I have two evergreen tree/shrubs up next to my house that have grown rather large(20 ft. tall or better). Can I cut them back(top) to get them off my house and to a more managable height? In Kentucky when is the earliest or best time to do this? I have attached a photo. They are on each side of my house. Thanks for any info.
Trimming evergreen trees.
- Thread starter Da Man
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
Kneejerk Bombas
ArboristSite King
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2001
- Messages
- 36,971
- Reaction score
- 9,980
I would start with the big one and shear it down as much as you can without things getting too woody looking. Then do the other one to match. Shoot for the gutter as a maximum height.
If it looks bad, you can wait until it fills back in, or cut it down. It's just starting to wreck your house.
If you time the trimming for just before spring, it will fill in faster with the spring flush of growth, less time looking woody.
Trees planted like this are kind of temporary. You can shear them or prune at them once or twice a year, but eventually, unless you really stay at it, they get too big and need replacing.
If it looks bad, you can wait until it fills back in, or cut it down. It's just starting to wreck your house.
If you time the trimming for just before spring, it will fill in faster with the spring flush of growth, less time looking woody.
Trees planted like this are kind of temporary. You can shear them or prune at them once or twice a year, but eventually, unless you really stay at it, they get too big and need replacing.
tshanefreeman
ArboristSite Operative
A question for Mike.............
You talked about shooting for the gutter. Do you not think that this is a little excessive considering the amount of foliage/top that will have to be removed through shearing and actual cutting back of the leader? Wouldn't you be worried about destroying the pyramidal structure of the tree? Inorder to keep the original shape/structure, the majority of the green foliage will be removed through shearing, leaving only chlorotic yellow foliage or dead/bare branches!
From what I gather from the picture, I would say that you could shear to the point of providing clearance between the shingles and siding, but to go as far as the gutter, I would rather suggest removal and planting something better suited to the area. I do agree that once you start a maintenance program, such as shearing, you will have to keep it up................and that such a fix is only temporary. Sooner or later, you the homeowner, will have to decide when the time has come.
You talked about shooting for the gutter. Do you not think that this is a little excessive considering the amount of foliage/top that will have to be removed through shearing and actual cutting back of the leader? Wouldn't you be worried about destroying the pyramidal structure of the tree? Inorder to keep the original shape/structure, the majority of the green foliage will be removed through shearing, leaving only chlorotic yellow foliage or dead/bare branches!
From what I gather from the picture, I would say that you could shear to the point of providing clearance between the shingles and siding, but to go as far as the gutter, I would rather suggest removal and planting something better suited to the area. I do agree that once you start a maintenance program, such as shearing, you will have to keep it up................and that such a fix is only temporary. Sooner or later, you the homeowner, will have to decide when the time has come.
sonny
ArboristSite Guru
both good sugestions , I would keep in mind its looks as if the one tree/bush is shadding the front pretty well. great shade for them summer months on the porch with a glass of tea. & will also
save on utility bills. But it does look from this angle to close to the home.
save on utility bills. But it does look from this angle to close to the home.
John Paul Sanborn
Above average climber
I shear it to a good conical shape and hand prune it away from the soffit. You need ood airflow around the woodwork so you don't get decay, or abrasion of the paint. It can grow over the gutters, but having a knotch in the top for clearance would be best.
Older houses are more tolerant of moisture because theop wood is older, denser material. Even the newer cedars are less decay resistant because they have fewer growthrings per inche then just a few decades ago.
Older houses are more tolerant of moisture because theop wood is older, denser material. Even the newer cedars are less decay resistant because they have fewer growthrings per inche then just a few decades ago.
Jay Banks
ArboristSite Operative
The labor of shearing and re-shearing/pruning will not make this tree any less of a headache for the owner.
Find someone to transplant the tree at the proper time of the year (when most trees are dormant). The cost of transplanting versus yearly pruning (on a good size ladder too) will be your determining factors.
If you decide to remove the tree think long and hard as to its replacement.
