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.

How Much is That Dogwood in the Window?: Economics of Tree Care

The mentality people have when it comes to spending money is usually stunning.  And it seems that almost every person has priorities that seem ludicous to others.  They HATE spending money on this, even if it's practical, but don't even think about splurging on some things that don't make a lot of senes in many cases.  I'll get to trees in a minute, but this part puts things in some perspective.  Here are a few examples:

1.  Tons of people will do anything they can to avoid paying for their kids' education more than they have to, but are happy to shell out tens of thousands for a car, or buy a much larger home than they need or really can afford, and will spend hours commuting each week to get to it.

2.  A large percentage of people spend thousands, or even tens of thousands, to bury the dead.  I get that it's an emotional thing, but regardless of your religion or other beliefs, a dead body is pretty much of little value, and the soul is what counts, but it has left the body by that point.  So the body is really just a bunch of chemicals and minerals that need no special, expensive treatment.  I'll be perfectly happy if I'm put into a Hefty bag at my demise, and left on the curb on Friday morning.  If you really want to go to some effort, plant a tree in my honor.

3.  People are really hesitant to spend money on good health care, but have no problem spending tens of thousands on jewelry, when they can get beautiful jewelry that looks every bit as good for a tiny fraction.

4.  A lot of people have no issue with splurging on incredibly expensive football tickets, especially the Suer Bowl, or fancy vacations with hotel rooms that cost perhaps thousands per night.  For a place to sleep, when you really should spend that time touring the place you went to all the trouble to get to.

OK, you get my point.  So on to how trees fit into all this.

Most people who own a fairly nice home or condo pay thousands or tens of thousands to landscape, and quite a bit each year to maintain their landscapes.  Most homeowners will spend at least $100 a month just to have lawns mowed and leaves blown every week or two.  But these same people would never think about spending a few hundred per year to maintain their trees, even though they're permanent and just as important as or more important than a temporary lawn.  A mature tree can't be easily replaced, and it might be worth tens of thousands in value to the home, whereas a lawn can be easily replaced for a small fraction of that.  And you dont have to water a tree much, if at all, whereas grass is very thirsty.

People give little thought to the quality of pruning, and spend money to have good trees butchered by people who don't know what they're doing, mostly because they don't know any better, but also because they're cheapskates.  Or they get the brilliant idea that they can do a good job themselves, but this is highly unlikely.  They pay to have leaves raked, which takes very little skill, but plunge into pruning trees themselves, which takes much skill.  Not so smart.

If you figure a tree should really be pruned twice a year, EVERY YEAR, or at least once a year minimum, as I maintain, then you might be paying $100 or $200 for a very nice tree per year, which will look good all year, including the leafless winter.  You have to figure out for yourself how much this costs for your whole property, but it's unlikely that it will be more than mow and blow.

I was included in a discussion with a very in-demand aesthetic pruner, who does high-end work.  He has clients that have paid thousands or more for a single Japanese Maple, and they gladly pay a few hundred each year per tree to keep them healthy and happy.  You mess those puppies up, and you threw a bunch of money away on a tree that can never be great again.

Keep in mind that the more infrequently you prune a tree, the more it costs per session to prune.  And it basically never can look great or be as healthy as possible if you wait too long.  Common sense tells you that paying twice a year for minor pruning will cost more than major pruning every 5 years, but the cost difference may not be as much as you think.  You might also use that reasoning of infrequency and think that maybe you just mow your lawn 2 or 3 times a year but leave it looking ratty most of the time.   But hardly anyone with a lick of sense would do that.

Give this some thought, and really understand how important your trees are, and why you're probably neglecting them.  Or hacking them up.

Trees in My Collection, "A"

Some pics are my trees, others are just stock photos, mostly off Pinterest.


Abutilon
Pic pending

Apple, Fuji.  Malus pumila

Apple, unknown
Pic pending

Acacia, "Cousin It"  Acacia cognata cousin itt

Acacia, Weeping  Acacia pendula 

Agave

Angel's Trumpet Yellow  Brugmansia Candida

Aralia, Snowflake  Trevesia palmata

Arbutus Marina, variegated

Arbutus Unedo

Athrotaxus laxifolia

Azalea "Ron Kuzon"

The Evil of All Roots: How Trees and Roots Should Expose Themselves

I've been learning more about how roots factor in the equation of a terrific tree.  Well, as it seems most folks usually think about a tree, they think of the overall shape and size first, foliage and flowers second, branching third, bark fourth, and other things like fruit and leaf change in autumn in various degrees of importance.  Your take may be a bit different, and mine certainly is, but that's kinda the normal way we prioritize what we see.

Roots are pretty much ignored.  They're down at the bottom, covered with dirt, so there's not much to see.  But ponder this a bit and your perspective will change.

In bonsai, roots are important to the whole presentation.  Root flare is called nebari, and it's pretty difficult to achieve an excellent system of this.  It's especially hard when we get a potted plant with roots what weren't managed well from the nursery days.  We can learn from a good bonsai nebari with landscape trees.  If we think of the roots as they exit the trunk, they're indeed part of the trunk, and can be just as interesting in many cases, maybe more so in some.  It's a hoot to see a bunch of tentacles radiating out, grabbing the ground, holding on for dear life, and fading into the ground inches or feet away.  Some of the most interesting trees in the world have roots as a huge part of their allure.  Think of one of those huge banyan/ficus trees like in Jurassic Park, or a Bald Cypress with roots and knees from the roots coming up from the ground and water.  Or think about arial roots.  If you haven't seen them on a real tree, they're powerful cool.

Anyway, as it turns out, it's much better for the tree to have the top of their immediate roots exposed right as they exit the trunk.  There's some rot and pest issues and stuff if they're covered over with dirt or mulch or other such nonsense.  As it turns out, if you mulch, you're supposed to keep it away from the immediate tree.  The feeder roots that are actually doing all the hard work are further away, so there's no reason the big fat roots need water.  And it's better to keep those puppies dry right there.  Actually, the tree was supposed to be elevated a bit during planting so water drains away from it. but in most cases trees are planted too low.

