Lumberjack Correspondence Course

Some years ago, I saw a vid with a high level climber making a generic demo about tree felling. He wanted to show how to fell a leaning tree, but he put only 2 wedges just behind the hinge. He did it, but had a hard time with a lot of banging. I bet that didn't went as he first expected. He ruined his wedges. I was very disappointed to see that good skill can be paired with bad brain use.
 
Marc, thanks for all the detailed comments/corrections/advice.

I think I will be changing my Maasdam's anchor! ...... and I need to see what is the application for those "D" shaped steel carabiners..... since evidently not for this!

ha, yeah, trigonometry, vectors, etc. are cool!



ha, I know you are right about the maasdam hook.... but I've already replaced it for the carabiner.... and it gives me a little extra peace of mind since it is *locked* closed instead of just a spring gate, right?

A carabiner gate is an necessary part of the structural build, reducing strength by about 2/3 when open. A hook gate being open reduces strength by zero.

You're system, once tensioned, with you at the puller, is going to have a hard time falling out of the hook.

You've noticed that cranes don't have carabiners on the end of the cable, right?
 
I've been absent from the forum for some time and am not sure if this has been covered.

The logging industry here regards the shallow, open scarfs (notches) and wedges placed immediately behind the hinge as a joke. Shallow notches here increase some risks to the faller and reduce tree control. The open (90 degree) notch provides no increase in safety or control to that of normal notches. Wedges placed immediately behind the hinge reduce safety and control of a back leaner. In our alpine forest where I work, any wedges placed there would be crushed into the stump or the tree would likely split up backwards. You certainly could not wedge the tree as is touted.

It has been introduced here some time ago by some poorly experienced arborist trainers. Despite my best efforts these arboricultural trainers will not engage with our timber industry trainers to align their training with that of the professional fallers. The substandard “arb” trainers use the anonymity of their international source as a form of shield for scrutiny.

I was told that the shallow scarf and other stuff have origins in Scandinavia. Does anyone know the origin of this (manurer)? I look to professional fallers in the country of origin to explain why it was devised and if it is used commercially? In addition if they consider it transferable to the hardwood trees in Victoria, Australia (arboriculture or logging)?

A “yes” answer to the last question, will create an invite to come over here and demonstrate how that all plays out. Alpine bush here is unforgiving unlike the armchair discussions for theorists.
Regards
You mean felling like this Graeme?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?ebc=ANy...YLbJefWMkR2dEp6_YIOMMbU7bferrUQ&v=ZQXxXJdWmnw

As a technique for felling a head leaner (without the wedge of course) it is sound I think, but after that, I am unsure of it’s benefits. It is beginning to be taught here as a generic one size fits all felling method, pushed forward by a consortium of forestry companies and some training providers as “the” safe felling technique. This is compounded by the way they are taught it - they learn it as a method with little understanding of the underpinning simple mechanics behind tree felling. I am meeting beginners who are struggling to move forward from their initial tuition, as they do not have this base knowledge to build on. They simply do not have enough information to enable them to make good decisions when things become less straightforward.
I spent only a brief time at your end of the world, but long enough to understand how different it is with regards to species & method compared to here in the UK. I think that every place in the world has developed the most suitable methods for it’s own specific species, topography, climate, markets etc & trying to impose limiting or detrimental constraints to working is shortsighted and perhaps dangerous.
 
Why the frig put a wedge in a headleaner!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That is about the stupidest thing I've seen in a long while.

If you can't determine lean in a Beech, get an office job.

The Danish forestry school pulls that one as well.

Come on, either the tree has head lean, in which case you fell it with a back strap or it does not, in which case you set a wedge.

Doing both is like holding a huge sign saying : " NEWB!!!!!!"
 
When the wedge dips, it's like a needle on a gauge, telling your the tree is moving, I'd think he means.
 
I call it a dial, but same thing.

You sure as hell don't wste time banging on that with amaul or axe, do you.
 
Some years ago, I saw a vid with a high level climber making a generic demo about tree felling. He wanted to show how to fell a leaning tree, but he put only 2 wedges just behind the hinge. He did it, but had a hard time with a lot of banging. I bet that didn't went as he first expected. He ruined his wedges. I was very disappointed to see that good skill can be paired with bad brain use.

I agree with your summary. I cannot see how anyone could consider wedges placed behind the hinge are a good idea. The source of that poor information, insulated from scrutiny remains a large part of the problem.

