Why Topping? + Dead Wooding| Dead Wood

defex · 9th November 2007, 04:25 PM

I always wondered why people use Topping as a service here in California, I like to call it massacre. Anyways can anyone give me a valid point of why anyone now even think of topping trees?

Sean Freeman · 9th November 2007, 05:52 PM

The truth I'm afraid like so much in our world is lazyness...now I'm not writing about Utility companies that cut trees and other vegetation to protect their asset, and ours the supply lines....(although I am constantly frustrated by the impotence of local authorities to educate the public and manage these trees in relation to power properly..ie remove and replace innappropriate species and properly prune the others)

In Oz we generally call topping-lopping its the same thing....why do hacks do it? Well simply because its quick and easy, no big timber to work and process, no time taken trying to undertake target pruning or judge dose (not that any of them even understand what dose is)

Why do tree owners want this damage done to their trees? I think the vast majority of tree owners have no concept of tree biology, they just view trees as big versions of their little shrubs and bushes...so anything goes..again education is the answer but so long as LGA's and big corporate bodies continue to endorse lopping and topping that brick wall is long high and thick.

Its not all bad news very slowly and with numerous backward stepd things are changing, OH&S is beginning to erode the falsehood that anything goes, standards are steadily making inrodes into the realm of tree work even here in NQ.

newguy18 · 9th November 2007, 05:59 PM

I have removed quite a few trees where just the top died in it but could just removing the dead tissue from the tree hurt it or would it in effect be like deadwooding.I'm asking only because i don't know and this has puzzeled me for some time.

Sean Freeman · 9th November 2007, 06:09 PM

Dead tops in any tree species is a very bad indicator, in effect the tree has lost the ability to continue to grow through the apical meristem...even in strongly decurrent species, this forces the system to re-establish a new leader, re-establish hormonal control over the growth of all tips....its incredibly expensive energetically and the tree pays a great cost for it...often the cost is too high and the debt increases and increases until it can no longer sustain even the slightest environmental pressure and the whole system collapses..the tree dies.

Removing deadwood (certainly older deadwood) does no harm to the tree....it does (if removed from the area) rob the ecosystem of essential carbon resources, and this is a big issue in many parts of the world USA Canada and Oz.
I tend to argue for less and less deadwood removal these days, without targets there is no reason to do it, and plenty not to. Where targets exist, or owners are insistant then yes cut only dead tissue, don't fuss too much about getting very close to natural targets since with older deadwood the tree has already created the chemical barriers between the non-functional and functional tissues.

newguy18 · 9th November 2007, 07:01 PM

Thanks Sean I'll just stick to removing them.Around here if it doesn't have a target right underneath it nine times out of ten most people just leave them alone.

treestyle · 9th November 2007, 07:12 PM

Sean,

You spoke about judging "dose".
I must admit that i don't know what you mean by that.

Thanks

Ekka · 9th November 2007, 07:19 PM

The amount of pruning (removal of canopy) the tree can sustain without negative impact.

Depends on species, age, vigour, location etc.

On very old trees often 5% per annum is suggested as maximum dose ... in an orchard it could be 50% etc.

The tree is a balanced unit, balanced between roots and canopy. Excessive canopy removal creates an imbalance which negatively affects the tree. New shoots (epicormics) are one reaction as the tree tries to replace foliage, you also have root problems plus pest/insect/disease problems that can arise.

Hope that helps.

treestyle · 9th November 2007, 07:26 PM

thanks Ekka!

Sean Freeman · 9th November 2007, 08:04 PM

Agree entirely with Eric's definition

I was off looking at pics of ice storm trees (beautiful pics!)

Dose is one of those concepts that as Arborists we get better at judging it the longer we work with trees and the deeper we become envolved with the trees we work on. The longer the period of observation on the effects of all kinds of impacts on specific species in specific environments the better able we are to predict what potential impacts say a 20% reduction on one elongated scaffold limb on say Euc camaldulensis (to cross over to another thread!) will have.

