Can This Live Oak be Saved?

[clearance]

I'll call it a good thing.

But the reality is that the 'cert' is a very basic test and does not even come close

The truth, how freaking true that is, I love it when people can admit it really is no garauntee of competence. When in doubt.......

 

[Rigger]

OTG BOSTON

A'h a "Tree Warden" back in the UK we called em "TPO" officers, (SOME of them make a nice snack!), and I get real hungry when their on the menu, especialy when covered in ISA Cert dressing.

OTG BOSTON> I must admit that I was trying to stir the pot.
Well don't "TRY" ..... not with me anyhow.

OTG BOSTON> It gets under my skin when non-certified guys try to claim, they don't need it or want it.
Well it get's under MY skin when certified guy's try to claim that I DO need it, should get it, truth is I DON'T need it and DON'T want it!!!

OTG BOSTON> Get it first then you can call it whatever you want.
H'uh... Give them my time and $$$'s first then open my eye's.

OTG BOSTON> You know so much about trees but you won't take the time to pass a simple certification exam??
What the hell for.... It's just a trade union, for what it's worth you push it and I'll pull it, in my op. it ain't worth the paper it's written on. I suspect you are in a position that dishes out contract work and no doubt you stipulate that the bid is only open to certified arborists....right.
So in effect your saying that the little 65year old lady and the fourteen year old kids that are cert. arb. can bid on your contract but a non cert. person like myself can't..... get real.
I have often wondered how long it will be before a local authority gets plonked with a trade discrimination suit.

OTG BOSTON> You keep it old school.....................I'll keep it real.
Well that's fine.......as long as you know what real is!!!!

OTG BOSTON> I guess we'll have to wait to hear back from our friend to see of he put up an erector set, or tried to correct the problem through judicious pruning.
Well how about a little of both? is that not an option you consider? Obviosly your mind is not open enough.


NOW I suggest we both let it go and walk away from this, but if you wish to continue stirring the pot I feel it would be better to start another thread OR take it private. I am sure we are both going to get ticketed by the cyber police anyway.

To all others:
I am relatively new here on these forums and it seems I have jumped right into the muck, I do come over as a salty old grouch, rough, gruff and tough, but in reality I am as soft as a baby's bottom. I appologize to all who are offended, however it does make interesting reading to watch two individuals stand by their conviction.

Have a nice interesting day.

 

[treeseer]

H'uh... Give them my time and $$$'s

$125 and three hours; much less than three really, depending on your expertise.

I suspect you are in a position that dishes out contract work and no doubt you stipulate that the bid is only open to certified arborists....right.

It's not always unethical to bid on work that you consult on. If all others who make the grade can also bid, that may be fair. The city of Raleigh requires certification, and there are dozens nearby who are eligible to bid. not a closed shop by any means.

Well how about a little of both? is that not an option you consider? Obviosly your mind is not open enough.

So far you've accused OTG of fraud and closed-mindedness. Seems like a good place to stop. I suspect OTG thought it goes without saying that pruning should always be considered in the cabling process

in reality I am as soft as a baby's bottom.

I did not need to know that. :fart:

 

[Rigger]

treeseer

treeseer> The city of Raleigh requires certification, and there are dozens nearby who are eligible to bid. not a closed shop by any means.
Sorry I must dissagree, once the term certified/certification is used it becomes a closed shop to all those NOT certified does it not?
We all know that the certification required is that of the ISA, so in effect the city of Raleigh will ONLY except bids from ISA certified Members.... correct?
That's a closed Shop!!!!! by anyones deffinition!!

treeseer> So far you've accused OTG of fraud and closed-mindedness.
Would you mind pointing out to me where you feel I have accused OTG of fraud. Please read my wording carefully before answering.

Let me make it clear, I have no problem with ISA members in general, in fact one of my former employees is at the top in the UK ISA. I have many collegues that are and many that are not members, just don't preach it to me, why is it that so many cert. arb's. look down on those who choose not to join.
Can't you see that the ISA is trying to unionize a whole Industry with a meaningless certificate as bait. So for me to bid on a contract in Raleigh I would have to Join the ISA and get certified! H'mmm I would rather put in my $125 and three hours toward educating the city of Raleigh to the facts of their certification stipulation.

OK "meaningless" maybe debatable.

Yes I agree it does seem like a good place to stop!

 

[OTG BOSTON]

Obviously I touched on a good subject. I don't care either way what you do professionally. I do what works for me.

