Arborjack's Tree Service

Tree Service

Preservation is the most proven and accepted way to keep your trees heathy and safe from breaking.

 

Preservation is weight and leverage reduction, gapping for high winds,training and light throughout the tree.

Along with preservation comes beauty, increased property values and neighborhood desirability.

The practice of tree topping is so wide spread that many people believe it is the proper way to trim trees.

Tree topping is the excessive and arbitrary removal of all parts of the tree above and beyond a certain height with no regard for the structure or growth pattern of the tree.

   Topping can cause a variety of problems in trees and ultimately cause problems for homeowners. Trees will grow back to thier natural hight, rapid regrowth is natures way of recovering from disasters. However, this new growth is weak and new sprouts are attached to the surface of stubs rather than being anchored from within. Futhermore,large stubs cannot heal. The stubs are seperated from food and water flow and as the tissues die, wounds dont seal properly and decay may enter and spead to the trunk (many topped trees become hollow and dangerous).Sunscald can also occur, in which bark tissues suddenly exposed to full sun may be burned and develop disease cankers. And to top it all off topping disfigures trees altering the trees natural beauty and form, bringing down the property value of your home.

Trust ArborJacks with the health of your trees!

title

 

Arborist Forum

By Cass Turnbull

 I'm a big fan of the American National 
Standards Committee (A
J::l"SI) A300 
pruning standards. I remember the 
time before we had ISA certified arborists and A300 standardsIt was·the Wild West for trees and the cowboys dominated the field. Tree topping was synonymous with tree pruning and it occurred everywhereall the timewithout challenge or recourse.If you hired a tree service to prune your tree, and they topped it instead, you were fresh out of luck.

These days the public has ways to find 
knowledgeable tree workers 
and can hav
them bid appl
es to applesinstead of tree 
pruning to tree topping. If the tree ser
vice 
tops instead of prunes
, you can suand 
pro
ve that they did not prune according to 
the bid-specified standards
I love the 
A300s. I refer to them in m
pruninbook
during the presentations I give to thpub- 
lic
and in interviewon radioTV and in 
print. I am engaged in these acti
vities as 
the founder and president of a non-profit

PlantAmnestywhose sole mission is to 
end bad pruning. The theory, sci
ence and 
practice of pruning are things that I have 
spent a great deal of time thinking critical- 
ly about. I also prune for a living, in my 
other life as a gardener and arborist.

This year the A300 Pruning standard
last updated in 2008, will be under review
and given the recent spate of print articles 
and PowerPoint presentations e
xtolling the virtues of various acceptable instances of topping and heading,I have developed some concernsWhat follows are proposals for a feadditions,

omissionsdefinitions and descriptions that I think would improve the document. Like I saidI do a lot of thinking about pruning.


Heading and topping

The current A300 Part 1 defmition of a 
heading is 
"the reduction of a shootstem,or branch back to a bud or lateral branch not large enough to assume the terminal role." I consider that phraseology to be one of the four great advances in arboriculture

in the past three decadesThe other three 
being the (Shigo) COD IT model, (arborist)
certification and the A300s
They easily 
could be considered the top four advances 
in the past 100 
years. I ask that this defini- 
tion remain as is and not be changed. I'm 
also concerned that by tr
ying to accommo- 
date 
"exceptions" to thno topping rule, 
the 
standards will become useless in prac- 
tice. Far from 
"the exception proves the 
rule
," I assert thatif incorporatedexcep- 
tions will "break 
(the rule)."

Exceptions to the no topping rule

By exceptions to the no-topping ruleI am 
mostly referring to 
"retrenchmentpruning 
for old, historicall
significant trees. But 
there are numerous other 
"exception" examples such as fruit-tree rejuvenation, 
re-topping unsafe trees
and toppinghead- 
ing and reduction pruning to create a living 
"habitat" tree. I have 
written about these and 
listed them myself
Many of them make 
senseothers are entirely bogusand some 
are borderline acceptable pr
actice.