Arboriculture is not an exact science we just don't have enough reliable data over long enough periods and our subjects are so very variable, the natives I work on interact with their changing environment very differently to the exotics, and even within the same State the trees (same species) Eric works on are often very different in form and structural integrity to those I encounter up here...Grevillea robusta is an example that comes immediately to mind, does very poorly here, have only seen probably 5 good reliable specimens in 15yrs up here, yet the same tree does visually very well in and around Brisbane...the further South you go the better it likes it...they look great along the banks of the Parramatta river.

Basic tree biology and physiology doesn't change no matter where you are but your understanding of how particular environmental conditions here you live and work effect the growth patterns and cycles of specific species will have a massive influence on how you interpret dose for each and every tree...I view dose as much as a measure of how much pressure a tree can sustain in the long term rather than applying it solely to the process of pruning...so that would include root loss through trenching, compaction soil contamination etc...alterations in water cycles, impervious cover etc...

I hope I have made at least some of that makes sense to you, and not merely made it more confusing!.

mdvaden · 9th November 2007, 08:06 PM

When in Los Angeles, a few weeks ago, I could see evidence of previous topping, but not a lot in the areas I travelled through, which was hit and miss.

But there was a little bit.

There are a couple of reasons for using the term in ads:

1. That's what the service plans to do a lot of.

2. They don't want to promote topping, but suspect that's what people might be looking for - not knowing what it really means.

But my guess is that most of the better arborists would not use the term "topping" in their ads at all.

Almost thought I'd get another chance to drive down this autumn to deliver a truckload of stuff to our daughter and her husband at Camp Pendleton, but the military men are going to arrange shipment. Oh..well..

Am really looking forward to visiting the big city again. When and if I get back there, I'd like to stay at least a week - not just a couple of days.

Ekka · 9th November 2007, 08:21 PM

Even the insurance papers for our business state "tree lopper"!

And they aint changing it, plus what we do is called tree lopping. That's pretty much ingrained in our language, from courts to media to Mrs Jones's backyard.

However on my website I have tried to use this term rather cleverly ....

Quote:

Traditionally in Brisbane the term tree lopping meant cutting the tree down to ground level, we refer to that as tree removal. If you wanted your tree cut in half (refering to trees not shrubs), like say cutting a 100' gum tree down to 50' high that is called topping within the industry ... but quite a few people do incorrectly refer to that as tree lopping also.

Brisbane Palm and Tree Services| Qualified Tree Lopping| Arborist Reports

treeseer · 16th November 2007, 06:46 PM

Sean I think deadwooding is usually good for the tree. As for natural targets i e collars, they move out onto dead limbs, so the better criterion for a cut location is to avoid damaging stem tissue even if it is 50 cm out on the branch!

Sean Freeman · 16th November 2007, 07:10 PM

Guy, I am less and less convinced that the removal of deadwood is in the interests of the tree nor more importantly in the interests of the ecological community (if one exists) around the tree.
Sure there will be instances hen deadwood represents a significant risk to persons and property then remove it, but beyond that for me leave it be.
Tree owners often have very different views on what they wish to see in the canopy of their trees and this is something that requires careful discussion/persuasion people generally like clean branches and limbs all (or 90%) live foliage and no (very little) deadwood, and if they are prepared to pay for the time to remove it fine but I won't try to sell such a service to anyone.
The instances when deadwood represents a health problem to the tree are very specific and unusaul in my experience, where that would be the case of course there's no objection to its removal.

newguy18 · 16th November 2007, 08:22 PM

Now i'm confused about pollarding.Is it good for trees or is it like an extreme form of topping?

Sean Freeman · 16th November 2007, 09:25 PM

Every time we make a cut into living tissue we cause an injury to the tree...therefore all pruning (of live timber) is "bad" for the tree, the greater the volume of live tissue removed the worse the impact on the health of the tree.

No I'm not saying there aren't defendable reasons for pruning a tree, just that it is important that we recognise the impact of the cuts we make..irrespective of the intention.