I am very open-minded to new and unproven techniques, and I am always up for a descussion to come up with the best solution.

If your gonna try and make a snack outta me better bring some friends.

Actually forget about the Certification try hooked on phonics.

Cheers!

 

[treeseer]

the ISA is trying to unionize a whole Industry with a meaningless certificate as bait. So for me to bid on a contract in Raleigh I would have to Join the ISA and get certified!
OK "meaningless" maybe debatable.

there is meaning to the test; ask lumberjack or others who have recently passed it. Thank you for catching your error.

One more: You do not have to be an ISA member to be certified.

Fireaxman, let us know how it goes, ok? Thanks for posting the pics and all.

 

[Treeman14]

I have to reiterate my objection to pruning this tree in order to "lighten" the load. I believe this is a short-sighted, ill-conceived attempt to correct a non-existent problem. This tree was damaged by a one-time, extraordinary event (presumably an unusually high gust of wind) and has been standing on its own for well over six months now. This talk of "drastic reduction" and the implied urgency is appalling.

Install the cables and rods as a supplemental support system. Good.

But removing living tissue and leaves(food factories) will only serve to starve the tree and hasten its demise. :bang:

 

[Fireaxman]

I have to reiterate my objection to pruning this tree in order to "lighten" the load. I believe this is a short-sighted, ill-conceived attempt to correct a non-existent problem. This tree was damaged by a one-time, extraordinary event (presumably an unusually high gust of wind) and has been standing on its own for well over six months now. This talk of "drastic reduction" and the implied urgency is appalling.

Install the cables and rods as a supplemental support system. Good.

But removing living tissue and leaves(food factories) will only serve to starve the tree and hasten its demise.

Thanks, Treeman, for your advice. It's good advice, well considered, I have not forgotten it. Your advice is certainly tempering my tampering. But while the original damage was done by Katrina, the crack opened up another 1/2 inch before I did any pruning from the fairly common winds of a normal spring thunderstorm. There is so much weight against the split that I could not pull it back together with about 1000 lbs of pull in a 3 part line. I have to think some judicious pruning is necessary. But I won't cut it "where [my] knees are". A compromise is in order.

...it seems to me that you are indicisive, easily persueded, agrees with everything said, and basically taking on somthing you shouldn't.:

Nope. I have decided to try and save this tree (against some advice) and I am investing my time at no charge to do it. Clearance will not find me "easily persueded" to do otherwise, even though it would be a lot easier to just put it on the ground than to try and save it. Clearance proposed an analogy of a dog hit by a car. Aside from the homeowner's emotional attachment (which is well worth considering), I can replace even a well trained dog in about 12 months to 2 years. This tree would take over 150 years (I am guessing) to replace. That alone makes it worth a day or two of work, since it poses little risk to human safety. If I fail, the homeowner is out about $450 for cabling equipment. I am out a few hours for messing around with cabling. The pruning would have had to be done for safe removal anyway.

"... basically taking on something shouldn't" ? Maybe. That's why this is in the "Arborist 101" thread and not in the "Commercial" thread. But I expect to grow through challenge. And I am doing my homework.

... and your dillying around with $5 non invasive bungy cords, and whacking off major sections.:

No. Treeseer's comment about $5.00 "BMP's" referred to the ISA Best Management Practices for Cabling brochure, which I have studied carefully, and which by the way now cost $7. The "$5 non invasive bungy cords" you mistakenly believe we were refering to are actually $432.60 worth of High Molecular Weight Polyethylene (HMWPe) fiber rope with a tensile strength of 20,000 lbs. and a couple of similarly rated support slings with anti-abrasion covers. You can find the details in the '06 Sherrill catalog page 94. I am informed by Tom Duffy at Sherrill that the strength of that HMWPe exceeds the strength of the steel cable previously favored for cable installations by professional arborists.

...Logic must tell you that no matter what you do up top it all sits on a major basal fracture that WILL deteriate over time.:

I understand, and the homeowner has been informed, that the cabling is not a permanent fix, and that the cables will have to be maintained, and that another Katrina would very likely bring all our efforts to naught. The homeowner told me "If there is a chance we can just keep it together for my lifetime I would be very grateful". I think she is maybe between 55 and 60. If we can get 5 or 10 more years of shade and beauty out of the tree I'll figure my time well spent. Actually, from what I am learning on this about what can and cannot be done, and the pleasure of climbing around in a grand old tree, and the fellowship of some good country people, I'm content regardless of the outcome.