The problem is that if we acknowledge 
them
it will quickly become open season 
on trees. This i
becauseover most of our 
history
people have been acting on their 
subconscious compulsion to tame trees by 
topping them
There ino other profession 
like ours
Customeractuallrequest that 
bad things be done to their trees
Can you 
imagine a car owner telling the body shop 
that he wants the car dented and please 
break the windows
Or construction guy 
asked to roof the house in cardboard
How 
about, "please amputate my arm, just in 
case it is infected.
Well, when your customer

        asks you to top the tree to make it 
smaller 
and saferhe is asking you to harm 
tree for no good reasonand it ilikelto 
b
ackfire. Whdo people think their tree is 
"too big?Nobodknows.

Thiis whsaying it is "OK to tophead 
and reduce an old historic 
tree that is 
alread
in failure mode" will quickly 
become
"OK to top a tree that we think is 
dangerous.
Then we are back where we 
started! And
any sort of general statement
such as "occasionally an experienced 
arborist may need to top or head trees under 
special circumstances'" won't work either

Everybody thinks toppingheading and 
crown reduction is bad, except when they 
do it. Then it is correct and clearly justified
.

The following is a partial list of para- 
phra
seand out-of-context statements made 
b
leaders in the industryLet me emphasize 
th
at these statements .are paraphrased
extrapolated and taken out of context
which iwhat happens in the real world and 
whwe need to be so careful not onlin 
whawe say, but in what people hear:

~ It'OK to re-top a hazardous tree to 
make it safe. I promi
se to come back 
to check it out in the future.

~ It's OK to top a large Douglas fir for a 
view if there is no target.

~ It's OK to top a tree if you plan to take 
it out in a few years, and you have 
already planted the replacement.

~ It's OK to top, or re-top, if you have 
good reason, you know what you're 
doing
and you don't do it veroften.

~ It's OK to top a middle-aged tree for a 
view if you top to an old node with an 
epicormic shoot
and promise to come 
b
ack everfew years.

~ In our countrwe top trees ever20 
yearand we believe they live longer 
bec
ause of it.

~ Topping and reduction pruning on a 
verold, well-loved tree that haa tar- 
get
and ialready in failure modeis 
OK. We will watch it closely
.

~ Reducing the height and size of a tree 
reduces the torque of a tree and can 
prevent failure.

 

TREE CARE INDUSTRY - OCTOBER 2013

Arborist Forum

By Cass Turnbull

 I'm a big fan of the American National 
Standards Committee (A
J::l"SI) A300 
pruning standards. I remember the 
time before we had ISA certified arborists and A300 standardsIt was·the Wild West for trees and the cowboys dominated the field. Tree topping was synonymous with tree pruning and it occurred everywhereall the timewithout challenge or recourse.If you hired a tree service to prune your tree, and they topped it instead, you were fresh out of luck.

These days the public has ways to find 
knowledgeable tree workers 
and can hav
them bid appl
es to applesinstead of tree 
pruning to tree topping. If the tree ser
vice 
tops instead of prunes
, you can suand 
pro
ve that they did not prune according to 
the bid-specified standards
I love the 
A300s. I refer to them in m
pruninbook
during the presentations I give to thpub- 
lic
and in interviewon radioTV and in 
print. I am engaged in these acti
vities as 
the founder and president of a non-profit

PlantAmnestywhose sole mission is to 
end bad pruning. The theory, sci
ence and 
practice of pruning are things that I have 
spent a great deal of time thinking critical- 
ly about. I also prune for a living, in my 
other life as a gardener and arborist.

This year the A300 Pruning standard
last updated in 2008, will be under review
and given the recent spate of print articles 
and PowerPoint presentations e
xtolling the virtues of various acceptable instances of topping and heading,I have developed some concernsWhat follows are proposals for a feadditions,

omissionsdefinitions and descriptions that I think would improve the document. Like I saidI do a lot of thinking about pruning.


Heading and topping

The current A300 Part 1 defmition of a 
heading is 
"the reduction of a shootstem,or branch back to a bud or lateral branch not large enough to assume the terminal role." I consider that phraseology to be one of the four great advances in arboriculture

in the past three decadesThe other three 
being the (Shigo) COD IT model, (arborist)
certification and the A300s
They easily 
could be considered the top four advances 
in the past 100 
years. I ask that this defini- 
tion remain as is and not be changed. I'm 
also concerned that by tr
ying to accommo- 
date 
"exceptions" to thno topping rule, 
the 
standards will become useless in prac- 
tice. Far from 
"the exception proves the 
rule
," I assert thatif incorporatedexcep- 
tions will "break 
(the rule)."

