Loading…
25
PSA: I had to pick between a full removal or a risky crown reduction on a big oak in Decatur.
The tree had major storm damage, and the owner wanted to save it, so we went with the reduction, using a 200-foot crane for safety. It worked out, but it was a close call with the weight distribution. Do you think a full removal is always the safer choice in these cases?
4 comments
Log in to join the discussion
Log In4 Comments
brian_taylor156mo ago
Tough spot to be in. A full removal is cleaner for the arborist's peace of mind, but saving a good tree has real value. You have to check for hidden cracks and root health first. @smith.elliot's story about the maple is a perfect example of how internal decay can ruin the plan. If the structure is too far gone, reduction just kicks the problem down the road. A crane helps with safety, but it doesn't fix a tree that's already failing inside.
7
grant3806mo ago
I read a study from the University of Florida that said a proper crown reduction can add like 10-15 years to a tree's life, but only if the decay is less than 30% of the trunk. It's all about that internal check.
2
smith.elliot6mo ago
My buddy had a similar call on a maple last spring. They tried the reduction and a big limb failed a week later, total loss. Sometimes the safe play is just to take it down.
4
simonk984mo ago
Wait... that limb failed a week later? Like... the whole thing just gave way? Man, that's rough. Makes you wonder if the reduction actually caused more harm than good.
2