 

[Fireaxman]

By the way, you will find me pretty quick to agree to suggestions from TreeSpyder, treeseer, Okietreedude, Skwerl, John Paul Sanborn, and a few others because I have been studying their posts for about a year now and they have won my confidence. The men who worked for me on production platforms offshore for 25 years would have found it amusing that I have become so "easily persueded" in my retirement. But I made a good career and a comfortable retirement out of being able to recognize and take good advice.

OTG and Rigger - when good advisors disagree, it's particularly interesting. I usually look for the solution somewhere in between their arguments. I think by the very nature of debate we tend to extremes. So Thanks for your arguments. I AM listening.

 

[clearance]

I will not forget the time we went to clean up and finally cut down a poplar city tree that some arborist had cabled years before. I almost chucked a top into the chipper before I saw the eye and piece of broken cable. If you cable a compromised tree thats all for you, but like you say Fireman, it will have to be maintained for its life. How are the future owners of the home to know this? One day these trees will have to be dealt with by someone, perhaps a big nasty suprise will lie in wait for them, I wonder. In the city of Surrey, BC, city arborists get treeguys to make "wildlife trees", good idea, these trees provide a home for bugs, that birds eat, its all good. But over time these man made snags need to be cut down because some of them are leaning towards houses, trails and playing fields. However they seem to have lost all track and count of these potentially fatal trees. People come and go, a tree that was stripped up 40', topped and girdled to make the "wildlife tree" back in '89 is forgotten now. So with cabled trees, the cables that hold the pos together are likely to be forgotten, they can rust, stress fracture etc. oh, well. Anyone of you cabling advocates care to educate me as to how this is unlikely?

 

[Treeman14]

Natmp

The North American Tree Monitoring Program.

"NATMP is a program that mails scheduled notification to property owners as a reminder to get their tree(s) with mechanical systems installed (lightning protection or support), inspected by an experienced or certified arborist. The American National Standards Institiute (ANSI) A300 standard suggests periodic inspection by an experienced professional to check for such things as tree and cable integrity, excessive tension, improper positioning and abnormal wear. Contracting for such inspection is the tree owners responsibility and will be at their expense unless otherwise stated in writing..."

This program provides periodic notification to the owner for 12 years.

The forms are available from Sherrill.

Clearance, you're comparing a poplar to a live oak?

 

[clearance]

Thats great for 12 years I guess, after that? Like I said earlier somebody or some insurance co will be paying again. Never compared an oak to a poplar, poplars are weak trees, but some arborist cabled it anyways, thats arborists for you. If it needs to be cabled it needs to be cut down, by "dealing" with it by cabling it you are just putting off the end for a while longer. Whatever, you get paid to cable it, someone else gets paid to buck it off the roof in chunks in a few years, its all good. Thats what it is really about, keeping p.o.s. trees around for years, so you can bill and bill. Job preservation, you first, not the customer.

 

[Treeman14]

Thats great for 12 years I guess, after that? Like I said earlier somebody or some insurance co will be paying again. Never compared an oak to a poplar, poplars are weak trees, but some arborist cabled it anyways, thats arborists for you. If it needs to be cabled it needs to be cut down, by "dealing" with it by cabling it you are just putting off the end for a while longer. Whatever, you get paid to cable it, someone else gets paid to buck it off the roof in chunks in a few years, its all good. Thats what it is really about, keeping p.o.s. trees around for years, so you can bill and bill. Job preservation, you first, not the customer.

May I suggest you try therapy. You've got some serious problems that you need to deal with. I'm sure you'll interpret that as a personal attack, but I'm genuinely concerned for your welfare. Nobody should go through life being so cynical. Do you have any friends?

If you actually READ his posts, he's doing this work for cost, NOT to make money but to help the tree and the owner and possibly to learn something too.

 

[clearance]

I have read the mans posts, I offered a worthwhile alternative. In regards to therapy, after a tree kills someone when it should have been cut down, do you think the person who was negligent should get some therapy? Do you even see my point of view? I have had people thank me for cutting down trees that scared them. I have seen trees on houses a few times, trees that anyone but a retard (or some ISA arborists) would have cut down first. I have been working for a city that employs ISA arborists and went to cut down trees that posed no threat for them while people were begging us to cut down the obviuos hazard trees that were not on the list. I am cynical of the incompetence I see out there, the "save the p.o.s. no matter what" crowd that make some of the decisions. I am happy of the work I do now, preventing trees from blowing down into creeks, I am doing a good thing, in a good place, no treehuggers, no ISA people around. The advice to get therapy/you need help is an old hat tactic to change the subject and deflect the truth, nice try, I advise you to quit scamming people and start removing more trees instead of saving them.