I'll have more to say about this later, but this is a good start.

Be a Tree Dawg Knight!

Wonderful tree #3: Silk Floss Tree

Silk Floss Tree, AKA Floss Silk Tree, AKA Ceiba speciosa, AKA Chorisia speciosa.

This is such a great tree, with so many outstanding features, it's hard to know where to start.  First of all, it's hard to mistake this tree for anything else.  Once you see it, you'll recognize more of them easily.

The trunk is hugely swollen as it gets older, which I always love.  Apparently it stores water like a Baobab or a camel or a waterbed.  Then, it has these Hershey's Kisses or nipple-shaped spikes, which are interesting if not attractive to everyone.  These are so prominent that I call this a Titty Tree.  This does, however, make the tree unhuggable unless you like pain.  At least you could scratch your back on the trunk.  Or your front.  But that might look funny.  Then, the trunk is largely green, which isn't common in mature trees.  Looks fresh.  And if that's not enough, the flowers are outstanding.  Add on the silk floss fibers that are useful, and the fruit, which isn't.  Looks like a cucumber, I've heard.

I've seen quite a few of these at arboretums, usually in mild climates.  Southern California and Florida are perfect.  There are a few in Oakland.  I know the Oakland Zoo has a few.  I'm told the biggest one in these United States is in Bel Air at the Bel Air Hotel.  Ooh, fancy.  I'm also told it may be recognized as the most beeeeautiful tree in the country.

So they used to make pillows and life preservers and stuff from the silk floss, which apparently is pretty darn good stuff.  Maybe they use it around the world still. I don't suppose you could use it for dental floss, but maybe.


 I have one of these that's about 4' tall and has a 3" trunk diameter, which is quite thick for such a young tree of any specie.  Having anything that's 3" thick when you're young is impressive.

To be continued..................

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?

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.

Why Pruning Your Trees is Like Raising a Kid

We can all agree that most people can do a better job of raising their kids, right?  Well, suppose the worst parents of all are just oblivious or are repeating some pretty mediocre parenting they received.  If they spent just a tiny amount of time learning about ways to better help their kids grow, it would radically make everything better with even less energy spent in the long run.  We get some training for almost everything else we do in life, why not for parenting, and tree trimming?  By the way, learning from the people on tabloid TV or MTV, or from the guys that stand in front of the liquor store, not the best teachers.

The way I see it, managing your trees is like raising a kid.  Unfortunately, people don't realize for any tree to be a great tree, you have to pay attention to it a few times a year, even if you don't make a single cut.  Trimming it every few years or even less often than that is like ignoring every aspect of what your kid is up to and hoping you can play catch-up, when the kid is all grown up.

For starters, unless you got the tree when it was only a few inches to about 18" tall, someone else already trained it just like a minimum-wage someone raising a baby for you until it's about 3 or 4 years old.  The problem is, nurseries raise trees like they're only expected to be able to be tall and dunk a basketball and nothing else.  No muscle tone and little regard for being a well-rounded individual.

From that point, people may plant a tree and give it just a little bit of trimming at that moment, then do almost nothing else for at least a couple seasons.  The may stake it, which would sorta be like giving your kid a jacket but no pants.  The initial pruning was almost certainly not well-planned or executed.  Staking itself isn't usually a perfect plan, and there's a good argument for NOT staking a young tree, which is like providing a crutch.  One good thing, is that most very young growth is only temporary and pretty easy to correct, sorta like diapers you just throw away instead of an expensive suit that has to last for years.

So a few years go by.  Some of the branches are too long or too large in relation to the size of the tree, or in the wrong place.  So they may get cut back or cut off.  Maybe that's good, but if it's not done right, it's like taking a license away from an underage driver AFTER they got a DUI.  But the kid didn't even understand heavy drinking could lead to any problems.

Jump ahead until the kid is now 15 or 20 years old.  Neglecting pruning every year (or worse, IMPROPER pruning) up to that point is like not paying attention to any of their schooling, physical shape, or habits, and the kid just isn't right.  So you try really hard to correct things, but you need to realize he can never be a world-class anything, but very average at best unless he goes to military school.  You may have such an untrained eye that you don't even see how mediocre your child became.  Not to berate you, because very, very few people have a good eye for a really good tree, including most professionals.  It would be like looking inside a computer and having no idea what any of the doo-dads do.  It's not your fault.  You just weren't trained in such manners.  Imagine if you could suddenly have Steve Wozniak show you what it all means and how to make your laptop run much faster.

There just happens to be another kid in the neighborhood who had good teachers and good parenting.  He never gets in trouble, his clothes are always clean and wrinkle-free, he can have any job he wants and the girls all are giddy around him.  You know how they tell us that we have the potential to be anything?  Trees all start out with an even slate, pretty much. The upbringing accounts for almost all of what it becomes.

So then we get to the point where your little guy is now an adult, say 30 years old.  He's out of shape, clothes are torn, he's in the hospital all the time with infections, has bad habits, and no amount of therapy can be equal to what a great upraising could have accomplished.  Even if you spend thousands, the best that you can hope for is average.  No chance at winning the lottery, even.

Meanwhile, someone else who spent an hour or less 2 or 3 times a year, has a son that turned out great in every way. He needs no rehab, and ends up like someone who had a fantastic but cheap education every year with straight A's compared with someone who went to first-grade and got a D-minus, dropped out of school,  then got an occasional poorly-trained but expensive tutor, and suddenly his parents thought spending a ton to send him to Stanford would make up for all the bad times.

Suppose you spent $100 per year maintaining this wonderful tree, and once it's 30 years old, it only needs to go to a refresher class once or twice a year for an hour.  But this other crappy tree had to be chopped down, or have thousands in rehabilitation costs, along with repairs by a second-rate mechanic who can't do anything about all the dents that can never be fixed.

Which kid would you rather raise?  Which TREE would you rather raise?

Not doing any pruning at all until adulthood comes around is asking for trouble.  Having a completely unqualified pruner trim your tree now and then is like having a drug dealer raise your kid and beat him up.  It's even worse than letting the kid raise himself.

