2 large trees

looksee

Probably a useful debate - but the op hasn't been back so we may never know what happened to the trees

gk5000

lazybones32 wrote: »

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.

Yes I see what you are saying - would have to take a closer look in real life to see whether it is separate sub trees or whether it is well connected and the bulges are just part of its trunk. Maybe would have to do plan B - which is to take the parts or subtree overhanging down with a bowsaw.

lazybones32 wrote: »

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.

Some people could handle it themselves safely (assuming on their own land) and some would need a professional. But it is unfair for some posters to attempt to dictate who can and who can not do it - and to comment on other peoples capability which they have no knowledge of.

There are several posters who seem to abhor the idea of anybody except an aboritist owning or using a chainsaw, or that anybody should cut their own trees.

Imaging if mechanics or their advocates on the motoring thread went:
- don't change your own oil - you'll burn yourself and it will leak
- don't change your own brakepads - you'll cause a crash, multiple pile-up and kill all your family.
That's what the nitpicking and condescension feels like to the point that it is fair to question the profession - and wonder why they or their advocates resort to this.

Hoof Hearted2

looksee wrote: »

Probably a useful debate - but the op hasn't been back so we may never know what happened to the trees

A useful debate?, are you serious?, sorry don't mean to sound harsh, but this is the problem with amateur DIYers, a little information is a dangerous thing, they think they more more than they do and almost always don't respect the skill or acknowledge the experience and training involved in providing a professional service. You either understand that or you don't.
There's a reason why people do courses and train in recognized colleges to learn tree surgery and there is also a reason why any Tom, Dick or Harry can't get the required public liability insurance.
It's a skilled profession, and if a DIYer wants to tackle it, I say leave them at it and they will learn the hard way.

looksee

It was a useful debate because it brought to the fore the fact that people do think they can casually fell trees with a chainsaw and no back up. If you look I did say that it wasn't an appropriate way to deal with the issue. If even one person was convinced that maybe it is not such a good idea, then it was useful.

The argument about not appreciating professional services is not for here, but it is true in many areas - other people's jobs are often ridiculously easy, according to people who have never done them. And who needs qualifications to be an electrician, plumber, scaffolder...

BorneTobyWilde

You want the tree shaped and pruned basically , not chopped down or hacked to bits .
One could put a lovely shape to those trees and get rid of the over hang onto the roof.

BorneTobyWilde

redser7

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Jesus wept. If anybody has an objection to this thread being put out of its misery, please speak now ...

Oldtree

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

You want the tree shaped and pruned basically , not chopped down or hacked to bits .
One could put a lovely shape to those trees and get rid of the over hang onto the roof.

An interesting idea, but somthing to bear in mind:

When a tree is pruned to such an extent it will seek to rebalance its roots to it shoots, with the new sprouts really going for it until a balance is achieved. If the tree is cut at the line in the photo, where the tree re-sprouts, at that point, weak junctions can form between the old wood and the new branches.

So you will end up in a short period with weight at these weak junctions that the old wood cannot cope with and may break at that point. This creates a potential hazard to the neighbour's property, road users and visitors to the OP's house and also an insurance issue for the person that carried out the pruning.

It would also be worth finding out the history of the site to find out when the tarmac, walls and neighbour's house were built as there may have been previous damage done to the tree and its root system.

Also worth thinking about is that if over a third of the tree is removed in one go, it could lead to the demise of the tree.

If this tree is to be pruned it would be best to remove it and to plant somthing more suited to the site. It is all about the right tree planted in the right place to begin with.

Oldtree

redser7 wrote: »

Jesus wept. If anybody has an objection to this thread being put out of its misery, please speak now ...

Why? It's a topical issue, given that the optimum time for the pruning of trees in the garden is winter and gardeners will be thinking about winter works in their gardens now the snow is here.

Target pruning is easy to do when doing the job and allows the tree to recover from the wound by sealing over the wound quicker than other types of cuts. It is important not to damage important parts of the trees defensive system called the branch bark ridge and the branch collar when pruning (even small branches) or to rip the bark on wood that is to remain.

