Pruning (beheading) trees

Tree Guy said this in another thread.

tree guy said:

"cut off his hands he who beheads a tree"

Click to expand...

Well... I think I may be guilty of that practice if I understand what is being said. I guess I need some thoughts/advise.

The land where my house was built was wooded and cleared for the house and yard. Therefore, many of the remaining trees have no branches in the lower 30-40'.

I have cut a couple of these off by "beheading". I basically went up the tree approximately 15-20' and cut the tree clean off. It then looks like a large stump with no branches. I don't recall exactly why but I remember something about taking a pick or hatchet and putting some notches in the bark approx. 6" from the top so I did that as well.

After a few months (or more), new branches then sprout out of my new stump. Within a couple years, it starts looking like a nice tree.

Now (disclaimer), I've only done this to trees that are not safe or appear to be dieing (basically all the leaves have fallen off in mid-summer). The former is if they're overhanging a building or have been struck by lightning. On the latter, if they don't bounce back in a year or 2, I figure they're dead and have a nice size stump for leverage.

Since I have had success, I would like to consider doing this to other trees but I don't want my hands cut off. Is what I've been doing a bad thing?

WHY would you want to do this to other trees ??? Do natural branches offend you ? If they are bothering you, why don't you cut them all the way down and have firewood or a log that could be sawn into lumber ?

I have some land that was damaged by ice storms. The few remaining trees have pom-poms on top like some poofy poodle. It looks stupid but all the rest of the ( damaged) trees were cut for firewood/pulp/lumber and it's nice to have a ( miniscule ) bit of shade around.

pixie said:

Do natural branches offend you ?

Click to expand...

Not if they're healthy.

pixie said:

If they are bothering you, why don't you cut them all the way down and have firewood or a log that could be sawn into lumber ?

Click to expand...

I have more firewood than I could ever use so I don't want/need to cut these for that purpose.
My thought was if I have a living and mature trunk, I have one heck of a head start on a tree as opposed to planting/growing a new one in its place.

I have more trees but no pictures so I'm going to use this one as an example.

Here's a BEFORE picture from 2004 of a couple trees at the edge of my property and near the neighbor's house. Next post has the AFTER or PROPOSED cutting/pruning.

This picture outlines differences as the tree(s) appear now.

The pink lines denote where a couple trees have been cut off.
The yellow shows the removed section.
The blue circle is where new growth has already occurred. That plume is now 2 years old (much larger) and when leaves are on it, it looks like a nice tree now.

Now, the tree on the left of the picture...
The areas in the red circles is now all dead. At almost 60' up, I'm not comfortable about getting up there and topping it.

My thoughts/plans were to cut this tree off at somewhere around the white line. If it grows back (like the one beside it is doing), it too would make a nice tree.

I understand better, now.

To me, part of the charm of a hardwood tree is it's winter form. If that is too bizare, it upsets me.

If it were me, I'd buy or dig up some evergreen trees and plant them out by those trees in your picture so I wouldn't have to see the neighbors house.

pixie said:

If it were me, I'd buy or dig up some evergreen trees and plant them out by those trees in your picture so I wouldn't have to see the neighbors house.

Click to expand...

I've thought of that as well but discarded the thought (although I have done that exact thing facing the other neighbor).

The owner is a very good friend so we do a lot of things together. Our kids are together all the time so if they're over at his house, I can see them. We also keep an eye on each others place.

We also share yards. We've both left our back yards (relatively) wide open which is great for the kids when riding their ATV's or being pulled on a toboggan.

topping,crown reduction, heading back , all these mean the same and it is the worst thing you can do as it causes decay, multiple sprouting, poorly attached branches and it also shocks and starves the tree, it would appear that your tops were dead though right ? if so yea what else you top it or remove it. looks like your dieback is construction related (newer home ?)
if they died to this point i guess you can keep them long enough to let the new ones (that i know you will plant) grow. its just a bad thing to do, click on that trees are good link and stomp around it's helpful !!! dont feel bad there are folks out there who call them selves pros that still do it !!!

take care
chris

Thanks for the info Chris.

I don't believe the dieback is construction related. I have these mature trees (that were once in heavily wooded area) all over my yard that have been dieing back from the top a couple feet a year. They're acting like they just want to be shorter since they don't have to reach for the canopy anymore for sunshine. Does that happen?
Some continue to appear healthy as they do this but others just appear to be dieing. The latter are the ones I was thinking of beheading.

Also, a lot of these trees just look crappy. They all go up 40' (or so) before there's a single branch then have a little "poof" at the top. Being primarily maples, I prefer to see 10' of trunk then a nice crown. I was hoping beheading could/would do this.

I guess I could go back in the woods and get some smaller trees and start planting. It just "seems" that beheading existing trees with 8-12" trunks gets me a mature tree a lot faster than growing from a 1" trunk... but I see your points (causes decay, multiple sprouting, poorly attached branches and it also shocks and starves the tree). Tell me though... since I don't need the firewood, would prefer to not dig out stumps... if I behead them and 50% grow back and live for 20 years won't I still be further ahead by at least giving it a shot?

tree guy said:

click on that trees are good link and stomp around it's helpful

Click to expand...

Not sure I understand what you mean.

if there location is such that structural issuses arent issuses or if parts break out they wont hit anything or worse yet anyonethen if you are sure the top is dead ok but if not i wouldnt,if there is some dead take them back to the live area. they are long and not "low limby" (is that a word ?)because they were once in the forest,even if const is 15 years old it can still hamper them, no tree is "native" to our yard, go in the forest and the first thing you see is an organic layer on the ground from which they feed also i bet you dont see any turf in the forest, turf is their enemy. the enviroment changes so much from forest to yard. it's just real hard on them when you prune that much. when pruning you should never remove more than 20% of the canopy, they bush out like that as a form of self defense to perform photosythesis to create the needed sugars and starches , that is one of the main functions of the leaves. (and we all thought it was to make our lives miserable this time of year). so if they are dead ok . it's just that if the tops are dead they are already stressed.
just my side of it and i did not stay at a holiday inn express last night.

as for the tops dying back , that is how they respond from construction damage and is the first sign of disturbance from const damage (sorry i had forgotten to comment on that part earlier, what is the age of the home ?