As a matter of interest, or not as the case may be , if this was presented on an ArbAC assessment I'd request to see something 'lighter' BUT I would pass it as a second example as long as there's adequate justification (remember that's what BS3998 requires of us.)

 

Hope these comments to be useful.

 

Cheers

Paul

[ukminch]

Just out of interest, what would you have said the target size of reduction was on that Paul?

 

R

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

Hi 'R', not quite sure I've got your question right (apologies if not) but ideally, and to better accord with BS3998, not to exceed 100mm dia. (sect. 7.7.1 Note 1) and, ideally, 50mm dia. (Table 1) ...but acknowledging this is 'guidance and recommendations' and not a specification.

 

My main point here was that the reduction to the right hand stem, as viewed, appears 'heavier' than the rest of the crown, which is quite heavy anyway.

 

Hope this helps.

Paul

[ukminch]

Sort of, I guess I'm wondering from your view how much has come off in size, ie 2 metres, 4 metres and in old money what percentage you would have thought.

 

It can be quite hard to get feedback at times as permission gets given, job gets done, customer is happy (or not) and it gets forgotten about, never really knowing what the tree officer that gave permission thinks of the work if that makes sense?

 

Rob

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

Sort of, I guess I'm wondering from your view how much has come off in size, ie 2 metres, 4 metres and in old money what percentage you would have thought.

 

It can be quite hard to get feedback at times as permission gets given, job gets done, customer is happy (or not) and it gets forgotten about, never really knowing what the tree officer that gave permission thinks of the work if that makes sense?

 

Rob

 

Difficult to say just from photo's but perhaps 3m generally and 4-5m on that right hand stem.

 

%...never was any good, maybe 30-40.

 

Not saying the work is not compliant in terms of target pruning, it generally looks fine, but just excessive in parts.

 

Cheers..

Paul

[edwood]

Hi Paul, yes the right hand stem did get more taken off it than the rest, well spotted, this was due to the the main limb of it being compromised in 3 places, a large wound on it created by the inclusion of another branch going about a quarter of the way into the stem, a small cavity created by a lost limb, and a wound where a delivery wagon had whacked it. The tree had also put out a large amount of reaction wood below the limb to counter the lever arm affect. Having discussed these issues with the client they decided they would want as much weight as possible off said limb due to it being right over their drive.

 

Like I said it was compromise:)

 

 

Also I'd say that 3m would be allot more than was actually taken off the tree, 2 meters at most for the majority of it. Would you agree Minch? You chipped them:)

 

I drove past it today and it dosnt look too bad, you can't even see the spike marks;)

 

 

 

 

Sent using Arbtalk Mobile App

[Barry_Skyland]

Looks good Ed, well done mate.

[edwood]

Cheers Barry!

 

 

Sent using Arbtalk Mobile App

[ukminch]

Yer that's why I was interested, in the photos (and real life) it looks like a lot more's come off than actually did.