This is all why almost every tree has big problems, at least aesthetically.  Only thing is, most of the problems are unrecognized because the observer can't see what's wrong either because they're not trained to look for things, or because things look good on the surface.  Meanwhile, the best examples of fine trees are in meticulously-maintained parks or Disneyland, where everyone can see how nice they are, even if they can't really pinpoint what's so great.  They just know that they're good examples.  They may wish their trees looked this good, but alas it's too late.  Most of the time.

Suppose your kid was born with a genetic anomaly that requires surgery after they become an adult.  It would be really nice to get the best surgeon you could, to give him the best chance to lead a normal or even exceptional life.  Getting someone who really knows how to work with trees is like having Dr. House, who tends to be able to figure out the best possible remedy while others are just scratching their heads and hanging out in the cafeteria and prescribing the wrong drugs and irritating the impatient patients.  Hopefully your surgeon knows his stuff and isn't so grumpy.

Of course there are other aspects to having great trees, like proper watering, fertilizing, mulching, etc , so pay some attention to those things, too.  But all those things pale in comparison to proper pruning.

Think about your trees early on, frequently, for the long term, and don't ever let butchers get ahold of them under any circumstances.  You'll be super proud of them like your kid growing up to be both an astronaut and brain surgeon with muscular arms, gorgeous hair, dry-cleaned outfits, and nice shoes.  And guess what?  It likely didn't cost much more in the long run to raise them this well than if you totally neglected them until they're in jail, needing an expensive lawyer and a nutritionist and some smokes.

Be a TreeDawg Knight!

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............

Domination, Tip Expansion and Hose Comparison: Apical Superiority

Apical Dominance.  That's a term you should become familiar with and understand somewhat if you're gonna be doing any pruning.  Unfortunately, when it's explained in most texts, it's not explained in easy-to-understand terms, and not even fully understood by science, just like they can't explain why some people intentionally walk around with their pants falling down.  This particular phenomenon doesn't blend especially well with pruning, even more especially if you're doing it in a ladder.

What the term "apical dominance" means, as well as I understand and can explain it, is that the terminal bud tip of a trunk or any given parent branch, at least a more vertical branch, tends to have much more vigor than any later/side branches or buds waiting to become branches closer to or further down the trunk.  The terminal bud is King.  At least until it sprouts and a new one takes over, or it gets knocked off.  With all this hereditary monarchy, No wonder the British like trees so much.

The apical bud, otherwise known as the terminal bud, or tip of the tree or tip of the branch, mysteriously maintains superiority over all other branches and buds lower down the line with a hormone called auxin.  This is the phenomenon that's not fully understood and it may work by means of several different mechanisms.  Terminal buds are like Mr. Potter or some Republicans, who want most of the power and go out of their way to take away the well-being of those below them.

Trees tend to grow tall and have long branches due to this mechanism.  They're more likely to reach the sunlight if they're they're tall while being in competition with other trees.  You might liken this to how humans became dominant primarily because they became taller and more manipulative of their surroundings.

If you cut the terminal bud or the last few inches off a branch, the remaining buds go nuts, trying to take over, much like when a dictatorship is overthrown.  The one closest to the new gmailend tends to take over, but other buds gain some vigor to a lesser degree, at least until the new tip gains momentum.

To maintain the approximate same natural shape as before pruning but in a more compact fashion and with more tapering branches, you want to cut just above a bud that's pointing in the preferred direction, and not at a sharp angle.  There is a tendency if you cut above a bud and not above an actual already-existing lateral/substitute branch, that the bud will generally grow fairly straight and follow the footsteps of the tip that was removed, within, say 10 degrees.  You usually want this new replacement branch to point outwards, maybe up just a bit, or down a bit in some cases.  Some expert may take me to task a bit on this point.

Severe pruning may ruin this natural structure, at least in the short term, and can create more of a bush, lollipop, mushroom, hedge, whatever you want to call it.  It's generally not what you want in a natural-looking tree.  You should strive for a stronger, but generally the same-shape tree as the Good Lord intended in the best specimens.  Of course we manipulate some species to look a certain way while still appearing to be natural.  Kinda how Bruce/Kaitlin Jenner does a pretty good job of approximating the look of a natural woman, with the goal that people couldn't tell what the real story is unless they read tabloids.

For a fun little analogy, let's think of it this way.  Suppose you have a garden hose hooked up to a spigot.  The terminal bud would be like the end of the hose, with a sprayer attached.  The rest of the hose would have pin holes every few inches, back to where it meets the spigot.  If you open up the sprayer fully, almost all the water would come out the end.  If you open up the sprayer about half way but maintain the same pressure from the spigot, most of the water would come out the end, but some would come out of the pin holes.  More water would come out of the holes near the end.  If you shut the sprayer off altogether, the holes would tend to more evenly distribute the water because the pressure isn't focused at the end.  Now, think of removal of the terminal bud as the sprayer you shut off, and poking an even bigger hole in the furthermost remaining pinhole is like the new replacement terminal bud.  Most of the pressure will come out of that new dominant hole, but some will be diverted to the remaining holes, though not a lot.  If you were to somehow be able to immediately put the sprayer over that new, bigger hole, and turn down the pressure of the sprayer very slightly, you can see where this is going.

The side branching tends to be longer further back coming out of a parent branch, because it's had more time to grow.  But as the parent branch lengthens, the vigor of these side branches lessens, and eventually will cease growing or even die, leaving the outermost side branches with the most vigor.  Cutting the patent branch back closer to the lateral branches increases their vigor.  Any side branching contributes to the bulk of the patent branch, increasing diameter and increasing tapering as long as there's some side branching nearest the base of the parent branch.  Concentrating all the growth near the very tip of a parent branch will create a weak branch with little tapering.  Most conifers don't ready tolerate pruning into a parent branch unless there's still fresh foliage behind it.  If all the energy is concentrated at the end and you cut it off, say bye bye to the whole branch.

