Cabling topped trees: how would you do it

[NickfromWI]

Here's a situation I think about often

So I got this tree. They call it a silver oak Grevillea robusta. DBH approx 24" maybe 60ft tall. Been topped in the past. Suffered a huge limb failure. Client wants to retain what is left. Along with some pruning for weight reduction, I'm recommending the tree be cabled.



How would you do it. Ideally I would want the cables high up near the red cables- but at the orange arrow you can see an old wound that has me wondering if I should have the cables go in WAY lower beneath the wound at the blue lines?



Here's a close up of the wound at the orange arrow



Whaddya think?




love
nick

 

[stig]

I wouldn't.
That thing will break in the next storm, cabled or not.

 

[Mick!]

Out or nothing.

 

[MasterBlaster]

Nah, cable it. Use the blue plan.

You can always come back later and slay it.

 

[Mick!]

But by cabling it there might be some kind of liability, would you not open yourself to some litigation if/when it failed considering it's clear problems.
Not saying for sure, just throwing it out there.

 

[MasterBlaster]

Not where I live. If it fails, it's an act of god.

 

[Sgriff]

Put a clause in the contract in regards to potential future failure,i would also go with the blue lines in this scenario,if it were any other kind of oak I would probably put them up higher but for the silk oak and that wound, i think that lower setup is golden. Good luck!

 

[sotc]

Hmmm, think I'd pass. If it's a good client insisting, my bid would have a disclaimer saying we recommended removal. You can be the risk assessor but your client is the risk manager. They decide how much risk they are comfortable with. Be clear about the risk and recommendations. If you install the blue, you'll probably want to sell both blue and red...

 

[sotc]

Though the right side red looks too high

 

[CurSedVoyce]

Normally, I would not recommend cable for that one. Static system would hold it together for a while. But ultimately. The non liable clause would be wise after a removal recommendation. I might make a cable continuous on all three leafs holding them together.

 

[Sgriff]

Be clear about the risk and recommendations. If you install the blue, you'll probably want to sell both blue and red...

👍

 

[Wood Collector]

Be careful when cabling the silky oak. My boss fell when inspecting one a few years ago that had some ivy at the base. The branches can be weak, so I would use a EWP if you do go ahead and cable it. The timber looks good so if it does get felled it would be worth milling it.

 

[treebilly]

I vote both blue and red. That is coming after my removal vote. Liability clause also

 

[pantheraba]

That's kinda what I was thinking...seems to me the right high leads need to be cabled back to the left leads that are going to be secured with the blue lines.

But that's from someone who has not installed any cables before.

 

[RopeArmour]

You want the tree to grow bigger? And fail than cable
Reduce to prevent failure and cable if necessary after observation are made.

 

[treelooker]

What are all these liability concerns about? The tearout wound shows a lot of rot, but there's also a lot of wood on the outside.
Cable just below the red. Reduce 20% of the sprawl.

That wound is ugly, but any scar tissue that forms is compensation. Keep your eyes on the prize of tree stability!

Gotta be craving a huff of 2-cycle high or quick cash to condemn that tree. There sure ain't any science or reality evident supporting removal.

Or did I miss something?

 

[treebilly]

Teams of tree lawyers out there in LA. We are just giving opinions from a picture not seeing it up close. I personally give the options I see fit and also the risk. The choice is ultimately up to the client. Along with the liability of their decision.

 

[NickfromWI]

The tree is already going to be thinned and reduced for weight reduction. Not all that much though. We're not going to butcher it.

There are a thousand tree services in LA that'll cut down the tree for the price I'm cabling and pruning it. They called me specifically because they want to retain it AND manage the risk.

I'm curious about the liability you guys are always so worried about. Contract states "to provide additional support."

A tree could fail after you prune it. How is that any different? I submit that it isn't.


love
nick

 

[Mick!]

Is this just another thread where Nick tells us how he's not like all the other firms, not a takedown merchant, and that clients think he's great......

Oh yeah it is.

 

[Sgriff]

A tree could fail after you prune it. How is that any different? I submit that it isn't.


love
nick

I agree,but,upon pruning or consulting you are giving your professional diagnosis and are basically clarifying the tree/s safe,unless you have determined it not,and prescribe proper remedies/hazard reduction/communications of hazard to client.this is California,if you think you aren't liable you most likely are...

 

[sotc]

What he said

 

[treelooker]

"upon pruning or consulting you are giving your professional diagnosis and are basically clarifying the tree/s safe"

Not really. Sorry to disbelieve, but are you a lawyer?

If liability is such a concern, what kind of disclaimer do you use?

Many firms sell preservation, because it's better business for arborists. Nothing more boring than removal imo.

 

[sotc]

You certainly wouldn't call that tree "safe" Guy? Sure you could do the pruning and cabling but wouldn't you be clear about the potential risk associated with keeping it? Not doing so may be neglect

 

[MasterBlaster]

No need to be an ass, Mick.

 

[Grendel]

Whatever else it is, it's an ugly example. That being said, why not put up a cool Cable & Hub setup. Make a day out of it.