An interesting observation

[BC WetCoast]

Our crew just finished removing a series of large poplars. Sorry no pics. And we are still trying to figure out which species of poplar (it's not in any of the books we have in the office so we are checking personal libraries).

They were getting too large for the site, so it was decided to remove them several years ago, but in the meantime replacement trees were planted about 5 years ago and are now established.

Anyway, these trees were spiked and topped about 25 years ago (by the boss). In looking at the stems, there was no rot at any of the spur marks and little rot at the topping cuts. There was a little root and butt rot.

My point being that sometimes I think we as arborists overstate the effect of spiking or other minor damages that trees suffer. Not that I condone it, let's just not overhype it.

I read on another thread how For the Action has been lambasted for wanting to drill a tree to check for rot. Reading the thread you would think that drilling a small hole would cause the tree to fall over tomorrow. I think it's time to put things into perspective, and not let your lack of respects for FTA, cloud your own logic.

 

[Norwayclimber]

The point is, as I see it, is that as a professional arborist you are obliged to do what is know as the best practice for trees. If we give up working with the best practices, just because some other way of working is cheaper and more efficient, the practice of arboriculture will stop evolving and everybody with a saw and some spikes can call themselves an arborist. Now, is that good for the trees, for the business of those that have taken the effort to study and for the society in general? (topped and unsafe trees)

As for drilling trees, sure, it may not cause big damage. (But what if you drilled in an already stressed tree, that might make a difference) But there are better methods available. Why should we go for substandard options? If you don't have the equipment, hire someone that does.

How would you think of going to the doctor with a crushed foot, and he amputates your leg. Shows out hes not really trained as a surgeon, so he didn't know how to do surgery and restore your foot, besides, amputation is easy and cheap! And people don't die of it....

 

[capetrees]

If you want to put a human comparison to it, sure, anyone can die from an infection, depending on what the infection is and how healthy the person was when the infection started. Same for the tree, was it healthy when they spiked the tree and did it survive. Not every cut to a person or tree is going to invite infection. But that comparison, humans to trees, is a stretch.

If drilling a tree for whatever purpose is bad for the tree, why then would a maple sugar maker drill/tap the very trees he is making his money from, potentially infecting them and thus killing the tree and his livelyhood? And they do this year after year, multiple holes per year. And believe me, these guys are not arborists using the most sterile of tools. I disagree that every cut to a tree will kill it or even stress it that much. It does happen but not every time.

 

[outofmytree]

Trees are as varied as other living things. Some can handle damage more readily than others. Just because they can doesnt mean however that they should. If you are going to create a rule surely it is better to err on the side of caution.

Lets be honest. If you cannot prune most urban trees without spikes you should probably be flipping burgers at Mcdonalds.



Actually whilst we are talking about observations, a friend of mine who was a seed collector for many years, had the oppurtunity to PM a number of trees he had spiked up. In these Eucalyptus regnans he found decay around almost every spike wound and in some cases it was so advanced the patches of rot had actually joined up. There was less than 10 years between climbing and felling in this case.

I don't doubt the OP. I just feel that it is better to say no spikes at all than spikes only on species X, Y and Z in the hope that these species will be identified correctly and that folks wont just say "stuff it" and spike em all.

 

[jefflovstrom]

The deal with FTA, is he is experimenting with clients trees posing as a professional, he could not even identify a myroporum, so if this is a plea for sympathy, just say so. He does not know how a tree re-acts to a wound. Even a prune cut is a wound.
Jeff

 

[BC WetCoast]

The point is, as I see it, is that as a professional arborist you are obliged to do what is know as the best practice for trees. If we give up working with the best practices, just because some other way of working is cheaper and more efficient, the practice of arboriculture will stop evolving and everybody with a saw and some spikes can call themselves an arborist. Now, is that good for the trees, for the business of those that have taken the effort to study and for the society in general? (topped and unsafe trees)

As for drilling trees, sure, it may not cause big damage. (But what if you drilled in an already stressed tree, that might make a difference) But there are better methods available. Why should we go for substandard options? If you don't have the equipment, hire someone that does.

How would you think of going to the doctor with a crushed foot, and he amputates your leg. Shows out hes not really trained as a surgeon, so he didn't know how to do surgery and restore your foot, besides, amputation is easy and cheap! And people don't die of it....

I agree, what was accepted practice 25 years ago isn't practiced today. My comment was more around how the tree reacted and how I think many arborists overreact when observing wound damage.

Better methods, like resistograph, exist to check trees for rot, but often it will be the "business" end of the business that will prevent it's use. If a Bartlett office needed one and didn't have it, do you think they would go and hire Davey to check the tree? Not freakin likely.

 

[treemandan]

The deal with FTA, is he is experimenting with clients trees posing as a professional, he could not even identify a myroporum, so if this is a plea for sympathy, just say so. He does not know how a tree re-acts to a wound. Even a prune cut is a wound.
Jeff

That is what is. And spiking live trees is for suckers. So some trees might not be hurt, still, its for suckers. But Hell, if I was gonna top some poplars I just might want my spikes.

 

[outofmytree]

That is what is. And spiking live trees is for suckers. So some trees might not be hurt, still, its for suckers.

BC I love the way you opened this subject up for discussion but I gotta go with my man Dan for the mostest accurate description of my opinion. Spikes is for suckers! Rep da Dan please, me outta bullets!

 

[ropensaddle]

That is what is. And spiking live trees is for suckers. So some trees might not be hurt, still, its for suckers. But Hell, if I was gonna top some poplars I just might want my spikes.

What about live removals sucker:hmm3grin2orange:

 

[EdenT]

They're just removals, they just haven't realized they're dead yet!:hmm3grin2orange:

 

[tree md]