When people do pollarding, liontailing, topping, etc., they tend to reduce or completely remove branches closer to the trunk and concentrate the energy into the very tips of the branches, and cut the end off too. This is not a good idea and it's just busy work that will lead to repetitive, unproductive annual pruning and in some species, a whole lot of mess coming out the end of a branch and an ugly knuckle.  In fact, people sometimes top their trees in an effort to make the tree more compact, but the effect may be exactly the opposite in time.  This is exactly what people compulsively do with Mulberry trees, which look absolutely terrible for half the year, especially winter, and Crape myrtles, hence the term "Crape Murder".

Pruning that's too severe will frequently cause vertical water spouts/sprouts to form, as the tree reacts to pruning, trying to replace what it lost, sometimes with more vigor than before.  In actuality, there's the same amount of roots as before pruning with energy that has to go somewhere.   During summer pruning, it's more of a two-wayvstreet as the leaves are providing the roots with energy, and removing some of the foliage slows down the tree's growth.  Water spouts/sprouts never look good, and my take on it is that you might leave them for a short time lower down the branch to increase tapering, remove the ones nearest the tip right away, but remove all or at least redirect into a pleasant direction before they become thicker than a pencil and would leave scarring that wouldn't seal (not heal, exactly) over relatively quickly.  Water spouts/sprouts tend to occur a lot more on certain trees than others.  If you look around, you're likely to see some vertical branches in a lot of trees that don't look right, especially if the tree has a more horizontal branching pattern.  Water spouts/sprouts are much more likely to exist with infrequent, severe pruning, than frequent, minor pruning.  It would be like eating well and taking care of your skin over a long period of time, where you can be healthy and look good, instead of going on a crash diet and getting botox, where things just aren't the same.  Interestingly, apical dominance is less pronounced on more horizontal branches than on more vertical branches since gravity helps the auxin move down and stores growth in lower lateral buds and branches  As a result, horizontal branches tend to have more sprouts along the length without pruning, and when pruning is carried out, especially excessively, more water spouts/sprouts.  It may also explain why more vertical branches tend to have less taper and grow faster in length, and aren't as strong for those reasons, along with the fact that the low angle of departure from the trunk makes for a better chance of splitting like firewood with an axe and ruining your day.

I hope this explains things a bit, and gives you a better understanding of why pruning should be done properly, and what the results will be.  Please try to understand the consequences of every cut you make.  And stay away from the botox.

Questions 67 and 68: Pruning Stuff You Should Ask

No, there really aren't that many questions here.  But it's a good Chicago song.  Questions you should ask me, other pruners, or yourself:

1. Do my trees need pruning?
Absolutely.  Almost every tree in the world, including those out in the wild, can benefit from smart pruning.  First of all, every tree accumulates dead material, and there's no reason at all to leave it there.  Second, trees in the wild and in cultivation frequently suffer from wind damage, caused by inadequate tapering or crotch formation.  Third, your trees came from the nursery already with some pruning that wasn't in the best interest of the long-term structure or health of the tree.  Eventually, every tree needs some guidance or correction, and sooner and more frequently is better than when it's in trouble or sick or dangerous or just ugly.

2.  Why should you prune a tree?
First off, if you need to ask this, you're probably not the one that should be doing any of tree work.  A tree should be pruned to clear out dead, diseased and damaged branches; to eliminate crossing, rubbing, parallel, over-crowded branches; to promote balance, taper, strength and ramification; to control the rate of growth and shape in any given area; to decrease wind resistance that can cause damage; to reduce overly-straight or overly-vertical branches/water spouts; to remove suckers that suck the life out of the tree; to remove branches with narrow crotch unions; to remove co-dominant leaders in most cases; to optimize flowering or fruiting (or decrease in some cases); to increase or decrease the vertical height or promote a more horizontal branching pattern; to slow or increase the growth or size; to promote good structure and an attractive silhouette; to correct past pruning mistakes and prevent future butchering by others; to maintain or enhance vigor.  That's for starters.

3.  How often should a tree be pruned?
This depends on how good you want it to look.  Ideally, you prune/pinch several times per year, and each time it takes a lot less work than if you prune infrequently.  This keeps the tree stress-free, and you never have to play catch-up.  Some trees need much more frequent pruning than others for various reasons.  If you pay attention each year, you'll probably never have to remove it.  Pruning this often may not take up any more time than major pruning every few years.

4.  How long does it take to prune a tree?
A tree that's very young and less than about 8' tall might only need a few minutes pruning each time.  A tree from 8' to about 15' is completely dependent on what shape it's in from past pruning or lack thereof.  If I get ahold of a tree this size that hasn't been touched in years or was hacked up, it may take 3 to 6 hours the first time, and perhaps 2 hours the next year, decreasing each year after that.  Pinching at seasonal intervals may take a few minutes up to a couple hours 1 or 2 or even 3 times per year depending on variables, again decreasing over the years.  For trees over 15', it's really a case-by-case basis.  There may be tons of dead stuff that takes time to remove, for one thing.  It's also far more likely that the tree has suffered from poor pruning in the past, and corrections can take some time, over several years in some cases. I tend to be much, much more meticulous than most pruners, so I spend more time than others.  But my hourly rate is very good, so it's win win.  And once a thorough, proper pruning session is done, it's a lot less work each time thereafter

5. Should my gardener do my pruning?
Probably not.  Any gardener that primarily takes care of the lawns, blowing leaves, and shearing hedges is probably not trained or educated or thoughtful enough to do good pruning on trees and shrubs.  This would be like a housecleaner thinking they can install appliances or a hair stylist thinking they can do brain surgery.

6.  What is your rate?
If you have to ask, I'm not the guy for you.  Just kidding.  I don't like to give out my rate for various reasons until we have a discussion.  I will tell you that it's very good, just above what most run-of-the mill accidental tree trimmers or mow and blow guys charge, but much, much less than what tree service companies change with all the overhead and so forth.  But if your not looking for a fantastic job, and just want a quickie job, I'm not the guy for you.

7.  Can ANY tree be improved?
No.  Some trees are too far gone, and they're either gonna die or always be ugly or too big or too messy or the wrong shape or in the wrong place.  But most trees can be improved in every way, some vastly.

