Commit a gaff?

[Stumper]

Granted that most of the regulars on here not only know that gaffing trees that are not being removed is in violation of A300. but also considering that most of us understand enough tree biology to support the standard....I was wondering-What about "trash" trees. (I think most of us have a species or 3 which we despise). I'm posting the poll but also want your imput on which trees you love to hate.

 

[Stumper]

Okay my poll stinks. Evidently it is so bad that none will deign to answer it. Can I take it that we are all good boys and girls who never gaff? Or are we just afraid to discuss it in front of our peers?
I know that most of us love trees but I really expected a little loathing for certain species! Personally I dislike Cottonwoods.-I think they are pleasant down by the river or out in a pasture but they are an awful choice for proximity to a dwelling. I think Siberian Elms are amazing in their hardiness and range of acceptable conditions,but as a shade/yard tree they are better than nothing-slightly. Ailanthus are actually attractive trees at times BUT they stink,they are brittle,and they spread like mad.( Also they stink and are brittle,yeah and they stink too.) Lombardy Poplars have some function as a windbreak but what a waste as a shade tree! Anybody with an opinion?

 

[Stumper]

I repent! I just voted myself and discovered that some of you did vote, Thank you!

 

[FBerkel]

Stumper,

It seems to me that trash trees decay easier, all the more reason not to gaff them (or any others). We've got the technology and skills by now to ascend by other methods, no?

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

I've known some people that will do the last option, but I can honestly say I have never gaffed a tree I was pruning. Been asked too, but I sat under them with a throw ball in the woods for 30 min each trying to get the one good crotch on pecker poles that were being raised for veiw.

I agree with Fred. Week compartmentalizers and canker prone trees should not be gaffed.

I sorta can see the argument of the PNW guys that say the bark is thicker then thier gaffs.....

I think gaffing on a prune is just as unproffesional as a gut&raise or a topping.

If it is too difficult to climb without gaffing then the practitioner is out of their depth.

Just because the work was under bid, why render substandard service?

 

[Nickrosis]

I can see using spurs in an emergency, if there was a critical reason for doing it quickly, if the tree is being removed soon anyways, and if you don't really care about the tree (trash, perhaps). Never would I hire someone who wanted to gaff trees.

In the PNW (Pacific Northwest), there are trees that have bark 6" thick. In that case, what is a 1.5" spur going to do? Nothing. John Hendricksen touched on that in the fall of his brother, noting that when he fell, he was wearing spikes on a trim job and that it was standard and acceptable.

Nickrosis

 

[Nickrosis]

In case you thought I was contradicting myself.... I wouldn't hire or work with someone who gaffed while pruning because it's unprofessional and it suggests the person is not interested in proper techniques.

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

i've seen 1 city worker not gaffing around here; suspect more. Saw him in the last 6 mos. only. Any one i talk to about it says i'm crazy or just shakes their head (same thing isn't it?). A few that advertise higher credentials, spike and advertise topping.

Then we got this 1 climber around town, quick, fearless, spurs always, 50+, talks about climbing with bowsaws and taking big limbs out with'em in Carolina when he started. With his 400# dad, the best climber he's ever seen. He has less gear, but the dog chain lanyard he insissts on using makes more noise than me. But, ummmmmmmmm, let's jest say even without that, he is immediately recognizable and everyone knows him.

 

[Stumper]

Dog chain lanyard? It must be reassuring looking at the label on the Hardware store reel "not for overhead lifting or use where personal safety may be involved" (or whatever the wording is down there).

FB and JPS, No arguement here-your reasoning seems impeccable.

 

[Tom Dunlap]

Either you do things right or wrong. Spike or not. No in between.

At the Tree**zz site someone came up with a good definition of a Hack: A person who does something that's wrong even when they know it's wrong. Does this apply to spiking a tree that you happen to dislike?

Tom

 

[rbtree]

There are some second growth conifers out here that are very spindly with small branches, sometimes drooping, that are next to impossible to get a safe line set in. However, usually, there is no need to prune them. i can't remember the last one we have had to resort to gaffing.

 

[Greg]

I've been doing a higher % of commercial work lately, and have been reading up on my local Tree Ordinance to make sure I keep my butt out of hot water. I found somthing very interesting on the subject. Our ordinance which covers all businesses speaks to the fact that tree work and triming must be done to ANSI specs. It also says that to enforce the ordinance the city or any individual can sue and seek to regain their attourneys fees if they win. I could sue about 90% of the tree guys in town for spiking trees on commercial jobs. I would not get any money, but they would have to pay hefty fines to our "Tree Preservation Fund" if they lost the court case in addition to my attourney fees.
Has anyone else ever heard of this happening? I can't imagine our ordinace being much different from most.
Greg

 

[rahtreelimbs]

I thought I heard somewhere that some line clearence co.'s permit gaffing on trees that are on a right-away. Please correct me if I am wrong.Rich.

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

You are right, they even got the verbiage into the ANSI A300

 

[rahtreelimbs]

Gaff a big, beautiful and healthy tree on a right-away!!! Where does that put us? Rich.

 

[Kevin]

I`m not sure where that puts you but I know where that puts me!
I`m the guy pruning those rotten limbs and dead trees off my lines.

 

[Stumper]

I can't believe what the lineclearers have been doing around here. Taking 1/2 of the tree-running 20 feet back from the lines. It is hideous.

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

i have long thought that many line trimmers are abusive to trees. It also seems to me that as a common sense safety item, spurs should be less allowed rather than more around power lines.

Of course i kinda think that if the best thing you can do to a tree under a powerline is rape the **** outta it; you shouldn't program planting the trees there in the first place; so what do i know?

 

[Kevin]

...and what about your houses, cities, subdivisions and highways... what about all those healthy trees that were killed to provide you with some of the luxuries you enjoy today?
It`s a necessary evil, there`s no point being hypocritical about it.
Do you want trees or power and communication?
I work in a jungle, there`s no point grooming it.
I can`t speak for other areas but the trees get cut and the slash gets chipped and the service continues at least until the next storm.
The power companies are just doing what needs to be done at a reasonable cost to provide a service.

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

I don't want to come off as a tree hater here, but I'm with Kevin on the subject. Each property owners should pay for their own utility trimming. I bet we wouldn't have so many hideuos trees, they would opt to remove them. Then as they were replaced, it would be with low growing trees.
I have a neighbor with a weed tree that is under a low wire. It needs to be trimmed twice a year by the utility. It has no redeeming quality. I am sure if that person had to pay $400 a year to trim it, it would have been gone long ago. Because I pay for it, with my electric bill, he keeps it.
My point, trees under wires are weeds.