Exceptions to the no topping rule

By exceptions to the no-topping ruleI am 
mostly referring to 
"retrenchmentpruning 
for old, historicall
significant trees. But 
there are numerous other 
"exception" examples such as fruit-tree rejuvenation, 
re-topping unsafe trees
and toppinghead- 
ing and reduction pruning to create a living 
"habitat" tree. I have 
written about these and 
listed them myself
Many of them make 
senseothers are entirely bogusand some 
are borderline acceptable pr
actice.

The problem is that if we acknowledge 
them
it will quickly become open season 
on trees. This i
becauseover most of our 
history
people have been acting on their 
subconscious compulsion to tame trees by 
topping them
There ino other profession 
like ours
Customeractuallrequest that 
bad things be done to their trees
Can you 
imagine a car owner telling the body shop 
that he wants the car dented and please 
break the windows
Or construction guy 
asked to roof the house in cardboard
How 
about, "please amputate my arm, just in 
case it is infected.
Well, when your customer

        asks you to top the tree to make it 
smaller 
and saferhe is asking you to harm 
tree for no good reasonand it ilikelto 
b
ackfire. Whdo people think their tree is 
"too big?Nobodknows.

Thiis whsaying it is "OK to tophead 
and reduce an old historic 
tree that is 
alread
in failure mode" will quickly 
become
"OK to top a tree that we think is 
dangerous.
Then we are back where we 
started! And
any sort of general statement
such as "occasionally an experienced 
arborist may need to top or head trees under 
special circumstances'" won't work either

Everybody thinks toppingheading and 
crown reduction is bad, except when they 
do it. Then it is correct and clearly justified
.

The following is a partial list of para- 
phra
seand out-of-context statements made 
b
leaders in the industryLet me emphasize 
th
at these statements .are paraphrased
extrapolated and taken out of context
which iwhat happens in the real world and 
whwe need to be so careful not onlin 
whawe say, but in what people hear:

~ It'OK to re-top a hazardous tree to 
make it safe. I promi
se to come back 
to check it out in the future.

~ It's OK to top a large Douglas fir for a 
view if there is no target.

~ It's OK to top a tree if you plan to take 
it out in a few years, and you have 
already planted the replacement.

~ It's OK to top, or re-top, if you have 
good reason, you know what you're 
doing
and you don't do it veroften.

~ It's OK to top a middle-aged tree for a 
view if you top to an old node with an 
epicormic shoot
and promise to come 
b
ack everfew years.

~ In our countrwe top trees ever20 
yearand we believe they live longer 
bec
ause of it.

~ Topping and reduction pruning on a 
verold, well-loved tree that haa tar- 
get
and ialready in failure modeis 
OK. We will watch it closely
.

~ Reducing the height and size of a tree 
reduces the torque of a tree and can 
prevent failure.

 

TREE CARE INDUSTRY - OCTOBER 2013

Arborist Forum

By Cass Turnbull

 I'm a big fan of the American National 
Standards Committee (A
J::l"SI) A300 
pruning standards. I remember the 
time before we had ISA certified arborists and A300 standardsIt was·the Wild West for trees and the cowboys dominated the field. Tree topping was synonymous with tree pruning and it occurred everywhereall the timewithout challenge or recourse.If you hired a tree service to prune your tree, and they topped it instead, you were fresh out of luck.

These days the public has ways to find 
knowledgeable tree workers 
and can hav
them bid appl
es to applesinstead of tree 
pruning to tree topping. If the tree ser
vice 
tops instead of prunes
, you can suand 
pro
ve that they did not prune according to 
the bid-specified standards
I love the 
A300s. I refer to them in m
pruninbook
during the presentations I give to thpub- 
lic
and in interviewon radioTV and in 
print. I am engaged in these acti
vities as 
the founder and president of a non-profit

PlantAmnestywhose sole mission is to 
end bad pruning. The theory, sci
ence and 
practice of pruning are things that I have 
spent a great deal of time thinking critical- 
ly about. I also prune for a living, in my 
other life as a gardener and arborist.

