Maple reduction

woodslinger

TreeHouser
Joined
Jan 6, 2015
Messages
748
Location
Southeast PA
This is probably a dumb question, but I feel not asking would be even dumber. .
Is it too late to prune maples? I've been trying to get together with my client for about a month now, and we are meeting next tuesday (jan 19th). Assuming he approves my estimate, I'd like to do the job later in the week. Are we too far into winter to trim to trim his maple trees? It been an extremely mild winter so far, it just got cold again this week, if that makes any difference. I've been told cutting them from now till spring will result in severe bleeding as the the sap is running up the tree now, and if I wait till "I hear the spring peepers" the sap is already up in the limbs and cutting it then will not be an issue.
As far as the type of work requested, he wants a significant canopy reduction, possibly to a pollarding level. 2 of them are close to his house, cable, and front door and he wants clearance and reduction. The other 2 are further from buildings but just getting too big.
Any suggestions? I can push it off till spring, but I did that last year and I got tied up with other spring work and never got to them, so I'd rather not do that again.
 
I would wait until the buds start to swell in the spring. Maples are bleeders so every cut you make now will not only form an icicle every cold night but it will leave a wet and carbohydrate rich coating on cuts that are, at the moment dormant.

Plus, keep in mind that maples are terrible candidates for a pollard but can be reduced well and kept smaller with lots of little cuts.
 
I've always been under the impression that all trimming was best done during winter, but I'm no expert on maples. Doesn't the sap move slower during this season? I've never heard that it moved faster...
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #6
Winter is when they are tapped for making syrup, so I would ASSume that it runs more in mid winter, but you know how THAT goes.
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #7
What makes them terrible pollard candidates? Is it the way they grow back after doing so?
 
What makes them terrible pollard candidates? Is it the way they grow back after doing so?

Primarily yes. Maples really want to grow. That fact combined with their opposite growth pattern will produce plentiful and awkward Y shaped and twisting regrowth. They also don't have much decay resistance, especially on larger cuts.
 
Larger cuts is topping, not pollarding.
I'm with Mich on this, done right, it works fine with maples.
 
Interesting. Do you guys see good nodule formation on your maple pollards?
 
If we start them early enough, yes.
One of the most favoured trees for pollards here is sycamore, which isn't too far from being a maple in drag.

Actually it may simply be that our Acer pseudoplatanus works better than your Saccharum etc.

Anyway, what Woodslinger is talking about is not a true pollard, in his case I think the cuts will be too big, and you'll never get good closure of them.
 
Dunno, is that a Chinese recipe? I usually take sandwiches to work.:D

What you call sycamore which I understand to be very close to what we call London Plane or Platane here in France is the best of the bunch for a pollard.
What we call sycamore does ok as well (that's an edit as I've seen Stig has included it)
Silver/sugar maple, Regrows well but rots at the pollard point so you may have to cut underneath it to establish a new pollard head after maybe 3 hits.
What we call field maple (acre campestre) does well but as you say has some pretty mixed up regrowth which makes it ugly and defeats the object.
I'll top all of them as well without prejudice (I'm open minded like that)
 
Some here are selling topping as pollarding it seems. Confusing the whole conversation.
 
Definitely throws a wrench in the conversation. If the US had a culture of pollarding, which it does not, we could pollard certain species. Problem is, a normal HO looks at a 'pollard' and then wants their tree topped as well... Seems like a constant cycle of misinformation and then having to explain to a client what they are really getting.
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #17
I'm most likely not looking at a proper pollard (even if I knew the difference between a proper one an improper one), one of the maples is very large, the other 2 are not as large, but still fairly substantial. I think if I were to cut them back to what I think is a pollard (which looks to be a lot less work for me) the cuts would be too large. So it'll most likely be a somewhat over done canopy reduction, further than the 1/3 standard, maybe closer to 1/2. I'll determine that when I meet with the client next week. I am not sure what the 4th tree is to be honest, looks like some ornamental fruit variety (pointless trees my wife calls them, fruit trees that bear no fruit). It is significantly smaller than the maples, and just needs to be contained a bit and gain some clearance from the house, front door, and walkway.
I appreciate all the input on this, I am totally clueless on proper trimming, pruning, etc. I'm much better at pruning to ground level.
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #19
I'm still not sure if its going to be winter or spring. I have about a week yet to make up my mind. I'm kinda leaning toward spring, I can't imagine someone seeing sap icicles in their tree and thinking their tree guy did the right thing.
 
Can you take some pictures? It would be great to have a reference for the size and the exact maple species you are working on.
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #21
This maple out front needs to be reduced and clear the house and wires.
IMG_20151203_111638290.jpg

I'm not sure what this one is, needs to be reduced, clear the house and the walkway.

IMG_20151203_112955444.jpg

Maple out behind the barn, canopy reduction

IMG_20151203_113402104.jpg

Last but certainly not least, this beast at the end of the driveway needs a reduction

IMG_20151203_113552740.jpg

I do not know the exact species of them, my tree ID skills are deplorable. :(
 
Might I wonder why the trees in the last two photos "need" a reduction? Cause I'm curious, is all.
Some thinning could be beneficial, imo. Doing nothing might also be equally beneficial.
 
Ahhh, the ol' quandary of makin' a buck with "reductions". Will the customer be happy with what you do, pay you and refer business to you, or complain later on. ;)

In my area it's pretty straight forward, if it "threatens" some property or valuables, cut'er down. If it's in a field with a 30ft blown out top hangin' over the kids play fort....meh, it'll be fine.
 
Those are small trees. Why do they NEED to be reduced. Is the customer driving the pruning specs?

A pollard is different than a reduction, different that topping.

As I explain to customers, topping, like a lot of removal cuts can be done with your eyes closed, paying no attention to the anatomy of the tree. I also point out that I sometimes make a pruning cut 3 times, sometimes twice, mostly once, as I need to prune it based on the anatomy of the tree, and re-growth response.

http://www.landscapearchitectureboston.com/blog/?p=962
 
Number 2 has already been done (by Stevie Wonder) just go back to previous points
Nos 3&4 don't seem to need anything.
In these cases I always ask the client "what is it about the tree that upsets/worries you"
If they say "I just thought it needs some maintence" then lift and deadwood, if it's a light issue or something tangible then sharpen your topper.
As for no1, you seem to have that one in hand, too close to the house but nice looking tree anyway.
 
Back
Top