You mean felling like this Graeme?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?ebc=ANy...YLbJefWMkR2dEp6_YIOMMbU7bferrUQ&v=ZQXxXJdWmnw

As a technique for felling a head leaner (without the wedge of course) it is sound I think, but after that, I am unsure of it’s benefits. It is beginning to be taught here as a generic one size fits all felling method, pushed forward by a consortium of forestry companies and some training providers as “the” safe felling technique. This is compounded by the way they are taught it - they learn it as a method with little understanding of the underpinning simple mechanics behind tree felling. I am meeting beginners who are struggling to move forward from their initial tuition, as they do not have this base knowledge to build on. They simply do not have enough information to enable them to make good decisions when things become less straightforward.
I spent only a brief time at your end of the world, but long enough to understand how different it is with regards to species & method compared to here in the UK. I think that every place in the world has developed the most suitable methods for it’s own specific species, topography, climate, markets etc & trying to impose limiting or detrimental constraints to working is shortsighted and perhaps dangerous.


It took a while to determine the purpose of that demonstration. When the tree eventually fell I saw the ridiculous minimal steep notch. The tree appeared to be back released with the "aid" of a wedge. It is a good demonstration of what some crappy arboriculture training is doing here and has done for years.
 
Thanks for the feedback/input. I kept looking at the video and looking for the notch/facecut that I am used to...nope, not there. Strange stuff.

I remember someone here once using the phrase "saw some lean in to it" when advising how to take down a tree and how deep to make the facecut.
 
Why the frig put a wedge in a headleaner!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That is about the stupidest thing I've seen in a long while.

If you can't determine lean in a Beech, get an office job.

The Danish forestry school pulls that one as well.

Come on, either the tree has head lean, in which case you fell it with a back strap or it does not, in which case you set a wedge.

Doing both is like holding a huge sign saying : " NEWB!!!!!!"

A perfect summary regarding the waste of time and effort if using wedges in a back release.

One of my employees was at arboricultural training and doing his tree felling part. He showed me what they expected him to do (notches, hinges, wedges etc) so I rang the trainer in charge to try and help fix some of the wrong information. He said "if he doesn't do it this way he will not pass". I said "If he does it like that on my job I will sack him". That training institution continues today without scrutiny or change.

Finding the source of this wrong information appears elusive but remains the platform for its continuation.
 
People do some whacky shit sometimes in the name of 'innovation'. Atleast here worksafeBC seems to have a somewhat firm grasp on reality and functionality in regards to felling trees.
 
That works well om straight conifers, Gary.
Trying to " saw some lean" into a broad crowned hardwood tree is a fools game.

Far as I remember, it was Jerry B. who coined that phrase.
I have the UTMOST respect for him, but his knowledge is in PNW conifers.

The trees I work in are completely different and so are the methods to fall them.

Nonetheless, I have learned stuff from Jerry that has put me way ahead of the competition here, so don't take this as me disrespecting him.

I'll give you a goos Jerry B. story.
Years ago, I posted pictures of a birch that had such twisted growth that one side of the hinge simply might as well not have been there.
About a year later, I'm driving up the Mendocino coast with Jerry and Terri, and suddenly he says: I have found a solution to your problem, but anybody seeing it will think the faller was on drugs.

Cut a slanted back cut, so you stay above the hinge in the side where the fibers go forwards and below or level with the hinge where they go backwards.

Blew my mind!
He'd been mulling that over since I psted the pics.

Totally right, too.

I realized that I was riding in a car with the Albert Einstein of treefalling.

Sorry Jer, for putting a personal conversation out here, but you just made such an impression on me back then.

It pisses me off big time, that I won't be making it over next year.
 
Graeme, I have that problem every time my apprentices take classes in the forestry school.

My kids ( Usually about 30 years old, but to me they are kids) will say, My master told me to do so and so, and they will be told that it is wrong.

15 or so years ago I had a deal with the forestry school that they would bring classes out to see me log mature hardwoods.
That ended when I felled a 140 year old beech with a bit of front lean and simply cut my way out of any trouble.

When thet tree was safely on the ground, the teacher said, " I would have liked to see a back strap on that tree"

So I asked him if he figured that I was unable to tell lean in a tree after having killed Becch on a commercial scale for 40 years. ( It was a calm day, no wind)

That was the last time they came visiting.
 
People do some whacky shit sometimes in the name of 'innovation'. Atleast here worksafeBC seems to have a somewhat firm grasp on reality and functionality in regards to felling trees.

:thumbup:

You're right; WorkSafe Victoria (here) "may" be the place to have it sorted. At least it would force the various training providers to produce their information sources.

Unfortunately here OH&S refer to "current industry practices". If enough arborists utilise incorrect methods it creates weight for its retention. Decades of separation between arboriculture training and logging has led to the notion by some arboriculture trainers that the skill of tree falling from logging has no relevance. They appear intent of reinventing the wheel.
 
Graeme, I have that problem every time my apprentices take classes in the forestry school.

My kids ( Usually about 30 years old, but to me they are kids) will say, My master told me to do so and so, and they will be told that it is wrong.