Find someone to transplant the tree at the proper time of the year (when most trees are dormant). The cost of transplanting versus yearly pruning (on a good size ladder too) will be your determining factors.
If you decide to remove the tree think long and hard as to its replacement.
Kneejerk Bombas
ArboristSite King
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2001
- Messages
- 36,971
- Reaction score
- 9,980
Re: A question for Mike.............
If the object were to preserve a prized specimen tree, I would not have recommended the radical crown reduction. The purpose of foundation plantings is to complement the house. Tall shrubs or trees at the corners are meant to soften the corners, and to frame the house, if you will. These trees are no longer doing there intended job, in fact, they are doing the opposite. They are covering the house, and worse dwarfing it, not to mention the structural damage they must be, or soon will be causing.
I can't tell what type of shrub that even is, but I often encounter the size problem here with yews, aborvitae, and junipers. I look at the tree and ask my client or my self: If this tree was not here, would you pay to have it here? In this case the answer is: No, it's too big. It's value is less than $0. I do a radical trim, enough to get it smaller than the ideal size, and ask the question again.
In some cases, the top can be cut back with just one or two cuts to the main stems. This will leave a hole at the top which quickly fills in.
Consider the mature size of a tree before planting and you'll save many headaches.
If the object were to preserve a prized specimen tree, I would not have recommended the radical crown reduction. The purpose of foundation plantings is to complement the house. Tall shrubs or trees at the corners are meant to soften the corners, and to frame the house, if you will. These trees are no longer doing there intended job, in fact, they are doing the opposite. They are covering the house, and worse dwarfing it, not to mention the structural damage they must be, or soon will be causing.
I can't tell what type of shrub that even is, but I often encounter the size problem here with yews, aborvitae, and junipers. I look at the tree and ask my client or my self: If this tree was not here, would you pay to have it here? In this case the answer is: No, it's too big. It's value is less than $0. I do a radical trim, enough to get it smaller than the ideal size, and ask the question again.
In some cases, the top can be cut back with just one or two cuts to the main stems. This will leave a hole at the top which quickly fills in.
Consider the mature size of a tree before planting and you'll save many headaches.
Shearing is a lot of work for something that is only going to be a problem again and again.
Remove and replace with something that doesn't need annual work... like fosters or nellie stevens holly, photina, sweetbay magnolia, cherry laurel( all evergreen or semi evergren)
You could also use smaller deciduous trees like ornamental magnolias, smoketree, fringetree, serviceberry
Those will get a little over your gutter but thats it
COME ON PEOPLE>>> THE RIGHT TREE FOR THE RIGHT PLACE !!
Remove and replace with something that doesn't need annual work... like fosters or nellie stevens holly, photina, sweetbay magnolia, cherry laurel( all evergreen or semi evergren)
You could also use smaller deciduous trees like ornamental magnolias, smoketree, fringetree, serviceberry
Those will get a little over your gutter but thats it
COME ON PEOPLE>>> THE RIGHT TREE FOR THE RIGHT PLACE !!
John Paul Sanborn
Above average climber
I'm a dwarf conifer fan for use in small landscapes. So many people around here want to get the little Taxus and keep them little. Spending more on the outset on a very slow growing spruce or pine would work much better.
If the person has the plant and all they have to invest is an hours work twice a year then why cut it down?
If the person has the plant and all they have to invest is an hours work twice a year then why cut it down?
Dan F
ArboristSite Operative
From what I can tell, it appears to be a yew. It also appears (quite clearly) that the other yews (aka- green concrete [I don't care much for yews - too overused]) are sheared heavily throughout the year. It also looks like the tall one at the corner has been sheared at some point in time, at least to a height that was attainable for someone on the ground.
My advice would be to go ahead and shear it, if you like it there, and you feel comfortable on a 12-16' ladder (I wouldn't). Make sure it is off of the house and out of the gutter. If you don't really like it there, cut it down. I would guess that you wouldn't care for the results of transplanting, because a shrub that size is probably into the house and has a bare backside. Unless that backside was put towards a neighbor.