This year the A300 Pruning standard
last updated in 2008, will be under review
and given the recent spate of print articles 
and PowerPoint presentations e
xtolling the virtues of various acceptable instances of topping and heading,I have developed some concernsWhat follows are proposals for a feadditions,

omissionsdefinitions and descriptions that I think would improve the document. Like I saidI do a lot of thinking about pruning.


Heading and topping

The current A300 Part 1 defmition of a 
heading is 
"the reduction of a shootstem,or branch back to a bud or lateral branch not large enough to assume the terminal role." I consider that phraseology to be one of the four great advances in arboriculture

in the past three decadesThe other three 
being the (Shigo) COD IT model, (arborist)
certification and the A300s
They easily 
could be considered the top four advances 
in the past 100 
years. I ask that this defini- 
tion remain as is and not be changed. I'm 
also concerned that by tr
ying to accommo- 
date 
"exceptions" to thno topping rule, 
the 
standards will become useless in prac- 
tice. Far from 
"the exception proves the 
rule
," I assert thatif incorporatedexcep- 
tions will "break 
(the rule)."

Exceptions to the no topping rule

By exceptions to the no-topping ruleI am 
mostly referring to 
"retrenchmentpruning 
for old, historicall
significant trees. But 
there are numerous other 
"exception" examples such as fruit-tree rejuvenation, 
re-topping unsafe trees
and toppinghead- 
ing and reduction pruning to create a living 
"habitat" tree. I have 
written about these and 
listed them myself
Many of them make 
senseothers are entirely bogusand some 
are borderline acceptable pr
actice.

The problem is that if we acknowledge 
them
it will quickly become open season 
on trees. This i
becauseover most of our 
history
people have been acting on their 
subconscious compulsion to tame trees by 
topping them
There ino other profession 
like ours
Customeractuallrequest that 
bad things be done to their trees
Can you 
imagine a car owner telling the body shop 
that he wants the car dented and please 
break the windows
Or construction guy 
asked to roof the house in cardboard
How 
about, "please amputate my arm, just in 
case it is infected.
Well, when your customer

        asks you to top the tree to make it 
smaller 
and saferhe is asking you to harm 
tree for no good reasonand it ilikelto 
b
ackfire. Whdo people think their tree is 
"too big?Nobodknows.

Thiis whsaying it is "OK to tophead 
and reduce an old historic 
tree that is 
alread
in failure mode" will quickly 
become
"OK to top a tree that we think is 
dangerous.
Then we are back where we 
started! And
any sort of general statement
such as "occasionally an experienced 
arborist may need to top or head trees under 
special circumstances'" won't work either

Everybody thinks toppingheading and 
crown reduction is bad, except when they 
do it. Then it is correct and clearly justified
.

The following is a partial list of para- 
phra
seand out-of-context statements made 
b
leaders in the industryLet me emphasize 
th
at these statements .are paraphrased
extrapolated and taken out of context
which iwhat happens in the real world and 
whwe need to be so careful not onlin 
whawe say, but in what people hear:

~ It'OK to re-top a hazardous tree to 
make it safe. I promi
se to come back 
to check it out in the future.

~ It's OK to top a large Douglas fir for a 
view if there is no target.

~ It's OK to top a tree if you plan to take 
it out in a few years, and you have 
already planted the replacement.

~ It's OK to top, or re-top, if you have 
good reason, you know what you're 
doing
and you don't do it veroften.

~ It's OK to top a middle-aged tree for a 
view if you top to an old node with an 
epicormic shoot
and promise to come 
b
ack everfew years.

~ In our countrwe top trees ever20 
yearand we believe they live longer 
bec
ause of it.

~ Topping and reduction pruning on a 
verold, well-loved tree that haa tar- 
get
and ialready in failure modeis 
OK. We will watch it closely
.

~ Reducing the height and size of a tree 
reduces the torque of a tree and can 
prevent failure.

 

TREE CARE INDUSTRY - OCTOBER 2013

Testimonials

  • "These guys took a huge tree down that was over top of my house. They were experts and did a great job! Thanks"
    Patrick Maddox
  • "I have used ArborJack's tree service several times now after having some poor experiences with some other companies and I will not use anyone except them in the future. They kno..."
    Luke Rivera
    Property Manager