Review: I know these have been asked a thousand times

[NoTalent]

I am not an arborist.

We have had two arborists come by to look at 3 acres of trees. One says he wants to come in right now (August, Mid Missouri) and cut a bunch of the lower branches off of some of the big oaks, maples etc. He says now is fine.

The other guys says no way, wait until winter.

Does it really matter when?

Also, mr. aggressive also says that it is best to cut lower branches -- makes the trees go up faster. Seems to me that the lower branches have a lot of leaves and may be contributiing to the over all health of the tree.

Thanks for helping a newby, non-arborist with your time-earned experience. I respect your expertise and your willingness to help.

Because, when it comes to my beautiful trees, I truly have...

NoTalent

 

[SpaceTaxi]

The timing question...

I don't think the timing matters for the most part.

Sounds like Mr. Agressive needs some work. August can be a bit slow...

For a similar reason, the other guy might be trying to sell some work for the winter season, which is even slower.

If the guy wants to drive his truck around the property, perhaps it would be better if the ground was frozen?

As for pruning lower limbs, the question is why? Perhaps pruning lower limbs will make the trees grow taller, but I doubt any faster. If these are mature trees, then I'd probably limit pruning to removal of deadwood. Pruning of lower limbs would be limited to issues of clearance under the trees (if necessary).

Thanks,

SpaceTaxi

 

[Stumper]

Now is fine if you are not in an oakwilt area. Removing lower limbs needs to be for a reason. -As you have said, they contribute to the tree. Personally, I like to be able to walk under the canopy of mature or older juvenile trees. If there is a road or driveway then clearing it is logical. Simply cutting off lower limbs, especially large limbs, is a bad practice.:angel:

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

Less is more. as Stumper says, there must be reasons and moderation for best health. The tree is maximizing, human intervention generally messes with that...

Cutting lower branches will lend to higher trees i think.

Biologically, i think the outside leaves get 'beat up' by elements of sun/wind etc. as to be less efficient food storage and processing, and the inner sanctum of more protected green carrying a higher efficiency to task.

Mechanically-The lower wounds will seal if correctly finished; after that the growth energy will continue at the remaining higher growing shoots. Leaving the largest of the large with a higher/ more leveraged Center of Gravity, and narrower base trunk; both are counter productive to stability of the giants. A martial artist would try to assume a wide base with lower Center of Gravity.

i'll never fergit Tom saying that "German peoples taught us to think of trees as bio-mechancial units.."(or something i hope close ); thereby conjoining the biological lessons of Doc Shigo and the mechancial analysis of Mr. Dent; lending in part the reason for those 3 bieng the first in myLinks & Respects Page ; that you might find enough links on for re-search! The models of tree health i'm working on there aren't finished; but all lend to leaving trees alone; observing all bio-mechanical possible results to your actions.

If the tops of the trees interlock or even restrict each others movement some dynamically , not statically, i think it is less wrong to raise branches; but would not seperate tops. i think this is natural support and dynamic restriction their genetic code expects more of from a wooded environment. Raising the Center of Gravity on a single tree, that doesn't have the dynamic support at the high leveraged reaches of the top limbs must then take all altered support functions on the stump unit only, unable to share that support alteration with top support/restriction strategy.

Leave'em low as ya can; learn to see that as natural beauty; alter your quality identifiers of what a good job is!

Or,
something like that!
:alien:

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

i think as wounds seal, plant re-equalizes foods produced would go to other, viable budding sites and stores; training to the side, up, topping to stay down. i think we see similar in palms. Other plants this might be known as forcing a response, bonsai etc. we don't stob as to not force a flush of green weakly attached etc. in something of attributes of size and leverage; but the similar activity can force more beauty in roses etc.

Trim too aggressively off sides of palms seems to draw plant upwards faster (as only thing it can do to regain food supplys of Co2 and sun) once it deals with trim shock; giving a narrower base and higher Center of Gravity, for less stability, closer to 50/1 rule of thumb for failure of height to DBH.

Taking branches, 'suckers' can also decrease the base spar size that it would take to support these systems; giving the narrower base of support, along with higher leveraged Center of Gravity at any rate.

The growth strategies of woods to single urban i think are different. The urban to have more fast growth/ weak jointing i think from sun from all sides; but also does not have the top support to releive leverage, and has more wind.

i think the strategies change, to lower set weigth, maybe even touching the ground for support in a single tree, that gets full wind and no neighborly support/ limit of movement. The lower weight,w ider trunk being more stable in the single environment, the more mass, the more maasive resistance to wind as a strategy, do to increased inertia- the heavier body is harder to move.

The tree strategies in woods or singlely protect their trunx as Rocky says, but also their mulch stores and the ground from being compressed by large animals etc., or filled by grasses taking all nutrients, not letting mulch feed, shutting off air etc. This is part of the tree's territory too, this is the biosphere that it wishes to set up to feed itself, and protect as the territory of the largest lifeform ever. It will rise above and shut out the light to competition, but also even if parts on ground are wounded or dead, they still protect, jail out some tresspass to this garden, as part of the tree functions.

