To fracture prune, or................

Open grown Mature multi stemmed Sessile Oak.

Lost a third of It's canopy to a very weak basal union (possibly Rabbit grazing at infancy)

Once a Site and Tree assesment has been carried out, we don't nescessarily fell these as par the course.

Have decided on a sail reduction using, here we go..............fractured retrenchment.

Finished shot to be posted at a later date.

Feel free to discuss, disgust, disrespect.......whatever is your want

 

Feel free to discuss, disgust, disrespect.......whatever is your want

I liked what you'd done on the Fulham oaks, but was wondering about your reasoning for using FP on this tree.

FP seemed to be about stimulating vigorous top growth - is this appropriate?

Could you not reduce the sail effect by just raising the canopy?

Also it looks like it's in a sheltered position, so is the sail effect going to be as important as trying to work out what kind of structural changes the limb loss will have on the tree and then removing limbs to help balance the weight on the remaining stem?

Or even introducing some form of support to take the place of the lost limb.

FP seemed to be about stimulating vigorous top growth - is this appropriate?

 

Could you not reduce the sail effect by just raising the canopy?

 

QUOTE]

 

 

The site is more open than the picture suggests.

 

Raising the canopy would I fear exasperate, (due to wind force) the dynamics being aplied to an already weakened anchorage.

 

Aesthetics come in to play with the descision to use fractures within this semi wood pasture environment.

 

But I do believe the technique will stimuate the existing internal foliage to establish a new canopy structure.

Any additional epicormic growth, stimulated at the fractured tips will be put under pressure from the natural affect of Oak mildew, Tortrix and Gypsy moth feeding.

 

 

 

.

Have decided on a sale reduction using, here we go..............fractured retrenchment.

 

How does that work then David?

You have reduced the amount of trees you have put up for SALE.

Sorry mate, had to do it, I'll behave myself now

Hopefully these next shots will generate a bit more input, in the way of debate,

and a little less in the way of jest, Mr lofthouse

http://www.arborecology.co.uk/resources/coronetcuts_naturalfracture.PDF

.

Hopefully these next shots will generate a bit more input, in the way of debate,

and a little less in the way of jest, Mr lofthouse

Ok Dave, looks like a lot of hard work there, trouble is, all the best firewood is still stood up:aetsch:

Seriously Dave, i am really interested in practices like this.

Out of interest, what is the feedback you get from this type of work, ie does anyone ever pass comment or ask why you are doing it?

Also, do you get any types of grants, perhaps from other departments within the LA, or any nature groups?

Man, ya'll must have money to blow spending it on a tree like that one.

What was the reason why, again? Where are the targets that would "require" that "trimming" be done?

Im afraid Im going to have to move over to the 'that looks ghash' side of the fence.

I AM a fan of fracture pruning... say where there are two or three limbs that are posing a risk or naturally failing and can be winched off to good and natural effect.

Im afraid, that to my mind, that tree now looks incredibly unnatural. It looks like its been 'reduced' and cut untidily. Dare I say it, like some rare cowboy with a sense of shape did it.

I dont like 'roundover' reductions as they look completely unnatural, but to then fracture the end of the branches to try and combat this IMO looks even worse.

so for me, it's failed to tick the aesthetic box, it's also failed to tick the mimicking nature box, and the only one I have left is the 'best for the tree' box... and tbh, I cant see that being the case either.

Sorry