Corrective Procedure

[TheTreeSpyder]

What is best for a limb that has been stobbed off 8' but has been growing in a regular fashion (ie. not dying or throwing 100 sprouts)?

What about short stobbs, almost right that seem to be being swallowed up nicely, do you re-wound?

Do y'all try to correct tree growth flourishing from being bucked back? Just steer away or recomend removal etc.?

If you caught a limb stobbed off without leader 2 weeks after the homeowner did it, ya take the limb out......? At what point would you might think of leaving it? Aesthetic consequences etc.

If taking all of the mistletoe you can strips a tree to the point that it is a poster for how not to leave a tree without protected inner green flourishing and feeding (as Tom Dunlap has championed against); do ya cut it down or give it a chance to live?

If the top dies in a sprawling oak, does the logic flow that i can't top; therefore i must remove?

Where do you guys see the borders and grey areas of some of these fine lines that would be basal definitions to go by?

 

[treeclimber165]

When pruning damaged or mistletoe/diseased trees, I look at what will be left after removing all the dead and diseased material. If the tree that is left is a viable tree, or the customer wants to keep it, then I just remove all the 'bad' stuff. If you no longer have a viable tree after removing the 'bad' stuff, I will recommend removal.

Many factors come into play and I assess it like any other risk tree. I look at what might break out in the tree and any possible targets of the breakage. The higher the exposure, the more likely I am to recommend removal. But the customer has the final say, after I have presented the facts and risks to the best of my ability.

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

I've worked on a good number of trees that were headed backs and had sprouts growing one them, just thin and choose the best one for dominance. Sorta like crown restoration.

Many times I will talk a customer into heading a larg limb back as a partial removal of it so that the tree can reduce dependancy on the carb production, rather then have the abrupt loss. I would much rather keep woulds out on brances then on trunks and heavy limbs.

Today we were deadwooding some hickories that are declining from construction damage. I left a lot of fine dead in the trees because they had twigs with a few leaves near them. We are trying to get the client to do radial trenching and soil amendments to preserve the trees. i want to keep as much leaf on these high outer limbs as possible.

 

[Stumper]

What JPS said- ditto ditto ditto! I am of the opinion that die back or storm damage makes for an exception to "no topping". Dead wood needs to be removed. Broken limbs need to be cut to viable laterals. The tree may wind up "topped" but if a viable tree remains that is often preferable to complete removal.

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

Yeah, that is about where i am with such borderline trees, just fishing!. Give it a chance to live if it isn't dangerous and the customer is okay with the risks.

Treeco, once again like your thoughts here. Specifically about imagery of trees meant to grow amongst their brethren, that rules out just slightly light starved limbs and what you talk about naturally. Then people want a single tree in their yard and still want that high canopy and detailed look, yet now it wishes to bush to the ground. Kinda a fine balance to hit, to please all points adequately, proper training in youth (as always) seems the best thing after genetics and environment.