8.  Does experience make a difference?
Usually.  It's common sense that the more you do something, the note you learn and the better and faster you become.  However, I see people in the tree trade, construction trade, and every trade imaginable that have lots of experience.  Problem is, they didn't learn well in the first place and continue, stubbornly, with the same bad habits.  Consider that Burger King has made billions of hamburgers.  They still can't produce a burger even remotely as good as a terrific chef that probably never makes burgers.  I see pruning "experts" butcher trees all the time.  They're either just in it for the money, or just don't know any better.

9.  Is pruning messy?
Yep.  There's no way around that.  You can either have me clean up everything, work with me, do it yourself, or have your gardener clean it up.  Unfortunately, it's the last enjoyable part of the job.  You might have wood to burn or material for mulching/composting, if you want to go that route.

10.  Do you take care of diseases?
Some.  Removing disease may be as simple as cutting off branches that are infected.  For other diseases, you'll need to have someone who does infections, spraying, treatment, etc.  And those guys aren't usually the ones you want doing your aesthetic pruning.

11.  Do you do topiary or pom poms or lollipops or boxes?
I could, but I choose not to.  Natural-looking trees, ones that look like they were never altered, are my thing.  If you have a tree already in this kind of shape and it looks good but needs a little work, I'll probably help you.

12.  Can you keep a tree a certain size?
Pretty much, if you get a handle on it early enough and have a good strategy.  Others will disagree with me, but there are ways to do this, AND have it look perfectly natural.  I do this all the time with potted/bonsai trees.  In the ground, they grow much faster, and root pruning may be needed at some point.  A good example is a Giant Sequoia I planted in a friend's yard about 12 years ago.  It's still only about 2' tall and looks more like a small juniper.

13.  Do you plant trees?
Yes, but I'm not often asked.  I study trees a great deal, and can recommend or even plant trees that would work well for you.

14.  Do you follow the rules?
Yes and no.  I obviously try to follow the rules that are critical for the health and the best looks for the tree.  Other rules sometimes need to be fudged a bit if there's a more important rule or goal at hand.  This could be a lengthy discussion, so it's better to address any specifics directly as they pertain to a given tree.

15.  What are your limitations?
At this point, I'm pretty much limited to most trees under about 30' tall.  Yes above this may require equipment or courage I don't have right now.  But I can deal with the lower section of any tree and someone else can do the top stuff.  I'm likely to be prepared for trees up to about 45 feet tall in the near future.

16.  Do you specialize in any particular species?
It's funny that so many pruners"specialize" in Japanese maples, but nobody else seems to specialize in any other kind of tree.  I specialize in any kind of tree that simply needs to be its best.  How's that?  By the way, the last Japanese maple I saw that was pruned by an "expert" of at least 30 years, was messed up to the point where it will take years to look good, if ever.

17.  Can you teach or train me?
I love showing people how I do things and more importantly WHY I do them.  I would say if someone wants to come help me out on a job, I'll teach them in exchange for their help, including cleanup or going to get us sandwiches or something.  If it's your own tree, hiring me gets you my teaching as well as my work, if you want that.

18.  Will you give me a bad time about past pruning?
No.  I realize almost nobody knows how to prune trees exceptionally well.  Let's call it amnesty.  It's best to point out what#have been done in the past, how to correct things as much as possible, and how to proceed properly form this point.  I never tell at anyone or call them names unless they start it.

19.  Why do you do this for a living?
I don't.  At least not fully.  This is a minor part of what I do,
But it's increasingly becoming a bigger part.  I enjoy it so much as a hobby, that it's more fun than any of the other work I do.  It's never been about making a lot of money.  I could make more money doing other things.  I'm not motivated by the highest amount of money I can make.  Never have been.  I've always strived to do things as well as I can, and it's so satisfying for me and my clients.  I'm not the smartest man that way, financially.  But a large amount of money makes little difference in happiness than an adequate amount.  Job satisfaction, however, can make a huge difference.  I figure at some point if I want to make more, my clients will be happy to pay it when they see my quality and honesty.

20. Why would I NOT hire you?
Well, we may just have different goals.  You may want a quick, cheap chop, and that's not me.  You may find someone else who agrees exactly with you on any particular issue or style.  You may find someone that talks a good game or has nice cologne or looks like George Clooney.  You may want a company that comes in with a while bunch of guys and finished the job in a day or two.  I work alone, at least for now   I may only be able to do one or two trees in a day.  You may think your gardener or son's buddy is a better value at eighteen bucks an hour.

21.  Do you do shrubs too?
Yes.  Shrubs need love, too.  Shrubs are really just small trees.

22.  Do you do other stuff in the yard?
Anyone that knows me knows that I'm very versatile and tackle everything I do with attention to quality.  I'm a finish carpenter/cabinetmaker and home remodeler by trade, and have been known to enthusiastically get involved with various yard projects, like hardscaping, garden buildings, etc.  But mowing lawns and blowing leaves and the like isn't really my thing.  Once people hire me, they usually hire me for a lot of different projects, some related and others completely unrelated.

23.  What are your titles?
You could call me a fine ornamental tree pruner, or an aesthetic pruner, or a tree fixer or a tree beautifier, Arboman, or just TreeDawg.

You can be a TreeDawg Knight.

Cut It Out Vol. 1: Pruning Tools You Must Have

I'll go into more detail of the various tools in dedicated posts.  Here's an overview:

If you're only working on very small trees, shrubs, etc., it may be possible to get by with only hand pruners, provided you do have hands and the tree hasn't been growing long without needing pruning.

But you're probably gonna need more.  In order, these are the tools I use the most.

First, alcohol.  What fun is pruning, and where would the great stories come from without alcohol?  Actually, rubbing alcohol is what I use to disinfect my tools between trees and between cuts if necessary.  Mostly what you read about is a bleach solution, which is cumbersome and corrodes the blades.  I think alcohol is much more practical.  They have it in little spray bottles, which you can carry in a belt pouch, and it's faster than wiping.  I can only imagine that alcohol is a better disinfectant than bleach or Lysol.  It is, of course, what they use in hospitals, which have higher standards of sterility.

