2 large trees

looksee

There has been a lot of sense talked in this thread by most people. That is a 50ft tree at least, it is a solid mass of interlocked branches that will need a team of professional people and equipment and insurance to take down.

I cannot imagine why the person next door has not registered their objection to their gutters being full of leaves and debris, though presumably the house was built when the tree was already a substantial size. Would I be right in guessing that the OP sold the piece of land to build that house on?

€2000 seems like a very reasonable price given all the issues.

gk5000

Obviously the OP is not interested in doing it themselves or they would not have posted this.

But many amateurs could and do tackle trees like this safely - on their own property.
One thing I have found useful is to use a manual bowsaw instead of a chainsaw on some (few) difficult branches or to top a tree at height where its relativly small diameter and you don't have a good stance for the chainsaw. You can go through a 6 inch branch in 5 mins with only one hand - and don't drop it on the ladder!

I'm not sure of the full layout of this tree and what obstackles, but it may be possible to drop the tree in one go - in the right direction - without needing to first do the branches over the roof. It looks as if it may line up to be made fall on the driveway pulling the overhanging branches away from the roof as it falls - taking all neessary precautions of course.

gk5000

Obviously the OP is not interested in doing it themselves or they would not have posted this.

But many amateurs could and do tackle trees like this safely - on their own property.
One thing I have found useful is to use a manual bowsaw instead of a chainsaw on some (few) difficult branches or to top a tree at height where its relativly small diameter and you don't have a good stance for the chainsaw. You can go through a 6 inch branch in 5 mins with only one hand - and don't drop it on the ladder!

I'm not sure of the full layout of this tree and what obstackles, but it may be possible to drop the tree in one go - in the right direction - without needing to first do the branches over the roof. It looks as if it may line up to be made fall on the driveway pulling the overhanging branches away from the roof as it falls - taking all neessary precautions of course.

magicbastarder

gk5000 wrote: »

But many amateurs could and do tackle trees like this safely - on their own property.
but it may be possible to drop the tree in one go - in the right direction - without needing to first do the branches over the roof.

good god. you could end up spending over 50k on the house to repair it if the tree fell the wrong way; is it really worth taking that chance to save 1 or 2k?
especially since insurance won't cover the repair cost to the house if an amateur attempts it.

and don't forget, there are two trees. twice the chances of dropping a tree the wrong way.

gk5000

magicbastarder wrote: »

good god. you could end up spending over 50k on the house to repair it if the tree fell the wrong way; is it really worth taking that chance to save 1 or 2k?
especially since insurance won't cover the repair cost to the house if an amateur attempts it.

and don't forget, there are two trees. twice the chances of dropping a tree the wrong way.

Course you would attach a rope to it to make sure.

Yes, I would generally prefer 1 or 2 k in my pocket - especially if it turns out to be relatively simple - say 1 hour to drop the tree - 2 hours to cut it up, and 2 hours to shred or dump the brash.

And time is not the key driver for an amateur - a sense of accomplishment, self sufficiency, independence, physical exercise, honest work, individual responsibility etc.

Should "eggsperts" dictate what we can and cannot do?

magicbastarder

gk5000 wrote: »

Course you would attach a rope to it to make sure.

i don't know jack **** of what i'm talking about, but i do know that attaching a rope to a tree does not 'make sure' it's going to fall the way you want.

the notion of someone who's an amateur and has not taken down a tree before, deciding to start on two trees closely overhanging a house is farcical. especially if it was someone else's house. if that was my house, i'd be calling the gardai the instant i knew what was going on.

looksee

Even if the tree(s) was cut and dropped, and it fell in the right place, there is no way on earth you would clear it all up, cut and remove, in a couple of days, never mind a couple of hours.

And the problem arises when it turns out not to be 'relatively simple' because it has fallen the wrong way. There appears to be way more growth on the house side of the tree than the path side, I doubt a rope would make any impression on that.

As for experts, would you let your next door neighbour take out your appendix?

iwillhtfu

Would it not be easiest to drop the entire tree in one go and replace with another tree that's had a few years growth. Probably expensive to buy the tree but it would surely be cheaper than manicuring an overview grown tree into a stump.

A nice Apple/Cherry blossom would look well there although the neighbours maybe annoyed come autumn.

Also once that tree is cut back and the neighbours realise the shade they've been under they may be on you back as it starts to grown again right to light and all that.

To add I've no experience with tree surgery but the tree choice looks to have been a poor one in the first place.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

gk5000 wrote: »

Course you would attach a rope to it to make sure.

Yes, I would generally prefer 1 or 2 k in my pocket - especially if it turns out to be relatively simple - say 1 hour to drop the tree - 2 hours to cut it up, and 2 hours to shred or dump the brash.

