douglas fir pruning?

[peter]

Are there resources on the web on how to prune a douglas fir tree (about 70 feet tall) to prevent wind damage?

[Mike LaMana]

Seems to have gotten to 70' without much problem? Did it know it had to be pruned??

[Timothy]

What are the reasons for your concerns? Has the tree thrown branches or does it have a lean? In general you really shouldn't worry much about the tree and at 70 feet it sounds a little less than middle aged. One thing to remember *not* to have done to the tree is to have it topped. This will only create a problem tree that will throw branches. If you really feel that the tree has isses with wind throw and wish to have it thinned, then have it "windowed". This is when some of the branches are thinned out of the tree as to let wind to pass through more easily. Other than that, leave the tree well alone or have it completly removed (in my humble opinion.)

[gregpresley]

[Travis]

I don't know of any resources but what you are looking for is called "windowing" it removes branches in layers to reduce the wind resistance.

[Pam - gardengal]

Unless you are trained for this type of tree work with all the necessary equipment, the only resource you need is the phone number of a certified arborist. One does NOT prune or window a 70' Doug fir without having a great deal of tree pruning experience under one's belt - translate: do this for a living. To even consider doing this on your own is foolhardy in the extreme. BTW, a certified arborist can give you a hazard assessment first - this will determine whether or not your tree even needs thinning or windowing to reduce wind damage.

pam - gardengal

[peter]

I just did a more accurate measurement by photographing the tree alongside with a 12-ft long 4x2 as reference:

estimated tree height is at least 92 feet. The tree drops a brance or two everytime there is a wind storm. These branches are 3 inches in diameter. Some dented the gutter, one punched a small hole on the siding, some fell on the roof and made a big bang. That is the motivation for pruning it.

A few years ago I did hire an arborist to prune the trees (I have three such trees). It cost me $900. That was the motivation to do it myself. But I think I'm too chicken to climb the tree myself afterall, so I may have to find a cheaper arborist...

-peter

[Warren]

It's not just a matter of whether you're brave enough to climb the tree. You need to know what to do, and have the equipment to do it once you get up there. As you've pointed out, those branches could do a lot of damage. Not to mention the damage that could happen to you if something went wrong while you were up there. And how would you know *which* branches (beyond deadwood) to trim?

There are reasons why it cost you $900. It wasn't just x-many hours of work. And it wasn't price gouging. It had a lot to do with the training, experience, and equipment used. The job is more complex than trimming off a little extra growth from a shrub.

Being chicken to climb the tree should be the least of your reasons for hiring a professional.

[SugarChile]

There was a sad story in the local paper yesterday about a employee of a tree-trimming firm who died on the job. He was cutting a tree; the tree fell and hit a stump, and the bottom of the tree "kicked up" and struck him in the head. There's an investigation underway, but it looks like it was just a terrible accident, not negligence.

Tree trimming is dangerous business. Add to the costs of training, equipment, etc, the cost of liability insurance, and the rates of a reputable firm don't seem all that outrageous.

Sue

[Travis]

There might not be negligence but it wasn't "just a terrible accident" either.

[SugarChile]

All I know is what I read in the papers......You might be right, I don't know the details, and I don't know enough about felling trees to extrapolate what really happened.

My point was, trimming and felling tall trees is dangerous work, even for the people who are getting paid to do it, and amateurs should think twice.

Sue

[FACE]

Really now?

Please allow how an "accident" is something other than an unplanned for event.

It comes down to a matter of "how likely" -- as in how likely was it for the falling tree to hit the stump squarely in order to cause the butt end to flip? How likely was it for the man to be standing in the correct position to be hit by the butt-end of the tree?

Of course he could have been more careful. He could have stood several feet to the side and in so doing he *could* have been hit by a meteor -- much less likely though.

Cheap accidents are when we do things like pick up a wet glass and it slips out of our hand and breaks. Fatal accidents are tragic events where we do not get the chance to say "boy! that was stupid of me!".

FACE

[Travis]

Really. You can make all the excuses for him that you want but as a professional he didn't act very professionally.

[Stephen M. Henning]

You say a tree hitting a stump means a tree faller is not professional. That is a strange conclusion. First, tree fallers don't claim to be professionals. Second, as skilled tradesmen, they can never be sure how a tree is going to react when it comes down. Tons of force are at play with a large amount of uncertainty. Sometimes their escape path becomes blocked before they can reach safety. Sometimes there is internal rot that weakens the holding wood they were counting on to direct the fall. Sometimes a gust of wind changes all of their plans. It is by no means an exact science.

[FACE]

Since you conveniently snipped everything I wrote I am sure you will point to where I made an excuse for him.