Closed Topic Closed
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
spike damage
 Login/Join 
<MICHAEL STARNER>
posted
I have read many books that address this fact; A NEW TREE BIOLOGY, MODERN ARBORICUTURE, P.P. PORONE'S TREE MAINTANENCE, along with many others. Can anyone tell me how hook marks hurt the tree any more than hundreds of small prunning cuts? One could argue that it is the shape, not being round. You could say that it is worse because it is to ragged of a cut for the tree to grow wound-wood over successfully.
You may even say that spike wounds occur where there are no branch protection zones to facilitate compartmentalization. However I find it hard to believe that a healthy tree would have any problem healing over a hook mark.
Furthermore , from experience working on transmission line right of ways where the utility has no concerns about hooking trees I have never witnessed any problems. We climb the same trees over and over again every three to five years and every time you can see that the previous wounds have been fully compartmentalized by codit wall #4. The only result is cosmetic damage on thin barked trees and occasionally some wet wood, which does not hurt the tree aside from cosmetics.

So to summarize, how are hooks so terribly bad for a tree that they should never be used even when they are the best way to get into a difficult tree. Now I know the standard and when doing trees residentually I will not wear them unless climbing with out them is impossible.
 
Report This Post
<Chris Rose>
posted
Reply to post by MICHAEL STARNER, on December 03, 2000 at 13:56:45:

(You are talking about gaff/spur marks, right?)I think one could find arguments both ways, but as arborists we should be concerned with minimizing injury to a tree. Spurring up a live tree causes multiple injuries and destroys the tree's own protection against outside invaders, such as insects and other pathogens. For example, it seems a healthy pine tree with no injuries is less attractive to pine borers than a sick bleeding one. Make a couple of holes in that same healthy pine tree and you will undoubtedly attract more pine borers, they can smell/sense the sap and therefore will target the tree. A tree must also use energy to recover from a wound much the same as an animal or human would. The overall vigor of the tree is reduced since energy that would normally be used for other normal metabolic functions must be redirected to heal wounds. The tree will probably survive but overall will not be as vigorous as it would have been had it not been injured. Spike holes also provide entry for bacteria and fungi which could infect the tree, possibly leading to its death. I think on the whole we should minimize injury by not spurring into live trees which are to be preserved.
 
Report This Post
<JPS>
posted
Reply to post by MICHAEL STARNER, on December 03, 2000 at 13:56:45:

When you take trees down start looking at the 3 dimentional phenomena that codit is. Wall 1 is verry weak, what is hapaening up and down from the wound. Wall 2 &3 are somewhat stronger but still relitively weak. Wall 4 is new wood, but if you climbe up again in three years it has been breached.

The discolored wood (different from heartwood) is now tissue that is walled off from thetransmission and storage system of the plant.

Now lets think about a succesion of wounds going up the side of the tree. What happens when the wall 1's start to join together? If it has gone to wetwood this can travel up the side of the tree, and structural integrity is compomised.

Your thinking is in effects of 3-6 years. What about 12, 24, 48...

I'm glad to read that your putting the spikes away. Do you throwball and footlock? Once you get good at it it's so much faster than anything else, what's the footlock record, around 11 seconds for 45ft? even if it takes 15min to set yuor rope and 2 to climbe taht's better then a ladder and yuo dont have the gaffs getting caught in crotches. Spikes for pruning are for people who don't want to learn and just from the aesthetic standpoint are unprofesional.

Go to your local chapters events, come here to Milwaukee for the ISA conferance in August. There are so many time and effortsaving techniques out there it is well worth going to these types of events for that alone. ( Tho I had fun sitting up til 2 in the mornintg talking with Tom D., Tim Walsh, Don Blair and opther people I can't remember).


Have fun and learn daily
 
Report This Post
<MICHAEL STARNER>
posted
Reply to post by Chris Rose, on December 03, 2000 at 13:56:45:

Thanks for the comments, they reinforce views that I already have. I have no doubt that hook marks injure a tree to a certain extent, but do they injure the tree to the extent that it becomes "the deadly sin of the tree industry". What I mean is why is hooking a tree worse than leaving stubs, rip cuts, over pruning,over fertilizing,incorect diagnosis and treatment...
My point here is sure hooks are not healthy for the tree and as arborists we have an obligation to do no harm. I'm just curious why hooks have become the determaning factor if someone is agood tree man or not. After all you could foot lock up a tree and still butcher it. I am not an advicate of wearing hooks to prune trees,but in my oppinion there is a time and a place for the notorious gaff.
 
