I'll readily admit that I tend to be self-taught about most things related to my work and the rest of life since back in the day. I never quite fit into school the way I wanted since formality, regimen, being part of a group, standardization, taking tests, sitting at desks, having weird classmates and things like that were never all that fun for me. I seemed to do best to have seeds planted in whatever way they would be, and go off on my own with discovering how to do things in various ways, outside a classroom. Since the days of the internet, education has been a double-edged sword. Tons more information available than ever before, and immediate access. There's plenty of places for debate and Q&A, too. Problem is, so much of what's out there is just plain wrong, or very bad opinion. So you really need to be able to sort it all out.
However, it's very hard to be certified, accredited, licensed, and so forth without going through courses about this or that. Much of my main profession (construction) doesn't really require such formality. But in the world of tree management, there are certain instances where you either can't get work, or get the work you want without the esteem of going through the schoolin'.
There happens to be an aesthetic pruning course at Merritt College in Oakland, not far from my house. This is one of very few around the country, and maybe the only one, dedicated to this. Since there are billions of trees, it's needed. Just like how there's not nearly enough access to education about construction, my other full-time passion.
I enrolled in these classes. I believe there are 14 classes required within the realm of certification. Rather than the normal system of needing to take all the classes in a course in order to be legit, each class is more or less stand-alone, but all would be needed to actually become certified. There are another 5 or 6 classes that are more specific to this or that, and not part of the required classes. I know some hobbyists and homeowners may want to take a specific class or two without the goal of certification.
OK. So the first class was an introduction. This covered the history of pruning, which was very interesting. I'll probably delve into this more and write another post about this. We then went through the biology and science, and then the specifics of pruning, lightly touching on the basics. The instructor was engaging and very passionate about trees. His interest goes way beyond pruning, into such things as how the interaction with trees led to human civilization, how trees affect our lives in health and mind, how we view trees, how trees have a mechanism for communicating chemically between themselves and how they respond to their surroundings as if they have a brain, and some other areas of interest. We covered how good pruning is every bit as much about art as about health and safety and survival.
I gained a lot of knowledge that isn't easy to happen across from books and web-browsing. Things you can only get when you talk to people that have been around a while. It's easy to ask a question that might be hard to phrase or categorize, and rather than trying to figure out how to arrive at the answer, the instructor is immediately available. From there, you can go off and explore more about the subject at hand.
The second class delved more into pruning how, why an when, specifically about deciduous trees, with some crossover into all plants. There was a bit more science and biology, and a lot of anecdotal experience, which was shared between the instructor and the students. One instance of this is how we learned that cherry trees don't hide their wounds well at all and nasty scars are hard to avoid, so good and frequent pruning these is even more critical than for most trees. I know from experience that cherry trees can look really bad after getting years of mistreatment, but this explanation put it all in perspective. Learning about the peculiarities about a number of specific species is invaluable, and not always very easy to find on your own.
If I were to summarize the classes so far, I would say that everything covered so far is on target with what I've been doing all along, and more of a reinforcement than a revelation. As the teacher and I were discussing during some off time, the more you learn, the more you realize what you don't know and want to learn more about, as is true with any level of expertise in any profession or area of knowledge. The word "expert" is something that people need to be careful to use, since it's not set in stone. I supose the very best of the best in any field would be considered experts, but that absolutely doen't mean that their knowledge won't advance or even change direction as things evolve. The medical industry evolves in such a way. Experts from 50 years ago would be wy outside their league today. Most other industries are similar that way. And just cuz the world of horticulture includes trees and plants that haven't changed much in thousands or millions of years, the understanding does, as does the list of diseases and such, requiring constand updating. So I would call this instructor an expert based on what I experienced, and probably one of the best maybe dozen or so pruners in the state. He may actually dispute this, since actual experts are usually hesitant to call themselves such. He might mention that there are Japanese pruning experts that have been doing this for 70 years, and are truly the best. That may be the case, but I maintain that much of the Japanese method of learning is too involved in tradition, often losing sight of the evolution of the subject. And not to get off topic too much, but Japanese pruning is considered the premier method of pruning, though that certainly doesn't mean they do eveything right and everything else is a step down.
I can't think of anything we learned that is a contradiction of what I've been practicing, but rather a deeper understanding and refinement, along with some stories that increase the interest of this or that. I haven't yet felt any tedium in the class, or that it's just not for me.
So if you're in the SF Bay Area, and want to learn more about pruning or appreciating trees and shrubs, this is possibly the best way to do it. Classes are eaily accessible without red tape and reams of paperwork. The cost is affordable. They're interesting and fun, and the first instructor is a pleasure. I would guess that the other instructors teaching the remaining classes will also be enjoyable. I'll find out in a couple weeks.
Be a Tree Dawg Knight!
Showing posts with label corrective pruning. Show all posts
Showing posts with label corrective pruning. Show all posts
Sunday, February 7, 2016
Tuesday, February 2, 2016
Cutting Up: Pruning Cuts, Reasons and Exceptions
If you get the hankering to study pruning to any extent, you'll find that the opinions are diverse and contradictory. Using logic helps much of the time, but much of the time the science doesn't seem intuitive, as biology often exemplifies.
There are certainly many cases where the rules apply almost absolutely, but there are almost always some exceptions, so the words "never" and "always" have to be carefully regarded. There are certain situations where you have to break a rule for the better good, just like if you have to break into someone's home if it's on fire to save their baby, or drive over the speed limit to outrun a racing tornado.
You first need to understand that much of the information out there is dumbed down. Those who write or teach realize that very few people will get a comprehensive education, so they make it as simple as they can with some rules to follow. Better safe than sorry. But most of the time, the finer points are missed or just disregarded. If you're one of those that just shrugs your shoulders, it's really best to find someone who knows what they're doing. Once they do what they need to do, then maybe you can do maintenance following their examples. If your tree hasn't been touched in years, or has been badly pruned, like most trees have, just once, hire an aesthetic pruner who knows what to do. Well worth it.
TYPES OF CUTS
Generally, you hear about only two types of pruning cuts, thinning and heading. Well, it's more complicated than that. Let's go on.....
THINNING is a type of cut where you remove a whole branch. Can be a huge branch or a tiny branch. It can be removed to a larger or parent branch, or to the trunk.
This is almost always the preferred cut. Confusion abounds, where people think that thinning means taking a lot of branches out of the middle of the tree and leaving almost all the branches except for the bare minimum major branches, at the very fringes of the tree. This is wrong. I'll explain why a bit later.
HEADING is generally the other cut you hear about. This is basically when you just cut off the end of a branch or tip of the trunk or main vertical leader. With anything bigger than a fraction of an inch, these cuts usually look terrible and are ill-advised. But once in a while, they're the best option or necessary. In most trees, if you make a heading cut, the end becomes blunt and stays that way, unless a new branch sprouts from that point. It may or may not depending on the situation. And if it does, it may go off in a weird direction that won't look good. HOWEVER, if you prune roses, pruning is generally made up of a bunch of heading cuts. In most trees, heading cuts are almost always avoidable if you follow a yearly proper pruning regimen and never let things get too far.
RE-LEADERING is a term you'll rarely see, and is generally reserved for those who know their stuff. Consider it a combination heading and thinning cut, from which you'll train a new leader or growing tip. This is done all the time in bonsai, but in landscape trees it has to be carefully considered. HOWEVER, if a branch is growing lengthy and lanky, and you want to promote tapering or side branching (ramification), cutting the tip back to a smaller branch or bud that's heading in the right direction would be smart. In reality re-leadering more like thinning, but back to a branch that either doesn't really exist yet or doesn't quite have enough oomph, even though you know it's there waiting to do its thing.
