Has anyone had good luck moving dormant deciduous trees in the 10-14" range bare root? I am looking for advice from people with field experience. Thanks.

Reply to post by Jerry, on May 28, 2002 at 08:17:42:

Jerry, 10-14" is pretty big for many species. this time of year, very risky.

Early winter, with all precautions, maples, green ashes and a few others will move bareroot.
Generally, you need to get a rootball with that size tree.

I moved 3 baldcypress that size, doing everything I could think of right, and lost them all. Much better experiences 6" and under.

Reply to post by Guy, on May 28, 2002 at 08:17:42:

From what I can gather it is all a function of money. And skill and equipment of course, not just money thrown away. I saw some white oaks (always regarded as a very difficult species) in the 40"+ range both being moved and in place 2-3 years after moving doing very nicely.

The people doing this told me their guiding rule was that the tree "not know it had been moved." They did this by taking huge soil balls and offsetting any root loss with irrigation. And money was no object.

So if you are moving bare root we'd guess the goal is to save some of the handling expense by eliminating soil weight. So if you had somebody's idea of what size ball you would take with a 10-14" tree. You'd root prune to that line (dig a trench there whatever) and remove soil inboard. The key issue would have to be, can you remove the soil from those roots and do no additional damage... you'd wnat not just the main roots but all the branches and feeders that woukld have been in the ball. So it sounds like air spade or hydro-vac. And do it quickly enough that the roots don't dessicate. And keep the tree upright enough that no roots a bent to breaking point. and then when you get it in its prepared planting spot keep it upright while spreading roots at approximately same distribution and depth as before digging in your new soil (might have been moved from original site). And then guy it appropriately. And of course irrigation management. On big trees data I've seen suggest up to 1/3 of total cost is establishment aftercare.

The big soil ball moves basically box or platform the ball and lift from beneath. Here you'd have to lift from trunk or scaffold branches... slings, dunno?

Reply to post by Scott Cullen, on May 28, 2002 at 16:44:05:

Slings under buttress roots and big branches can work; trunk not so useful due to lack of leverage and fear of bark damage.

Pines and maples in the 10" caliper range have been moved by backhoe. Some soil stays near the center but the rest of the roots are bare.

The box-and-lift method moves some huge trees, which really pushes the limit on the "commonly available transplantable tree" criterion set forth in the Guide for Appraisal. The Disney World experience and others show many 20+" trees moving successfully.

This seems more reliable and defensible than the ATA calculations, so using that experience with moving giants sure makes appraisal of 10-20" specimens more straightforward, imo. Sure you need to build in establishment cost, but it still seems preferable.

Reply to post by Jerry, on May 28, 2002 at 08:17:42:

Try contacting Longwood Gardens. About 3 or 4 years ago they moved an American beech and a sugar maple bareroot. Both were in the 10" to 12" range, I believe. I think they tried several digging methods, and ended up doing it by hand. Not sure if they tried an airspade.

They had lost two large trees (Hurricane Hugo?) in the middle of the Garden, and the only access for large trees was to lift them in via helicopter.

Longwood Gardens
http://www.longwoodgardens.org/

Reply to post by Russ Carlson, on May 28, 2002 at 08:17:42:

Followup-
Guess I shoulda looked it up first. It was a copper beech, and diameters were up to 20 inches. See Longwood's article at the link below.

http://www.longwoodgardens.org/Plants&Horticulture/Helicopter.htm

Reply to post by Guy, on May 28, 2002 at 19:16:20:

Yes, it opens a whole new window on appraisal. I just finished a pretty dramatic graph for the FL-ISA tree appraisal workshop June 22. Actual appraisal figures for a 45" tree. TFM using installed full dia (no ATA adjustment) was about 1/2 the cost estimate by a "full size" contractor.

The underlying logic of TFM is that the unit costs provide a surrogate for real costs. This case demonstrates that that surrogacy may be flawed for larger sizes and that real costs move OPPOSITE the direction of the ATA curve.

It is important to recognize that these are COSTS. The appraiser must depreciate those costs to value. So for a given case total depreciation of real cost would have to be ~2x depreciation of unit costs to come up with the same value. And that would be proper technique. Depreciation percentages must be related to the facts, NOT rigidly tied to Guide tables.

Reply to post by Russ Carlson, on May 28, 2002 at 23:50:41:

Great link Russ.

It changes my original observation that cost would be the principle motivation for choosing bare root. Weight/access limitations are obviously a guiding consideration as well.

THe steel lifting pin through the trunk is definitely a Disney technique. I have heard about this for at least 20 years. I have not heard about long term folllow up on trunk decay. Overall it may be the least damaging and most secure.

Jerry, Andy Hillman and Nina Bassuk have a lot of experience with the Terra-Sorb or equiv barerooting small trees.

One potential advantage of bare rooting is better long term stability as the backfill material is likely to uniformly consolidate with underlying soil. Some of the big tree movers use steel pipe as the lifting platform and it is left in place under the ball in the new location. Some consider guy cables a permanent fixture. I have wondered if the steel platform creates a soil fracture plane under the tree that is also permanent.

Reply to post by Jerry, on May 28, 2002 at 08:17:42:

Thanks for the advice. The context is a client who has lots of experience moving large trees with soil. This time, though, the site is polluted, and I am considering the possibility of doing the move bareroot in order to avoid having the client being considered a polluter for taking the original soil. There is some literature on the technique for trees in the south with sandy soils ("thanks" to Harris/Matheny/Clark), and now that the air spade/knife is available, I am wondering if it would work here. As Scott says too, I am concerned about the long-term effect of rods through the trunk, especially on trees with little ability to compartmentalize decay like the ones I am considering.

Reply to post by Jerry, on May 28, 2002 at 08:17:42:

Steve Day in Denver managed the tree portions of a multi-year project removing soil from an entire residential neighborhood near a lead foundry. They removed soild with spoons. I'll see if I can find out if they moved any trees effectively bare root.

Another alternative might be to "trap crop" the pollutants with herbacious material planted over the move soil balls. Different plants trap different chemicals or heavy metals.