To be honest, if it was my house, *and I could afford it*, all of the shrubs would be ripped out and I would start over with different plants. But that is *my* opinion. And it is kind of my situation as well; I have yews along my front porch. Just bought the house 9 months ago and have no money to rip those out and start over, so I understand if that is the case for you too!
Dan
My advice would be to go ahead and shear it, if you like it there, and you feel comfortable on a 12-16' ladder (I wouldn't). Make sure it is off of the house and out of the gutter. If you don't really like it there, cut it down. I would guess that you wouldn't care for the results of transplanting, because a shrub that size is probably into the house and has a bare backside. Unless that backside was put towards a neighbor.
To be honest, if it was my house, *and I could afford it*, all of the shrubs would be ripped out and I would start over with different plants. But that is *my* opinion. And it is kind of my situation as well; I have yews along my front porch. Just bought the house 9 months ago and have no money to rip those out and start over, so I understand if that is the case for you too!
Dan
DadF
ArboristSite Operative
Yes it's really the Dad to DanF. I am in the process now of reducing the size of an upright yew for one of my clients. It was also six feet over the eaves and they did not want it removed. Basically it is about a three year process. First reduce the top to the desired height by removing the leader(I know this leaves a big hole at the top but also lets sunlight in to interior branches) from the road it will look odd at the top but won't look dead! At the same time also reduce the exterior by HAND PRUNING deep into the interior, just enough to also let some light in but not enough to to be noticeable from the road. The second year is more deep HAND PRUNING all around the tree. By this time you should notice some regeneration greening in the interior of the of the tree. The third year should let you remove what is left of the original exterior and have the tree back to the size wanted. After that, yearly deep pruning will keep the tree at the size needed.
Labor intensive yes - labor for keeping an existing evergreen that the homeowner likes-priceless. Still we're only talking an hour/year to do this.
I also hate to do this on my first post but I really wish that some of you would learn how to spell. It reflects poorly on our profession and professionalism.
Labor intensive yes - labor for keeping an existing evergreen that the homeowner likes-priceless. Still we're only talking an hour/year to do this.
I also hate to do this on my first post but I really wish that some of you would learn how to spell. It reflects poorly on our profession and professionalism.
Bob Wulkowicz
ArboristSite Operative
I respect your extended time taken to help the tree and the client, but I can't agree with the practices and their explanations.
Seems to me in the above photo, it would take about the same amount of time to trench out at an angle toward the sidewalk intersection, deep and wide enough to literally slide the tree over, keeping the same orientation and doing no pruning.
Rock it up on a sheet of plastic tarp, and pull/push it right into place.
The new distance should be far enough to not let the natural spread of the tree affect the house. I'd also do some additional planting to continue the concept of softening. the corners
Let the clients participate. A visit by an arborist doesn't have to only be sawing. If you plant more trees and greenery, who'll they remember for a call-back?
If your only tool is a saw, all problems are logs--or topping.
Professionalism is best seen by our actions and practices, not our spelling. I don't necessarily do a better job in a tree because I can spell it.
Spell checkers keep us from thinking and improving our memory. To me, it's a bad swap of opportunities lost for the appearance of being educated.
Bob Wulkowcz
Kneejerk Bombas
ArboristSite King
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2001
- Messages
- 36,971
- Reaction score
- 9,980
Bob, I was thinking about the damage to the roof and overhang.
Interesting idea to move the whole tree, wouldn't that be a big project? That's assuming underground utilities would allow it. And what about planting a tree with a mature size that is too large for the site? Just moving the tree out a little only postpones the same problem, see the sidewalk?
In spite of my criticism, the idea is one I need to keep in mind when I run across this problem again, thanks.
As far as my spelling, it's prefect, my keyboard is to small for my big fingers. Yeah, yeah, that's it.