I use this technique a lot, since I'm very big on proportion and tapering, and re-leadering is frequently the only way to get there. Since apical dominance is so powerful, sometimes a branch wants to head straight out and never look back. This conflicts with creating important side branching and can weaken the branch and mess up the proportions. With re-leadering, you want to avoid cutting anything larger than about 1/2" in most cases, but you need to know what the results will be in any situation. If it's a huge tree, maybe a bit bigger, say up to an inch or more, and on small trees, maybe 1/4" is a bit too big. In any case, it's usually smart not to cut back to anything less than 1/3 the diameter of what you're removing. And it's also best to avoid taking off more than 25% of a given branch, since taking more than that can sometimes lead to die-off, since what's left doesn't have enough vigor, or it can sprout profusely since that removed energy has to go somewhere.
It's best to take out branches before they get to be no larger than about 2" in diameter, since above that thickness requires much more time to callous over. We're very careful not to use the word "heal", since unlike human skin that eventually becomes just like the original in most cases, think of a branch wound as an injury that remains either an open wound or a scab FOREVER. Trees are very susceptible to rotting within the branch column under certain conditions. The larger the wound, the more likely the rot, not to mention the ugliness. In all fairness, some wounds are actually pretty cool looking if they get a nifty ring around the collar. In bonsai, these wounds can enhance the apparent age, but these aren't always desirable. In most cases, it's advised to cut back to a branch that's at least 1/3 the diameter of the branch you remove.
TOPPING is when you simply cut off the top of a leader or trunk, with no regard to how it looks or will respond. This almost always looks terrible, and unless the tree is about to hit something, or has a bizarre protruding angle, or is dead or diseased, there's no reason to do it. EXCEPT if someone else has already done it, and in the course of making it right, you actually need to cut it back even more, as is the case with re-murdering Crape Myrtles that have been previously murdered. People do this a lot with Fruitless Mulberry trees too, and they always look terrible in the dormant season. No reason exists to do this. Why have a terrible tree instead of putting a good one in its place, and making sure it fits?
Re-leadering could technically be considered a form of topping if done on a trunk or vertical branch, though refined and with good reason. So anytime you see it stated that topping is NEVER ok, well, there are some exceptions. But generally it's a terrible thing to do to anything bigger than maybe 3/4" in diameter. And you'd better know what the heck you're doing.
LIONTAILING is the practice where people cut most branches out except for a few major ones, and leave almost all the branching at the fringes. This may actually look ok at a glance, but it eliminates most of the taper which is so important to branches, visually and for strength. What you really want in most cases is one heavy trunk, a few beefy major scaffold branches, a number of secondary branches coming off of those, and then finer and finer branches multiplying all the way out to the tips. There's probably some equation out there that makes sense of how many branches and what size they should be at any point within the tree, but it would be quite variable from tree to tree and always changing as a tree grows. I really find most people really don't get this, including lots of arborists and nursery growers. There's an artistic sensibility. There's also the need to understand how some branches are purely temporary. You may leave them near the base of a branch to increase bulk at that point, but remove them before the removal scar creates problems.
WATER SPROUTS are almost always to be avoided. These are the reactionary sprouts that shoot up vertically following pruning or injury, or other stresses, and some will happen with almost no apparent encouragement. In almost all cases, these are to be removed. I would sometimes leave these in place if I want to fatten up a branch at that point, and remove them before they're the size of a pencil. And if you get a bunch of these in the Spring, or after a flush of growth, it's a good idea to rub them off or cut them when they just emerge. Even if you rub them off, some will re-emege, and it may have to be done several times until the tree settles down. But in some cases, these sprouts may become a viable secondary branch. Probably not if they're coming right out of the top of the parent branch. But I guess a water sprout by definition is really a vertical shoot heading straight up. You'll see these in most vigorous trees, and perhaps the most obvious is plum trees and birches. I just pruned a mature Valley Oak that had some, in response to some major (not good) pruning by the utility company to keep a chunk of the tree from messing up phone or power lines. These companies lack much desire to prune correctly. They want to spend 1/2 hour removing a big chunk instead of 3 or 4 hours making it look good and equally avoiding the impending entanglement. My job is now to try to get that tree to balance out better over time. This will take a long time, since the tree is already at least 50 years old. But even a compromised Valley Oak is usually a pretty cool tree.
Well, maybe this strayed a bit from the main subject, but these are all connected points. Hopefully I made some sense out of it. I'm sure some professionals may disagree a bit on some of the terminology and remedies, but it's mostly dead-on, at least in practice.
I guess the most important thing to take away is, DON'T CUT ANYTHING UNLESS YOU HAVE A GOOD REASON AND A PRETTY GOOD IDEA OF THE REACTION.
TreeDawg out.
There are certainly many cases where the rules apply almost absolutely, but there are almost always some exceptions, so the words "never" and "always" have to be carefully regarded. There are certain situations where you have to break a rule for the better good, just like if you have to break into someone's home if it's on fire to save their baby, or drive over the speed limit to outrun a racing tornado.
You first need to understand that much of the information out there is dumbed down. Those who write or teach realize that very few people will get a comprehensive education, so they make it as simple as they can with some rules to follow. Better safe than sorry. But most of the time, the finer points are missed or just disregarded. If you're one of those that just shrugs your shoulders, it's really best to find someone who knows what they're doing. Once they do what they need to do, then maybe you can do maintenance following their examples. If your tree hasn't been touched in years, or has been badly pruned, like most trees have, just once, hire an aesthetic pruner who knows what to do. Well worth it.
TYPES OF CUTS
Generally, you hear about only two types of pruning cuts, thinning and heading. Well, it's more complicated than that. Let's go on.....
THINNING is a type of cut where you remove a whole branch. Can be a huge branch or a tiny branch. It can be removed to a larger or parent branch, or to the trunk.
This is almost always the preferred cut. Confusion abounds, where people think that thinning means taking a lot of branches out of the middle of the tree and leaving almost all the branches except for the bare minimum major branches, at the very fringes of the tree. This is wrong. I'll explain why a bit later.
HEADING is generally the other cut you hear about. This is basically when you just cut off the end of a branch or tip of the trunk or main vertical leader. With anything bigger than a fraction of an inch, these cuts usually look terrible and are ill-advised. But once in a while, they're the best option or necessary. In most trees, if you make a heading cut, the end becomes blunt and stays that way, unless a new branch sprouts from that point. It may or may not depending on the situation. And if it does, it may go off in a weird direction that won't look good. HOWEVER, if you prune roses, pruning is generally made up of a bunch of heading cuts. In most trees, heading cuts are almost always avoidable if you follow a yearly proper pruning regimen and never let things get too far.
RE-LEADERING is a term you'll rarely see, and is generally reserved for those who know their stuff. Consider it a combination heading and thinning cut, from which you'll train a new leader or growing tip. This is done all the time in bonsai, but in landscape trees it has to be carefully considered. HOWEVER, if a branch is growing lengthy and lanky, and you want to promote tapering or side branching (ramification), cutting the tip back to a smaller branch or bud that's heading in the right direction would be smart. In reality re-leadering more like thinning, but back to a branch that either doesn't really exist yet or doesn't quite have enough oomph, even though you know it's there waiting to do its thing.
