Where to make cut on this willow?

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

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

JimL

Addicted to ArboristSite
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
1,250
Reaction score
24
Location
midwest
Im pretty sure this is a green weeping willow. Limb split bad in the wind recently.
Just not sure where to make the final cut, this almost looks like a codom, limb was close in size to the main stem.
 
Hey! Don't you guys remember school days? Giving the answer isn't enough - you have to show your work!

WHY would you cut there? Why not higher? Lower?

Give the ignoramuses some help, here! :D
 
I would go with the yellow line. Any collar formation probably wouldn't be damaged there. Compartmentalization time might be increased, but a wound that size may never close. This may not matter if the boundaries set up well. Some people think that angle would catch water, but i think trees can handle that.
 
If it's like this willow in my yard, you can't kill it. The first pic is a year after an ice storm destroyed it. You can tell where I cut it at the trunk, thinking it was doomed. The second pic is later that year. The last one I just took out my bedroom window.
 
Mike Maas said:
If you really wanted to know, you could wait a year and come back and see where the living tissue is and then cut just past it.

Leaving a stub, even for just a year, may give decay a head start. What if a collar did not form in that time, would you wait another year? 3? 5? :confused:
The stub will rot and the rot will be in the trunk faster than if the correct cut was made first. I'd look/feel for a bulge somewhere around the red line and cut to it.

Given the speed this genus rots and the size of wound and lack of collar, I would experiment with a sealer. What would we have to lose? But this is not the NEWTS thread
 
Hi Guy, we haven't gone at it for a while, so let's have at it.
I'm surprised to read you saying "What if a collar did not form in that time", you being a stickler for proper semantics and all.
Here is a definition of a collar, from Tree Dictionary.com:

"Branch Collar - The branch collar and trunk collar are collectively called the branch collar. Where branches meet the trunks of most trees, there will be a series of collars. Each year two new collars will form. One collar is a trunk collar and the other a collar which is made up of branch tissues. Collectively we call them the branch collar. These collars are what support the astronomical weight of the branch (cantilever). Note, when looking at a tree from the outside, the two collars are often spoken of as the branch collar, e.g., “do not remove branch collars when pruning” "

There are two problems with a branch collar forming once the limb is removed. First, once a branch is removed, it is gone and won't be forming anymore annual collars to interlock with the trunk collar. From that point on there is some callus that forms around the wound, which turns to wound wood, and eventually is just covered up by normal wood, but there isn't a collar.
The second problem is this is clearly a co dominant stem, not a branch, so there is no collar. If there is no collar to start with, and no collar can form, you statement makes no sense.
I suspect what you meant, is there might be a problem finding the line of demarcation between living and dead tissue. On a healthy looking, fast growing tree, after one year, you are suggesting that you won't be able tell living from dead?:dizzy:


Now to the silly advancing decay argument.
You suggest the the branch tissue, now dead because the majority of the branch was removed, will be an open route for decay into the tree, and that the dead stub will be food for fungus allowing them to build up populations and vigor, thereby increasing their ability to attack CODIT walls.
I say this is simply unfounded.
Consider my statement that "most of the limb was removed". What did i mean by that? Well, even if you flush cut, there's still tissue from the limb in the trunk. It is cone shaped, and in a lot of cases runs all the way to the pith.
Here's a link to a drawing and a picture from Treedictionary.com:
DIAGRAM%20PULL%20APART.jpg


collars-insidebirch.jpg

It's clear that when you cut off a limb, your not removing it all. The other thing that is well understood by most arborists, is that covering a wound whether it is with paint, or if new wood grows over it, it does not slow the process of decay! Shigo even suggested that it actually speeds decay.
If that stub, in one years time will somehow "give the decay a head start", then it follows that the center of that cone shaped area inside the trunk, is also giving decay a head start.
Are you suggesting that hollowing out that cone would slow decay?
No it would not.
You, and others here, would do well to wrap their heads around the theory of CODIT. All that left over wood from a removed branch is abandoned. the tree doesn't care about it. CODIT describes how the tree walls off the decay. Nowhere in Shigos CODIT theory, is callus growing over and covering a wound even mentioned.
Wound closure is not part of CODIT.
You are asking your self, how can this tree survive this injury? Rot will surely go into the tree and quickly spread up and down the other stem!
Don't worry. Trees add new wood every year. This outer layer is where all the good stuff happens in a tree. Because of this a tree can be hollow and still live on.
When injured CODIT tells us there will be a wall 4. The wall is set up between the tree and any new wood that is added from that day forward.
In time, everything you see in the picture may be decayed away, but the tree can still be alive, strong, and healthy.
Although Willow decays fast, it grows fast. By the time that wood decays to the point it has lost it's strength, the tree will have grown in circumference enough that it won't matter, and wall 4 will stop the decay from advancing into the new wood.
You may be asking, "Then how do some trees rot out and die or break?"
It's simple. Young healthy vigorous trees set up good CODIT walls and out grow decay problems. Old, stressed, over trimmed, trees that underwent un-needed crown reductions, trees that get spiked on trims, and diseased trees, do not.
 