And time is not the key driver for an amateur - a sense of accomplishment, self sufficiency, independence, physical exercise, honest work, individual responsibility etc.

Should "eggsperts" dictate what we can and cannot do?

You obviously have never dealt with trees such as the OP posted. An Hour to drop? 4 to cut up and shed? Not within an ass's roar of the time needed.

Attach a rope? I give up!!!

gk5000

Rocco Massive Crane wrote: »

You obviously have never dealt with trees such as the OP posted. An Hour to drop? 4 to cut up and shed? Not within an ass's roar of the time needed.

Attach a rope? I give up!!!

Course I have - average one or two per year for 30 years.
Obviously you would take precautions, and assuming the tree is neutrally leaning and there are no obstacles - cut a v notch in it in the right direction opposite to where you want it to fall.
The rope is just for insurance, and to nudge it over at the end.

10 mins to climb ladder and attach rope high up, and attach it to something solid on the ground side in the direction of fall.
10 mins to notch the v and 10 mins for the main cut, and 10 mins to pull on the rope and nudge it over - so wh

4 hours should be plenty to cut up (maybe not to the shed) and shred the branches. But as I say time is not the key element for an amateur - so no worries if it takes an extra hour or two.

And just to be clear - I'm taking as an amateur if it was my own tree only, not contracting work.

Dropping a tree is not rocket science nor appendix removal etc...

Oldtree

Oh dear, dim and dimmer..... :rolleyes:

Fell in one go?

Broadleaf tree like that can bounce back once the crown hits the ground taking dim and dimmer out.

Tie ropes around the crown and pull over?

Dim and dimmer do not have the necessary experience to assess the strength of the wood in the existing branches that they tie the ropes around to ensure the branches can take the weight of the tree when pulled by said rope.

which way would the tree naturally fall?

The crown weight of the far tree it towards the neighbour's house, roadway side of the tree.

Did dim and dimmer notice the telephone wires? is the far tree growing through the telephone/eectric wires? Are there gas pipes around the area? Cars need to be prevented from parking near the trees before works. etc, etc...

A 5 man team would be necessary to do this job safely. 2 climbers, 1 groundsman and 2 men on traffic duty. The climbers would cut bits off the tree and lower on ropes.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

gk5000 wrote: »

Course I have - average one or two per year for 30 years.
Obviously you would take precautions, and assuming the tree is neutrally leaning and there are no obstacles - cut a v notch in it in the right direction opposite to where you want it to fall.
The rope is just for insurance, and to nudge it over at the end.

10 mins to climb ladder and attach rope high up, and attach it to something solid on the ground side in the direction of fall.
10 mins to notch the v and 10 mins for the main cut, and 10 mins to pull on the rope and nudge it over - so wh

4 hours should be plenty to cut up (maybe not to the shed) and shred the branches. But as I say time is not the key element for an amateur - so no worries if it takes an extra hour or two.

And just to be clear - I'm taking as an amateur if it was my own tree only, not contracting work.

Dropping a tree is not rocket science nor appendix removal etc...

This is incredibly bad advice. The trees aren't in a rural or farming environment. These are multi branched ornamental trees in an urban setting with limbs overhanging a house, gates, wall, services and a road.

It is irresponsible, at it's mildest, if not downright dangerous to suggest a complete amateur attempts to fell these trees in this environment.

gk5000

Rocco Massive Crane wrote: »

This is incredibly bad advice. The trees aren't in a rural or farming environment. These are multi branched ornamental trees in an urban setting with limbs overhanging a house, gates, wall, services and a road.

It is irresponsible, at it's mildest, if not downright dangerous to suggest a complete amateur attempts to fell these trees in this environment.

It's not advice. I'm saying what I would do after having checked the sensible precautions if these were my trees - and an amateur in the sense of non-professional but still with plenty of experience. There are many similar amateurs doing work like this safely every day.

gk5000

I think it's mainly "petite eggsperts" we have on here - not secure in their own knowledge and abilities, that they have to try to look down on others.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

gk5000 wrote: »

I think it's mainly "petite eggsperts" we have on here - not secure in their own knowledge and abilities, that they have to try to look down on others.

I think we should be able to discuss and advise without the snide comments or paranoia.

I have no idea what relevance the use of "eggsperts" has either.


I have in my lifetime felled many trees and had other felled for me. Some situations allow for us amateurs to do it, other don't. And I personally think this particular situation calls for much more care and finesse.