Report This Post
<Chris Rose>
posted
Reply to post by MICHAEL STARNER, on December 03, 2000 at 23:00:00:

I think that you bring up an excellent point in addressing the various shortcomings or mistakes "arborists" can make and the fact that these actions also can have negative impacts/outcomes, but I feel strongly that wherever there is an opportunity for failure, one has the option to turn that into an opportunity for "rising to the occasion", finding alternative solutions potentially, and becoming more professional and proficient in an industry which needs exactly these qualities. We also need to recognize that we all make mistakes, or have made mistakes and that we should focus on learning from these mistakes and move on, hopefully becoming more professional and educated along the way.
 
Report This Post
<JPS>
posted
Reply to post by MICHAEL STARNER, on December 03, 2000 at 23:00:00:

I guesse it depends on how one sells the work. If it is economy pricing "Noone will beat our prices!" and the tendancy is towards bigger cuts and alot of polesaw work; then stubs, rips, and taking big wood may be expected.

If you promote yuorself as a professional arborist that does the job to or above the ANSI standards, then you should be climbing to the tips and hand sawing them. Getting the right position to not leave a dogear. Doing textbook cuts so as not to tear the bark. Concentrate on fine pruning so you leave small wounds. Educate the customer about lionstail, topping, and excesive raising of canopy.

All that aside, trees don't grow perfect, so we will never make perfect cuts 100% of the time. Sometimes a perfect cut looks like a stub to a customer, or if the collar is indestinkt it may be better to leave a stub than accidentaly flush.

It has been my experiance that a person with higher standards in one area of the proffession is more likely to have them in all. As a freelance climber I prefer to work with those who have high standards in workmanship because they are less likely to take chances in with safety.
 
Report This Post
<Tom Dunlap>
posted
Reply to post by MICHAEL STARNER, on December 03, 2000 at 13:56:45:

Having this discussion in the "Ethics" room instead of the "General ARbo" or "Climber's Corner" lends a different tone, don't you think?

There has already been good points made about minimizing injury and professionalism.

When I started in the trade I spiked. After learning about the damage, I quit spiking and became a better climber.

By using a throwline, there is no tree that needs to be spiked. On many removals I will footlock up and then haul up my spikes. It is easier and faster. There are times when I will not use spikes for a removal too. When accessing the smaller wood at the ends of limbs I think you would find that it is easier to find a foot placement than a spike placement. The few times that I could not get a toe hold I will use a sling for a step.

Tom
 
Report This Post
<Chris Rose>
posted
Reply to post by JPS, on December 05, 2000 at 20:34:59:

Thanks Jon for your input, it's good to hear others promoting professionalism in this industry.
 
Report This Post
<John Sanborn>
posted
Reply to post by Tom Dunlap, on December 03, 2000 at 13:56:45:

>>Having this discussion in the "Ethics" room
>>instead of the "General ARbo" or
>>"Climber's Corner" lends a different tone,
>>don't you think?

I think it must, th context demands the highest concideration for the plants need. Some of the other threads discussed the infrequent occasion where throwball/footlock were impractical or impossible.

The general tone was some saying spikes should be verboten in prun/trim work, and others saying that it sould be should not verbage.

One was about a declining tree where the practitioner regularly used spikes for traction when doing suckering and roof clearance. it speeded up the work and this long time client was on a tight budget.

A mutal aquatance of Tom and I, who is a vey acoplished rope climber, admits to a single recent situation like this. Was he unethical, since he is a skilled profesional? Not in my book.

I see the people who do it on a regular basis as being the unprofesional ones that refuse to do things differently just because they always have.

Same as those who plant too deep because no tree has failed in their one year "warranty".

What does the current comunity hrer at the Knothole think about the ethics of very limited use?
 
Report This Post
  Powered by Social Strata  

Closed Topic Closed


© 1997-2003 Tree Tech Consulting. All messages are the property of the original author.