Sick CottonWood tree, but how sick?

[IchWarriorMkII]

Here is my predicament, I have a very large and very sick cotton wood tree in my yard. The worst part about this tree is that its to the west of my house, come spring winds some year, its going to blow hard towards me... and I think its well tall enough to cause me some heart ache.

My first trouble is a massive rotton hole in the trunk. The cavity extends well into the center of the tree, all surrounded by rotton wood.

You can also see the dead wood extending from the cavity to about 5 feet up the trunk.

Also, you can see dead sections of the trunk through the bark, in these cracks about 10 feet up.

Looking higher up the tree, you can see more dead tree through the bark as its peeling away.

I guess lightning hit this tree a while back, as it broke a branch completely off. It also killed the tree back down the ground, about a 15 or 20 foot span of bare tree I would guess.

Here is a shot of the tree as best I could get in the waning light. To the left starting at the bottom there is the cavity in the trunk, the start of the dead materiel in the 4th picture ( to give an idea of scale I guess) and the top arrow is where the limb was broke from the lightning. On the right of the tree, the arrow shows a section of dead bark opposite of the cavity, it extends a little higher, around 6-8 feet.

I think its about time this tree came down, what do you think?

 

[computeruser]

I'm not tree health expert, but I gotta tell you that you did a great job of posting some very nice pictures!

 

[stumpjumper83]

I cut a hard maple down earlier this week that didn't look as bad as your cottonwood, but there was only about a 2" ring around the outside that was sound. I don't see too many lightening strikes though. I know that ekka has done so though so he might have some insite, dont know about cottonwood in Australia though.

My vote is for the :greenchainsaw:

 

[IchWarriorMkII]

Thanks, to both replys.

Any idea on what it would cost to drop the tree, no clean up? I don't think I'd like to mess with a tree this large this close to my house... until its horizontal.

 

[TimberPig]

Given, the size, condition and proximity to your house, I'd say it should come down. I'm not sure where the house is exactly, but it looks to me like it would be fairly simple to fall it into the clear, as you've got plenty of open space to work with.

To simply have a faller drop the tree, probably only a couple hundred bucks based upon what I can see.

 

[treeseer]

Great pics. does not look good, but it's easy to find out just how bad it is. remove any rotten material and measure the hollow. even if you just do the part you can reach from the ground, that will tell a lot.

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

Are you asking us because you need some ammunition with other memebers of the family?

Generally there are 2 factors in determining hazard in a tree; risk of failure x target values in the case of failure.

The most basic way of doing this is a 3 point scale Low, medium and high. Call it a poor mans risk assesment, since we are not doing any invasive testing.

One can allso add in the owners risk tolerance. we will go in reverse here high, med and low.

The risk of failure is increased due to the basal holow, and columns of visible deadwood. I would put it at 2, medium of failure.

Assuming the risk of failure onto the house is low, and that large wood is unlikely to strike the house the value is 2, so we are 4:6, or 67%. Not low, but many would bet on that.

But your concern leads me to believe that you are loosing sleep over the trees existance near your family. So we assign your risk tolerance as low or 3 points 7:9, or 78%.

All off us in the buisness have cut down perfectly healthy trees because people are no longer comfortable under them. Ultimatly the professional casn ony offer advise to the woner who is the true descision maker.

The real question is, since the risk of failure is undenigabley higher, can you coexist with this dieing plant?

 

[treeseer]

Call it a poor mans risk assesment, since we are not doing any invasive testing.
The risk of failure is increased due to the basal holow, and columns of visible deadwood. I would put it at 2, medium of failure.

Sanborn, how about some NONinvasive testing before setting numbers out of what sounds like a hunch? That basal hollow can be excavated and measured without breaking boundaries, without invading the living tree. Even if the hollow is substantial--Did you read Jerry Bond's piece on the insanity of using a strength loss formula based on the size of hollow alone?

If condition is rated at a high number without inspection, that sounds like arborphobia talking. Free online assessments are worth their cost, and often no more than that.