 

[trevmcrev]

Thats what it is really about, keeping p.o.s. trees around for years, so you can bill and bill. Job preservation, you first, not the customer.

Clearance, i see where your coming from, and often i will advise a customer than when removal is inevitable within a few years to do it now, so they can replant now and have something on its way in the time that they would have hung on to some decrepid old tree.

But is not as black & white as you suggest in terms of "you first, not the customer" There are plenty of customers out there that truly LOVE thier trees and will happily spend whatever they have to to keep that tree for 1, a few, 5 or mabye 10 years longer.

Trev

 

[treeseer]

"I have to reiterate my objection to pruning this tree in order to "lighten" the load. I believe this is a short-sighted, ill-conceived attempt to correct a non-existent problem."

Brett, I suggest that you look at the picture again. that lead is super-heavy and sprawling. From the BMP's (someone who considers himself an authority thought this was an acronym for a product? :taped: that's kind of funny, and scary in a way) page 3:

"Pruning may remove structural defects or *lighten the load* on tree parts with high risk of failure. On larger and mature trees, the combination of pruning and a support system may reduce the risk of failure."

From the Pruning BMP's page 12: "...limbs can be reduced to balance the canopy, provide clearance, or reduce likelihood of breakage on limbs with defects...Reducing or thinning should be considered if cabling would be performed."

Brett when you look at that end you can see that the tips are folded in on each other due to the change in lean. Those leaves don't get the sun they used to, so they don't make food like they did, so they are more exendable than they were. Is it better to let those leaves shade out and shed?

You could take off 10-15% from that end, all small diameter cuts, and have it look better than it does now without costing the tree vital food. You've got good reason for fear when you hear someone say they want to "lighten the load" on a tree--too often that has lead to topping. Proper thinning and reduction, which this tree badly needs, are different.

Don't fear arboriculture.

 

[Plant Manager]

Live Oak

Fireaxman

I agree with a previous poster (rigger). Real hardware and real proping could do the trick.

I would also like for you to leave the crown alone. Dont worry about trying to close the gap

If you do get it properly reinforced mulch the tree and get the cars away from it I'm sure those old rides are leaking at least one fluid
Good luck sorting through all the nonsense and misinformation.

 

[treeseer]

get the cars away from it I'm sure those old rides are leaking at least one fluid
Good luck sorting through all the nonsense and misinformation.

Good tip on the cars leaking. As for misinformation, look to the BMP's. I disagree with some stuff in there, but I'm not going against the Standards and BMP's and simple physics without a really good reason. What experience does PHM have to disagree with thinning shaded out branches?

Those who think they need no reasoning or reference but only their own opinion are legends in their own minds. Carly Simon:

"But you're a legend in your own time
A hero in the footlights
Playin' tunes to fit your rhyme
But a legends only a lonely boy
When he goes home alone.

 

[Lumberjacked]

That is a very nice tree they have there and should defiantly tried to be saved. I agree with some of you that this tree should not be cabled but not for invasive reasons. That tree is huge and unless you plan on filling the canopy with numerous cables, one cable will just not cut it. All the weight of those leaders is way past the center point and if you expect a couple of cables to hold that much weight that far out on the limbs I believe you are sadly mistaken. I forgot who mentioned it but bracing the leaders with pipe from the underside it your best option, instead of the weight pulling the cables it will be pushing on the pipe with is a much better option. We have no live oak here in NY, but wont they send out a lot of water sprouts if heavily pruned?? Which could be even worse then your current situation due to the added weight. I know some would still say take it down, but given the age added aesthetics that the tree adds to the property I would hope you and your customers would want to prolong its life as long as possible.

 

[clearance]

Clearance, i see where your coming from, and often i will advise a customer than when removal is inevitable within a few years to do it now, so they can replant now and have something on its way in the time that they would have hung on to some decrepid old tree.

But is not as black & white as you suggest in terms of "you first, not the customer" There are plenty of customers out there that truly LOVE thier trees and will happily spend whatever they have to to keep that tree for 1, a few, 5 or mabye 10 years longer.

Trev

OK, Trev, what you say makes sense, reasonable words, thanks.