Pollarding has its roots in European social history and the management of timber resources, it became a method of "managing" larger trees in restricted urban areas, based on a 24mth cycle of cutting it was to some an efficient and economical means to deal with regrowth. Is it in some way better than lopping??? Well if the tree being pollarded has been cut since a juvenile and has very well developed pollard heads then sure it is a more sustainable pruning regime than lopping and topping....unfortunately there are very very few examples of such long term pollarding, rather more common in all urban areas are trees that have been lopped and topped in a failed attempt to mimic the pollarding approach.

Is it better to have crap pollarding (really topping) or replace the trees...which given the budget problems all LGA's have would mean less trees, well each community should be involved in such decision making, for me personally I'd rather have fewer but bigger trees in the urban forest and have porper long term management built on worlds best practice, rather than what we have at the moment.....

9th November 2007, 04:25 PM	#1 (permalink)
defex Sappling Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 8	Why Topping? + Dead Wooding\| Dead Wood I always wondered why people use Topping as a service here in California, I like to call it massacre. Anyways can anyone give me a valid point of why anyone now even think of topping trees?

9th November 2007, 05:52 PM	#2 (permalink)
Sean Freeman PDF King & Arborist Extrodinaire Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Townsville Nth Queensland & Gold Coast Sth Queensland Posts: 1,671	Re: Why Topping? The truth I'm afraid like so much in our world is lazyness...now I'm not writing about Utility companies that cut trees and other vegetation to protect their asset, and ours the supply lines....(although I am constantly frustrated by the impotence of local authorities to educate the public and manage these trees in relation to power properly..ie remove and replace innappropriate species and properly prune the others) In Oz we generally call topping-lopping its the same thing....why do hacks do it? Well simply because its quick and easy, no big timber to work and process, no time taken trying to undertake target pruning or judge dose (not that any of them even understand what dose is) Why do tree owners want this damage done to their trees? I think the vast majority of tree owners have no concept of tree biology, they just view trees as big versions of their little shrubs and bushes...so anything goes..again education is the answer but so long as LGA's and big corporate bodies continue to endorse lopping and topping that brick wall is long high and thick. Its not all bad news very slowly and with numerous backward stepd things are changing, OH&S is beginning to erode the falsehood that anything goes, standards are steadily making inrodes into the realm of tree work even here in NQ. __________________ Sean Trees are poems that earth writes upon the sky, We fell them down and turn them into paper, That we may record our emptiness. - Kahlil Gibran

9th November 2007, 05:59 PM	#3 (permalink)
newguy18 Part of the Furniture Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Live Oak Florida home of the crapiest trees you will ever see. Posts: 2,679	Re: Why Topping? I have removed quite a few trees where just the top died in it but could just removing the dead tissue from the tree hurt it or would it in effect be like deadwooding.I'm asking only because i don't know and this has puzzeled me for some time. __________________ Have your say join us today. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzkd_m4ivmc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzfzb...eature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-OqK...eature=related

9th November 2007, 06:09 PM	#4 (permalink)
Sean Freeman PDF King & Arborist Extrodinaire Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Townsville Nth Queensland & Gold Coast Sth Queensland Posts: 1,671	Re: Why Topping? Dead tops in any tree species is a very bad indicator, in effect the tree has lost the ability to continue to grow through the apical meristem...even in strongly decurrent species, this forces the system to re-establish a new leader, re-establish hormonal control over the growth of all tips....its incredibly expensive energetically and the tree pays a great cost for it...often the cost is too high and the debt increases and increases until it can no longer sustain even the slightest environmental pressure and the whole system collapses..the tree dies. Removing deadwood (certainly older deadwood) does no harm to the tree....it does (if removed from the area) rob the ecosystem of essential carbon resources, and this is a big issue in many parts of the world USA Canada and Oz. I tend to argue for less and less deadwood removal these days, without targets there is no reason to do it, and plenty not to. Where targets exist, or owners are insistant then yes cut only dead tissue, don't fuss too much about getting very close to natural targets since with older deadwood the tree has already created the chemical barriers between the non-functional and functional tissues. __________________ Sean Trees are poems that earth writes upon the sky, We fell them down and turn them into paper, That we may record our emptiness. - Kahlil Gibran