“Can you tell me if this tree is safe?” We’ve all heard variations of this question, and it’s a tough one to answer. Trees everywhere are exposed to gravity 24/7/365, and Nature’s more explosive forces can strike at any time. Tree owners decide how much tree risk they will accept, depending on: how much they value the tree, what condition the tree is in, and how much they value the nearby people and property—the “targets”.

Your assignment, should you choose to accept it, is to calculate and clearly communicate to the owners the risk associated with their tree, and what they can do about it. “Risk” means danger, the possibility of suffering loss. The reality is, everything carries risk. A “defect” has been defined as a visible sign that a tree has the potential to fail. However, since every tree has the potential to fail, the questions of how visible, and how much potential, remain. Any harmless feature of a tree that looks unfamiliar to the inexperienced observer can be called a defect that creates a “hazard tree”, defined as a tree with an unacceptable level of risk to a target.

The question is, what can be done about it? All risks can be lowered (abated, mitigated, lessened), but when arboricultural options are not carefully considered and clearly communicated, the owners cannot make an informed decision. Quickly labeling “defects” and “hazards” can lead to the needless removal of valuable trees, when more conservative actions may have been more reasonable.
Basic tree risk assessment involves an objective, systematic review of the tree’s condition (good and bad), the site, and the exposure of targets. It is important to learn all you can about past maintenance practices, previous symptoms noted, and changes in nearby plants. Recent disturbance, such as construction, grade changes, and trenching, can impair the stability of trees on the site, and increase their risk of failure.

Risk is a fact of life--it’s only a matter of degree. It is important to remember that there is no zero-risk scenario. An experienced arborist can inspect a tree, assess in relative terms the risk of failure and the risk of harm, and describe reasonable actions that can lower those risks.

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

M. Milliuere, my purpose in the was to inject into the conversation that client risk tolerance should be taken into concideration, and how it can effect the outcome. I was not writing a treaties on formal consulting

Is the tree reasonably "safe" now, is the question he asks. But if you inject his, assumed, low tolerance for risk into any equasion where it has proper weight, you will come to a high hazard score.

Sometimes a quick and dirty assumption is what needs to be used. The tree may have a moderatly high risk of failure now, but that will only increase with time due to condition and speciese.

Yes, cavity size alone is meaningless. You need to know the entire wall thikness and variances there in to "calculate" strength loss with any certainty.

IMnsHO species and overall condition, as seen in the few pictures show, lead me to beleive that this tree has a high probability to become a hazard in the not too distant future, thus increasing the risk in the removal.

 

[treeseer]

...if you inject his, assumed, low tolerance for risk into any equasion where it has proper weight, you will come to a high hazard score.

Mr. Sanborn, sir, by assuming this low risk tolerance, you feed it and thus increase it. How you can assume that in the first place is beyond me, not knowing the household dynamic or anything else other than landers' considerable skill at posting pictures. His worrying may be a passing mood. Unless you're a keyboard clairvoyant, making these assumptions is in itself risky business.

Client risk tolerance is typically not an arborist's business. Yes I use it when I avoid mentioning removal as an option to someone who does not worry and values trees. But by and large we need to stay objective and keep our focus on the tree, and stay out of clients' heads.

Sometimes a quick and dirty assumption is what needs to be used.

When is that--when there are 1000 trees to assess in a day? I don't see the need to make a rushed judgment here--you got something burning on the stove?

The tree may have a moderatly high risk of failure now, but that will only increase with time due to condition and speciese...IMnsHO species and overall condition, as seen in the few pictures show, lead me to beleive that this tree has a high probability to become a hazard in the not too distant future, thus increasing the risk in the removal.

You have more experience with cottonwoods, but you are right to point out that individual specimen's condition is also important, as well as location. And you cannot judge condition based on a 17" image.

It soon becomes clear that the kind of professional assessment that minimizes liability for all concerned takes a lot of valuable time. You should be paid for this time, and if you are not, think carefully before offering an opinion. Getting paid for assessment affords the time needed to put together and write down a report that a tree owner can use. It also removes the appearance of bias, since assessors will not be compelled to sell maintenance or removal to justify their assessment time. Risk assessment is a distinct service, best done independently, and separate from the sale of tree care services.

