Logging pics

Thanks for the comments guys. Definitely got to be low for commercial felling but can see the advantages of cutting high in a domestic/urban setting. The swept grain from the buttresses can cause hinges to run or shear real easy on shorter grained species when cutting low though.

Pete- good to post again too mate, as for the felling, got to be lucky some days!
 
No they are not, Jed, and you know it.

Hazard tree felling, when the faller wants to be able to get away from the nasty deteriorated bastard as fast and nimbly as possible...smart move is to cut standing straight up, so you can most easily rabbit out of there at the first sign that things are getting too sketchy. Much easier to keep one eye on what the top is doing from an upright position as well.

Now I know that 8 out of 10 of every tree I have ever felled was in this category to some degree or another, per my job description, so maybe I'm hyper-aware of this...but I'll bet any of you folks in the arb scene understand it, too.
 
:|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|::|:.... Yet another one of the Ten Thousand things that I don't think of when I drink copious ammounts of beer and shoot my mouth off around here.
 
With an avatar like that, you're allowed to shoot your mouth off all you want:lol:
 
Agreed from here, too.
On a hazard tree I'll forget about saving the log and do what I can to save the guy with the saw.
That being me.
Hip high stump and get the hell out of Dodge when she starts to creak.
 
No they are not, Jed, and you know it.

Hazard tree felling, when the faller wants to be able to get away from the nasty deteriorated bastard as fast and nimbly as possible...smart move is to cut standing straight up, so you can most easily rabbit out of there at the first sign that things are getting too sketchy. Much easier to keep one eye on what the top is doing from an upright position as well.

Now I know that 8 out of 10 of every tree I have ever felled was in this category to some degree or another, per my job description, so maybe I'm hyper-aware of this...but I'll bet any of you folks in the arb scene understand it, too.

:thumbup:
 
From a practical standpoint though, ceterus parabus, and other things being equal, I still have to maintain that very low stumps are (ok almost always) better. I mean when the safety considerations that B, and Stig have put forth are not the main consideration, and, we are also not taking ergonomic issues into account. I'm just talking about the practical considerations of steering the tree into the lay in the best way possible; and I'm suggesting that the lowest stump is always the best one.

I know that August Hunnike has said, "Conventional wisdom dictates that to come up the stem further generally means to get into straighter wood-grain which is always better for getting a tree to hit a lay."... but this is untrue. Now, I know that a bunch of guys are going to come after me here. They will say that to have twisting wood-grain in the hinge means to have a weaker and directionally inferior hinge, because the twisted grain has much less compression strength, and tends to "mush-out," much more easily, or be more prone to torsion failure. While this is true, folks who rely on this as the main rule for how high up to cut the tree are failing to see the bigger picture.

Let's think about the nature of buttress flare wood for a moment. It generally doesn't even happen in a tree's development untill that tree begins to approach maturity. Think about what it's like to go into a patch of regen fir, or to see any young tree at all for that matter. There are no "buttress roots," just perfectly straight up and down wood grain till the tree hits the dirt. And this continues to be the case untill the tree becomes rather advanced in age, when the amount of twisted wood-grain vs. vertical wood-grain finally becomes appreciable. My point is that an old tree (with lots of buttress flare) cut low, still retains EXACTLY THE SAME AMMOUT OF VERTICAL WOOD GRAIN as the same stem cut higher up would, BUT WITH THE ADDED BENNEFIT THAT THE FLARE WOOD PROVIDES A TON MORE STUMP-HOLDING POWER than the same hinge would have had if cut higher up out of the flare. And this is always the case unless a guy is jackass enough to only make his hinge about 20% into the tree, or something like that. If he has sense enough to cut at least 30% to 50% in (I'm talking about a tree that is growing perfectly plum with even foliage distribution on a nearly windless day)... he'll get into every bit as much vertical grain as the higher up stem wood would exhibit, except with the added benefit of the stump-holding power that the twisty wood provides.

Someone will say that we are still better off to cut up out of the flare so that our wedges are less prone to plit-out wood, but this also is rather silly to me, and, I think, stems from laziness and a desire to be away from the flare, so that the dogs will work better. (As opposed to trying to cut a humboldt in the flare where the dogs can be more of a hinderance than a help.)

When you wedge in flare-wood, and the wood splits out, you can very easily just trim off the busted wood on the top of the wedge with a sharp axe, and just continue to drive deeper. At worst the flare wood becomes trimmed off till it is the same diameter as the stem would have been higher up, and at best (when you're packing plenty of wedges to distribute the compression better) you are affording much more working distance between wedge-tip and saw chain. More better every time down low untill safety and ergonomics become prohibitive in my opinion.

While the old-timers had EVERY GOOD REASON to cut well up out of the flare (MISERY WHIPS REMEMBER!!!:O) to rely on the same excuse with a power saw (remember, I'm excluding hazard-falling situations) is in my opinion just pure laziness.
 
Hardwoods with hollow stems? Lack of rocks and other crap in the cut zone? Arborist setting with no concern of log length maximizing or the like? I'm not even in your league, but these are all considerations in my neck of the woods.
 
Bullshit, Jed. Just plain bare-assed bullshit. You are incorrect imltho, on every single point of your last post.
 
Sean/Kyle: Sure. But those things are all what my, "other things being equal," proviso was supposed to eliminate.

Burnham: Well now... that is a real difference of opinion, and rather manfully expressed. And yet it smacks more of the argumentum ad baculum than the more cogent refutations that we have all come to respect from you. Care to redress the matter? Of course, if it's not worth your energy, I completely understand. Life is short.
 
Jed, i could take a camera, go outside on my property and find you a bunch of "young" trees with root flare.
Where you get the idea, that it only occurs in mature trees, I don't know.
 
Sean/Kyle: Sure. But those things are all what my, "other things being equal," proviso was supposed to eliminate.

Burnham: Well now... that is a real difference of opinion, and rather manfully expressed. And yet it smacks more of the argumentum ad baculum than the more cogent refutations that we have all come to respect from you. Care to redress the matter? Of course, if it's not worth your energy, I completely understand. Life is short.

Sure, Jed. I'll need to catch up with you re consumption of beverage, perhaps...but I'll go back and give it a try later this evening.

That is, if at that point it seems worth my energy ;). I mean...hell, you are so off the mark here it hardly needs elaboration on my part, after all :D.
 
Jed, i could take a camera, go outside on my property and find you a bunch of "young" trees with root flare.
Where you get the idea, that it only occurs in mature trees, I don't know.

When landscrapers plant them 6" too deep, it takes a long time for buttress roots to show.
 
Back
Top