Crown reduction

[Mountain man]

But why lateral and not height?

I'm not a big fan of reductions either and I tend too agree with leave or fell but Joe public doesn't really understand that

 

[B][/b]I wouldrather see a properly reduce tree than no tree at all.

 

As would anyone, except of course the Arb-nazis.

[Scott Walker]

It's how they respond afterwards that's the problem.

If a tree is very lightly reduced it responds so much better, but then what was the point of the reduction?

 

Trees seemed to get on ok for millions of years before Steve Bullman, Paul Banister and John Shutler invented 'reductions' in a pub beer garden in 1974.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

 

Totally agree with this.

[Paul Cleaver]

But why lateral and not height?

I'm not a big fan of reductions either and I tend too agree with leave or fell but Joe public doesn't really understand that

 

I would rather see a properly reduce tree than no tree at all.

 

why reduce a Lombardy - you can hardly reduce them without them rotting at the pruning point, causing more problems later.

 

When mature the but often becomes hollow too - they live fast die young

[Ian C]

why reduce a Lombardy - you can hardly reduce them without them rotting at the pruning point, causing more problems later.

 

When mature the but often becomes hollow too - they live fast die young

 

Yes I agree and pops are bad but I'm not talking about hat racking I'm talking about say a 2m reduction on an oak, beech etc, why reduce the sides but not in height?

[Paul Cleaver]

Yes I agree and pops are bad but I'm not talking about hat racking I'm talking about say a 2m reduction on an oak, beech etc, why reduce the sides but not in height?

 

oh I see - yes I agree with you on this

[Chris at eden]

Why? Can't really see the problem as long as it's done right as per bs3998.

 

I just don't think they look as good once reduced. No matter how well they are done, I can't see the point. Reduce only if there is a need. Lateral reductions to clear buildings but why height? equally I don't see the point in reducing laterally for the sake of it.

 

I processed an application to reduce lateral branch growth to clear an adjacent building by 10m a few years ago. It already had about 5m so I refused it. It went to PINS and they also refused it. It would have looked ridiculous.

 

I know TO's who don't even allow thinning. I think that is well over the top to be fair. Not damaging to the tree so why refuse.

[Ian C]

And yet it is part of the AAAC assessment and in BS3998, no wonder there is confusion .

[Chris at eden]

And yet it is part of the AAAC assessment and in BS3998, no wonder there is confusion .

 

No mate, I'm not saying it shouldn't be done. Just that there should be a genuine reason for it. For example to reduce the load on a compression fork. Lifting and thinning have less impact on the tree visually and the tree responds better in my opinion. I agree with it being in both those areas cos if its gonna be done it should be done properly.

[Ian C]

No mate, I'm not saying it shouldn't be done. Just that there should be a genuine reason for it. For example to reduce the load on a compression fork. Lifting and thinning have less impact on the tree visually and the tree responds better in my opinion. I agree with it being in both those areas cos if its gonna be done it should be done properly.

 

I agree with you Chris and I don't do alot of it, more lateral and lifts but leeds council won't entertain it full stop yet you have too show 2 for arb ac accreditation :what:

[MattyF]

Completely disagree, thinning is bad it's what trees do when they die !

Plus most of the time it means the tree just gets lions tailed because people can't be bothered to do it properly anyway ,so there is more wind sail leverage and it only encourages week epicormic regrowth and your removing any suitable future reduction points.

I'm all for taking 2 meters or what ever out of branch tips to allow better wind sail and leverage... I can't remember the figures but it reduces a lot of pressure just a light reduction.

I remember years ago on Arb talk there was a discussion about a large sweet chestnut and what to do with it.

I would of reduced it ... The vast majority of people said leave it , OP never had to do any thing because it tore apart in the next Storm.. Would of been interesting to see if it had stayed up if reduced.