Proper Wounding

[TheTreeSpyder]

i go with the evaluation that every live cut is a wound; so should be chosen sttraegically.

When the choice is made to wound, it should be a wound that can heal best, per needs of the branches functions, and at the site of the cut as seperate factors.

You should take branches at nodes that allow terminal functions of any part of the branch left. Meaning a fair proportion of wood and green from what the branch had before, taken at a growing 'node' left to continue most towards natural growth, without killing or scaring the branch.

The cut should be clean almost glazed shut by a sharp clean saw, not tattered exposing more surface area and 'open' fibers. Also left to dry out nature-ally without paint etc.

The finishing cut should not be into, rip, disturb the branch collar, that might seem to be part of the limb you are taking, but is really part of what you are leaving quite fairly, and what the tree uses for healing. Seeing as you are wounding the tree, it needs this for 'swelled area' at the connection for healing/sealing the wound you chose to make. This closing and healing should not be impeded from being performed by either being kept open when it needs to close, nor by scarring/cutting into this one important area, especially at your choice to upset things. Kinda like a responsibility.

Also taking about all of the limb in 1 or more cuts,then making a finishing cut that has about no wieght, releasing to the side perhaps; so as not to stress the fibres you are leaving in this area. The more resistance in fiber/weight of limb, can disturb fibre deeper into the cut left. So we let that happen farther out, then take off the last few inches to have no fiber disturbing pulls and give this important part of the cut our most intense concentration, to do just right.

So if you must mess with Nature, do so in a way that She can most likely recoup. That also means no increased woulnding with spikes on a non-removal tree.

These few guidlines can go along way in doing some little thing yourself, or evaluating someone elses' work to see if you wish to use them from that perspective of allowing tree to heal as best as possible.

 

[Guy Meilleur]

Originally posted by TheTreeSpyder
You should take branches at nodes that allow terminal functions of any part of the branch left. Meaning a fair proportion of wood and green from what the branch had before, taken at a growing 'node' left to continue most towards natural growth,
Spyder that's it, cut to the node that will result in the healthiest new branch. The node need not have a lateral branch present to be the best target, tho of course it is ideal to have one there at the time ready to go...

The finishing cut should not be into, rip, disturb the branch collar, that might seem to be part of the limb you are taking, but is really part of what you are leaving quite fairly, and what the tree uses for healing.

Right again; branch collars are stem tissue. On nodes with no laterals there is often a bundle of wrinkled tissue that resembles a collar. And nodes that contain old branch wounds are often good targets because they have callus tissue and latent buds ready to grow.

 

[ORclimber]

Cool post KC.

Slip sliding in the rain on white birches today observing how even proper cuts don't compartmentalize worth a hoot on those trees. Kind of a bummer when cleaning up storm damage, cutting back to branches less than 1/3, knowing those cuts won't compartmentalize. It's either that or create a huge unsealing wound further down the trunk.

Later orchard pruned an apple. Cut out all the apical dominant buds. "Unorthodox" cuts leaving many 6" sucker "stubs" cut back to buds, to protect the bark from sunscald. hundreds of little cuts. The apples take that abuse year after year. Good compartmentalizers those apples, at least on little cuts.

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

KC, in the picture you say the dead stub is keeping the collar from closing, yet it looks like the stub is slowly decayng from the outside in, at about the same rate as the collar closes. If this is true, doesn't the stub actually plug the opening while the tree slowly closes it?
If you have an old fence post and look at the end grain on the top, you will see the decay moves down the end grain more quickly than it moves in from the sides. If you cut the top off, there will be sound wood underneth.
In your picture, if you cut that stub, will that move the starting point of that decay closer to the heart of the tree?

 

[ORclimber]

I heard secondhand that there is an arborist in Portland who purposely leaves stubs. He goes back a year later to remove them. His belief is that the trees compartmentalize better under those conditions.

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

Originally posted by ORclimber
I heard secondhand that there is an arborist in Portland who purposely leaves stubs. He goes back a year later to remove them. His belief is that the trees compartmentalize better under those conditions.

You would not have mentioned this unless you see some logic to it.
New ideas are not always backed up with research, but oddly enough, neither are some old ideas.
Why hasn't kc, or my friend guy chimed in yet?

 

[che]

Here's a wound on a gingko from a long time ago. I've posted it before, and was told it was TOO flush. It's about completely closed now, but it did take a long time.

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

Good picture.
The side you were too close on is still not "healing".
The real question is, just because it is coverd by new growth, is it healed?
The answer, of course, is no. It can be covered and not "healed" at all.
Today, we removed a spruce. Looked fine, but totally hollow.

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

Well Mike i tried emailing ya about putting parts of this two-gather, but i'll just march on and see what trouble i can get into here!

My pic of a too flat cut into the Branch Collar was too dark. Funny as you catch things as you go along that look wrong to you, you seem flooded by them; carry a camera to stalk up on a chance one in travels, and they all hide, and the only one ya find, don't come out write. Or something like that! Soooooooo, i had to steal one, somehow just came to me so magi-call.... Oooooops thanx Lady Che!

i think that if the tree can't wall off across the wound with in tact Branch Collar, that it has to wall off down the sides inside where the branch is rotting away or something. So though the Branch Collar function is not compromised by being cut into; it is forced to go crazy covering a much larger area with 'callous' while tree is also fighting more decay etc. organisms in the same area. So, doesn't seal as well, as quickly, takes longer to do so, taxes tree more to accomadate all that or something. i think callousing is a special function, requiring more energy etc.

i think the model presented is a fair guide, especially for the 'Residential Tree Care' forum, and probably for some 'arborists' that have 'lesser' cutting technique/target. With these types of pix in head as guide while they cut, i think more attention can be paid and better results gained.

i think the tree won't heal/replace tissue, but wall off (of course) thew living tree, from what it has left of the other limb inside the parent limb as it dies. Needing the Branch Collar to do so. Needing to do so as quickly and completely as possible to avoid a real debilitating amount of decay to further compete with/strain the system of the tree. i think we have all seen interior decay pockets, that were like 'sterile'/clean non-supportive/soft, but not spreading nasty rot.

i think part of that is luck and part L.U.C.K.(Labor Under Controlled Knowledge); and all you can do is allow the best chance for success and usher the function as close in the right direction as you can. As with any patient getting any kind of tissue removal.

i think the pix are a fair guide, especially for those starting out, complimenting standard pencil drawn guides, not just showing the standard were to cut, but why; and how important the decisions are over time in the conceptulazation.