 

[SpaceTaxi]

Originally posted by RockyJSquirrel
So how is a reduction in a tree's ability to feed or protect itself going to result in a taller (or stronger, healthier) tree? Just stating that you've seen tall trees without lower limbs doesn't prove anything.

I would suspect that a tree's response would be to put on growth where it's branches remained, resulting in a taller tree.

Would you believe there is a study on this very question? Moderate pruning lower branches of poplars increased height and overall growth.

Thanks,

SpaceTaxi

 

[M.D. Vaden]

I agree with the "Squirrel meister" about the height speed thing.

Not once have I seen lower foliage removal speed upward growth.

It's certain that if the lower limbs are living, leaving them will usually produce a larger tree - size of trunk and mass, but not height as far as I can tell.

Dead stuff can come out any time.

If it is a dusty sweaty enormous project in tangled brush, I could understand why someone would want cool weather. If it's a clean environment, and you are only removing like 10% of each tree from the bottom, maybe find an arborist that wants to do it now - but understands why.

The chompin at the bit guy - it may be he does not understand trees. Why not call him back and ask him what kind of education he has accumulated and from where.

No need to make a decision is you don't feel you have the right info in hand yet.

 

[coffeecraver]

What is the main purpose for wanting to raise the trees?

Tipping the ends of the branches could help to raise the canopy
enough to walk under.

Raising the limbs will provide more light to the wooded floor,
The light could help to encourage poison ivy,blue berries,and
other undesired plant growth.

If you want to naturalize the area,you may be better off to
remove the undesired sucker trees and tip up the canopy.

If you have plans to install sod and landscape,
consider tree protection with a different Arborist.

Sod directly competes with trees for nutrients and water.
Irrigation trenches damage trees,as well as mulching incorrectly.

Take time to consider the long term plans for the area before
removing those lower branches. They provide food as long as they are there,and help keep the trees healthy.

 

[Guy Meilleur]

Originally posted by coffeecraver
The light could help to encourage poison ivy,blue berries,and
other undesired plant growth.

I agree with everyone about retaining lower branches. Research on little poplars has little meaning for big oak mtc.

But Norm, tell me this is a typo; Blueberries (Vaccinium sp.) are excellent plants, and tasty too.

Yeah I'll see you in Sept; have another hour to show 2-year data on response of oaks to heading cuts.

On the big oaks in the back yard, crown cleaning is removing dead dying diseased and damaged. Cutting big limbs to the trunk will create a hollow tree; good for coons but not the tree.

Mr. Aggressive doesn't sound like the man for the job.

 

[M.D. Vaden]

Those trees weren't planted for harvest were they?

That could change the strategy depending on whether they are to become knot-free premium wood, or framing lumber, or just plain old heathy trees.

Is that a crop?

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

Though it is hard to prove totally one way or another and i might have stuck neck out a lil'far on tree growing taller theory-

i have to maintain the pivotal part of the concept; that all growth is reactionary, and greedily to the limits of resources that can be taken on, as the Nature of the beast. Though the gone green reduces the light energy and carbon building block inputs; the tree still has the root input potential, and if any energy stores, then will try to seal and replace green for functions at sites where it can? Like, trying to catch up somewhat before complimentary root die out evens out totally?

We are told not to stob, to cut correctly so we don't force a growth with chainsaw of sprouts etc. Here, the tree tries to seal, and rushes new green out where it can make weak connections.

So, if we cut correctly, there is not the energy for more growth; but if we cut incorrectly there is? Quite fairly, some of wrong cut growth would be responsive, a triggered survival response to not grow stronger becasue of the 'threat'/damage, but quickly to replace green in a survival rather than correct growth way, lending weakness (in my own cartoons). So, why in a 'healthy' cut, would the tree have always less energy etc.?

i ken be wrong as any, but the logic doesn't seem to flow right.

-KC

 

[Guy Meilleur]

Ken I kind of hear what you're saying on the redirection of root energy theory. Many other factors too affecting things--amount of codit needed to seal, location, and esp. how much vigorous photosynthetic potential and how much stored energy is lost by the branch removal.

If the limb is growing well or real thick I don't like to cut it all the way off. And species and age make a big difference, which is why the research on young poplars doesn't sway my thoughts on how to manage old oaks.

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

Sounds like that leads into balance of dynamic tissue in system theory? Oldest, least dynamic tissue store, would also be the last taken; trunk? Whereas, any lost branching is a loss in dynamic tissue balance? i guess that would show more applications for the model you present.

In the imagery of the largest creature ever, to be able use the Earth's resources in the greatest quanity and efficeincy, with a voracious appetite to assemble and maintain itself. If there is energy to replace green in bad cut, why not in good, just green placed at different points? Is there less energy to do so? In a living thing, that has grabbed so much with it's will to go on and thrive, wouldn't it try to replace the green, or fruit etc. loss somehow; borrowing from energy stores; maintain the present inertia of lifeforce that it has?

If we stob, we get more green right there. If we work tips we get more green inside; break the lead tip off a cone shaped pine, it bushes out, palms seem to grow skinnier/taller to me if over trimmed, pinch rose buds for more, trim soft roots some say, pick fruit to force others bigger etc. All actions and responses, some, even saw connected.

 

[bottlefed89]

??

So what did you end up doing?? Where abouts in Missouri are you??