15 or so years ago I had a deal with the forestry school that they would bring classes out to see me log mature hardwoods.
That ended when I felled a 140 year old beech with a bit of front lean and simply cut my way out of any trouble.

When thet tree was safely on the ground, the teacher said, " I would have liked to see a back strap on that tree"

So I asked him if he figured that I was unable to tell lean in a tree after having killed Becch on a commercial scale for 40 years. ( It was a calm day, no wind)

That was the last time they came visiting.

I hear you Stig, I chase trees off their stumps as well when I feel it will work or I have too. :O

That was a great opportunity for students and trainer to come and see the work being done. It was a mistake by the trainer to spoil it.

A short story. I had and arborist trainer say to me in front of the State Coroner, "you are lucky Graeme, you have been up the bush as a faller, us arborists can fall as well as you or better because we fall trees between houses and have to dodge things". I invited him to come up the bush and do some falling. He came up.

I let him use my saw. He wouldn’t let me go until I told him which tree I would do first and which way it was leaning. Sometime later he came and found me to say that I was wrong the tree has come back and the saw is now jammed in the tree. He said because it was my fault I had to fix it. The saw was only bogged in sawdust and about my head high in the back cut (don't ask me why). I finished that tree without fuss and by the end of the day he had not felled one tree. He had qualified many hundreds if not thousands of arborist tree fallers.

Adopting falling tecniques dreamed up from overseas and incompatable proffesional fallers ensures continued separation between our arboriculture and logging industries.
 
Why the frig put a wedge in a headleaner!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That is about the stupidest thing I've seen in a long while.

If you can't determine lean in a Beech, get an office job.

The Danish forestry school pulls that one as well.

Come on, either the tree has head lean, in which case you fell it with a back strap or it does not, in which case you set a wedge.

Doing both is like holding a huge sign saying : " NEWB!!!!!!"

I couldn't agree more stig!
 
The only tree removal I ever wussed out on was a huge hollow Coulter pine, leaning over a 3 story multimillion dollar home, on the shoreline of Lake Arrowhead.

A triple header 4 foot DBH, covered in ivy, bouta hundred foot tall.

Dreading the ivy, I got on the roof with my throwbag, put a line in the middle head, then a 3/4 bull line, 150 feet long, one end tied to the left head, the other to the right, then a pulley in the middle, with another 3/4 bull line from the pulley to the beach, where a big rubber tracked bobcat did the pulling to stand it up straight and pull it over exactly 180 degrees opposite the lean.

Took me half the day to set it all up, avoiding the ivy that reached well over half the trees height, obscuring the triple crotch junction entirely. But there I was rigged ready n confident. However immediately upon cuttin ivy off the trunk it became apparent the base was hollow, indeed the ivy had hidden an entrance into the base I could walk into, there was maybe a ten inch circle of live wood, compression side entrance hole, tension side keepin it off the house.

Now I was gettin nervous and nowhere near confident about which way to hinge such a hollow beast up n off a mansion, with a view of Winona Ryder's boat dock.

Being a hired subcontractor, I called the boss, a third generation logger, and explained the situation to him. He says no problem Jon, just use a boxcut, and leave about six inches of hinge on each side, then let the bobcat do the rest. I explained I had no idea what a boxcut was, and would he please come demonstrate how it's done? He laughed and said oh alright Jon, I'll be there shortly.

Shows up in his beat up old ford, whips out his 084 with a three foot bar, cuts an 18 inch high, 24 inch deep rectangular face cut outta the tension side, after tensioning the pull line of course. I asked Matt to explain the square insteada triangle face cut? He answered the purpose was to hold onto the stump as long as possible, ideally until the tree hit the ground.

Then he made the felling cuts from the compression/house side, to line up with the top of the rectangle, leaving six inches on each side, then signaling the bobcat to go as he ran outta there. Sure enough, it held to the stump, and only tore loose on the bounce.

He explained the 18 inch face allowed it to bend farther and hold more tenaciously than an itty bitty triangular face would.

Does that make any sense to any of you old multi generational loggers.

While it worked well on that hollow Coulter, I don't think I'd ever try it on a hardwood, like euc.

Jomo
 
Finding the source of this wrong information appears elusive but remains the platform for its continuation.

Graeme, I can tell you for a fact that here in the USA, this method started back in the late 80's-early 90's from Soren Erickson (from Sweden) when he first starting workshops for Stihl, than Husqvarna and then with GOL (Game Of Logging) hear on the East Coast where I work. I remember the instructors teaching us these methods way back in the mid 90's when I got certified for the NH Pro Logger Program.

From here it took off like friggen wild fire and spread all cross the US (and overseas), until everyone thought that this was the only and "Correct" method for every tree! Don't even get me started on "ArborMaster" and their teaching methods. Can't tell those guys anything. Only the GOL Method is correct.

Makes me want to puke!
 
Back
Top