 

[geofore]

wounding

The first 3 out of four look like tearouts from improper cuts, not undercut to prevent bark ripping off. While improper wounds, they could have been prevented with an undercut to stop the tearout.
Spider, when you post, the post is a pain to read when it exceeds the screen size, having to slide the post left and right to catch the last few words is a PITA, narrow it to make it easier to read. Nice pics.

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

Must be screen size differance, i addressed that issue to look right here, will take the pic off post, that should do it; thanks for the perspective.

Good point on the undercutting, one point that i was drawing to as this develops. i kinda started this to draw some y'all in; but also answer questions that i would think that 'homeowners' and builders should be asking, to get these answers; going by what i hear about everyday in the field.

i'm just trying to give examples of what to draw to and what to prevent. Don't go to ripping/cutting Branch Collar is first priority; then allowing it to close too as second; in cases where you can't leave enough properly to continue the needs and processes of a branching unit.

Orrrrrrrrrrrrrr something like that!
:alien:

 

[geofore]

Fixxed

That fixxed the size problem. Now to work on those guys that let the limb rip, pulling the bark off. They need to learn to under cut to avoid the tearout. It is something I see a lot of. Cutting from the top down and no under cut to stop the tearout. The weight of the limb pulls but without a clean cut all the way through the bark hangs on as long as it can and pulls away from the tree. If you're not making that cut clean and fast the undercut should be made so the limb does not have to tear off or hang while you finish the cut.
At first I thought the problem was the wife using Mozilla, she's been changing my internet explorer nearly every day which is driving me nuts.

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

One thing this does not take into concideration is branching that does not have a collar.

If the branch originated from a bud the same age as the terminal bud for that stem then the pith is conjoined and all the tissue is the same. Even if that branch is subordinate. (Gilman calls this codominance, I can't agree with that usage.)

 

[Guy Meilleur]

Originally posted by Mike Maas
New ideas are not always backed up with research, but oddly enough, neither are some old ideas.

Good point. It pays to check back on where some of these rules came from.
I doubt that the stub rots as fast as the collar. Best to get the dead branch off.
Re leaving stubs and coming back in a year allowing a better collar to form, i do that sometimes. You have to balance that benefit against the possibility of decay enzymes going past the final barrier in the interim.
Good pictures and good principles, Spyder.

jps where so you get the codominant reference from Gilman?

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

From a few discussions I've been to and at least one magazine article

This comes from his studies on decay in pruning wounds and branch union strength.

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

These guys that i have learned some of, or more respect for these things from; slide in to increase all of our educations past these primaries.

In the more homeowner, builder or perhaps even first few years as a pro, assessing other's work etc.; these pictures should fairly carry you through 90% + of what you will encounter for least violating healing after the decision to take a branching from the tree. Keeping these fewest of principles in mind will take you very far IMLHO.

 

[Guy Meilleur]

The fun begins when you notice many collars, some thick collars out the branch. me I'd rather make a 4" cut to a weaker collar than a 6" cut to a thick collar. So I agree with your note that a little stub can be ok.

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

i remember being trained to use spikes, drive them hard piercing for safety (like my life depended on it )into the tree for an instant foot hold about anywhere. i remember hearing that spikes hurt the trees, and thinking "those lil holes huring that big thing!". But, just hearing that made me feel guilty as i saw then before me my own trails, then and years later, open wounds, violated fibers; stuff that about only a climber would see.

So i had to start changing over to a whole new strategy of climbing and handling self 50' in the air, wasn't easy; but it is better for the tree, quite obviously to anyone climbing and seening ripped and pierced violations all over screaming for years later at ya for their unnecessity.

The wounds look worse in early years, this shows how long their disruption lasts, ususally unseen. The branch color is made to close and heal, and is better suited to that than this 'trunk' section.

Proper Wounding is not making holes and tears into the flesh and shallowly placed circulation/feeding system (in youngest, most vital layers in outside 'rings' of tree)in a tree as you service it!

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

The ragged nature of the wound is not the only problem with gaffing the stem.

Many compare the small wound to the large pruning wound when justifying the act. Even a very basic understanding of CODIT will show the falicy of the argument.
---



"It is a far, far better thing to stub a little, then to flush at all."

 

[tomreeve]

Its nice not to read people arguing with your proper tree care guides. What amazes me is that there are still people out there improperly pruning. This winter I noticed lots of flush cuts, tipping and topping for no reason, spike wounds, and 6 inch branches stubbed about twelve feet out with a little branchlet growing skyward. When the big ice storm hit Lexington, KY last year I read in the newspaper the same old arguement, that people have been treating trees this way for hundreds of years. When I hear that I want to scream, "We also used to bleed people for a fever but we gave that up, cause it hurt more than helped!" I think that its best to go to a forest to see how healthy trees prune themselves and really think about what they're doing and how. And always remember to touch trees.
tom