opinion on hazard tree assessment

[jomoco]

There are a few things about this funeral party that strike me as mighty peculiar.

First this talk of a spiral crack. I see the crack all right, but its only apparently limited to the bark and cambium, and it is relatively vertical not spiral to my eye at all. There is no visual indications that the heartwood or xylem structural supportwood is indeed cracked or weakened at all. This could easily be a case of bark damage sustained in the trees youth from rough handling by whoever transplanted it. It would be somewhat ironic to cut down a tree after its 30 years of diligent generation of cambial wound repair tissue sufficient to finally close the wound to weather, only to be whacked down for its remarkable ability to heal itself after being so seriously
scraped of skin in its youth.

Your assertion that the spruce in question here is 95 years old is highly questionable at best in my opinion. To my old experienced arborist eyes the tree is no more than 55 or 60 feet tall in your photo of it. My guess on it's maximum potential age is no more than 35 years old, with a very slight 10 degree lean downwind. This small degree of downwind lean is perfectly natural
and even expected in a solitary unsheltered spruce fighting the wind its whole life.

Now the thing that really doesn't click for me in my old worn out brain, is your fear of this tree failing in the western prevailing and falling on the clients house. Now your post states that the crack faces west on the tension wood side of the tree, the crack faces the camera that the picture was taken with.
So the camera is pointing due east along the path 180 degrees off the crack itself, let's assume a huge howling wind came out of the west and actually blows this very tree over to the east, to my eye that lands it on top of the little bitty deciduous trees to the east, not on the house, the tree will miss the house by a whopping 24 inches or 2 feet easy!

Are you aware that there are laws against picking on abused juveniles?

Why are you bending over backwards to rationalize killing this pubescent teen?

If you really want to do what's best for the tree and customer, deadwood the tree for a reasonable fee and assure the client that it's a healthy tree with a slight natural lean to the east and an almost completely healed old wound.

I would have no qualms about drilling a half inch inspection hole right through just the bark and cambium only to ascertain visually if the crack actually penetrates the xylem or heartwood that gives this tree its structural integrity.
New cambium tissue will cover the shallow inspection hole in it in less than two years or so. Offer this to the client to reassure both him and yourself at a modest fee along with the deadwooding.

I hope you don't feel insulted by my observations, and remember they are only the opinions of a crusty old treeman with old climbers disease.

jomoco

 

[treemandan]

There are a few things about this funeral party that strike me as mighty peculiar.

First this talk of a spiral crack. I see the crack all right, but its only apparently limited to the bark and cambium, and it is relatively vertical not spiral to my eye at all. There is no visual indications that the heartwood or xylem structural supportwood is indeed cracked or weakened at all. This could easily be a case of bark damage sustained in the trees youth from rough handling by whoever transplanted it. It would be somewhat ironic to cut down a tree after its 30 years of diligent generation of cambial wound repair tissue sufficient to finally close the wound to weather, only to be whacked down for its remarkable ability to heal itself after being so seriously
scraped of skin in its youth.

Your assertion that the spruce in question here is 95 years old is highly questionable at best in my opinion. To my old experienced arborist eyes the tree is no more than 55 or 60 feet tall in your photo of it. My guess on it's maximum potential age is no more than 35 years old, with a very slight 10 degree lean downwind. This small degree of downwind lean is perfectly natural
and even expected in a solitary unsheltered spruce fighting the wind its whole life.

Now the thing that really doesn't click for me in my old worn out brain, is your fear of this tree failing in the western prevailing and falling on the clients house. Now your post states that the crack faces west on the tension wood side of the tree, the crack faces the camera that the picture was taken with.
So the camera is pointing due east along the path 180 degrees off the crack itself, let's assume a huge howling wind came out of the west and actually blows this very tree over to the east, to my eye that lands it on top of the little bitty deciduous trees to the east, not on the house, the tree will miss the house by a whopping 24 inches or 2 feet easy!

Are you aware that there are laws against picking on abused juveniles?

Why are you bending over backwards to rationalize killing this pubescent teen?

If you really want to do what's best for the tree and customer, deadwood the tree for a reasonable fee and assure the client that it's a healthy tree with a slight natural lean to the east and an almost completely healed old wound.

I would have no qualms about drilling a half inch inspection hole right through just the bark and cambium only to ascertain visually if the crack actually penetrates the xylem or heartwood that gives this tree its structural integrity.
New cambium tissue will cover the shallow inspection hole in it in less than two years or so. Offer this to the client to reassure both him and yourself at a modest fee along with the deadwooding.