Interesting idea to move the whole tree, wouldn't that be a big project? That's assuming underground utilities would allow it. And what about planting a tree with a mature size that is too large for the site? Just moving the tree out a little only postpones the same problem, see the sidewalk?
In spite of my criticism, the idea is one I need to keep in mind when I run across this problem again, thanks.
As far as my spelling, it's prefect, my keyboard is to small for my big fingers. Yeah, yeah, that's it.
Bob Wulkowicz
ArboristSite Operative
<i>Originally posted by Mike Maas
Bob, I was thinking about the damage to the roof and overhang.
</i>
I thought that might be, but as you know, I'm prickly about the mythical drivel over trees and foundations. I agree it's a concern for the roof and overhang, and that helped propel me toward an alternative.
<i>
Interesting idea to move the whole tree, wouldn't that be a big project? That's assuming underground utilities would allow it. And what about planting a tree with a mature size that is too large for the site? Just moving the tree out a little only postpones the same problem, see the sidewalk?</i>
Look at the picture again. The only real effort I see is that I'd cut down at the dripline, roll back the sod at the same width to the new hole if its too heavy and needs a slot, and dig there. Ahead of time, utilities always, in my experience, come out and locate their pipes for free. If it's OK, that's the new hole.
<IMG SRC="http://www.arboristsite.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=72713">
I'd make my severing cuts easily at the drip line I said, but I could reach in and tie up the branches to make a smaller ball. ( However, the more roots I take, the better.) Then, I'd rock the tree to see how it acts. This is all touchy-feely stuff. If the planned ball seems to stay together and I can lever it a bit up with shovels to get a sense of its weight, I might just tip it to get my plastic underneath (Visquene, or other tough plastic), leave the sod alone, and raise it to slide ove on the grass rather than make a slot. Big deal; you're paid by the hour.
If you don't like shovels, like "I don't do windows." That's your business--or actually the lack of your business. I'm a blue collar guy, so I think about what I turn down as beneath my station.
Additionally, why butcher a tree or cut it down and waste the time it's spent in growing at the site? That's the creepy disposable society crap carried on into innocent creatures who don't look at all to me like a tin can or a bottle.
I will guarantee that the sidewalk with that house is the cheapest construction possible, and I assume you're worried about it being uplifted, but if the tree stays healthy, it'll be more of a problem of branch encroachment. The landscape design is the same cheapest no-brainer as well.
My answer? If the wee beast is up; drag it somewhere else that's better suited. Keep the same orientation to the sun.
As I look at it again, It's a mini-project for you; and a great story for the client at barbeques. You saved a tree; the customer's delighted and the saw stayed in the truck. (My general goal about saws anyway, to help people understand the value of alternatives.)
<i>
In spite of my criticism, the idea is one I need to keep in mind when I run across this problem again, thanks.
As far as my spelling, it's prefect, my keyboard is to small for my big fingers. Yeah, yeah, that's it. </i>
I didn't notice any criticism. Just two old friends thinkin' aloud. Good to be back in touch.
And as to your fingers being too big for the keyboard, how come they ain't too big for your nose...?
Bob Wulkowicz
Kneejerk Bombas
ArboristSite King
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2001
- Messages
- 36,971
- Reaction score
- 9,980
Bob, are you aware of the size of this tree? Attached below, I have done very accurate measurements using digital imaging. Please check my math.
To be cost effective, this tree would require some type of heavy machinery. A ball this size would weigh tons, it's 2.5 boys wide, for crying out loud.
To be cost effective, this tree would require some type of heavy machinery. A ball this size would weigh tons, it's 2.5 boys wide, for crying out loud.
Bob Wulkowicz
ArboristSite Operative
<hr>
Jeez, Mike.
All I hear these days is whining. If everyone's so worried about this, cut the tree in half at the gutter where everyone's talking about. Move the bottom tree and restaple the top back together.
What's there nothin' in the ISA brochures about transplanting a tree with a chainsaw?