Buy, look, it's pointless continuing this ping pong with you about it.

magicbastarder

i know i keep coming back to this point - but in the situation above, assuming the property in question does not belong to the OP, an amateur has absolutely *no* right to practice their tree felling skills over someone else's house. if that was my property, i would have the gardai there in a heartbeat. and i'd deny access to the property for the purposes of the felling. because if said amateur did drop the tree onto my house with no insurance to cover the damage, it'd result in a potentially uninhabitable house with little recourse for an easy resolution.

regardless of how easy you think it is or isn't to take the tree down, the fact that the main concern in case of an accident would befell someone else's property, means the only recourse you have is to use someone who is insured to deal with such an accident.
the neighbour would be a thundering idiot to let an amateur proceed with the job.

gk5000

Rocco Massive Crane wrote: »

I think we should be able to discuss and advise without the snide comments or paranoia.

I have no idea what relevance the use of "eggsperts" has either.


I have in my lifetime felled many trees and had other felled for me. Some situations allow for us amateurs to do it, other don't. And I personally think this particular situation calls for much more care and finesse.

Buy, look, it's pointless continuing this ping pong with you about it.

The snide comments started elsewhere.

Your opinion is fine - you would not be happy felling these trees, but that does not mean that others would not be comfortable felling these on their own property - or that people are dim or dum for doing so.

From the photos the near tree looks doable as I have described above. The far one is harder to see but does not seem too bad either. If it could not be felled in one, then I would tackle the overhanging parts first with a bowsaw.

Each to their own but there is not need to pay for a 3 ring circus complete with clown to deal with trees such as these.

Oldtree

2 things spring to mind,
If you pay peanuts you get monkeys!
And stupid is as stupid does!

Bet ya dim and dimmer have a bit of tar, in a bucket in the back of the van, to fill up the holes in the lovely new tarmac.

delly

Folks, give over with the snipes towards each other. Please make your point or counter argument in a constructive manner.

Squiggle

Oldtree wrote: »

Not extraordinary at all. Your DIM post implied to the OP that they could do it themselves, not much more to know from that statement really.

It didn't , "Personally and I" believe it or not refers to me :rolleyes:

Your ignorance of working with large trees in an urban environment is obviousm otherwise you would be aware of the problems working in a tree with a chainsaw, over a roof and over a public roadway would be obvious, have a closer zoom in on the picture to see the hazards.

The only trees I've taken down are in an urban environment and all done without incident. Fully aware of the hazards. which are minimal taking small sections done . Branches appear very light from what we can see. Hard to credit you don't appear to have any experience with a top handled saw.

Your assessment of works/experience needed to reduce/fell the Op's tree is also severely lacking.

Laughable. I've doen it many times over a 25 year period.

PS You forgot to mention the man on the ground ensuring no one went underneath works and the man on the road ensuring no traffic, etc, etc.....

Really, you cant let kids out to play while felling? :rolleyes:

Squiggle

Oldtree wrote: »

Oh dear, dim and dimmer..... :rolleyes:

A 5 man team would be necessary to do this job safely. 2 climbers, 1 groundsman and 2 men on traffic duty. The climbers would cut bits off the tree and lower on ropes.

Not a prerequisite at all that you have two climbers, I've seen bigger jobs done by tree surgeons with one climber, top handled saw and not a rope in sight for the light stuff. If the guy doing the cutting on the majority of the tree that's in full view needs traffic stopped, he shouldn't be there. It's largely about cop on so substantially less of your arrogance and patronising shíte would be appreciated.

Oldtree

Squiggle wrote: »

It didn't , "Personally and I" believe it or not refers to me :rolleyes:

The only trees I've taken down are in an urban environment and all done without incident. Fully aware of the hazards. which are minimal taking small sections done . Branches appear very light from what we can see. Hard to credit you don't appear to have any experience with a top handled saw.

Laughable. I've doen it many times over a 25 year period.

Really, you cant let kids out to play while felling? :rolleyes:

Squiggle wrote: »

Not a prerequisite at all that you have two climbers, I've seen bigger jobs done by tree surgeons with one climber, top handled saw and not a rope in sight for the light stuff. If the guy doing the cutting on the majority of the tree that's in full view needs traffic stopped, he shouldn't be there. It's largely about cop on so substantially less of your arrogance and patronising shíte would be appreciated.

Oh dear oh dear. I do have experience with a top handled saw and climbing. Yes the near side would pose no difficulty to a single climber dropping stuff onto sheets of mdf, nor need traffic control, other than a groundsman, but the left side over the roof and the road sides need more than 1 climber and ropes and traffic control. Anything less is unprofessional.

If a climber is out on the left hand side over the roof or out over the road, what is he suppost to do with the 'light" or "heavy" " stuff', throw it somewhere safe?