I hope you don't feel insulted by my observations, and remember they are only the opinions of a crusty old treeman with old climbers disease.

jomoco

You are right but it would be as much to prune it properly as it would to remove it. That tree is like a car labeled ' mechanics special' , if you can either afford to maintain or yoou can do it yourself than its OK.
It would really be a good job to prune it.
I figured 4 hours for 2 guys to put that tree on wheels and get it out, maybe an hour with the stump work, Hell, I 'd take the grindings.
At least that much time with poles and a top rope. Or just figure for a lift. I have done it many times. Once to a giant white pine.
I have seen enough trees like that broken out. Is it possible to be educated enough to know exact details how a tree like that is going to fall.

 

[Nailsbeats]

Is it possible to be educated enough to know exact details how a tree like that is going to fall.

Good question Dan. Answer, no. Only after the insurance claim will you know exactly how it fell.

 

[clearance]

Finally looked at the pics. No brainer, saw it down. Looks pretty easy even if you climbed it. Seems as if most of the branches can be cut and held, or cut and pushed. You could take big chunks, and fall a decent sized butt log as well. Big top, big chunks, big butt log. I say no more than two hours to strip and chunk, maybe less, weathers nice and cool, sharp 020 and off to the races. Have fun, be safe.

 

[Bigus Termitius]

Good question Dan. Answer, no. Only after the insurance claim will you know exactly how it fell.

LOL!!

Good question is right.

and good answer is left, BTW.

Greenleaf on site says it's got a good shot at hitting the house.

Guy online says no it will miss by 24 inches.

I say take her down and it won't do either, but provide a great opportunity for new life for a new tree....and no new insurance claims.

 

[Greenleaf]

Going to give it the benefit of an increment bore, and talking to the previous owner before putting a saw to it just yet. But I had figured a 4 hour job with the cleanup if it comes to taking it down.

Jomoco the tree has 20% lean, and the top is plum line over a bedroom. Just took down a similar size tree in my front yard and counted the rings and that's where 95 years is coming from.

 

[treesandsurf]

Remember try not to impose your opinions on the clients. State the facts. That is what they are looking for. Everyone's level of acceptable risk is different and balanced by different criteria. They need you to give them the facts and with those facts any decisions are theirs to make.

A voice of clarity!


jp

 

[Job Corps Tree]

Hazard tree assessment

AMF, just take it down. Plant new

 

[Greenleaf]

I definitely take the approach of letting the owners decide on the course of action for the tree based on what we know for sure and what we don't know. Cored the tree this morning and didn't find any evidence of decay. I realize that the increment bore is a tool which gives you a very small glimpse into the interior of a tree. But I am feeling that the tree is still very sound, and like Jomco pointed out it does look like a wound that has closed over fairly well. That being said I don't have to sleep under it and therefore the people who do, or the tree owners (municipality) can decide from here.

Just looked at one of my neighbors spruce trees which was a lot easier to make a decision than this. Obvious but rot with rapid dieback occuring over the year. Nice easy flop and chop..

 

[scottbaker]

My two bits =

Follow the protocol from the new ISA WCB Risk Assessor. Help the client make the management decision.

A quick test with a Resistograph will reveal the extent of the crack. IMO likely to be shallow crack. A shear crack (showing on both sides) is bigger issue.

Cracks are common in conifers and don't often lead to decay problems.

The tree has recently had two winters with very strong winds (yes?)
Windthrow unlikely or not.?..check soils depth.

Pruning seems a legitimate option to get more service from this tree. Several options offered in posts could be considered.

95 years seems like a good estimate and a good method used for basing the estimate....that's a long time in human terms. I think it is generally easier to cut a tree down than it is to use your skills to say that it is reasonable to retain. Professional liability insurance is a must for people in the risk assessment business.

I see a lot of trees cut down where an autopsy reveals that the property owner paid cash to reduce their property value by taking out a manageable tree that might take 95 years to replace.

Scott

 

[jomoco]

I definitely take the approach of letting the owners decide on the course of action for the tree based on what we know for sure and what we don't know. Cored the tree this morning and didn't find any evidence of decay. I realize that the increment bore is a tool which gives you a very small glimpse into the interior of a tree. But I am feeling that the tree is still very sound, and like Jomco pointed out it does look like a wound that has closed over fairly well. That being said I don't have to sleep under it and therefore the people who do, or the tree owners (municipality) can decide from here.

Just looked at one of my neighbors spruce trees which was a lot easier to make a decision than this. Obvious but rot with rapid dieback occuring over the year. Nice easy flop and chop..

Hey there Greenleaf, tell me, do you know exactly what species of spruce this tree is? It most certainly is not a white spruce (Picea glauca).

Sounds like you're trying to do the right thing letting your client decide its fate after listening to your test results and professional input.