I use this technique a lot, since I'm very big on proportion and tapering, and re-leadering is frequently the only way to get there. Since apical dominance is so powerful, sometimes a branch wants to head straight out and never look back. This conflicts with creating important side branching and can weaken the branch and mess up the proportions. With re-leadering, you want to avoid cutting anything larger than about 1/2" in most cases, but you need to know what the results will be in any situation. If it's a huge tree, maybe a bit bigger, say up to an inch or more, and on small trees, maybe 1/4" is a bit too big. In any case, it's usually smart not to cut back to anything less than 1/3 the diameter of what you're removing. And it's also best to avoid taking off more than 25% of a given branch, since taking more than that can sometimes lead to die-off, since what's left doesn't have enough vigor, or it can sprout profusely since that removed energy has to go somewhere.
It's best to take out branches before they get to be no larger than about 2" in diameter, since above that thickness requires much more time to callous over. We're very careful not to use the word "heal", since unlike human skin that eventually becomes just like the original in most cases, think of a branch wound as an injury that remains either an open wound or a scab FOREVER. Trees are very susceptible to rotting within the branch column under certain conditions. The larger the wound, the more likely the rot, not to mention the ugliness. In all fairness, some wounds are actually pretty cool looking if they get a nifty ring around the collar. In bonsai, these wounds can enhance the apparent age, but these aren't always desirable. In most cases, it's advised to cut back to a branch that's at least 1/3 the diameter of the branch you remove.
TOPPING is when you simply cut off the top of a leader or trunk, with no regard to how it looks or will respond. This almost always looks terrible, and unless the tree is about to hit something, or has a bizarre protruding angle, or is dead or diseased, there's no reason to do it. EXCEPT if someone else has already done it, and in the course of making it right, you actually need to cut it back even more, as is the case with re-murdering Crape Myrtles that have been previously murdered. People do this a lot with Fruitless Mulberry trees too, and they always look terrible in the dormant season. No reason exists to do this. Why have a terrible tree instead of putting a good one in its place, and making sure it fits?
Re-leadering could technically be considered a form of topping if done on a trunk or vertical branch, though refined and with good reason. So anytime you see it stated that topping is NEVER ok, well, there are some exceptions. But generally it's a terrible thing to do to anything bigger than maybe 3/4" in diameter. And you'd better know what the heck you're doing.
LIONTAILING is the practice where people cut most branches out except for a few major ones, and leave almost all the branching at the fringes. This may actually look ok at a glance, but it eliminates most of the taper which is so important to branches, visually and for strength. What you really want in most cases is one heavy trunk, a few beefy major scaffold branches, a number of secondary branches coming off of those, and then finer and finer branches multiplying all the way out to the tips. There's probably some equation out there that makes sense of how many branches and what size they should be at any point within the tree, but it would be quite variable from tree to tree and always changing as a tree grows. I really find most people really don't get this, including lots of arborists and nursery growers. There's an artistic sensibility. There's also the need to understand how some branches are purely temporary. You may leave them near the base of a branch to increase bulk at that point, but remove them before the removal scar creates problems.
WATER SPROUTS are almost always to be avoided. These are the reactionary sprouts that shoot up vertically following pruning or injury, or other stresses, and some will happen with almost no apparent encouragement. In almost all cases, these are to be removed. I would sometimes leave these in place if I want to fatten up a branch at that point, and remove them before they're the size of a pencil. And if you get a bunch of these in the Spring, or after a flush of growth, it's a good idea to rub them off or cut them when they just emerge. Even if you rub them off, some will re-emege, and it may have to be done several times until the tree settles down. But in some cases, these sprouts may become a viable secondary branch. Probably not if they're coming right out of the top of the parent branch. But I guess a water sprout by definition is really a vertical shoot heading straight up. You'll see these in most vigorous trees, and perhaps the most obvious is plum trees and birches. I just pruned a mature Valley Oak that had some, in response to some major (not good) pruning by the utility company to keep a chunk of the tree from messing up phone or power lines. These companies lack much desire to prune correctly. They want to spend 1/2 hour removing a big chunk instead of 3 or 4 hours making it look good and equally avoiding the impending entanglement. My job is now to try to get that tree to balance out better over time. This will take a long time, since the tree is already at least 50 years old. But even a compromised Valley Oak is usually a pretty cool tree.
Well, maybe this strayed a bit from the main subject, but these are all connected points. Hopefully I made some sense out of it. I'm sure some professionals may disagree a bit on some of the terminology and remedies, but it's mostly dead-on, at least in practice.
I guess the most important thing to take away is, DON'T CUT ANYTHING UNLESS YOU HAVE A GOOD REASON AND A PRETTY GOOD IDEA OF THE REACTION.
TreeDawg out.
Wednesday, January 27, 2016
Thick at the Base, Thin at the Tip: Trunk and Branch Taper
Taper is one of the most overlooked issues with tree pruning, and perhaps causes the most problems that allow trees to get destroyed by wind or snow. The problem is that a trunk or heavy branch can't be strong if there's not enough taper, or if there's too much weight only at the ends. It can't always support the weight it's holding including its own, especially if there's fruit or heavy flowers. And it really just doesn't look right and shows a history of neglect or improper pruning. If you want to keep a tree a desired size, at least in the near term, it's imperitive that you encourage tapering so that once it's the desired size you can't go back and start over. Tapering gives you more options.
The tricky part is determining how much taper there should be. A trunk and main branches will ever increase in diameter over the years, and you can't stop it. You can slow it down or speed it up with various techniques. Eventually, the trunk diameter will be a good proportion to the overall height, but if the taper is lacking, it won't look right no matter what the base diameter.
There are some different patterns that dictate the amount of taper to a degree. Willows and maples and some birches and various other trees are known to be more slender, so the amount of taper isn't as obvious. But take a look at an old oak tree, and you'll usually see great taper throughout the tree, unless someone has pruned it incorrectly. That's one of the reasons the trees look (and are) so strong. Like a muscleman with thick upper arms, tapering to fairly thin wrists, instead of looking like Popeye.
In bonsai, taper is usually much more encouraged. Some of these old trees are merely 2 or 3 times as tall as the diameter of the trunk, and the trees look very old and permanent and strong. I have a little olive tree with about a 3" diameter base that's only about 10" or 12" tall, but I got it that way from a previous bosai grower and frankly the taper is too abrupt and needs refinement. I strive for a minimum 20 to 1 ratio in all my trees in my collection. In landscape trees, however, you'll never achieve a ratio of probably 10 to 1 or better in your lifetime, at least not in a good way.
As a very rough estimate, without studying many trees with a tape measure, I would probably see good trunk taper as anything more tapered than about 30 to 1, height to base trunk diameter, and 20 to 1 is really good. Once again, I wouldn't expect the latter thickness to be common on a Japanese Maple or a Willow, but on more stocky trees, it's something to strive for. And the taper should really be fairly even all the way to the top, ending at a mere tiny stem at the tip.
Branches wouldn't have this kind of taper, but I would say that in the range of between 30 to 1 and 75 to 1 is pretty good. But you'll often see trees with almost no taper, and the branches might be 200 to 1! Pear trees commonly have nearly untapered branches, and this is one of their downsides. Do what you can to avoid this.