Then, you should really wear gloves.  I've done plenty of pruning without, but there's no good reason.

And shoes.  You want good, stiff-soled shoes for this work.  Sneakers don't really cut the tough stuff and don't grip ladders that well.  Steel toes are a good idea, too.

Wearing a helmet is a great idea.  A branch could fall on you or you can fall off a ladder or roof, or out of a tree.  I like using a bike helmet, which ventilated, fits snugly, and is comfy.

Safety glasses.  Ok, I'm guilty of not using these much of the time, but there's little excuse except for misplacing them.  You should have clear ones and sunglass ones.

On to the tools:

1.  Hand pruners.  There's are an absolute must.  Get a good pair, or at least a mid-range pair, to keep from damaging your trees.  Recommended brands include Bahco, ARS, Felco and Corona, but there are tons of brands that work well.  I also frequently use my Japanese bonsai concave pruners quite a bit.  Love those.

2.  Long-reach lopper/pole loppers.  I use pole pruners more often than short loppers.  I have several different styles depending on the need.  I have a Corona 6' model with an articulating head that lasts me cut up to 1-1/2".  It's great, but the head sticks shut all the time, making it a bit frustrating.  I can't figure out how to keep it from sticking.  Oiling doesn't do the trick.  I have a Fiskars ropeless pole pruners that goes to about 12', with an articulating/tilting head.  It works great and is very user-friendly, but they become troublesome in a very short time, just a couple hours of use.  I've returned two of them for a refund and then bought new ones.  They're not terribly expensive, but work very well up until the time they don't.  I have longer, standard pole pruners, but don't like using them as much.

3.  Reciprocating saw.  I stray from the crowd here.  People tend to use either hand pruning saws (a bit slow) or a chain saw (cumbersome and rough), or a pole saw (too long for close work).  I have a couple I use.  One is two-handed, and cuts fast, and the other is single-handed, which works great if you need a free hand to stabilize yourself or a branch you're cutting.  A reciprocating saw can also do the work of loppers, in about the same amount of time, and especially useful if you need to cut anything over about 1-1/4" thick, and they're much better with dead wood.  I use corded models, but cordless ones are great to, as long as you don't run out of juice in the middle of something.

4.  Extended pruners.  I have a Stihl model that's about 7' long, which is like a hand pruner on a lightweight pole.  This works much better on anything under 3/4" thick than a pole pruner/lopper.  I actually use this tool almost as much as my handpruners.  Love it.

5.  Loppers.  Short loppers are good at pruning branches up to 1-1/2" thick. And then it becomes a struggle for most people.  There are some that go up to 2-1/2", but at that size you're probably better off with a reciprocating saw.  I have various types and sizes depending on the application.  Avoid buying discount brands.  They'll be a hassle and fall apart almost right away.

6.  Ladders.  I have a 10' orchard ladder that's a dream to use, much better and safer to use than a stepladder.  If I smarten up, I'll get a standing platform to save my feet.  It's not tall enough for a lot of things, so extension ladders are needed sometimes.  With those, however, you should have some rope to tie them off if at all precarious.  Standing on a 10' orchard ladder, up to the 7' rung, I can reach up to about 21' easily with my extended pruners.  If you're cutting a tree about 24' high, this is perfect.  Orchard ladders come taller, which is a good idea much of the time.  I have carried my orchard ladder on top of my car, with padding underneath and ratcheting straps to hold it to the roof.  This worked surprisingly well.  But I really should have a truck.

7. Pole saw.  I don't like using a pole saw very much for various reasons, unless there's no other way.  You usually get a saw that comes with pole loppers, but the blade are really too short.  The really good ones are very expensive, and I haven't gone that way yet.  These can lead to disastrous consequences if you don't think through what you're doing.

8.  Binoculars.  What?!  These are very useful for evaluating what to cut.  Dead wood can be spotted from a distance, and if you need to use a pole saw, you might need someone looking at your positioning from a distance as you start cutting.

Other things you might want:

Took bag/holster.  Once in a while I keep hand pruners in my back pocket, but regret not having my bag or holster.  You might want a bag large enough to hold alcohol, protein bar, or good luck charm.

Buddy.  It's gross to have someone close for various reasons.  But try to train them not to say what most people say, "there's not gonna be anything left of that tree when you're done, yuk yuk".

Hot tea.  Winter pruning can get cold, and hot tea is really comforting.

This list could go on and on, but I'll stop there.

Cut it Out Vol. 2: Pruning Tools: Hand Pruners

I've always been a tool nut.  Some people would say I'm just a tool, others would say I'm just a nut.  Whatever.

Anyway, quality is important to me, but I'm sensible enough to know when a certain budget tool will do just fine, and can even do a better job sometimes.

When it comes to pruning tools, there's a lot of stuff out there.  What works on one job or for one person may not be best for another.  If you read reviews, opinions are all over the place.

I recently decided that I may be in for some trouble if I'm doing a lot of repetitive cuts.  It may take a full day or more, but my hands or forearm may regret using pruners that are less than ideal.  I've been using 1" capacity Corona hand pruners, and can't complain about them really, except they're not terribly ergonomic.    They're fine, but not the best for great cuts or comfort.

I've checked out some other brands in person and read a lot of reviews.  It seems that having more precise, ergonomic, extra sharp cutters can make a big difference over time.

It sure looks like the industry standard has been Felco for some time.  And most people love them.  But now there are at least two other contenders worth considering.  I must admit I had a hard time figuring out which brand to get.

ARS is a Japanese brand, known for having the sharpest blades and for staying sharp the longest.  I haven't seen them in any stores, so it looks like online is the way to go.

Bahco is the third one to mention. Instead of $50-something for Felco or ARS, these cost about $34.  They're probably the most ergonomic pruners of all, and very high quality.

I was ordering some Bahco pruners last night, but wasn't able to get them delivered to my area from Amazon.  I figure there's some lead in the metal or suffering, so that was that.  So instead I ordered the ARS instead.  We'll see what they're like in a few days.  I'll report back after I spend some time with them.