Good job!

jomoco

 

[Greenleaf]

Picea engelmannii (Engelmann Spruce). They are very closely related to a white spruce.

 

[BC WetCoast]

That crack sure looks like a frost crack to me. Very common on Interior Englemann spruce.

A tree like that, using the WCB/ISA/Dunster methodology, is going to default to a high hazard. That is because the methodology overweights the size of the part that will likely fail (in this case the whole tree) and the target (the house) and underweights the probability of failure. So even if there was virtually no probability of failure, it will still rate as a high hazard. This holds for every tree that will hit a house or high use target. To me, it is a problem in the methodology.

I don't see a big risk in this tree. However, I would word my report to state that there are no indicators of root failure so a very low probablity of tree toppling. There is a higher probability of mid-stem snapping due to the presence of the crack, but you should do a couple of borings at the top of the crack to ensure there is no heart rot.

I would recommend deadwooding the tree and a 10-15% crown reduction.

I have always been taught in this type of situation to never state the tree is safe. Rather provide objective information on what you see and allow the decision maker (homeowner) to make their own informed decision. Everyone has a different tolerance of risk and will make their decisions accordingly.

To those who say this is a cop out, remember that doctors or lawyers never tell you what to do. They provide advice, alternatives and potential outcomes, the decision to do or not do something always belongs to the patient/client.

 

[Bigus Termitius]

My two bits =

Follow the protocol from the new ISA WCB Risk Assessor. Help the client make the management decision.

A quick test with a Resistograph will reveal the extent of the crack. IMO likely to be shallow crack. A shear crack (showing on both sides) is bigger issue.

Cracks are common in conifers and don't often lead to decay problems.

The tree has recently had two winters with very strong winds (yes?)
Windthrow unlikely or not.?..check soils depth.

Pruning seems a legitimate option to get more service from this tree. Several options offered in posts could be considered.

95 years seems like a good estimate and a good method used for basing the estimate....that's a long time in human terms. I think it is generally easier to cut a tree down than it is to use your skills to say that it is reasonable to retain. Professional liability insurance is a must for people in the risk assessment business.

I see a lot of trees cut down where an autopsy reveals that the property owner paid cash to reduce their property value by taking out a manageable tree that might take 95 years to replace.

Scott

Two comments for two bits.

First, if this tree were, say, in the big big back yard, then perhaps it would be considered a fair influence on greater property value. However, with the house in its very crosshairs, I beg to differ. Somebody made a comment about arborists being sort of like doctors and lawyers. I can agree to the extent that I believe they meant it, though in general I detest such a notion on general principle. Still, we need to step out of our diagnosis and desires to save trees a moment and consider the HO's perception( and safety) and those around them in general. If we are anything like doctors and lawyers in their minds, then the general perceptions are that we are just practicing arboriculture and prone to make just as many boneheaded decisions in our best interest financially and according to our idealisms.

I suppose I've said all of this to say that I can't imagine that this tree is an asset when it is so apparently a liability. If we are anything at all like doctors and lawyers, then the fact that we tinkered with it at all and said it is good increases the liability.

Second comment, Professional liability insurance? Since when do insurance companies put people back together again as good as they were? Raise the dead?

Oh, that's right they don't, they can only pay to actually fix the house itself. It's likely the house will even be better than it was when it is all said and done. That would be a wonderful outcome, perhaps even increase the property value. Splendid...if they are at Disneyworld at the time.

When I see that a house is a target, I'm not thinking about all that is replaceable and repairable and saying: "well, if, with all 'my skills,' I'm wrong(imagine that), that is what insurance is for." No, I'm thinking about the souls inside that doctors, lawyers, and arborists with snazzy insurance policies can't fix if 95 years of worthlessness and arborist arrogance comes crashing through day or night.

Surely, we aren't so in love with 'our skills' (and trees, or rather what some want us to believe about them) and puffed with pride (arrogance x ignorance) as to think that this tree is a good prospect for salvation. Are we going to justify this with shallow justifications such as property values? Our egos?

How does this compare to human value?

I'd rather wait and watch a tree grow and see my little ones grow with it than to say I had a very nice 95 year old tree aimed at the house in my front yard, but now I have neither a house, nor tree, nor my little Malorie that I had just kissed goodnight.

Forgive me, I just can't seem to wrap my brain, nor my heart around this line of thinking. Somebody help me out, if I'm off my lawn chair that I had made from the last home wrecking tree that never had a shot once my feet hit the ground on site.

Scott, I’m not picking on you personally, you are just going along with a certain ebb tide within the industry. It is to a couple of things you said that mirror or mimic a certain attitude that I see that I want to draw closer to the light.

I know that I’ve gone beyond two comments, but it is a couple main points that I want to finish addressing.