So for a good example, if you have an adolescent ornamental tree that's 20 feet tall, maybe the same width or maybe wider, the trunk should be 8 to 12" in diameter, and thicker as it gets old. A 3" branch coming off the trunk at about 6' off the ground should be from about 8' long to say 15' long, while keeping it all in proportion (height to width of the tree while tapering of branches thoughout). This takes some thought and planning and a good aesthetic sense.
Proper pruning will also allow you to control the direction better, and promoting more horizontal branching than vertical is usually better, even in fastigate or upright trees like poplars or liquidambers, some birches, and lots of conifers.
Of course, as you bring a tree home from the nursery, they're usually 6' to 10' tall, with a base diameter of about 3/4" to 1-1/2". Nobody's gonna wait for great tapering before putting it in the ground. They want to get the trees in the ground and on their way. And then they stake the tree so it won't fall over or curve too much, though staking weakens the tree, and in my opinion makes trees grow too perfectly straight. So it'll take at least 7 to 10 years in most cases before the trees get decent trunks and scaffold branches. As a side note, remove those stakes as early as you can. I've seen trees with stakes left in for 20 years or more, with the trunk growing around and devouring the big black rubber band. That REALLY shows that people paid no attention to their trees after the first couple years.
I'll keep working on this and see if I can get some better numbers and some pictures to demonstrate. In the meantime, give this some attention when you start to prune a tree. Strive for even tapering, never blunt tips of long, untapered branches. Ramification is so important.
The tricky part is determining how much taper there should be. A trunk and main branches will ever increase in diameter over the years, and you can't stop it. You can slow it down or speed it up with various techniques. Eventually, the trunk diameter will be a good proportion to the overall height, but if the taper is lacking, it won't look right no matter what the base diameter.
There are some different patterns that dictate the amount of taper to a degree. Willows and maples and some birches and various other trees are known to be more slender, so the amount of taper isn't as obvious. But take a look at an old oak tree, and you'll usually see great taper throughout the tree, unless someone has pruned it incorrectly. That's one of the reasons the trees look (and are) so strong. Like a muscleman with thick upper arms, tapering to fairly thin wrists, instead of looking like Popeye.
In bonsai, taper is usually much more encouraged. Some of these old trees are merely 2 or 3 times as tall as the diameter of the trunk, and the trees look very old and permanent and strong. I have a little olive tree with about a 3" diameter base that's only about 10" or 12" tall, but I got it that way from a previous bosai grower and frankly the taper is too abrupt and needs refinement. I strive for a minimum 20 to 1 ratio in all my trees in my collection. In landscape trees, however, you'll never achieve a ratio of probably 10 to 1 or better in your lifetime, at least not in a good way.
As a very rough estimate, without studying many trees with a tape measure, I would probably see good trunk taper as anything more tapered than about 30 to 1, height to base trunk diameter, and 20 to 1 is really good. Once again, I wouldn't expect the latter thickness to be common on a Japanese Maple or a Willow, but on more stocky trees, it's something to strive for. And the taper should really be fairly even all the way to the top, ending at a mere tiny stem at the tip.
Branches wouldn't have this kind of taper, but I would say that in the range of between 30 to 1 and 75 to 1 is pretty good. But you'll often see trees with almost no taper, and the branches might be 200 to 1! Pear trees commonly have nearly untapered branches, and this is one of their downsides. Do what you can to avoid this.
So for a good example, if you have an adolescent ornamental tree that's 20 feet tall, maybe the same width or maybe wider, the trunk should be 8 to 12" in diameter, and thicker as it gets old. A 3" branch coming off the trunk at about 6' off the ground should be from about 8' long to say 15' long, while keeping it all in proportion (height to width of the tree while tapering of branches thoughout). This takes some thought and planning and a good aesthetic sense.
Proper pruning will also allow you to control the direction better, and promoting more horizontal branching than vertical is usually better, even in fastigate or upright trees like poplars or liquidambers, some birches, and lots of conifers.
Of course, as you bring a tree home from the nursery, they're usually 6' to 10' tall, with a base diameter of about 3/4" to 1-1/2". Nobody's gonna wait for great tapering before putting it in the ground. They want to get the trees in the ground and on their way. And then they stake the tree so it won't fall over or curve too much, though staking weakens the tree, and in my opinion makes trees grow too perfectly straight. So it'll take at least 7 to 10 years in most cases before the trees get decent trunks and scaffold branches. As a side note, remove those stakes as early as you can. I've seen trees with stakes left in for 20 years or more, with the trunk growing around and devouring the big black rubber band. That REALLY shows that people paid no attention to their trees after the first couple years.
I'll keep working on this and see if I can get some better numbers and some pictures to demonstrate. In the meantime, give this some attention when you start to prune a tree. Strive for even tapering, never blunt tips of long, untapered branches. Ramification is so important.
Wednesday, January 6, 2016
So Disagreeable Like on Capitol Hill: Experts Confuse the Pruning Universe
I don't know if I've seen any other subject besides politics and pruning, where the experts and people we look to for guidance can so disagree on fundamentals.
I can't say most of them are wrong, but approaches can be quite contrary. I've read hundreds of articles on most aspects of pruning. The only thing I can do is try to understand where they're coming from, see if there's a consensus, throw out what doesn't make sense, put some logic to it, apply personal experience, and in many cases think outside the box.
I believe that most writers on the subject realize that teaching someone all about pruning within a short article is really hard without the reader losing patience. And the reader may have little, if any experience on the subject. Because of this, most articles really tend to dumb things down to the point where the student can't screw things up too badly or poke their eye out or fall off a ladder or cut their finger off, but they miss the mark on some of the finer or more confusing points.
You should also understand that most people simply ignore their trees for extended periods, then over-prune to make up for it. I never recommend this, but since it's human nature, the guides tend to reflect this approach.
You'll see most articles focus on how to cut properly, but spend less time on where and why to cut or not cut this or that, and consequences of every cut. I find that the instructions on how to cut are usually accurate and quite good. Since you can find these instructions everywhere, I tend to avoid spending much time on that. I spend much more time preaching about the where, why, and when.
I see perhaps the most confusing subject is when to prune this or that. You'll usually see it mentioned that most trees and shrubs should be pruned during late winter, early spring, or summer, depending on the specie, when it flowers, and your goal. I rarely see anything mentioned about how your climate affects this timing. This is puzzling. If you live in Miami, shouldn't your timing be different than if you're in Fargo? Maybe it doesn't change that much with certain species, or a specific tree simply doesn't grow in your location, so the point may be meaningless at times.
Plenty of articles deal with timing your pruning for maximum flowering or fruiting benefit. They're pretty much on the mark, but they don't deal with some finer issues about pruning throughout the year, which I write about a lot. Many articles deal with trees that are problematic, either because they catch disease easily or bleed heavily b or respond to pruning in notable ways. But some of this advice may be contradictory. For instance, pruning a birch or elm during the summer may be best to avoid bleeding or water sprouts, etc., but the cuts can attract well-known pests that can kill the tree. So it seems most articles reflect the better decision, though you have to learn more to make the right decision. Once again, as I can't mention often enough, frequent, minor pruning is much better than infrequent, major pruning.
I have a post or two that deal with timing. My rationale is a based on many hours of research, and as things progress, my approach may change somewhat, just as it may change from one individual tree to another of the same specie.
Regarding thinning, heading back, topping, pollarding, Crape Murder, butchery, etc. I have very strong feelings about all of these treatments and those opinions run rampant throughout my posts. Be very careful while watching videos. Much more often than not, the ones that claim to show you the right way, don't.