Meanwhile, I have a pair of Barnell pruners that I bought for lighter jobs.  They have a nice feel, but I haven't spent enough time with them to give my best two cents.  And I still have my Coronas for the heavy hand work.

Most of these brands have at least a model or two with rotating lower handles.  This is great for people with issues or if you hold the pruners in your hand for long periods of time.  I don't find it ideal because I put my pruners in my pouch frequently, while using other tools at the same time,  and each time you pick them up, you have to regain your grip so it feels right.  I'll stick with the fixed-handle models for now bb

One thing that's never mentioned in these articles is BONSAI PRUNERS.  Well, I have two pairs of these, and for certain kinds of work, like Japanese Maples, they can't be beat.  They cut better than "normal" hand pruners, but you have to hold them differently and they would probably tire you out faster.  I love them, and feel sorry for those who never have tried them.  They have the added advantage of making a concave cut, which is great for certain situations.  Cutting close  in a very precise way is something standard hand pruners can't do as easily, like if you're trying to surgically remove a third twig from a whorl, for instance, these things are the way to go.  They're also great for nipping away at a cut if your first cut wasn't exactly as close as  you wanted. I have an 8" and a 10" pair.  Since both edges are very sharp blades, they have the ability to cut more cleanly and seem to be even better at cutting thick, hard branches, though I wouldn't sensibly go larger than 1" with either type.  Gosh darn, I try often enough.  I should know better.  But I never break tools trying, just get a bit frustrated momentarily.

Now, if you have a fat wallet or some real grip or arthritis problems, there are cordless pruners.  You pull a little trigger and it does all the work.  Problem is, they start at around $800 or $900 and can go up to $2000 or more.  Come on!  These are made in China!  Well, I'm gonna do a little research and see if there's another tool that can be modified or something.  I did glance at some similar but lighter-weight models from Craftsnan or Ryobi or one of those.  As I remember, the maximum cut was only 1/2", which doesn't excite me that much.  Maybe these could be modified. I also like the idea of the organic nature of a fully manual hand pruner.  We'll see what happens when I get older and lose strength and flexibility.

UPDATE:
I received my ARS pruners today.  They look very similar to most other pruners of the same style, which I dose are made to mimic Delco.  You can tell the quality is great.  And they're super sharp.  They weren't kidding.  I pruned a peach and an oak tree.  I don't think I cut anything bigger than about 3/4", maybe a couple that were an inch.  You still have to use pretty good hand strength, so it's not like cutting butter.  But pretty darn good.  The action of the pruners is smooth and sexy and it was a pleasure.

UPDATE #2
I'very been using my ARS pruners for about 2 weeks now.  Unlike a lot of other people,  I use a variety of hand pruners for didn't tasks.  But my ARS's are the main machine.  They do cut really well,  but I wouldn't go so far as to say it's night and day between those,  my slightly smaller Barnels, or equally-sized Coronas.  I fix come across a couple occasions where I cut about a 5/8" branch, and they acted up.   Lo and behold,  the blade had a nick or dent or starve you want to call it,  and they wouldn't close.  So I immediately had to go sharpen it.   It seems the tolerance is much closer than other pruners,  so a small flaw in the blade can really make a difference between working great and not at all.  I still can't figure out how cutting wood ended up like cutting into a metal cable.  Head-scratcher on that one.  Are these pruners worth 2 or 3 times what others cost?   Hard to say,  but if you use them for years,  the daily cost is so minor that it makes sense to get the best.  And these probably are the best,  or at least tied.

Now, cut loose.

Tiny DawgTrees and My Own Take on Bonsai

Everyone understands what bonsai is, right?  At least to a degree?

In the simplest terms, it would mean keeping a tree or shrub in a pot.  It also usually means keeping it miniaturized by pruning, pinching, and root pruning.  It also usually means making the tree or shrub look more like a mature tree than a shrub or a seedling/sapling/juvenile tree, with proportions, taper, ramification (fine branching), and other attention to detail.

Bonsai is an extremely rewarding, engrossing, soothing, sometimes frustrating form of art like ntoo other.  No other form of art is continually evolving to the same degree.  I suppose some art installations left to degrade in the rain would be evolving, but that's not the same.  General gardening comes close, but generally you're not manipulating the plants at hand to become exactly what you envision, not to the same degree.

The world of bonsai is full of experts who know much more than I do about some very technical and specific tasks that all come together in the finished product.  As wonderfully experienced and knowledgeable as these aficionados are, they have a different perspective than I do.  But they're close.

I figure what I disagree or stray from the most is some of the traditionalism.  I tend to want to experiment in some ways that might irritate some purists.  As a tree collector, I really enjoy working with species rarely or never seen in bonsai shows.  I know there are others who do this, but they're on the fringes and probably not easily welcomed by the usual bonsai culture until something catches on.

Now, I totally respect what they're doing, and when I see what they do, I become jealous, and realize I probably can't become as good as them at specific things.  Maybe I'm a bit reckless.  I just normally have an urge to experiment, see how things go without the confines of all the rules.  I know certain rules must be followed, but I realize the people that really make a big difference in the world are the ones that followed the ABSOLUTE rules, and drifted away from the rules that weren't set in stone.

A lot of bonsai people would tell you just to keep a few trees and treat them as well as you can.  I probably should do this and wholeheartedly agree,but every time I discover a new tree specie or see one in a way others don't, I can't help but think that I'm gonna have something very unusual.  I'm working on some trees that are perhaps completely unique, or trying to become that way.  Of course, having so many tiny trees means I can't devote as much aggregation to any of them to make them as great as possible.  It's a trade-off.

My ultimate goal is to have a plethora of trees that conjure up the image of a mature tree with great proportions, etc., but without the confines of a particular pot.  Most of my creations may end up in the ground, in more of an arboretum setting, but we'll see.  I expect it will be something between true bonsai and a normal arboretum, where the goal is usually to plant a tree and let it be its natural self with as little human manipulation as possible.  I expect my trees will be kept much smaller than naturally-growing trees, but larger than bonsai, which rarely exceed 3 or 4 feet tall.  I also want to give the impression that the trees GREW naturally, so any pruning, wiring, etc. needs to remain very discreet.