9th November 2007, 07:01 PM	#5 (permalink)
newguy18 Part of the Furniture Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Live Oak Florida home of the crapiest trees you will ever see. Posts: 2,679	Re: Why Topping? Thanks Sean I'll just stick to removing them.Around here if it doesn't have a target right underneath it nine times out of ten most people just leave them alone. __________________ Have your say join us today. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzkd_m4ivmc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzfzb...eature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-OqK...eature=related

9th November 2007, 07:12 PM	#6 (permalink)
treestyle Semi-mature vigorous tree Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: North Brisbane Posts: 128	Re: Why Topping? Sean, You spoke about judging "dose". I must admit that i don't know what you mean by that. Thanks

9th November 2007, 07:19 PM	#7 (permalink)
Ekka Eric Frei Administrator - Brisbane L5 (Dip) Hort Cert III Arb + some Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Brisbane Posts: 6,932	Re: Why Topping? The amount of pruning (removal of canopy) the tree can sustain without negative impact. Depends on species, age, vigour, location etc. On very old trees often 5% per annum is suggested as maximum dose ... in an orchard it could be 50% etc. The tree is a balanced unit, balanced between roots and canopy. Excessive canopy removal creates an imbalance which negatively affects the tree. New shoots (epicormics) are one reaction as the tree tries to replace foliage, you also have root problems plus pest/insect/disease problems that can arise. Hope that helps. __________________ Remember to use the "search" function, if you have answers/questions post them so everyone can benefit. Free Tree and Green Industry Link Directory Qualified Brisbane Tree Lopping \| Stump Grinding and Stump Removal Brisbane Brisbane Tree Care, Consultations, Developer, Tree and Arborist Reports Forum Sponsors

9th November 2007, 07:26 PM	#8 (permalink)
treestyle Semi-mature vigorous tree Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: North Brisbane Posts: 128	Re: Why Topping? thanks Ekka!

9th November 2007, 08:04 PM	#9 (permalink)
Sean Freeman PDF King & Arborist Extrodinaire Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Townsville Nth Queensland & Gold Coast Sth Queensland Posts: 1,671	Re: Why Topping? Agree entirely with Eric's definition I was off looking at pics of ice storm trees (beautiful pics!) Dose is one of those concepts that as Arborists we get better at judging it the longer we work with trees and the deeper we become envolved with the trees we work on. The longer the period of observation on the effects of all kinds of impacts on specific species in specific environments the better able we are to predict what potential impacts say a 20% reduction on one elongated scaffold limb on say Euc camaldulensis (to cross over to another thread!) will have. Arboriculture is not an exact science we just don't have enough reliable data over long enough periods and our subjects are so very variable, the natives I work on interact with their changing environment very differently to the exotics, and even within the same State the trees (same species) Eric works on are often very different in form and structural integrity to those I encounter up here...Grevillea robusta is an example that comes immediately to mind, does very poorly here, have only seen probably 5 good reliable specimens in 15yrs up here, yet the same tree does visually very well in and around Brisbane...the further South you go the better it likes it...they look great along the banks of the Parramatta river. Basic tree biology and physiology doesn't change no matter where you are but your understanding of how particular environmental conditions here you live and work effect the growth patterns and cycles of specific species will have a massive influence on how you interpret dose for each and every tree...I view dose as much as a measure of how much pressure a tree can sustain in the long term rather than applying it solely to the process of pruning...so that would include root loss through trenching, compaction soil contamination etc...alterations in water cycles, impervious cover etc... I hope I have made at least some of that makes sense to you, and not merely made it more confusing!. __________________ Sean Trees are poems that earth writes upon the sky, We fell them down and turn them into paper, That we may record our emptiness. - Kahlil Gibran