Isn't this fun?
I can't say most of them are wrong, but approaches can be quite contrary. I've read hundreds of articles on most aspects of pruning. The only thing I can do is try to understand where they're coming from, see if there's a consensus, throw out what doesn't make sense, put some logic to it, apply personal experience, and in many cases think outside the box.
I believe that most writers on the subject realize that teaching someone all about pruning within a short article is really hard without the reader losing patience. And the reader may have little, if any experience on the subject. Because of this, most articles really tend to dumb things down to the point where the student can't screw things up too badly or poke their eye out or fall off a ladder or cut their finger off, but they miss the mark on some of the finer or more confusing points.
You should also understand that most people simply ignore their trees for extended periods, then over-prune to make up for it. I never recommend this, but since it's human nature, the guides tend to reflect this approach.
You'll see most articles focus on how to cut properly, but spend less time on where and why to cut or not cut this or that, and consequences of every cut. I find that the instructions on how to cut are usually accurate and quite good. Since you can find these instructions everywhere, I tend to avoid spending much time on that. I spend much more time preaching about the where, why, and when.
I see perhaps the most confusing subject is when to prune this or that. You'll usually see it mentioned that most trees and shrubs should be pruned during late winter, early spring, or summer, depending on the specie, when it flowers, and your goal. I rarely see anything mentioned about how your climate affects this timing. This is puzzling. If you live in Miami, shouldn't your timing be different than if you're in Fargo? Maybe it doesn't change that much with certain species, or a specific tree simply doesn't grow in your location, so the point may be meaningless at times.
Plenty of articles deal with timing your pruning for maximum flowering or fruiting benefit. They're pretty much on the mark, but they don't deal with some finer issues about pruning throughout the year, which I write about a lot. Many articles deal with trees that are problematic, either because they catch disease easily or bleed heavily b or respond to pruning in notable ways. But some of this advice may be contradictory. For instance, pruning a birch or elm during the summer may be best to avoid bleeding or water sprouts, etc., but the cuts can attract well-known pests that can kill the tree. So it seems most articles reflect the better decision, though you have to learn more to make the right decision. Once again, as I can't mention often enough, frequent, minor pruning is much better than infrequent, major pruning.
I have a post or two that deal with timing. My rationale is a based on many hours of research, and as things progress, my approach may change somewhat, just as it may change from one individual tree to another of the same specie.
Regarding thinning, heading back, topping, pollarding, Crape Murder, butchery, etc. I have very strong feelings about all of these treatments and those opinions run rampant throughout my posts. Be very careful while watching videos. Much more often than not, the ones that claim to show you the right way, don't.
Isn't this fun?
Tuesday, January 5, 2016
Things Almost All Pruners Get Wrong
Almost everyone who trims trees gets at least some of these things wrong. All these issues are discussed in detail in my other posts, so I'm only going to touch briefly on these items here.
In order, these are the most common errors I see in almost every managed tree:
WHORLS
Too many branches originating from the same point. Branches should be staggered. Bonsai artists are usually exceptionally diligent about this, and everyone else can learn a lesson from their styling. Unfortunately, if you don't avoid them very early, you're stuck with them for good and have to make the best of it.
OVERLY-LONG, DISPROPORTIONATE, UNTAPERING, TOO-STRAIGHT BRANCHES
These branches overwhelm the tree's balance, especially in relation to the trunk, create weakness, and just don't look good. This is equally caused by over- AND under-pruning, ironically usually simultaneously.
WAITING TOO LONG
Once you play catch-up, it's a long recovery that may never turn out right.
LIONTAILING
Cutting out way too many secondary/intermediate branches, leaving almost all growth at the very fringes. Good thinning does not remove everything below the top. Ramification throughout the tree is important.
BLUNT TIPS
A tree will always look pruned (not in a good way) if you cut the tips off the branches, pretty much anything larger than the thickness of a pencil. This also leads to over-thinning the canopy if you're thinning out the ramified tips too much. Sometimes, however, this is necessary and good plans will correct this remedy within short order.
VERTICAL BRANCHES/WATER SPROUTS
These are hard to avoid after major pruning in some trees and usually look bad and are unhealthy, so diligent management is key. Frequent, minor pruning is much better. Pruning more than about 25% in most trees is best avoided, and with good, frequent pruning, more than 10% should rarely be needed.
LOW CROTCH ANGLES
Branches should exit from the trunk at angles that increase strength and look good. Included bark is best avoided.
TOPPING
This is the queen mother of all pruning mistakes, along with its little brothers, pollarding and Crape Murder. Luckily, most people realize topping is just a terrible thing to do in almost all circumstances. Unfortunately, most people are guilty of pollarding to a point, whether unintentional or semi-intentional.
Ok. Pay attention to this in your own trees, learn about and check out what a really good tree looks like, and be careful who attacks your trees. Pruning is, after all, an attack from which it must recover. You can assault it with infrequent bloody violence or give it a frequent attack of sweet, sweet love. You decide.
In order, these are the most common errors I see in almost every managed tree:
WHORLS
Too many branches originating from the same point. Branches should be staggered. Bonsai artists are usually exceptionally diligent about this, and everyone else can learn a lesson from their styling. Unfortunately, if you don't avoid them very early, you're stuck with them for good and have to make the best of it.
OVERLY-LONG, DISPROPORTIONATE, UNTAPERING, TOO-STRAIGHT BRANCHES
These branches overwhelm the tree's balance, especially in relation to the trunk, create weakness, and just don't look good. This is equally caused by over- AND under-pruning, ironically usually simultaneously.
WAITING TOO LONG
Once you play catch-up, it's a long recovery that may never turn out right.
LIONTAILING
Cutting out way too many secondary/intermediate branches, leaving almost all growth at the very fringes. Good thinning does not remove everything below the top. Ramification throughout the tree is important.
BLUNT TIPS
A tree will always look pruned (not in a good way) if you cut the tips off the branches, pretty much anything larger than the thickness of a pencil. This also leads to over-thinning the canopy if you're thinning out the ramified tips too much. Sometimes, however, this is necessary and good plans will correct this remedy within short order.
VERTICAL BRANCHES/WATER SPROUTS
These are hard to avoid after major pruning in some trees and usually look bad and are unhealthy, so diligent management is key. Frequent, minor pruning is much better. Pruning more than about 25% in most trees is best avoided, and with good, frequent pruning, more than 10% should rarely be needed.
LOW CROTCH ANGLES
Branches should exit from the trunk at angles that increase strength and look good. Included bark is best avoided.
TOPPING
This is the queen mother of all pruning mistakes, along with its little brothers, pollarding and Crape Murder. Luckily, most people realize topping is just a terrible thing to do in almost all circumstances. Unfortunately, most people are guilty of pollarding to a point, whether unintentional or semi-intentional.
Ok. Pay attention to this in your own trees, learn about and check out what a really good tree looks like, and be careful who attacks your trees. Pruning is, after all, an attack from which it must recover. You can assault it with infrequent bloody violence or give it a frequent attack of sweet, sweet love. You decide.
Thursday, December 31, 2015
Promoting & Perpetuating Potentially Perfect Plant Pruning, Perennially
If you want to make a tree be the best it can possibly be, it takes a little work every year. As much as nature helps, no such thing as a naturally perfect tree. The concept that it's best to let nature take care of it isn't accurate. I'll explain more about that specifically in another post.