You may be aware that a when professional training is given with a top handled saw it is to be held with 2 hands.

Hoof Hearted2

Oldtree wrote: »

Oh dear oh dear. I do have experience with a top handled saw and climbing. Yes the near side would pose no difficulty to a single climber dropping stuff onto sheets of mdf, nor need traffic control, other than a groundsman, but the left side over the roof and the road sides need more than 1 climber and ropes and traffic control. Anything less is unprofessional.

If a climber is out on the left hand side over the roof or out over the road, what is he suppost to do with the 'light" or "heavy" " stuff', throw it somewhere safe?

You may be aware that a when professional training is given with a top handled saw it is to be held with 2 hands.

Cop-on does not include stupidity, and seeing something done is a lot different from doing.

You should qualify that statement by saying "when ever possible and it is safe to do so".
A top handled chainsaw is designed to be used using one hand by a qualified tree surgeon and while he is carrying out work up a tree.
Just an FYI It is not designed to be used while working on the ground.

delly

Infractions for Squiggle for not following Mod direction. The next posters who continue arguing will have a short ban from the forum.

lazybones32

gk5000 wrote: »

From the photos the near tree looks doable as I have described above.

I think you might want to take a closer look at the trunk of the tree. You'll see that the trunk only goes a few feet off the ground before it 'splits' into branches...which continue for another 50 feet into the air. Cutting a notch and felling whole is asking for trouble; the tree would split vertically and there'd be no controlling the fall.

gk5000 wrote: »

Each to their own but there is not need to pay for a 3 ring circus complete with clown to deal with trees such as these.

Yes, there is. You don't agree, fair enough, but arborists are professionals and for hazardous jobs (involving people's homes, public property, street lighting and overhead wires - all visible in the photo) you need more than one person who knows what they're doing and comprehensive insurance cover.

Oldtree

I do hope this post is seen as a statement of fact and a continuation of a discussion, rather than an argumentative post.

Hoof Hearted2 wrote: »

You should qualify that statement by saying "when ever possible and it is safe to do so".
A top handled chainsaw is designed to be used using one hand by a qualified tree surgeon and while he is carrying out work up a tree.
Just an FYI It is not designed to be used while working on the ground.

As you say Hoof Hearted2 top handed saws are not allowed to be used on the ground, but it should be noted that this applies to the UK, as there are no guidelines/restrictions here in Ireland afaik relating specifically to the use of top handled saws.

There are more general employer restrictions here in Ireland for chainsaw use, such as:

There are certain types of equipment which in their use give rise to hazards, such that specific training is necessary for their safe operation, e.g. forklift trucks and chainsaws. In such cases, the employer must confine the use of the equipment to those employees properly trained to operate it.

From pg 10 here: Guide to the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work 2010 Update (General Application) Regulations 2007:
http://www.hsa.ie/eng/Publications_and_Forms/Publications/General_Application_Regulations/Work%20Equipment%20updated%20version.pdf

It may well be that the top handled saw was designed to be used one handed when climbing a tree. However it is not best industry practice to use a top handled saw for general one handed use by a qualified tree surgeon in a tree, it is only intended for restricted or extreme one handed use (see below).

Only in extreme situations should the chainsaw be used one-handed. Industry best practice dictates that top-handled saws must only be used one-handed where one hand is required to help hold a balanced stance or when material is situated out of reach of twohanded use.

from here: Safe working methods with top-handled chainsaws (Industry Standards published by H&S (UK) for guidance) see pg 14:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/crr_pdf/2001/crr01402.pdf

One-handed use should be restricted to circumstances where one hand is required to maintain a stable working position and the saw is used at extended reach with the other hand, eg while cutting at the extremities of limbs.

from here: Top-handled chainsaws (HSE UK publication):
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/afag308.pdf

Cutting at the extremities of branches one handedly in the OP’s example would require rope work to drop the material safely, esp over a neighbour’s roof or the public roadway.

I would hope that professional arborists here in Ireland adhere to industry standards.

Also worth noting is that in the UK (not here) proof of appropriate professional training must shown to purchase a top handled saw.

Discodog

As a professional owner of a Stihl 200T tophandle there is some genuinely scary advice in this thread. I watched a local company removing a tree similar to this one & they used a crane. Attach the bough, at two points, to the crane & cut at the bottom. That way you aren't cutting over the neighbour's roof.

magicbastarder

sure an amateur could hire a crane...

Discodog

magicbastarder wrote: »

sure an amateur could hire a crane...

It's not an amateur job. It looks as if it would be difficult to reduce it & then lower heavy branches by hand.

The crane slings would need careful positioning.

magicbastarder

i was joking.