how do i reduce this...

[Andymacp]

All depends how much the client wants it reduced

[Aunt Maud]

Just wondering if it's grown straight up because of those great big green things hemming it in on either side.

 

I like a pollard and it's crying out for the treatment. What ever you do it'll probably end up going straight up anyway.

[M Large Forestry Equipment]

This conversation is developing a theme and I agree. Re-pollarding looks like the best option.

"Fell and replace" should be for a reason, not just an easy way out (not that I'm suggesting anything Couldyajust). But the client does need to know what a pollard will look like and potential work needed in future. That might not suit them.

[Stubby]

This conversation is developing a theme and I agree. Re-pollarding looks like the best option.

"Fell and replace" should be for a reason, not just an easy way out (not that I'm suggesting anything Couldyajust). But the client does need to know what a pollard will look like and potential work needed in future. That might not suit them.

 

Point out to them the old wounds / new growth and say it will be like that .

[josharb87]

Re-top/pollard and maintain/manage appropriately

 

Be a shame to loose that stem and all the biodiversity it likely houses

 

Nice bit of firewood in the pollard stems for the client now, and again in the future when its re-topped....growing their own firewood!

[gooseflight]

Ash responds well to re-pollarding.

[treesrus]

ash is not big on biodiversity. it looks too close to the house which is presumably why the customer wants at least 50% gone. pollarding is o.k. if done on a regular basis, but left too long can lead to structural weakness'. it's not a particularly lovely tree, so i'm with the 'fell and replace with something more suitable' brigade.

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

There's a terminology issue here in regards to customer understanding and industry standards, namely in relation to the term pollarding / re-pollarding.

 

BS3998 gives quite clear guidance on what qualifies as pollarding, at least in the first instance:

 

"If the stem has attained a diameter of more than 50 mm, but less than

about 200 mm at 2 m to 3 m height, pollarding may still be initiated."

 

Hence, on many occasions you will be 'topping', albeit in a professional manner of course, and not pollarding.

 

However such terminology to your customer may be off-putting and do you a dis-service BUT it is important you understand when pollarding aligns with BS3998 and when it doesn't. This may seem a tad pedantic, and academic as the outcome will be anyway, BUT it is as per the industry standard.

 

Perhaps give the customer a range of options here with the pro's n con's of each...and the cost differentials of course

 

Sorry, just being very 'AA Teccie...ISH here!'

 

Cheers..

Paul

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

Setting aside the relative pro's & cons of the pollard or fell / replace options, are we tying ourselves up in knots over the pollard issue?

 

Granted, 3998 refers to a tree within a certain size range for original pollard, but, I just looked back at the recent pollard thread http://arbtalk.co.uk/forum/general-chat/95131-pollards-they-out-vogue-uk.html and looking at some of the fine examples there, it's left me wondering, can the 3998 size range be applied to individual vertical stems from an existing single main stem?

 

Is there a reason why this might not be appropriate other than the industry self flagellation over "topping?"

[Aunt Maud]

Out of interest, if you take a look at the video from The Basque country that I posted on the other thread, it shows that the individual pollard shoots/stems are quite large when they cut them off.