Do I only prune the broken branch from this dogwood or do I go ahead and prune the other split? I'm assuming it split because of rot at the "y".
Which to Prune?
- Thread starter Section VIII
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
Just the broken one. Depending on where your located watch for Dogwood Borer moving into the wound.
Thanks for the reply. I'm in Delaware. Try to prune it as close to where the split stops splitting?
Yes. Without damaging the remaining section of tree if you can. The tree will live the rest of it's days with the damage but it may last decades or more.
Thanks.
Followup of the pruning.
You might want to do a little 'crown reduction' on the damaged leader. Maybe 20% off the top of just that leader. It takes weight off and reduces sail. That leader might last for decades but as decay increases more reduction may reduce chances of failure.
I guess that might give me an excuse to buy a pole saw/lopper.
Just an advisory: That wasn't really "rot" where that branch broke off. That was the result of a structural flaw in the tree. Had it been pruned out earlier in life, it would never have split.
That is called an "included bark" fork, and it nearly always splits off... eventually.
"Included bark" refers to a situation where, in the crotch or fork of a tree, there is a layer of bark or wood tissue trapped between the two branches that are growing apart. This trapped or "included" bark can create structural weaknesses in the tree. It forms when a narrow angle is formed between two branches. As they grow in greater and greater diameter, they trap the layer of bark between the two growing branches. The union between the two trees cannot grow, however, due to the bark being pressed between the two branches. So the tops of the tree get heavier and heavier with the passing years, but the fork does not gain strength to match. Eventually, one of the branches will fall off in a wind or ice storm. Especially since these narrow forks are inclined to "rot" sooner than any other part of the tree, as well.
It is recommend that included bark forks get pruned early in their life cycle so as to avoid the catastrophic failure that eventually happens. You might check other trees for that problem.
This:
leads eventually to this:
That is called an "included bark" fork, and it nearly always splits off... eventually.
"Included bark" refers to a situation where, in the crotch or fork of a tree, there is a layer of bark or wood tissue trapped between the two branches that are growing apart. This trapped or "included" bark can create structural weaknesses in the tree. It forms when a narrow angle is formed between two branches. As they grow in greater and greater diameter, they trap the layer of bark between the two growing branches. The union between the two trees cannot grow, however, due to the bark being pressed between the two branches. So the tops of the tree get heavier and heavier with the passing years, but the fork does not gain strength to match. Eventually, one of the branches will fall off in a wind or ice storm. Especially since these narrow forks are inclined to "rot" sooner than any other part of the tree, as well.
It is recommend that included bark forks get pruned early in their life cycle so as to avoid the catastrophic failure that eventually happens. You might check other trees for that problem.
This:
leads eventually to this:
Yup. I have numerous trees that did not get pruned early in their lives. I have some type of oaks, a tulip poplar, and a maple (all fairly large--guessing to be 30"+ dbh) that the previous owners had a tree service cable because of these forks (I'm assuming).
All three are on my list to get the cables checked and adjusted as needed. But I'm also thinking that I'll just have them removed as they drop a ton of large branches during strong storms. All could cause significant damage to the house.
Similar threads
