Storm damaged tree - is it a goner?

boreality

I guess you could save it if you had to for about 10 years. But really that's a major wound and decay will follow even from the large proper pruning cut required to clean it up. Chop er down, plant a new one, do it right.

kieren

I am always in favor of keeping a tree where posable especially here in Adelaide where there is hardly any tree canopy. Adelaide has some of the most inhospitable weather in Australia. Hot long dry summers with heat waves of over 45 degrees and storms blowing in from Antarctica with wind gusts over 100 kmph and frost that will freeze the balls of a brass monkey. to have a tree that is already majorly flawed is asking for trouble , and i wouldn't want to open myself up for litigation by trying to keep it.

boreality

Check the picture of the base on post #14 - this tree is not a champ. Do those roots look normal? Another victim of poor nursery stock, no juvenile structure pruning, all the usual suspects. But if it's a minor miracle that the tree did that well in that climate keep it of course. Shows how little I know about Aus. I thought it was the land of plenty.

shaun05

Litigation? Based on what? Mutual consent between neighbours? The possible cost of minor property repair?

I am fairly sure a client couldn't sue you for giving them information and helping them make an informed decision or for implementing a management plan based on their decision.

Come on we are tree guys, lets get some guts start helping people make decisions and stop worrying about the being sued.

By the way my posts keep getting delayed and a message pops up about a moderator setting. Does anyone know how I fix that?

stirmantrees

i did suggest possibly planting another tree now and look at removing the remainig tree later) when the wife loves the new trees ofcourse.

Sometimes one can spend money to retain a tree over the years that could have bought a couple of structurally superior trees now.

sometimes a wise spenditure of money can be a very romantic thing to a women, dont you think

shaun, glad you look at all the options

shaun05

[QUOTE=stirmantrees;78793] sometimes a wise spenditure of money can be a very romantic thing to a women, dont you think
QUOTE]

Shoes? NO ...

Women and wise expenditure are sometimes at complete opposites ! A romantic use of money is saying yes when the wife is emotionally involved.

gawd

shit Shaun05 - my wife is an intrical part of my company- without her [tracey ] I honestly believe I would have failed years ago - u seem to be a very outspoken person ? u quote a hell of a lot of people-[ jfk,.albert , sigmund ] I can not help - but to predict -hitler, sadam ;pol pott ] r u sure u r all there ! I have taken u to task on another thread ----- U have not replied [I m only a tree surgeon } by the way , its a claret ash , take u eyes off the wound ,look up 3-4 feet -its what I call another compression fork , u have also lost a wind facing -countering side o this tree - the rest of this tree will pretty much be blown apart the next time - this tree is not - I dont care how good u guys r , this tree will fail - unless u lop it [???? was that shaun05 was rccomending]

gawd

in other words cut it down - grind it

stirmantrees

for the price of retention..then .....removal...then....replanting.....
cut out the retention and one may possibly buy quite a few pair of shoes..

I see both sides though..so i am having fun...lets see what the verdict is with the homeowner(s)...

Gawd.. im with you.. i would be nowhere in this business without my wife... happy to buy her as many pair of shoes as she wants.

shaun05

Gawd,

Thanks for the off line message! I am not trying to avoid your messages. As I have explained in another post every message I send is being processed by the moderators and it doesn't get posted in the sequence that I posted it but in the sequence they approved it. In the same vain I cannot respond to your message off line because of the restrictions.

Yes I am sure that I am all here! Thanks for your inappropriate sledging but I guess that for some there is little else they have to offer ... lets hope that you are not in that category. Keep it nice or keep it to yourself ... show yourself to be a gentleman!

You are right the tree has sustained damage and probably lost 10% of the canopy. That part will obviously not fail again but another part may fail. Unfortunately as arborists we spend too much time looking at parts that fail rather than looking at what doesn't fail. Every one of these inclusions was present prior to failure and had been there for a number of years.

Yes it is true that the tree will take a period of time to fully adapt to the new forces but trees certainly will do that. I promise to post a picture of an Accacia that had one half, that according to my boss, failed 18 years ago. I am sure the other half will fail in time but without any care this tree has already survived.

