Is my Alder a hazard?

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

RickP

ArboristSite Lurker
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Location
Washington
I have an Alder in my backyard about 70' tall. The truck is over 3' in diameter. About 6' up the trunk it forks and about 2' up ea fork it forks again.

So basically I have a huge Alder that looks like a candleabra.

It seems to be really healthy,but doesn't look very safe. To my utrained eyes it seems ready to split in half.

How bad are Alders in this condition?
 
Alder

You sure its an alder? Alders in the northeast on ly grow to be less then 20 ft, but who knows just wanted to clarify
 
RickP

You really need to get a local arborist to check it out, plus we dont even have pics here. There's many factors to consider.
 
Yep, if it's an alder, it's a weed - ripper down! ;) Just kidding, what Ekka said, get someone to check it. Problem with alder is that 60 - 70 years is an old one. Very susceptible to decay - weak compartmentalizers - fast growers, first thing to come up on a cleared lot, at least here.
 
I'd like to have an Arborist take a look at it,but I can't afford to have them look at it and then afford to have it taken down if needed. I called a couple Arborists yesterday and the average price for a "consult" was almost $200.

Add that to the $5-600 to have it removed and a couple hundred for chipping the stump and I'm at $1000.

I do have a picture of the tree if anyone can help me get it posted.
 
I'd like to have an Arborist take a look at it,but I can't afford to have them look at it and then afford to have it taken down if needed. I called a couple Arborists yesterday and the average price for a "consult" was almost $200.

Add that to the $5-600 to have it removed and a couple hundred for chipping the stump and I'm at $1000.

I do have a picture of the tree if anyone can help me get it posted.

Send them to me in an email, and I'll try to get them posted for you.
 
Alder Picture for RickP

attachment.php
 
I'd like to have an Arborist take a look at it,but I can't afford to have them look at it and then afford to have it taken down if needed. I called a couple Arborists yesterday and the average price for a "consult" was almost $200.
:mad: I hate to hear this. Such a high minimum charge is not justifiable imo. I've been doing it for 15+ years and I charge about half that.

I see nothing wrong with the bottom of the tree; a little bark inclusion does not a hazard make. It'd be nice to see the whole tree though.
 
If you are within say 15mins drive of me I charge $88 minimum which includes 1 hour.

It still is hard to tell from the pics as we see no canopy, environment and targets etc. To assess correctly we need the BIG PICTURE.

Ring around some more, just make sure the person is qualified and reputable otherwise you may get advice that helps feed a chipper.
 
just make sure the person is qualified and reputable otherwise you may get advice that helps feed a chipper.

This is a problem here. Some municipalities have stated that tree assessors and the companies doing the work can't be the same, at least when the trees in question fall under their authority.
 
Hmmm

They do that occasionally here. In fact to be a member of the Australian Consulting Arborists you need to be not only qualified but peer reviewed and interogated and not be affiliated or owner of tree removal business.

However, it's rare that it's stipulated the consultant must be of that association.

This is why, from a clients perspective, that even a verbal report requires some degree of fact based evidence. Some guy standing their scratching his head saying "yeah mate, she stuffed, look at those forks" whilst he kicks the trunk like the tire of a used car is not what you want.
 
They do that occasionally here. In fact to be a member of the Australian Consulting Arborists you need to be not only qualified but peer reviewed and interogated and not be affiliated or owner of tree removal business.

Interesting.

This is why, from a clients perspective, that even a verbal report requires some degree of fact based evidence. Some guy standing their scratching his head saying "yeah mate, she stuffed, look at those forks" whilst he kicks the trunk like the tire of a used car is not what you want.

Thankfully that's becoming much less of a problem here. I get asked almost daily for my papers and references.
 
They do that occasionally here. In fact to be a member of the Australian Consulting Arborists you need to be not only qualified but peer reviewed and interogated and not be affiliated or owner of tree removal business.
That's insane. How else does someone get qualified to assess trees, other than by working on them? Books only get you so far.

Here in the usa, some ASCA members claim that their advice is superior if they have no affiliations. That sounds like they are saying that you can't be an objective consultant if you are a working arborist. :sucks:
 
Here you go, read it for yourself. Be a real boys club this one. :hmm3grin2orange:

From

http://www.iaca.org.au/pages/constitution.htm

RULES OF MEMBERSHIP

4.0 MEMBERSHIP

4.1 Membership will be by invitation from the executive after a nomination has been formally made in writing to the executive by a member and seconded by a member of the executive once the application has been received, and the applicant admitted after the criteria for membership has been satisfied. A member will abide by the rules of membership and the code of ethics.

5.0 CRITERIA FOR MEMBERSHIP

5.1 Membership will be restricted to individuals who are practitioners involved in an Arboricultural Consultancy practice as the majority of their business activity. This allows for the undertaking or supervision of scientific testing or research and associated reporting on trees, and related tree management and tree protection practices, e.g. the installation of tree protection zones on construction sites, or root investigation excavation, and where no situation of a conflict of interest could arise that would bias or unduly influence the provision of their consultancy service.
5.2 Further to 5.1 and 5.3, eligibility for membership is excluded to Arboriculturists involved in the undertaking of tree pruning or removal works, or the management, or ownership of such businesses, due to the obvious potential for ethical conflict between these activities and the consultancy process.
5.3 Further to 5.1 and 5.2, the minimum qualification will be a Diploma of Horticulture (Arboriculture) as recognised by the Australian Qualification Framework (AQF).

5.4 Further to 5.1, 5.2, 5.3 and 5.5, the applicant will be required to have and maintain Professional Indemnity insurance with the minimum requirements for such insurance as determined by the Institute.
5.5 The Sunset Clause, further to the requirements of 5.1, 5.2 and 5.4, and taken from the date of the formation of the Start-up Committee. Membership in the first year of operation will be open to competent practitioners with a diverse range of qualifications, other than that in 5.3, where their work is known to and recognised by other members. Where a dispute arises members of the Start-up Committee with the minimum qualification will form an initial Extra-admissions Criteria Committee, for the duration of the first year or until the first executive elections are conducted, with disputes referred to that committee.
 
"Membership will be restricted to...where no situation of a conflict of interest could arise"

This is impossible. Conflict can arise out of many scenarios. If this were enforced strictly, their membership would have to be Zero.
 
I have an Alder in my backyard about 70' tall. The truck is over 3' in diameter. About 6' up the trunk it forks and about 2' up ea fork it forks again.

So basically I have a huge Alder that looks like a candleabra.

It seems to be really healthy,but doesn't look very safe. To my utrained eyes it seems ready to split in half.

How bad are Alders in this condition?

Rick, show us the big picture. We need canopy, trunk, buttress flare pictures as well as anything below this tree that may be damaged from structure failure. Give the history of care for the tree.

And one of these, very kind, arborist just might hazard a helpful guess.
 
Rick, show us the big picture. We need canopy, trunk, buttress flare pictures as well as anything below this tree that may be damaged from structure failure. Give the history of care for the tree.

And one of these, very kind, arborist just might hazard a helpful guess.
Right, just senmd them to PA Plumber. As for "hazarding" a guess, I dunno...one might be offered tho:jester:
 

Latest posts

Back
Top