9th November 2007, 08:06 PM	#10 (permalink)
mdvaden Over mature heritage tree Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Oregon Posts: 543	Re: Why Topping? When in Los Angeles, a few weeks ago, I could see evidence of previous topping, but not a lot in the areas I travelled through, which was hit and miss. But there was a little bit. There are a couple of reasons for using the term in ads: 1. That's what the service plans to do a lot of. 2. They don't want to promote topping, but suspect that's what people might be looking for - not knowing what it really means. But my guess is that most of the better arborists would not use the term "topping" in their ads at all. Almost thought I'd get another chance to drive down this autumn to deliver a truckload of stuff to our daughter and her husband at Camp Pendleton, but the military men are going to arrange shipment. Oh..well.. Am really looking forward to visiting the big city again. When and if I get back there, I'd like to stay at least a week - not just a couple of days. __________________ ____________________________________ Grove of Redwood TITANS Oregon BIGOOT trap

16th November 2007, 06:46 PM	#12 (permalink)
treeseer Over mature heritage tree Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: SE USA Posts: 585	Re: Why Topping? Sean I think deadwooding is usually good for the tree. As for natural targets i e collars, they move out onto dead limbs, so the better criterion for a cut location is to avoid damaging stem tissue even if it is 50 cm out on the branch! __________________ Guy Meilleur \| Forensic Arborist \| Better Tree Care

16th November 2007, 07:10 PM	#13 (permalink)
Sean Freeman PDF King & Arborist Extrodinaire Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Townsville Nth Queensland & Gold Coast Sth Queensland Posts: 1,671	Re: Why Topping? Guy, I am less and less convinced that the removal of deadwood is in the interests of the tree nor more importantly in the interests of the ecological community (if one exists) around the tree. Sure there will be instances hen deadwood represents a significant risk to persons and property then remove it, but beyond that for me leave it be. Tree owners often have very different views on what they wish to see in the canopy of their trees and this is something that requires careful discussion/persuasion people generally like clean branches and limbs all (or 90%) live foliage and no (very little) deadwood, and if they are prepared to pay for the time to remove it fine but I won't try to sell such a service to anyone. The instances when deadwood represents a health problem to the tree are very specific and unusaul in my experience, where that would be the case of course there's no objection to its removal. __________________ Sean Trees are poems that earth writes upon the sky, We fell them down and turn them into paper, That we may record our emptiness. - Kahlil Gibran

16th November 2007, 08:22 PM	#14 (permalink)
newguy18 Part of the Furniture Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Live Oak Florida home of the crapiest trees you will ever see. Posts: 2,679	Re: Why Topping? Now i'm confused about pollarding.Is it good for trees or is it like an extreme form of topping? __________________ Have your say join us today. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzkd_m4ivmc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzfzb...eature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-OqK...eature=related

16th November 2007, 09:25 PM	#15 (permalink)
Sean Freeman PDF King & Arborist Extrodinaire Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Townsville Nth Queensland & Gold Coast Sth Queensland Posts: 1,671	Re: Why Topping? Every time we make a cut into living tissue we cause an injury to the tree...therefore all pruning (of live timber) is "bad" for the tree, the greater the volume of live tissue removed the worse the impact on the health of the tree. No I'm not saying there aren't defendable reasons for pruning a tree, just that it is important that we recognise the impact of the cuts we make..irrespective of the intention. Pollarding has its roots in European social history and the management of timber resources, it became a method of "managing" larger trees in restricted urban areas, based on a 24mth cycle of cutting it was to some an efficient and economical means to deal with regrowth. Is it in some way better than lopping??? Well if the tree being pollarded has been cut since a juvenile and has very well developed pollard heads then sure it is a more sustainable pruning regime than lopping and topping....unfortunately there are very very few examples of such long term pollarding, rather more common in all urban areas are trees that have been lopped and topped in a failed attempt to mimic the pollarding approach. Is it better to have crap pollarding (really topping) or replace the trees...which given the budget problems all LGA's have would mean less trees, well each community should be involved in such decision making, for me personally I'd rather have fewer but bigger trees in the urban forest and have porper long term management built on worlds best practice, rather than what we have at the moment..... __________________ Sean Trees are poems that earth writes upon the sky, We fell them down and turn them into paper, That we may record our emptiness. - Kahlil Gibran