No I am not suggesting lopping the tree or even heavy reduction. I am saying basic routine work, a few reduction cuts on the worst inclusions that remain then repeating that process in 18 months (when the tree is dormant) then every year or two after that.

Yes it will cost money but that is not my choice it is the clients choice. We have many clients that have spent far more to keep a tree than it would have cost to remove the same tree. In fact we have clients that spend more on a single treatment to take care of a tree than it would have cost to remove the same tree. In fact we have 1 client that has spent over $10,000 to date pruning a grey box that could be felled.

In my first 3 years of tree work the bulk of what we did was care for trees and probably only 10% was tree removal. I know that many arborists who derive the bulk of their income from tree removal find it strange but people actually get emotionally attached to trees. Check the post about the pregnant lady beating up an arborist.

By way of another example I just did a field trip with two other arborists. On the way we visited a small little town of less than 100. It was where one of the arborist first remembered trees. He left the house at age 3.5 years old (46years ago). He was real miffed because the new owners had cut down a hibiscus at the back porch and he was visibly in tears when he mentioned the removal of a Liquidambar near the kitchen window.

I am not suggesting bad work practices, I am suggesting that we need to inform the client and let them make decisions. What I hear is most Arborists going in with their values rather than taking the extra time to listen. I am sure for example that he said his wife would like to keep the tree.

Additionally off line you said

You will note that I did mention that the neighbour would ideally need to be happy with this but even so the tree owner is at liberty to wear the risk. If the neighbour is a part of the decision then he is unlikely to sue and would find it difficult to mount a case in Australia. Yes it may result in an insurance claim but then that is what insurance is for. I am certainly not suggesting negligence. I am suggesting managing risk rather than simply always trying to eliminate it as the first response.

I am sure that if the repairs cost 10 times as much as the current damage the tree owner's wife would not be concerned. (At this stage there is no evidence of the damage costing anything more than the cost of tree work).

In addition, and perhaps I am wrong, but the cost of damage from failing trees is so small that insurance companies in general do not care about requiring trees to be regularly inspected or trimmed. One interesting piece of information in this regard according to the BOM web site is that hail causes substantially more damage to buildings than trees. But wait trees reduce the amount of damage caused by hail so well maintained trees have a real benefit for insurance companies.

Again Gawd, I accept that I may have a completely warped perspective but it is the way I see things all the same so please don't get personal.

shaun05

I should have respond to this in the earlier post but missed it altogether. In Australia it is very rare for the insurance company of a property owner to sue another property owner's insurance company over a tree. The reason relates to a general agreement not to bring suit against each other based on pure common sense.

The reason should be obvious ... it only lines the pockets of the lawyers. On a "tit for tat" basis they would bring as many actions against other insurance companies as they would have brought against them so the only party that would benefit would be lawyers.

So contrary to what you assert, such trivial claims have no real affect on premiums. Hail, flood, fire, wind in general all come before trees and in terms of property damage (I can supply the sources but need approval from Eric to post a pdf document written by MH)

Further most tree damage occurs during storms and gets written off as "An Act of God" Gawd, even though sometimes it may not be and act of God but rather an act of complete stupidity.

shaun05

For the record I only paraphrased Einstein's and had not quoted any one else although I do conceed that I adopted the sentiment of JFK's inauguration speech since the sentiment was entirely appropriate. I am personally frustrated wite the question "what can associations do for me"? Today's aborists ofthen sit there and ride on the coat tails of people that have gone before them, who have put in amazing effort asking "what can you do for me ...'