One benefit to true bonsai is that they're completely portable.  I have a dilemma in that I wouldn't be able to easily transport trees that are let's say over 6' tall.

I can't say I have a big emphasis on the pots at this time.  Most likely, this hasn't become a focus yet because most of what I have is still in training, and it'll be years before they're ready to unveil.  Small pots are not really conducive to my ultimate goal, at least not until they get to the point where they seem ready to put on a show.  Trees will grow faster and in some cases more healthfully in larger pots, especially breathable pots, or in the ground.  But you can't show them off as well.

I have a number of true bonsai now.  They may remain that way, or I may go ahead and let them loose to become bigger than originally intended in the scope of bonsai.  We'll see.

Either way you decide to go, it's a heck of a lot of fun.  It's also a hobby that allows you to become so focused that you don't think much at all about everyday stresses.  You can be outside more often, and will tend to do that even when the weather normally rejects you.  You can also bring trees indoors to work on them while sitting at the dinner table, though the clippings and soil will probably irritate someone you live with.

I urge you to learn more about bonsai and even more about trees in general.  If you care to have a discussion, I'm always open to that.  Attend at least one bonsai show in person.  You'll really be amazed.

Ye Olde Tree and Me Historee

So, here's my story.

I became very interested with plants and trees while I was a wee lad.  I used to have my mom take me to the plant nursery and look at all the immense variety.  Sometimes we would buy a plant to put in the front yard.  I knew nothing about them except what I thought looked neat.  If the sign mentioned that a tree grew to be 100 feet tall, this was incredible to me since I was only about 4 feet tall, and since we didn't go to the forest, there were no trees that size around me and it was a rather alien concept.  We didn't have the internet, so looking this stuff up was almost impossible.

I used to make rock gardens and terrariums, but like any kid that age, interest would wane after a short time.  True love would have to wait.  House plants were still pretty uncommon, mostly reserved for hippies and girls that wore ponchos and burned incense.

When I started driving, the first job I took on was pruning.  Not really good pruning, but I was an ace at trimming hedges to razor precision.  I started learning about real pruning over the years.

Jump ahead a number of years.  I think I was in a restaurant that had some potted Japanese Maples, and it fulfilled my design and nature sensibilities simultaneously.  I just had to go out and buy one right away.  Well, within just a few days of that revelation, I happened upon a bonsai show.  Before that, I'd seen bonsai and was fascinated, but had no real way to become more educated or exposed.  So that was the biggie.  At that point my interest really took off, and I absorbed everything I could about trees in a very short time.  I learned to prune the right way and could identify most trees among with their botanical names.  I collected a bunch.

I remained a cabinetmaker and remodeling contractor during this time.  But as years went by, I had the urge to make pruning part of my business.  I would prune trees for friends and clients, but never actively sought work.  Remaining a hobby wasn't enough.

Over the past few years, I've studied trees and pruning extensively, and fine-tuned the craft.  The thing I realize the most is how badly managed almost all trees are, including by so-called experts.  I have an obsession now with making trees absolutely as good as they can be.

Finally, in the last couple years, I decided to make a go of it, and tree management is now a fair chunk of the work I do.  It's the most fun I have at work, and I'm every bit as good at it as any of the trades I practiced for many years.  Being a perfectionist leads one to strive to be great at multiple things.  If I don't get really good at something, I just give up. I suppose as I get older that I won't be able to do hard remodeling labor, but can prune trees well into my 80's or 90's, though I probably won't be climbing tall trees at that point.

The end.

Splitsville: Tree Bark Opens Up Like Dr. Phil's Guests

Most people never see bark splitting open on a tree branch.   It's usually on top, hidden like the dark side of the moon. It may or may not be a big problem. It's possible it could kill a branch, and even the whole tree in severe cases.  Splitting occurs mostly on thin-barked trees, and younger ones at that.

It appears that there are a number of causes.  Some we can control, others we can't.  The actual cause on your tree may remain a mystery.  Best thing to do is manage the tree properly.

Cracked bark generally appears lengthwise, facing the southwest.  Since it's usually on top, it's open to more rot since water can soak right in, along with dust, bugs, fungus,  etc.  This problem can be minimized after the fact in some cases.  Keeping your crack clean is probably quite helpful so that rot doesn't have much to grab onto.

The cause may be excessive vigorous growth.  That's good, right?  Well, it can be, but it's complicated.  Like in most of life, excessive isn't so great.  Growth at the wrong time of year can leave it vulnerable.  So according to experts, pruning or fertilizing too late in the summer or in the fall can encourage growth that doesn't tolerate winter very well and sets up a bad crack situation..

A combination of frost and hot sun in the right combination can cause expansion of the wood, which leads to cracks.  Incorrectly pruning can exacerbate this problem.  It can open up too much of the canopy to sunlight, and an incorrect cut can cause a wound that opens the rest of the branch to stress.  It seems best, therefore, to prune frequently and diligently rather than infrequently and heavily.  That's been my motto anyway.  Removing vertical water spouts/sprouts as soon as possible, at least when they're smaller than about 1/2", is a good idea.  They grow faster than other branches, but weakly, and they only like it on top, so this is a bad combination.  They look terrible, anyway.  Most things don't look right sticking straight up.

Drought can apparently make things worse, especially if there's a sudden increase in rain.  It's probably best to give your trees a drink now and then during hot summers, just to the point that it's sensible without being wasteful.  You'd probably split if you didn't get a drink when you were thirsty.

You can usually tell if the branch will recover well if the bark is cleanly separated and the wood beneath looks healthy.  Cutting cleanly any separated bark that allows intrusion and retention of water and yucky pests is a good idea.  You'll need to read up on how to do this.  If it just looks awful, it's probably gonna die sooner or later.  But if there's no replacement branch in the wings, you probably should leave it for now if it's not an imminent hazard.

Check out your trees, and if they're split more often than a country music couple, read more about the subject and try to figure out what led to the problem.  Fix it if you can.

You can be a TreeDawg Knight!