Search results for query: *

On the left lead that you subordinated, it looks like the tip still interfered with the main lead. Maybe the photo shows it more crowded than it really is, maybe not. If so, i would snip back that tip just to avoid contact in a moderate wind. Nice pics, good looking work.

Ha! Sounds like a much-needed type of session for those in attendance. If they don't keep one foot in the field they can lose touch in a hurry. Yes much to be said for trees supporting themselves by intertwining branches.;)

Joe up the road from me thinks thinning is very often better. I disagree. Here's his study: http://www1.brcc.edu/murray/research/subordination/default.htm

For how long? In tree time, it will fill the holes made by the reduction cuts. That's not books talking, it's just looking at the tree with the tree's own chronological perspective. The need to subordinate this thing is not great, unless the forks are defective. So I am not arguing with the...

i dunno, tc. 3 main stems seems like too many. what do the forks look like? That will tell whether the pruning would be done for structure or aesthetics.

Good job on the pics. The pruning specs seem reasonable to me. Should be a one-time subordination treatment, fixing the codominant problem in that high-target area.

I still don't get it...too dense I guess, and yes many trees start out excurrent and then turn decurrent. Boy a pic or two would be good here.

I've never seen a fork failure on redcedar. Sounds like nutsy overreacting to narrow crotches.

Cable?

What is wrong with this forum ? Pruning is tree care. Look harder in the site; it is there. Or better yet buy the book.

I think you mean subordinating... look at Gilman's book for a good description. His site http://hort.ifas.ufl.edu/woody/preventivepruning.html describes it, in the powerpoints somewhere. I've seen it overdone as an overrection to included bark, but more often I've seen it underdone when...