Discodog

The biggest problem I see every day is so called professionals removing branches & leaving a spur which ends up rotting back into the trunk.

BorneTobyWilde

redser7 wrote: »

Jesus wept. If anybody has an objection to this thread being put out of its misery, please speak now ...

If you read OP's post, which few seem to have read, he wants tree lowered and shaped to around the height of the buildings around it.
He never said he wanted it chopped down .

BorneTobyWilde

Oldtree wrote: »

An interesting idea, but somthing to bear in mind:

When a tree is pruned to such an extent it will seek to rebalance its roots to it shoots, with the new sprouts really going for it until a balance is achieved. If the tree is cut at the line in the photo, where the tree re-sprouts, at that point, weak junctions can form between the old wood and the new branches.

So you will end up in a short period with weight at these weak junctions that the old wood cannot cope with and may break at that point. This creates a potential hazard to the neighbour's property, road users and visitors to the OP's house and also an insurance issue for the person that carried out the pruning.

It would also be worth finding out the history of the site to find out when the tarmac, walls and neighbour's house were built as there may have been previous damage done to the tree and its root system.

Also worth thinking about is that if over a third of the tree is removed in one go, it could lead to the demise of the tree.

If this tree is to be pruned it would be best to remove it and to plant somthing more suited to the site. It is all about the right tree planted in the right place to begin with.

I've lowered trees to half their height , smaller trees than this though. Just normal pruning to restrict a tree from getting out of control. Never hurts the tree, all about where you cut it .

weary1

Oldtree wrote: »

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.

I really think this is an exaggeration. I've seen large trees (not puny ones like this) blown straight onto roads and I have never seen a mark on the tarmac.

Oldtree

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

I've lowered trees to half their height , smaller trees than this though. Just normal pruning to restrict a tree from getting out of control. Never hurts the tree, all about where you cut it .

Experience and care are important.

It can be done, but with somthing this size the shoots would become a problem. It may be that a agreed management plan to prune off the shoots every year or so would mitigate the hazard.

Smaller limbs have smaller wounds which could seal over quicker and could stop the avenue of decay in its path, whereas large wounds will seal over more slowly and decay can get a hold and the new growth breaks off after a few years.

Oldtree

weary1 wrote: »

I really think this is an exaggeration. I've seen large trees (not puny ones like this) blown straight onto roads and I have never seen a mark on the tarmac.

That would depend on how the limbs impact on the tarmac. Road tarmac is much harder than driveway tarmac,

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

weary1 wrote: »

I really think this is an exaggeration. I've seen large trees (not puny ones like this) blown straight onto roads and I have never seen a mark on the tarmac.

You have seen a tree surrounded by tarmac blown come down without damaging the surrounding tarmac? What did they do? Jump out of the ground leaving roots behind, or snap at exactly ground level? A tree can't fall down without uprooting itself. The roots of these trees are under tarmac on several sides.

my3cents

Rocco Massive Crane wrote: »

You have seen a tree surrounded by tarmac blown come down without damaging the surrounding tarmac? What did they do? Jump out of the ground leaving roots behind, or snap at exactly ground level? A tree can't fall down without uprooting itself. The roots of these trees are under tarmac on several sides.

What can happen is that the tree's roots get badly damaged when they dig out for the drive.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

my3cents wrote: »

What can happen is that the tree's roots get badly damaged when they dig out for the drive.

That'll a different scenario altogether.

magicbastarder

57s in. isn't it wonderful what technology can do. flying chainsaws.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbuiiuqS41c

looksee

I like the felling at 2.15 ...don't try this at home!

Oldtree

That video was gas and the video that automatically followed it was a laugh too

magicbastarder

1:19 in - 'quick! hold the tree up!'

quagmire47

magicbastarder wrote: »

a fair whack of that will be paying for insurance.

or put it another way, this is what you are paying for to not happen:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvW0E3AsXzU

One of the funniest things I've ever seen.:D