 

[D Mc]

Some good advice has been given here. As JPS alludes to, species play a large part in assessment of what is "hazardous and acceptable". Cottonwoods are a funny tree. We have many century-old cottonwoods in this valley that I would have sworn 20 years ago wouldn't last another year. Now, I'm pretty sure they'll outlast me! Some of these trees are in much worse condition than the tree in the pictures you posted.

HOWEVER, if this tree is within striking distance of your house, if people picnic under it or it is a general play/use area the risks are very real. We have had two clients who have lost family members to falling cottonwood limbs. They have a nasty habit of snapping off in the still of a hot summer afternoon when you are not thinking about it (and that's the live wood not the dead hangers than can come out at any time).

The risks can be reduced with proper maintenance as has been recommended. There does appear to be a large amount of vigorous growth remaining in the tree (from what I can tell by your pics). The value to your property is the shade produced, protecting you from the late afternoon summer sun. This would be well worth asking a professional to evaluate and possibly trim. Do NOT mess with this tree yourself. Because of their lack of integrity, cottonwoods can respond very erratically.

So much for your hopes of a simple, definitive answer...

Dave

 

[IchWarriorMkII]

Thanks for the responses, I will definately have it looked at, if not removed entirely.

 

[Rtom45]

I hate cottonwoods, just on general principles. If it was on my lot, I'd take it down. I had a cottonwood and 3 willows on my lot when I bought it, they're all gone now. I have red maples and weeping cherries as replacements. I don't see cottonwoods adding anything to the landscape, and they're dirty. They do have a place as a windbreak, or to stabilize soil where other trees may not grow well, but no where near a home. My 2 cents.

 

[IchWarriorMkII]

I have a 105' Bucket truck, I might dismantle it from the top down....

If I kept the sticks a managable size, it could be done fairly easy... at least I think. The hardest part would be the trunk, getting it low enough to allow me to winch the pieces with a derrick truck.

 

[Ekka]

I know that ekka has done so though so he might have some insite, dont know about cottonwood in Australia though.
My vote is for the :greenchainsaw:

Thanks.

Well we have a cottonwood tree here and it's nothing like that. Ours is Hibiscus tiliaceus, not a poplar.

Aren't these species notorious for decay and failure?

If the tree had a protection order on it by local law ... would the assessing officer let it go through for culling ... you bet.

That's perhaps another way to look at it. It's big, it's old and it's wounded bad. Customers call though.

 

[Quercus34]

I would have that tree inspected by a qualified Arborist asap. Cottonwoods have a high frequency of failure here in Colorado. High winds and heavy spring snows bring down many Cottonwoods each year. Have it checked out or removed before it leafs out.

 

[IchWarriorMkII]

Its got the notice to make like a tree and get the heck out...

Or was it leave? I forget...


Anyways, its on its last leg, but the decision is out on dropping it. Would one stake a house on the fact a faller could drop the tree where its needed? Or would it better to take it down from the top?

 

[treeseer]

the decision is out on dropping it.

Does this mean you are going to gather more information before deciding?

http://www.treesaregood.com/treecare/tree_Benefits.aspx

If you do decide to fell it, using ropes and enough pull will get it to go in the direction you want.

 

[IchWarriorMkII]

I guess to clarify, the decision is out on felling the tree, or blocking it down from the top, then fell the base.

I enjoy the link, and there are already trees planted next to this sick tree, that will hopefully take off and grow a lot healthier if they don't have to compete for sunlight and water.

 

[geofore]

cottonwood problem

A guy that knows what he is doing can put the tree down anywhere he wants it more than 99 out of 100 times. An inexperienced homeowner can put down on a house first try
with no training. Your pictures were great on the condition of the tree but are of limited value to which way the tree is leaning. Four pics are needed. One from the house to the tree, then from behind the tree to the house and then from the left of the tree and one from the right of the tree. Stand the same distance from the tree as the distance from the house to the tree in all four pics. Take the pics in daylight and hold the camera level. If the distance from the house to the tree does not allow you to get the tree in the pic from top to bottom step back and get the whole tree in the later three pics. The last photo you posted is about the right distance. The lean of the tree would tell me if I need to use wedges, a rope, let it fall under it's own weight or take it apart from the top down.