Maple reduction

[woodslinger]

Thanks for the assessment, Mick, and for the comment and link, Sean. They may be small in the grand scheme, but for maples in my area they are substantial, especially the last one. It looks smaller in the pic than it does in person.

The whole job is client requested, and as much as I hate to talk a client out of putting more money in my pocket, the points brought up do make a lot of sense. This is a regular mowing client of mine, I have done some other tree work for him, and he has referred several clients to me. I have other work lined up with him also. This is not really a make or break project, I'll bring up the points mentioned when I meet with him next week and see what he wants to do. Thank you for all the input.
Pinging back to the original question, should the trimming be done next week or wait till the buds push in the spring? Or till the leaves push? or till the leaves turn next fall? My impression so far is what we do decide to trim should wait till spring, I am still open to other input though.

 

[Mick!]

Crack a small branch and see if it bleeds, the official line (here) on walnuts and some other bleeders is do them in full leaf.

 

[SouthSoundTree-]

What is the objective/ goal of the reduction?

Does the HO just want less leaves?

 

[stig]

Agent Orange is the proved method for that.

 

[SouthSoundTree-]

Is that last tree 60' tall? Consider reduction of that trunk on the right with the bad inclusion.

 

[woodslinger]

I haven't measured it, but I would estimate it at about 70

 

[woodslinger]

The lower right, toward the old farm equip? Do you mean cut it back to reduce the weight on it to prevent it splitting away from the main trunk? Or cut it back to the main trunk?

 

[SouthSoundTree-]

End-weight reduction and maybe some thinning on the lead, keeping the cuts small and far away from the main junction.

Guy has a spec 15% reduction can add 50% to stability.

Cutting that whole lead would be like cutting a healthy tree down so it doesn't break in a storm.

The lead is healthy (presumably, unless you say otherwise), but the attachment is the issue.

Reduction can prevent a big tear-out.

 

[SouthSoundTree-]

Check your root collar depth, particularly in the raised bed.

 

[woodslinger]

To make sure its not getting over-mulched?

Thanks for the advice and explaination, I'll include that in my conversation about what my client actually wants done and why.

 

[SouthSoundTree-]

Stem-girdling roots will circle the root collar when buried.

Every gargantuan redwood root started out one cell wide.

Filling over the roots is no bueno. If they are supposed to be starting at 0" depth, and down, and you put 2' of soil on them by putting in raised beds, the roots area also way too deep.

 

[SouthSoundTree-]

I haven't measured it, but I would estimate it at about 70

I see the one by the farm equipment looks bigger, but not over any significant infrastructure that I can see.

What are the HOs goals? Why do anything?

 

[squisher]

Don't be frigging it up for money, like Mick would. Find out if there are clear goals for the trees. Clearance, sure a no brainer but if the trees are just needing a haircut because they're 'to big', that will be and become even more so after a healthy chop, a ongoing expense/liability. Best to be upfront about that.

 

[Bermy]

I'm with the others...2 and 3 don't look like they need much at all. Maybe some formative pruning just to take care of structural issues if any...
If they are bleeders, leave them till spring.

I get people asking me how big does a tree get before it 'needs' to be cut back, as long as the structure is sound, there is no need. Big trees grow big. An exception would be near a house or important infrastructure, like number 1. But it wasn't the tree's fault!

 

[SouthSoundTree-]

2 and 4...previously topped?


All 4...
Building clearance prune, utility wire clearance pruning, deadwood for hazard and will increase light penetration slightly. Prune for bad crotches. Pruning for walkway/ delivery truck/ emergency vehicle clearance.


Consider underplanting other trees farther from the house.

 

[woodslinger]

2 was previously trimmed, I don't think 3 and 4 have had anything preventative done to them. 3 had some lower branches removed for clearance, it used to have a slightly larger maple next to it that was starting to die, I removed that one last january.

 

[Mick!]

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.

For you Squish, previous post on this thread. Me being all caring...
if it was your intention to hurt me, you suceeded

 

[SouthSoundTree-]

now I get the Stevie Wonder bit.

 

[squisher]

I was harassing you Mick because it seems you were one of the parties blurring the lines between pollarding and topping. I have no doubt that you actually know the difference between the two. It's not cool to sell a topping as a good old fashioned pollard, when it's clearly not.

I am sorry if I hurt your feelings. I was only looking to razz ya and rile you up a bit. No damage intended.

 

[Mick!]

Sure, none taken.
Just to blur the lines a bit more here's a couple of pictures of an common intervention that I took photos of just to show off my new truck.
A lime/linden/tillieul tree in a courtyard that 7 years ago was all over the roof of the house and generally "un peu trop"
So after talking to the clients and discussing the options (sounds inclusive doesn't it!) we went for a topping all over.
Just before xmas last year I went back to re-top/re-pollard and with the exception of the top two leaders there was no rot at all in the cut ends. Came out nice and it can be repeated ad nauseum. 500 bucks I charged = 70 bucks a year to keep the tree.
Thinning/lifting stuff was not an option here and neither was removal and replanting, it provides shade in the afternoon.
Just call it "late pollard cycle commencent" or something.
I'd be interested to hear if anyone could think of a better way of keeping a tree like this in such a space.

 

[stig]

As small as your cuts on that one are, it would qualify as a pollard in my book.
Nice balanced job.

 

[MasterBlaster]

Just let it grow and leave it be.

The tree doesn't need any help from humans to be a tree.

 

[Mick!]

serious post?

 

[squisher]

Looks good. Seven years between chops is pushing it to still call it a pollard?

No decay at all in the rest? I'll take your word for it. Now update it in another seven years ok?

That is a sweet truck!

 

[Pelorus]

Neat job, Mick.
Am unaware of any tree companies that do that kinda work up in this part of the world.