“I think it is generally easier to cut a tree down than it is to use your skills to say that it is reasonable to retain. Professional liability insurance is a must for people in the risk assessment business.”

Look at this statement. First of all, it is easier, most no brainers are. It is easier for me, the HO and family, the insurance companies, the neighborhood, etc.

So now then, this gentle gab at those that wouldn’t rather waste their skills and time on a 95 year old home wrecker is very revealing…to me anyway. Is this about doing the right thing, or about your skills…or in other words….about you…and your ideals? Seems to me your comment about insurance is right on the money in so many ways.

If it is so reasonable with all of your skills, then why the need for insurance. Because you and many others much smarter realize even with all of your skills it is a crap shoot, wherein if you lose someone else is very likely to loose bigger…..perhaps even unbearably so.

But hey, maybe you’re thinking you tried to save one more tree, which is so much more important to the greater good, right? Are these homes and endangered souls acceptable losses in the grand scheme of things?

I apologize, maybe I’m presumptuous with respect to your ideals, but so many marry their skills to their ideals, and thus their actions suspect. As a result, I can’t see anyone so bent on saving such a tree unless they were hornswoggled into some save the planet one tree at a time poppycock

If this doesn’t apply to you Scott, disregard, or rather…duck…there are so many others that I can’t hardly miss.

Lastly, why don’t so many so concerned apply their skills and go save trees like this that are countless out in the middle of nowhere where the casualties of their skills are NOT homes and homeowners, sons and daughters, dogs, cats, and goldfish and the like?

You guessed it…..there isn’t any money in it. So then we have a new dimension. A bizarre love triangle, if you will. The skills are married to the ideals with the wallet as the maid and the mistress.

A removal only pays once?

 

[jomoco]

Picea engelmannii (Engelmann Spruce). They are very closely related to a white spruce.

Thanks Greenleaf, that allowed me to do a little in depth research on Engelman spruce and their characteristics done by Robert R. Alexander.

http://www.na.fs.fed.us/pubs/silvics_manual/Volume_1/picea/engelmannii.htm

After reading this in depth study, I feel I owe you an apology for accusing you of not giving an accurate age on this slow growing species of spruce, you were right and I should have kept my opinions on the subject limited to species of trees I have more direct knowledge of, again my apologies.


I highly suggest you read Mr. Alexander's in depth report on the characteristics of the Engelman spruce as I did. I can only apologize and say let the funeral proceedings begin.

Sorry Mr. 95 year old Engelman, but your chances of living to your senior age of 5-600 years old have become very very slim.

Thanks for prodding me to educate myself a bit more on high altitude trees and their survival characteristics.

Nothing more pitiful than an old fool thinking his learning ever stops or his ability to make a fool of himself ever diminishes.

jomoco

 

[beowulf343]

Bigus Termitius, can't rep you but that was one of the best posts i've read on here in a long time. My feelings exactly.

 

[Stumpcutter1]

I wouldn't want a freakin' tall spruce like that leaning toward my house without the crack.Took too many off houses over the years.
Put it this way what would you do if you tell them its safe,prune it,it cracks in half,hits the house and hurts or kills someone?

 

[Greenleaf]

Thanks for that link Jomoco. After working in the forest industry for many years around here and seeing more than enough spruce uproot following the opening up of stands, I've had a good amount of respect for the ones left standing in town.

I submitted my report and outlined very clearly some of the facts we do know, and even clearer some of the uncertainty and potential consequences. The decision to remove or not should not be the owness of the assessor, however we definitely influence the decision to a large extent. Conducting assessments for the municipality in the past, when I hold any reservations about a tree they automatically default to removing the risk. Therefore I like to be really thorough and present as many facts, possibilities and uncertainties as I can find and let them make the call. Either way I gain work, and stand to gain more work when I show honesty and integrity in what I know and don't know. Personal and professional ethics are a big part in what we do. Will I tell a client that I think their trees are fine and don't need any work when I just drove 25 minutes out of my way to look at them, you bet. Because being honest might not line your pockets today, but in the long run I believe it will create a much more sustainable network of loyal clients, especially when you live in a small community and word of mouth is everything.

 

[brandon]

remove

definite removal soft wood tree that close to a house/ bad lean and a crack. think about for a second then remove it.

 

[treeseer]

I submitted my report and outlined very clearly some of the facts we do know, and even clearer some of the uncertainty and potential consequences. The decision to remove or not should not be the ones of the assessor,

That sounds responsible. I hope that you pointed out the lack of defects. Most of the calls here for removal are coming not from risk assessors but from removal specialists/salesmen, so they are worth what they cost.


:monkey: :spam: