Dual trunk maple, leaning

[DLK150]

I need some help regarding what or if I should do anything with this tree. To start off with, it has sentimental value to my wife. She helped raise her nephew, and it was a tree he planted.

However, it wasn't "trained" or really tended to well when it was in early growth. The trunk split into two separate, smaller trunks. The separation occurs about 2 feet above ground. One is about 8 inches in diameter, the other 6 inches in diameter. They both lean towards the house, the larger one more. The larger one is about 20 degrees from vertical, the smaller about 10 degrees. The larger leans directly east, the smaller more to the east northeast. It hasn't begun leaning out of the blue. It grew that way, and I imagine since it had to compete with another maple and large oak behind it, it was growing towards the sunlight. The soil is a sandy loam, fairly firm The top 6 inches of soil are fairly firm, but it drains well.

It's easily 40, probably 50 feet tall. It's only 27 feet away from the house, leaning directly toward the kitchen. The larger segment also has higher limbs that overhang the service cable from the power pole to the house.

We live in an area that gets fairly rough weather during tornado season, although we don't see tornados here annually. The worst weather usually blows in from the west, in the same direction the tree is leaning. It's not unusual to see several storms a year with sustained winds in the 30s or 40s and gusts in the 50s-60s. We had some straight line winds come through a couple of years ago that blew down 4 willow trees growing next to each other behind the houses across the street from us.

She's adamant about not cutting it down. I told her it's an accident waiting to happen. Am I being paranoid, or are my fears justified? She suggested removing the part that leans the most, but I told her I couldn't guarantee it would live if we had that done rather than just removing it. She countered that with the fact that our neighbor cut down an elm tree, but it kept bushing out from the stump. Her reasoning is, if a tree can survive being cut down to three feet, it can survive having half of it removed.

I took two pictures. One of the tree from about 30 feet away, the other a close up of where the trunk divides.

 

[treeseer]

She's adamant about not cutting it down. I told her it's an accident waiting to happen. Am I being paranoid,

No

or are my fears justified?

No.

You're both right; the split and the lean are defects that pose an unreasonable risk to the house. Mitigate these defects by pruning many small branches from the top, to lessen the lean and reduce the strain on the split-trunk defect. The trunks could also be cabled or braced (personally I doubt this is needed, but it's not a bad idea). You'll need a good arborist; can you get a referral from Purdue, or search for one via isa-arbor.com.

If the big trunk is cut to the origin it will rot. The rot may extend into the remaining trunk. pLus, the sprouting would be uncontrolled and be weakly attached to the outer shell of the trunk. Plus, the remaining t4runk would move more in the wind with its neighbor gone. Bad idea x 3. Removing the whole tree is extreme and unnecessary. The soul of marriage is compromise.

Those black and white spots on the trunk are trouble. Search "gloomy scale" for info.

 

[Treeman14]

You're both right; the split and the lean are defects that pose an unreasonable risk to the house. Mitigate these defects by pruning many small branches from the top, to lessen the lean and reduce the strain on the split-trunk defect.

Please explain how removing energy (food-producing leaves) from the system will help to mitigate the split OR the lean of this tree. If you choose this method, remeber that it is not a one-time fix. This tree will need regular maintenance as it attempts to replace the lost foliage.

Your wife is correct. The tree will continue to grow if cut to a three foot stump. That is a sure way to eliminate the hazard. But, is that the look you want?

 

[treeseer]

"Please explain how removing energy (food-producing leaves) from the system will help to mitigate the split OR the lean of this tree."
**Removing branches that lean the most will make the tree lean less; that's like "Who's buried in Grant's Tomb". Totally tautological, Dude.
I don't think that lost photosynthetic area is gonna strain this young maple.

"If you choose this method, remeber that it is not a one-time fix. This tree will need regular maintenance as it attempts to replace the lost foliage."
**This is not the nightmate scenario that may be conjured by scaremongering removal specialists (and I know you're not one Brett) into gullible minds. Depending on sun exposure, vitality. PESTS etc. it may need pruning in 3 years or 6, not too high a price to pay. It looks like 20 minutes with a ladder and a pole pruner from here.

I know arbos who would say that to cable/brace could make pruning unnecessary. And I'd worry about the gloomy scale; dlk can you scrape those bumps off with your fingernail?

 

[Stumper]

I'll side with Guy on this one minor reduction on the lean side will remove a little weight where the weight has the most leverage and greatly reduce the probability of catastrophic failure. I would recommend cabling much more strongly than Guy. I think $100-$200 for a Cobra dynamic cable installation would be worthwhile both for protection of the tree and enhanced peace of mind.

 

[DLK150]

Thank you all for the replies. I'm glad to hear there's a possible resolution short of removal. We had a storm come through this afternoon with some decent winds, so I made a point of studying what kind of an effect wind might have on it. There wasn't much movement compared to our other trees, so it looks as though the other ones provide a buffer to the wind for it, unless it were to come from the north where it would receive the full brunt of it.

I neglected to mention initially that there are several other trees that it shares that side of the yard with. Around 30 feet to the right of this tree is a large red oak. The one on the left in the one picture is a Crimson King maple, around 20 feet to the rear. Directly to the right of the shed is a sugar maple. In between the sugar maple and the oak is a small ash tree. The CK is about 15 feet taller and fuller, the sugar maple is probably 20-30 feet taller, and the oak is so big I couldn't estimate the size without looking from a neighbor's house a couple yards down. The trunk is around 2.5-3 feet in diameter, and I would guesstimate that the dripline is 50-60 feet in diameter. The trunks of all 5 trees are all within a 25x50 foot area.

I mention this now because the view in the picture is looking south, and the sun passes slightly to the south in our area behind the maples, and in the mid-late afternoon passes behind the oak. Would the size of these trees make it more difficult for it to recover from thinning, competing with these other trees for sunlight?

Regarding the gloomy scales, I looked at them today and they appear to be raised bumps, protruding maybe 1/4-3/8 of an inch from the surface of the trunk. I'll examine them more closely and try scraping them tomorrow. I'll also take a closeup shot of them.

I truly appreciate all the help, and I enjoy learning more about trees in general. This is a very informative site, and having a section set aside just for helping a novice like myself(And preventing myself and others like me from making silly judgements.) is very generous of you all.

 

[treeseer]

Maples are content to be trained to the understory. Smart of you to study the tree's movement in the wind, and yes its neighbors seem to protect it well.

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

Naturally leaning trees, those not shifted by wind or some other force, are not statistically any more likely to fail than a tree that grows straight. All you can really say is, that if it does fall, it will probably fall the direction of the lean.

As for the double crotch, I'd be inclined to do nothing or perhaps span a cable across.

If you really wanted to remove one half, I would recommend you do it in stages, over a number of years. Slowly subordinate one half allowing the other to grow comparatively larger with a goal of reducing the co-dominance and developing a collar around the subordinated limb.
At some point the smaller half will get shaded out and grow more slowly, and will have been subordinated into a branch. Perhaps it won't even need removal, or if it does, it will be a comparatively smaller limb.

Guys idea to do repeated reduction cuts to keep the tree a small enough size that it doesn't threaten the house, is interesting, but sounds like the tree will not look natural, especially in winter when all the cuts will be obvious. And what about down the road after multiple reductions?

 

[DLK150]

All right then. So the recommended course of action is some thinning of the crown, connecting them with cable, or a combination of both. Treeseer, I've tried to be more aware after a storm that rolled through here a few years ago. Straight line winds blew down a line of trees behind a house across the street and down from us. They were by the edge of a drainage stream so I know that contributed, but they weren't the only ones to go down that day. I have some pictures someplace.

Edit: I found those pictures, just for the heck of it. If this isn't enough to get you thinking, I don't know what is....
http://home.comcast.net/~dklink913/mess.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~dklink913/uprooted.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~dklink913/boom.jpg

I also took some pictures of the spots, and it does appear to be that gloomy scale, based on the images I saw of it. There were a couple of places where you could see the "armor", and in one of them the inner armor left behind was fairly apparent. They're kind of large, so I won't attempt to insert them. Assuming this is correct, what course of action should I take?

http://home.comcast.net/~dklink913/spot.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~dklink913/spota.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~dklink913/spots.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~dklink913/bump.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~dklink913/armor.jpg

While I'm at it, could the identity of a couple of those trees I named oh so confidently be confirmed? I had them IDed by picture in another forum, but there was some dissent as to what they were. I basically took the suggestions offered and validated based on pictures of different types I saw. They are all over 32 years old(In existence when my wife moved here.), but no older than 38(When this development was constructed).

The one I called the sugar maple.(Also suggested to be a black maple.) The trunk is around 16 inches in diameter.

http://home.comcast.net/~dklink913/mapletrunk.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~dklink913/mapleleaves.jpg

The red oak. (Pin oak was an alternate suggestion.)The trunk is just over 2.5' in diameter. Off years in acorn production with a bumper crop every 2-3 years.

http://home.comcast.net/~dklink913/oaktrunk.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~dklink913/oakleaves.jpg

The ash. The trunk is 11" in diameter at the base, but drops off to around 9 inches 2 feet up.

http://home.comcast.net/~dklink913/aleaves.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~dklink913/atrunk.jpg

Again, I appreciate all the help!