ISA standards are proudly followed by the best pruners and arborists, but there's a lot more to it than that. In some cases, you have to break the rules for the greater good. Knowing when to do this is an art. Since most pruners see it as a job and not an art, they usually fall short of the best results, usually by a large margin. It sometimes can be worse if a client dictates that they want things a certain way, or want a more conservative or aggressive approach than what is really the best long-term need
As far as what I strive for in pruning a tree perfectly over the long term, these are the goals:
HIDE THE EVIDENCE
The ultimate goal of any pruning undertaking should be to conceal all evidence that pruning ever took place. Overcoming this paradox takes great long-term planning. I once saw a Beech tree at a show that was renowned for its great balance and taper and lack of visible scars. It was as flawless as Grace Kelly. The tree was probably about 2 feet tall and at least 20 or 30 years old. This nearly perfect, natural-looking tiny tree was the result of meticulous, frequent, strategic pruning. Removing or pinching back a branch at just the right time will reduce or eliminate obvious scarring. Ideally, branches should be cut when they're small enough to heal/seal over within 2 or 3 years, or at least a relatively short time. Any branches over about 1-1/2" in diameter will leave scarring for years, maybe forever. However, if you cut back or remove branches too early, this can reduce tapering and induce sparse branching. This timing and balance is difficult for most pruners to achieve or even understand.
STRONG, TAPERED TRUNK
A thick, tapered trunk will reveal some history, strength and permanence. The trunk by virtue of its texture, shape and bark may also be the most interesting feature a tree has to offer. Careful long-term planning and pruning is needed to achieve a terrific trunk. Just like how our torsos are more important than our arms and legs. But thick isn't necessarily good for us. I have a ratio in mind, of between 20-to-1 and 30-to-1, of the height of the tree in relation to its trunk diameter near the base, tapering to zero at the top. This is good taper. Very young trees won't have this ratio unless you work really hard at it, but mature trees can almost all achieve this with the exception of some naturally stubborn skinny species. But even those species can be optimized. Older trees take on a ratio that may be more like 10-1 or less, which is really solid.
LACK OF DEATH, DISEASE, DAMAGE AND DANGER
Wouldn't we all like this? For various reasons, all trees have branches that just die. Some we can prevent, others we can't. Some branches get diseased or damaged. Some pose an imminent danger of breaking or otherwise causing destruction. We need to remove these as soon as possible. If we don't, the wind and gravity might do it for us, or disease can spread the branch itself. Removing death, damage, danger and disease should be the first step each time you prune. For whatever reason, real or perceived, a living branch can't exist if there's a dead one in the way. Removing dead wood tends to invigorate a tree.
WELL-DISTRIBUTED, TAPERING BRANCHES
This is where almost everyone misses the mark. Too often, you see a whole bunch of branches emerge from the same point about 6 to 8 feet off the ground, grow with inadequate tapering, proportion and angle, bypass important intermediate branches (ramification), and finish with a burst of most of the branches and foliage at the outer edges. Frequent, proper pruning will promote better distribution and balance, creating a far better-looking and healthier tree. Having this ramification is also important so that there is a replacement branch fairly close by in case another branch dies or otherwise has to go, thus reducing bare areas like in Charlie Brown's Xmas tree. Snoopy and Linus can't fix that problem. Only time and spiffy actions can, best case.
AVOIDING WHORLS AND REDUNDANCY
Whenever you see whorls (more than one branch coming out of the trunk or another branch in one spot), it's redundant. A trunk or branch should extend a bit before another branch emerges. Whorls create ugly bulges and eliminate attractive, staggered branching patterns that are much preferred. Some species naturally produce whorls, and in cases where the specie is naturally symmetrical, like a blue spruce or Auracarias, for example, you respect that look. In most other cases, like Japanese Maples, this inherent whorl pattern can and should be reduced or eliminated in the big picture for a more pleasing look.
TRUNK TO BRANCH SIZE RATIO
Simply put, the thickness or length of a branch should not "compete" with the trunk. The trunk is king, The ratio may be hard to target, but generally a branch should be no more than half the diameter of the trunk where they meet and depart. Length is harder to pinpoint. The closer you get to the top of the tree, the less dominant a branch should be. I frequently see White Birches where 3/4 of the way up, a branch emerges just way too thick and long. While this attribute in people might well excite their friends, once you start noticing it in trees, it will gnaw at you like a stain on a necktie, and may be where your eye goes first. In the case of a co-dominant leader, the trunk is nearly equally split in two, either from pruning an existing trunk to become two trunks, or from a branch getting a little too cocky and showing up the boss. More often than not, one leader is better than two. Japanese Maples are frequently trained to have two leaders primarily to increase their real or perceived width.
PROMOTING HORIZONTAL BRANCHING
Most trees look better and are stronger with a more horizontal rather than vertical branching pattern. Certain species, such as White Birches, tend to be more vertical. Even in these trees, doing what you can to enhance a more horizontal pattern is a good thing.
ELIMINATE OVERLY-STRAIGHT BRANCHING
The most interesting trees, aside from super-straight species like Coast Redwoods, have branches that curve or twist, a little or a lot. Valley oaks are most notable for this curvy growth pattern. Branches that keep going straight for a long distance tend to indicate under- or over-pruning, and it's just not very interesting. Proper pruning will promote some curvature, as well as good taper, strength and ramification. And vertical water spouts/sprouts, so often mentioned in my posts, are to be avoided at all costs once they get bigger than about a pencil.
BALANCE FOLIAGE DENSITY
This is a really hard ratio to pinpoint. It can depend on the specie, age, size, or preference. Essentially, you want enough foliage distributed throughout the tree, not just at the very outside, to avoid large voids, but also to allow light and air to penetrate. Japanese Maples are known for having a delicate, airy texture, with the branching being a large part of the appeal. Waterfall-type maples generally have more dense foliage, especially at the edges. Even in those cases where they look great, it would be better for the tree to be opened up a bit and retain some inner branching.
AVOID BLUNT BRANCH TIPS
Nothing is more obvious in pruning than when someone cuts the end of a branch tip off so that it's larger than about the thickness of a pencil, and in smaller or more delicate trees, less than that, perhaps 1/8 or 3/16". Now, during restorative pruning, some of this is unavoidable, but it's better to make it a long-term goal to keep all the branch tips tiny. FYI, cutting the tip off a branch is called a "heading cut". Some pruning guides discourage heading cuts, but they're not bad in all cases, and quite beneficial or even necessary in some cases. You just have to know when.
AVOID POLLARDING, TOPPING, LIONTAILING, MURDER
OK. In case you haven't caught my other articles, I frequently mention "Crape Murder". You need to have a good understanding of this, or you really won't understand good pruning at all. What this term refers to is when the branches are cut off very bluntly at the very outside, with the additional removal of most inner secondary branches. In the spring following this dastardly treatment, the tips of each of the blunt branches explode into multiple, up to a dozen or more, mostly vertical shoots that grow so quickly, long and skinny, that they can't support the weight of the coming flowers or even their own wood and foliage, and they flop over like a sad wet green and magenta noodle. This process is repeated year after year, and each year the tree looks a bit worse until it's utterly hideous. And the removal of all the inner branches over time left nothing to take over in case you want to remove some of these stocky branches. People prune other trees this way, but it's especially common in Crape Myrtles and Mulberry trees. Whatever convinced someone to prune this way, it's never a good idea and can't be justified in the long term. Liontailing refers to removing all inner branching and foliage so that all of it's on the very outside. Not good. Now, once you have this problem with your trees, it'a long process to repair with very diligent, thoughtful pruning that itself won't look great for a few years, but it's like heart surgery, cleaning your garage, or repainting a car. It gets a bit uglier before it gets better. At this point you can't take a conservative approach, and pruning and pinching several times per year is required to get things back on track until it recovers. Luckily, Crape Myrtles, Mulberries, and other vigorous trees that people torment this way are great at recovering from aggressive rehabilitation, even to the point where some trees are cut down to the ground to start all over.