I figured it would take two and a half boys to move it.
Dan F
ArboristSite Operative
Bob,
I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you on the transplanting issue....
First off, when it is transplanted, the side of the shrub that is against the house will be bare and will be for some time. It WON'T look good!
Secondly, look at the cost of transplanting versus cutting down and replacing with something else.
Cutting down and replacement (say replacement with a viburnum for example):
Viburnum cost: ~$50
1 yard mulch cost:~$30
3 man hours to complete removal and replacement: $120
Total cost is approximately $200, and that is probably a high figure.
Transplanting:
You are looking at a minimum of 3 guys for at least 2 hours, probably 3 hours more realistically. Or 2 guys and a skidsteer, which should figure in as another man when estimating. I'm going to say with 2 guys and a skidsteer, it *might* take 2 hours, if they are good and have done it before and know what they are doing. So, 6 man hours (remember the machine) equals $240 at a minimum. But, I still think 3 hours is more realistic for a total realistic cost of $360. Plus the aforementioned bare spot in the back. Not to mention no one in their right mind would garantee the shrub after it has been transplanted (at least I wouldn't!).
Yes, I have transplanted bigger things like this before. I know how long it takes. There is a cost/benefit analysis that you have to do to determine whether you think you should do it. If it was a Japanese maple that was that tall (or even half that tall), I would be right there with you on moving it. It would be worth moving a tree that would be worth $1000-$1500 -- I've done it! (In the middle of July too! But that was a case where it had to be done in order for construction/demolition to continue. It was at a $2+ million house, so the homeowners could afford it.)
And lastly, I'm not trying to take a cheap shot here, but simply trying to make a point--- the fact that you are advocating "sliding it over on plastic" such as visquene or other heavy plastic tells me you haven't done much in the way of transplanting. Around here you use burlap, and I think that is pretty much standard for the industry.
I still think pruning/shearing would be the cheapest and easiest way to go.
And Mike- I love your "very accurate measurements using digital imaging"!
Dan
I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you on the transplanting issue....
First off, when it is transplanted, the side of the shrub that is against the house will be bare and will be for some time. It WON'T look good!
Secondly, look at the cost of transplanting versus cutting down and replacing with something else.
Cutting down and replacement (say replacement with a viburnum for example):
Viburnum cost: ~$50
1 yard mulch cost:~$30
3 man hours to complete removal and replacement: $120
Total cost is approximately $200, and that is probably a high figure.
Transplanting:
You are looking at a minimum of 3 guys for at least 2 hours, probably 3 hours more realistically. Or 2 guys and a skidsteer, which should figure in as another man when estimating. I'm going to say with 2 guys and a skidsteer, it *might* take 2 hours, if they are good and have done it before and know what they are doing. So, 6 man hours (remember the machine) equals $240 at a minimum. But, I still think 3 hours is more realistic for a total realistic cost of $360. Plus the aforementioned bare spot in the back. Not to mention no one in their right mind would garantee the shrub after it has been transplanted (at least I wouldn't!).
Yes, I have transplanted bigger things like this before. I know how long it takes. There is a cost/benefit analysis that you have to do to determine whether you think you should do it. If it was a Japanese maple that was that tall (or even half that tall), I would be right there with you on moving it. It would be worth moving a tree that would be worth $1000-$1500 -- I've done it! (In the middle of July too! But that was a case where it had to be done in order for construction/demolition to continue. It was at a $2+ million house, so the homeowners could afford it.)
And lastly, I'm not trying to take a cheap shot here, but simply trying to make a point--- the fact that you are advocating "sliding it over on plastic" such as visquene or other heavy plastic tells me you haven't done much in the way of transplanting. Around here you use burlap, and I think that is pretty much standard for the industry.
I still think pruning/shearing would be the cheapest and easiest way to go.
And Mike- I love your "very accurate measurements using digital imaging"!
Dan
Bob Wulkowicz
ArboristSite Operative
Similar threads