If we have arboricultural training, then we owe a debt, if we use a saw with antivibration and a chain break, we are benefiting, if we climb on a braided rope, we have gained from associations (formal or informal)

Gawd, I appologise if my education offended you ... it was by no means meant to offend simply meant to give credit where credit us due

Talking of which, "Whowever undetakes to set himself up as a Judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods"... yep Einstein again .... you might think he was stupid but I thyink he was fairly smart

boreality

No tree is safe, by definition. It has been engineered by nature which is the best engineer but it doesn't conduct strength tests in the lab. So if we really wanted to cover our a$$ we would have to have everything in writing signed by the client and video every interaction. I think our civilization would grind to a hault if it got to this. It's too bad but one whining client and a good lawyer could cost us everything. Whose really at risk? It makes me wonder about acting too professional. Next thing we will have the expectations of a physician, and they don't seem that happy or effective because of malpractice suites. I might grow a mullet to lower risk, impress the chicks, plus keep the sun off the back of my neck.

stirmantrees

sometimes it is the professional that says it need to go and then leaves it up to the client. that is another angle. even though she may love the tree, we must assume that people or children utilize these yards to some degree...
what then?
some failure has occured... inclusion is present....
obviously we would have to be there so for me this an exercise in conjecture (to a point), but nonetheless it is important that all sides are understood.

many sides, many sides

shaun05

We don't need to assume anything! We can ask and based on the answer we can make informed decissions.

So assuming there are children (having just said not to make assumptions).

We could reduce the target by erecting a well engineered pergola or telling the children not to play outside in windy weather. If their is no target then who cares if it fails ... other than the wife who would like to take reasonable steps to save the tree?

King koala

Alright here goes, Kieren how about you go and piss in your own pot instead of on other people, I am not a hack and neither is the company I work for roughas guts, I have given a positive response to a legitimate question from a concerned h/o based on three photos they have taken. without acutally seeing the tree in these shots with my own eyes i did not commit to a definte course of action, only tried to get the foot in the door. far as I can tell nothing wrong with that and suggest two other companys that I know of but not personally as to maintain some professional distance.There are plently of other tree mobs in Adelaide that would be deserving of being pissed on in this forum. hell Ive worked for a couple of them and that is why I dont work for them now.
If you have any problems with the two other mobs I mentioned why dont you take it up with them, Branching out conforms to the As standards that I have been instructed in, and I always put in 110% when carrying out pruning or removals, dont believe me well with a 90 odd % customer satisfaction rate for my work or the fact I just completed a 35 grand contract at the Adelaide Botanic gardens including a complex removal inside the conservetry building, If you still doubt me the ring up Enzo or Cliff and ask them. Doesnt mean I still cant get better or learn more than I currently know now as I am more than willing to do so given the opportuinity to do so(thats why I spend my saturdays in class instead of relaxing and drinking beer like alought of my mates get to do every weekend).why- Because I give a SHIT>.
Still dont like me then why dont you come up to our yard some time and talk it over with me and the bossman, bring some concrete evidence with you,
looking forward to a meet and greet.

kieren

King Koala I was not taking a dig at you only the company's that you recommend, research companies better before you recommend them! Im sure that your company has done a lot of high profile jobs, most companies have. Ive not worked for Branching out But have seen them driving around and on the job, I was not very impressed with the appearance of the machinery nor the appearance of the work crews. That is not to say you are not a good bunch of blokes but the image projected in my opinion was sloppy and the pruning was for lack of a better word lopping. This may have been what the client asked for, but it is our role to inform of best practice and some times walk away when you cant change there mind.
Its good to know you care about trees and seeing you on this forum is proof of that! I have made no comment of liking or not liking you and dont think i will come to your yard to get my head beat in. but if you would like to meet for a chat over a beer i would welcome the opportunity to do so!

Jeff Darby

Lets keep it cival folks..otherwise it's off to the poky for the bad boys...

__________________

Member: Australian Tree Association

Join the Australian Tree Association...Have your voice heard !

Arboriculture, A life long study for some, a passing phase for others

© Jeffrey J Darby 2011

Eric Frei

Dang, you'd think for a town where there's spot fines for dope they'd be a little more chilled out.

__________________

kieren

Ok Ok sorry lads didnt mean to start a row cant help taking the piss

Cole

HAHAHAHA thats hilarious, id have to agree shit looking trucks chippers and guys doesnt look good, haha look out its the tree world police

Jeff Darby

Forever vigilant ...the rest is up to you


Moving on..

__________________

Member: Australian Tree Association

Join the Australian Tree Association...Have your voice heard !

Arboriculture, A life long study for some, a passing phase for others

© Jeffrey J Darby 2011