APPROPRIATE THINNING
Thinning is the most common cut. You take it a branch entirely or back to a point where a lateral branch will take its place. Thinning will remove mass if there's too much, or eliminate crossing, rubbing, oddly-directed or parallel branches. If you're removing a portion of a branch back to a lateral/descendant branch, then that branch that becomes the new tip should be at least 1/3 the diameter of that you cut off at that point. This will help keep taper appropriate, and also vigor in a branch that's too small may not be enough to sustain the growth, or the point of cutoff actually could explode in a pollarding style and then you have a we're lot of little branches to deal with. Whenever you make a thinning cut, or heading cut for that matter, new growth will tend to occur either from that point or further inside the tree, usually some of each.
LEAVE TEMPORARY BRANCHES
Some of the most important branches are the ones that are temporary. Technically, almost all branches are temporary, until new ones emerge and develop and older ones die or lose their importance. In many cases, we knowingly let branches stick around just long enough to do a task, knowing all the while that they're doomed within a year or two. Most notably, a branch may be needed lower on a parent branch to help thicken the parent in and around that point. But if we don't like it, we cut it off when it gets to about 1/4", and nobody realizes was there or removed. But if tree branch grows into something we like, we can just leave it. We may not particularly like the look of a tempest branch, but the long-term benefit may outweigh the immediate need for beauty.
BRANCH ORIGINATION ANGLE
Branches may come out of a trunk at almost any angle. They usually come out pretty perpendicular in a left/right orientation, and usually anywhere from 90 degrees (straight out horizontal) to nearly vertical. The closer to vertical it is, the weaker it will be, since the nearly parallel wood to the trunk can split easily. It's best to have an angle at least 30 degrees from vertical, and 45 is better. 90 is a bit much to ask for in certain trees. Many, if not most conifers have more horizontal branching. Though you can't do a lot to determine the angle a branch comes out, you can decide which branch among others close together has the best properties, and remove others that may be a problem. For pruning purposes, you can nudge the branch in a certain direction over time, but the origination angle is pretty well set in wood. Some trees that tend to naturally have more vertical branching, like European white birches, maybe the best you can do is just go for the branches that have a few degrees difference, provided all other deciding factors are equal. Bark inclusion is also a consideration. I'll go into that in another post, or you can research that subject on your own.
CHANGE THE SIZE OR SHAPE
You'll often be told that you shouldn't try to limit the size of a tree, but plant a tree that fits the space. That's mostly true, but you know we all prefer to pick a tree we like and live with the consequences. This happens more with shrubs than trees, so we shear them or cut them back so they don't rub against she house, etc. Trees will tolerate some of this, though shearing isn't usually practical or pretty. So then what? Well, you can control the size to a good degree, at least until it gets old. Then it becomes a lot harder and you should give up. If there's something that can be fixed, great. If not, don't butcher it, cut it down if it's a problem. But controlling the size has to start early in its life, or you'll end up with all sorts of proportionality and growth pattern problems. You simply can't wait until a tree is 20 years old, that you want to hold it to that size forever. There may be some exceptions to this, but it's not a good plan.
More to come............
ISA standards are proudly followed by the best pruners and arborists, but there's a lot more to it than that. In some cases, you have to break the rules for the greater good. Knowing when to do this is an art. Since most pruners see it as a job and not an art, they usually fall short of the best results, usually by a large margin. It sometimes can be worse if a client dictates that they want things a certain way, or want a more conservative or aggressive approach than what is really the best long-term need
As far as what I strive for in pruning a tree perfectly over the long term, these are the goals:
HIDE THE EVIDENCE
The ultimate goal of any pruning undertaking should be to conceal all evidence that pruning ever took place. Overcoming this paradox takes great long-term planning. I once saw a Beech tree at a show that was renowned for its great balance and taper and lack of visible scars. It was as flawless as Grace Kelly. The tree was probably about 2 feet tall and at least 20 or 30 years old. This nearly perfect, natural-looking tiny tree was the result of meticulous, frequent, strategic pruning. Removing or pinching back a branch at just the right time will reduce or eliminate obvious scarring. Ideally, branches should be cut when they're small enough to heal/seal over within 2 or 3 years, or at least a relatively short time. Any branches over about 1-1/2" in diameter will leave scarring for years, maybe forever. However, if you cut back or remove branches too early, this can reduce tapering and induce sparse branching. This timing and balance is difficult for most pruners to achieve or even understand.
STRONG, TAPERED TRUNK
A thick, tapered trunk will reveal some history, strength and permanence. The trunk by virtue of its texture, shape and bark may also be the most interesting feature a tree has to offer. Careful long-term planning and pruning is needed to achieve a terrific trunk. Just like how our torsos are more important than our arms and legs. But thick isn't necessarily good for us. I have a ratio in mind, of between 20-to-1 and 30-to-1, of the height of the tree in relation to its trunk diameter near the base, tapering to zero at the top. This is good taper. Very young trees won't have this ratio unless you work really hard at it, but mature trees can almost all achieve this with the exception of some naturally stubborn skinny species. But even those species can be optimized. Older trees take on a ratio that may be more like 10-1 or less, which is really solid.
LACK OF DEATH, DISEASE, DAMAGE AND DANGER
Wouldn't we all like this? For various reasons, all trees have branches that just die. Some we can prevent, others we can't. Some branches get diseased or damaged. Some pose an imminent danger of breaking or otherwise causing destruction. We need to remove these as soon as possible. If we don't, the wind and gravity might do it for us, or disease can spread the branch itself. Removing death, damage, danger and disease should be the first step each time you prune. For whatever reason, real or perceived, a living branch can't exist if there's a dead one in the way. Removing dead wood tends to invigorate a tree.
WELL-DISTRIBUTED, TAPERING BRANCHES
This is where almost everyone misses the mark. Too often, you see a whole bunch of branches emerge from the same point about 6 to 8 feet off the ground, grow with inadequate tapering, proportion and angle, bypass important intermediate branches (ramification), and finish with a burst of most of the branches and foliage at the outer edges. Frequent, proper pruning will promote better distribution and balance, creating a far better-looking and healthier tree. Having this ramification is also important so that there is a replacement branch fairly close by in case another branch dies or otherwise has to go, thus reducing bare areas like in Charlie Brown's Xmas tree. Snoopy and Linus can't fix that problem. Only time and spiffy actions can, best case.
AVOIDING WHORLS AND REDUNDANCY
Whenever you see whorls (more than one branch coming out of the trunk or another branch in one spot), it's redundant. A trunk or branch should extend a bit before another branch emerges. Whorls create ugly bulges and eliminate attractive, staggered branching patterns that are much preferred. Some species naturally produce whorls, and in cases where the specie is naturally symmetrical, like a blue spruce or Auracarias, for example, you respect that look. In most other cases, like Japanese Maples, this inherent whorl pattern can and should be reduced or eliminated in the big picture for a more pleasing look.