Mike Maas said:
Hi Guy, we haven't gone at it for a while, so let's have at it.
I'm surprised to read you saying "What if a collar did not form in that time", you being a stickler for proper semantics and all.
... there is some callus that forms around the wound, which turns to wound wood, and eventually is just covered up by normal wood, but there isn't a collar.
ok i stand semantically corrected, substitute "callus".

On a healthy looking, fast growing tree, after one year, you are suggesting that you won't be able tell living from dead?
no guarantee of that. Your argument that stubs are ok and will not advance decay make no sense to me--inoculum builds up-- but it's a nice day and we're going to work.
 
Here's a drawing of where the branch wood really ends. Is there really an appreciable amount more beyond the lines originally drawn and whats down inside the tree?
What, more fungus on a 3 foot long branch than a 2.5 foot long branch (the part down in the tree)?
Enough that you think it will now be able to bust through wall 4?
Let me think about that for a minute...uh...No.


attachment.php
 
JimL - some can of worms you opened up, huh? These pissing matches can be awfully informative though.

I would've made a final cut probably just beyond the red line not quite halfway to the yellow. On something like that, after the other consideration of branch collars, I try to keep the wound as small as possible. Even if it appears stub-like you're still better off than flushing it.

Mike's idear of waiting a year is pretty interesting - you'd learn a bit about your willow without doing serious damage, in my humble opinion. However, just don't forget it. We come across staking and guying that should've only been left for one growing season years later that causes serious injury or death to trees because a year seems to be too long for some people's attention span.

Good luck.
 
tawilson said:
So I was right, it doesn't matter what you do, it'll be fine?

If that furry stump thingy in your yard is your basis for 'fine' then go for it. Every day can be a "Do as you feel festival."


And Clarence, expertitus is everywhere. Every profession. Every race. Every gender, age. Every subject that gets debated. You're guilty of it too, albeit less windy than the others.

No reason to pee on the fire just yet.
 
tawilson said:
If it's like this willow in my yard, you can't kill it. The first pic is a year after an ice storm destroyed it. You can tell where I cut it at the trunk, thinking it was doomed. The second pic is later that year. The last one I just took out my bedroom window.

You t.a., how about measuring the rot in those hacked stubs? we could have a pool, call it March Madness. How many years until the rot goes to the ground and how many years until that mess splits apart?

Ice storms damage neglected trees a lot more than cared-for trees. You're likely to lose yours way ahead of its time.

Yes it makes a difference.
 
treeseer,
It was the ice storm of January, 1998 that wiped out much of the northeast and a chunk of Canada. I was w/o power for 21 days. Anyways,as I said, it damaged the willow so bad I figured it would die, and as I didn't like the messy thing I'd finish cutting it down or make a totem pole out of it, I didn't care. But when I saw how it resprouted I figured I'd let it go. But you've got me thinking, and if the tree isn't going to last much longer, maybe this spring I should go dig something up and plant beside it to get established for when it goes. I've got a backhoe and 70 acres of woods and always on the lookout for trees to transplant. I've got a couple of maples flagged now, but I think an oak would be nice there. Thanks for the wakeup call.
 
Tawlison.
Even perfectly cared for Willows are prone to limb breakage, and they are very messy trees. With this in mind, the spot it's growing, so close to the house and driveway, is not ideal.
At this point in time it looks like a nice little tree, but I worry that in time it will outgrow its location and need either reduction or removal. Which wouldn't be so bad, except now you'll have a decaying trunk, which may or may not be weakened to the point that it is a problem.
I like to suggest to people in your position, to go ahead and plant the new, more desireable tree closeby, and then when it gets established and gets to a nice size, remove the Willow.
I do not have the dooms day outlook that some folks have about a damaged tree. Sometimes they can recover just fine. If you really like the Willow, closely monitor the decay, water it often, prune it regularly, and enjoy it.
 
Thanks for the advice, Mike. I don't like the willow for the reasons you mentioned. I figured anything that wanted to live as much as that deserved the right, so I let it do it's thing. I'll leave it and plant a replacement towards the middle of the yard. It will be partially shaded by the willow, and in a place where we can water it when needed, so that's why I'm thinking oak. Sorry to hijack Jimls' thread, but he got lots of answers. The main reason I brought it up was that I was impressed with this willows ability to recover from serious trauma.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top