This may be a stupid question...

[silvafox]

Is it or is it not a fact that crown reduction by 10-30% has the effect of halting root growth below ground?

 

I ask because this is what a tree officer told my client.

 

In this case we are discussing a medium-large size ash. I think the canopy would stand 15% reduction.

 

The roots are pushing against a retaining wall and the tree is self set.

[MasterBlaster]

I wonder how that study could actually be done scientifically.

[Dean Lofthouse]

Not entirely sure.

 

You should quite safely be able to crown reduce 15% at any time.

 

If you are talking 30% which is the established limit certain trees can take without causing trauma, you would need to do once the leaves have done their job and paid back. ie end of autumn, winter

 

I would have thought root growth or any other type of growth would only be affected through trauma, which would, according to Shigo, be over 30%

 

What about root pruning, is it a situation where that could be done

[silvafox]

Not really pecon as the tree is abutted to the wall. From above the root plate would appear semi-circular. The wall is 15 feet high and the roots grow donwards behind it and the wall is increasingly bulging out.

[Dean Lofthouse]

Sounds more like it needs to come down.

 

As I'm sure you are fully aware, even if the roots did stop growing it would be only a very short term fix, same for root pruning, they act the same as a branch when pruned.

 

It seems to have run out of room.

 

A Tree officer told one of my customers last week that the tree I had just described as hazardous wasn't at all and that this type of tree was brittle by nature and that, although it was bad practice, it could be retopped.

 

The Tree was a large Ash that had a 35ft hanger, that it had dropped off in the winds, the branch had ripped away from the point of a previous topping wound, one of several all over the tree.

 

I recommended that the tree come down simply because if we did as the tree officer recommended, it would put responsibility on the owner to keep up with the maintenance of the tree and what if the said owner moved, would the new owners then keep upto the maintenance.

 

I cross sectioned the joints between the topping cuts and the new growth, to show the customer how weak they were.

 

Some tree officers should don climbing gear and a closer look before they make their comments.

 

Sometimes they don't make sense at all

[bob]

 

A Tree officer told one of my customers last week that the tree I had just described as hazardous wasn't at all and that this type of tree was brittle by nature and that, although it was bad practice, it could be retopped.

 

The Tree was a large Ash that had a 35ft hanger, that it had dropped off in the winds, the branch had ripped away from the point of a previous topping wound, one of several all over the tree.

 

Sometimes they don't make sense at all

 

I see what your saying but if were not carefull all ash trees would have to be removed along with any tree that has been topped or pollarded or had ever had a hanging branch

i would always be carefull about making a definitive comment that a tree is dangerous as the owner will always be worried

to some people all trees are dangerous

[skyhuck]

I see what your saying but if were not carefull all ash trees would have to be removed along with any tree that has been topped or pollarded or had ever had a hanging branch

i would always be carefull about making a definitive comment that a tree is dangerous as the owner will always be worried

to some people all trees are dangerous

 

Well put!

[Dean Lofthouse]

i would always be carefull about making a definitive comment that a tree is dangerous as the owner will always be worried

to some people all trees are dangerous

 

I know what you are saying Bob, But I am always careful and only say a tree is dangerous when I have inspected it closely. That's why the owner contacted a Tree Surgeon for his opinion after all and not the local plumber.

 

This will be the second occasion where I have gone strongly against a Tree officers decision. I recommended 6 Sycamore be taken down, it was refused and pooed by the tree officer. It ended up at appeal and it came out that another tree officer had recommended the trees come down 5 years earlier and that they were hazardous

 

This one in question is because I described the whole "tree" as dangerous and not the weak "branch unions", which is a play on words, he knew exactly what I meant.

 

An Ash is probably one of the worst trees to "top" and once topped that tree is IMO condemded to be eventually, taken down.

 

I climbed the tree and inspected it closely, I even photographed the weak unions one of which is below.

 

What pees me off is a Tree officer then comes along and poos what you have told your customer by looking at the tree from a distance. Had that tree officer donned his harness and inspected it a little more closely, I would have had much more respect for his comment.

 

You decide whether this branch union is hazardous or has the potentail to fail in windy conditions, the tree was full of these .

[bob]

theres nowt wrong with that

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

only joking:wave:

[Dean Lofthouse]

theres nowt wrong with that

 

only joking:wave:

 

Thought you were a Tree Officers Son for a moment there Bob