TRUNK TO BRANCH SIZE RATIO
Simply put, the thickness or length of a branch should not "compete" with the trunk. The trunk is king, The ratio may be hard to target, but generally a branch should be no more than half the diameter of the trunk where they meet and depart. Length is harder to pinpoint. The closer you get to the top of the tree, the less dominant a branch should be. I frequently see White Birches where 3/4 of the way up, a branch emerges just way too thick and long. While this attribute in people might well excite their friends, once you start noticing it in trees, it will gnaw at you like a stain on a necktie, and may be where your eye goes first. In the case of a co-dominant leader, the trunk is nearly equally split in two, either from pruning an existing trunk to become two trunks, or from a branch getting a little too cocky and showing up the boss. More often than not, one leader is better than two. Japanese Maples are frequently trained to have two leaders primarily to increase their real or perceived width.
PROMOTING HORIZONTAL BRANCHING
Most trees look better and are stronger with a more horizontal rather than vertical branching pattern. Certain species, such as White Birches, tend to be more vertical. Even in these trees, doing what you can to enhance a more horizontal pattern is a good thing.
ELIMINATE OVERLY-STRAIGHT BRANCHING
The most interesting trees, aside from super-straight species like Coast Redwoods, have branches that curve or twist, a little or a lot. Valley oaks are most notable for this curvy growth pattern. Branches that keep going straight for a long distance tend to indicate under- or over-pruning, and it's just not very interesting. Proper pruning will promote some curvature, as well as good taper, strength and ramification. And vertical water spouts/sprouts, so often mentioned in my posts, are to be avoided at all costs once they get bigger than about a pencil.
BALANCE FOLIAGE DENSITY
This is a really hard ratio to pinpoint. It can depend on the specie, age, size, or preference. Essentially, you want enough foliage distributed throughout the tree, not just at the very outside, to avoid large voids, but also to allow light and air to penetrate. Japanese Maples are known for having a delicate, airy texture, with the branching being a large part of the appeal. Waterfall-type maples generally have more dense foliage, especially at the edges. Even in those cases where they look great, it would be better for the tree to be opened up a bit and retain some inner branching.
AVOID BLUNT BRANCH TIPS
Nothing is more obvious in pruning than when someone cuts the end of a branch tip off so that it's larger than about the thickness of a pencil, and in smaller or more delicate trees, less than that, perhaps 1/8 or 3/16". Now, during restorative pruning, some of this is unavoidable, but it's better to make it a long-term goal to keep all the branch tips tiny. FYI, cutting the tip off a branch is called a "heading cut". Some pruning guides discourage heading cuts, but they're not bad in all cases, and quite beneficial or even necessary in some cases. You just have to know when.
AVOID POLLARDING, TOPPING, LIONTAILING, MURDER
OK. In case you haven't caught my other articles, I frequently mention "Crape Murder". You need to have a good understanding of this, or you really won't understand good pruning at all. What this term refers to is when the branches are cut off very bluntly at the very outside, with the additional removal of most inner secondary branches. In the spring following this dastardly treatment, the tips of each of the blunt branches explode into multiple, up to a dozen or more, mostly vertical shoots that grow so quickly, long and skinny, that they can't support the weight of the coming flowers or even their own wood and foliage, and they flop over like a sad wet green and magenta noodle. This process is repeated year after year, and each year the tree looks a bit worse until it's utterly hideous. And the removal of all the inner branches over time left nothing to take over in case you want to remove some of these stocky branches. People prune other trees this way, but it's especially common in Crape Myrtles and Mulberry trees. Whatever convinced someone to prune this way, it's never a good idea and can't be justified in the long term. Liontailing refers to removing all inner branching and foliage so that all of it's on the very outside. Not good. Now, once you have this problem with your trees, it'a long process to repair with very diligent, thoughtful pruning that itself won't look great for a few years, but it's like heart surgery, cleaning your garage, or repainting a car. It gets a bit uglier before it gets better. At this point you can't take a conservative approach, and pruning and pinching several times per year is required to get things back on track until it recovers. Luckily, Crape Myrtles, Mulberries, and other vigorous trees that people torment this way are great at recovering from aggressive rehabilitation, even to the point where some trees are cut down to the ground to start all over.
APPROPRIATE THINNING
Thinning is the most common cut. You take it a branch entirely or back to a point where a lateral branch will take its place. Thinning will remove mass if there's too much, or eliminate crossing, rubbing, oddly-directed or parallel branches. If you're removing a portion of a branch back to a lateral/descendant branch, then that branch that becomes the new tip should be at least 1/3 the diameter of that you cut off at that point. This will help keep taper appropriate, and also vigor in a branch that's too small may not be enough to sustain the growth, or the point of cutoff actually could explode in a pollarding style and then you have a we're lot of little branches to deal with. Whenever you make a thinning cut, or heading cut for that matter, new growth will tend to occur either from that point or further inside the tree, usually some of each.
LEAVE TEMPORARY BRANCHES
Some of the most important branches are the ones that are temporary. Technically, almost all branches are temporary, until new ones emerge and develop and older ones die or lose their importance. In many cases, we knowingly let branches stick around just long enough to do a task, knowing all the while that they're doomed within a year or two. Most notably, a branch may be needed lower on a parent branch to help thicken the parent in and around that point. But if we don't like it, we cut it off when it gets to about 1/4", and nobody realizes was there or removed. But if tree branch grows into something we like, we can just leave it. We may not particularly like the look of a tempest branch, but the long-term benefit may outweigh the immediate need for beauty.
BRANCH ORIGINATION ANGLE
Branches may come out of a trunk at almost any angle. They usually come out pretty perpendicular in a left/right orientation, and usually anywhere from 90 degrees (straight out horizontal) to nearly vertical. The closer to vertical it is, the weaker it will be, since the nearly parallel wood to the trunk can split easily. It's best to have an angle at least 30 degrees from vertical, and 45 is better. 90 is a bit much to ask for in certain trees. Many, if not most conifers have more horizontal branching. Though you can't do a lot to determine the angle a branch comes out, you can decide which branch among others close together has the best properties, and remove others that may be a problem. For pruning purposes, you can nudge the branch in a certain direction over time, but the origination angle is pretty well set in wood. Some trees that tend to naturally have more vertical branching, like European white birches, maybe the best you can do is just go for the branches that have a few degrees difference, provided all other deciding factors are equal. Bark inclusion is also a consideration. I'll go into that in another post, or you can research that subject on your own.
CHANGE THE SIZE OR SHAPE
You'll often be told that you shouldn't try to limit the size of a tree, but plant a tree that fits the space. That's mostly true, but you know we all prefer to pick a tree we like and live with the consequences. This happens more with shrubs than trees, so we shear them or cut them back so they don't rub against she house, etc. Trees will tolerate some of this, though shearing isn't usually practical or pretty. So then what? Well, you can control the size to a good degree, at least until it gets old. Then it becomes a lot harder and you should give up. If there's something that can be fixed, great. If not, don't butcher it, cut it down if it's a problem. But controlling the size has to start early in its life, or you'll end up with all sorts of proportionality and growth pattern problems. You simply can't wait until a tree is 20 years old, that you want to hold it to that size forever. There may be some exceptions to this, but it's not a good plan.
More to come............
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)