Trimming a Maple

[lindy rig]

Can I take a couple branches off my maple tree right now? Also, can I use regular paint to seal up the cuts or even some leftover deck sealer?

[Powerstroke]

Trim the branch, DO NOT paint seal with anything.

Maples are perfectly safe to trim this time of year. as far as the wound, if its safe to prune then you don't have to worry about the wound. They no longer recommend painting wounds for any tree so don't bother. Its proven not to be beneficial. Let it heal naturally.

[lindy rig]

Thanks man!

[solbes]

Best to do it this time of year. They "bleed" a lot in the early spring.

[Powerstroke]

Maples "bleeding" is nothing. This comes up every spring. Nothing to worry about.

[Steve Foss]

Make sure you leave a little nub when trimming the branch. An inch or so is fine. It's much easier for the tree to heal the cut this way. If you trim flush to the trunk, the tree has a harder time.

[lindy rig]

Was talking to my neighbors and they suggested I have the tree "shaped". Right now it is growing mostly verticle and not filling out much. Any idea of what I should expect from a professional to do this? Would they just top it or actually trim several branches at specific spots to shape it nicely?

Just trying to decide if I could do it myself.

[Powerstroke]

A maple is not meant to be shaped. You can make cuts if you want to "guide" it, but its not meant to be an ornamental tree.

Some maples are tall and skinny like a sugar maple, some are short and squatty like a red or maybe a silver.

About the only maple I would shape is an amur maple and they are like a bush.

Your choice but you'd be wasting your money IMHO.

[LwnmwnMan2]

I'm with Powerstroke.

As far as landscaping goes, too many people have an idea of what looks "pretty" and not enough have an idea of "common sense".

It's one thing to trim bushes and shape them. It's something completely different to think you can shape something that grows 50-75-100+' tall and it's going to retain that shape.

It's your tree, don't let your neighbors talk you into an added expense that isn't needed.

No offense Powerstroke or other tree guys on here.

[Powerstroke]

Its one thing to shape an ornamental apple tree or magnolia or similar because they only grow to 20-30' max.

All tree's have a natural shape. The only way the shape changes is through natural intervention (storm damage, insect/disease damage) or human intervention (pruning or mechanical damage from vehicles etc. If the tree does get damaged it will still try to regain its natural shape on its own.

The point is you can "shape a tree" if you're following its natural shape, but you can't take a tall tree and make it a short bushy tree. Think bonzi, it would require lots of tedious maintenance and it must be done on the right type.

[Powerstroke]

Not to beat the dead horse, but for the price of having someone "shape" a tree, you can buy the right type of tree that can have the shape you want. That would require less money and less effort in the long run.

[lindy rig]

Right on...

Well, that was the type of feedback I was looking for.

The tree kind of comes to a Y about 6ft up with two main trunks at that point. Would you put a chain or some type of band there to help prevent it from splitting?

[JacobMHD]

Might not hurt to provide a picture of the tree......

[311Hemi]

Don't think you would really need a chain or anything for it, probably not a good chance of it splitting. That maple right in my front house is the same way, it splits about 8 feet off the ground into two large trunks.

[Steve Foss]

Right on...

Well, that was the type of feedback I was looking for.

The tree kind of comes to a Y about 6ft up with two main trunks at that point. Would you put a chain or some type of band there to help prevent it from splitting?

+1 on previous comments against shaping the tree.

Additionally, the narrower the angle of that Y, the more likely you'll get trouble over time as that tree matures. The narrow angles are weak structurally in the first place, and then you get rainwater pooling in the fork, and it can speed up rotting the tree. Also, standing water or saturated wood in the fork will split it apart and weaken it further because of the winter freeze/thaw cycle.

A chain is not the best way to stabilize that kind of fork, IMO, and a band can kill the tree because it can girdle it as the tree grows. I've had some luck with stainless or galvanized threaded rod at least 1/2 inch in diameter, and drilling right through both trunks just above the Y, and using plate steel and nuts on the rod, but you honestly can't fix it totally for the long haul.

And maples are kinda "rotty" trees anyway.

Now, all that is useless information if the Y angle is wider and strong. I think a pic would be a great help here. We need to see how old the tree is to help you more. And we need to know if you have a sentimental attachment to the tree, or if you could care less if it gets removed and a different tree put in its place.

[Powerstroke]

If the crotch of the tree is more of a U than a V, then its good. U= good, V=bad. Proper way to stabilize this is with a threaded rod through the crotch and bracing cables about 2/3 up towards the tips.

If this is a small tree, don't worry about it. That's a lot of money and work for a tree so it has to be worth it.

[311Hemi]

Interesting, would you do this if both trunks above the y are 10-12" in diameter.

[lindy rig]

Pretty narrow angle on the V I'm afraid. Also, as you can see the branches on lower portion of the tree don't really bloom outwards which is why I thought it looked kind of goofy.

I don't know, maybe it looks fine. Certainly not something I'm going to throw a bunch of money at.

Here's the pics

[LwnmwnMan2]

IMO, you'll be fine.

As the tree matures, you'll have branches that'll start to work outwards as they reach for more sunshine.

Sure there are "tricks" or options to supposedly keep the tree together, but if you think about it, there would be ALOT of weight on that rod IF the tree ever decided to split,

Plus, as the tree grows, it will have a tendency to grow around the plates, which would cause problems where the plates are.

Now, remember I'm not a tree guy, just going by what I've seen on different properties.

[Steve Foss]

That's a very attractive tree, and I like the vertical statement it makes. Very healthy and neat. Probably it's a variety of maple designed with a vertical habit with angled sprays of branches.

For the long term, as that narrow crotch weakens, the pic confirms for me the rod and plates.

The key is to use a beefy rod of galvanized or stainless, and plates that are only a few inches in diameter, basically like glorified washers. You don't have to tighten the thing down so the plates dig into the bark. Time and tree growth will take care of that. Eventually, if the tree lives long enough, it'll grow right around those plates and the whole thing will be incorporated into the tree.

Because the plates are small and only interrupt transfer of nutrients in very limited areas, they don't hurt the tree's growth.

Eventually, unless it's made of titanium, the rod will decay and fail, but we're talking 50 years or more.

I will admit that this type of thing is hated by tree service fellas. Good way to rack up a chain if you're taking one of these apart and aren't paying close attention to odd growth patterns.

I'd charge about $200 for the rod/plate job. I think cables farther up the tree wouldn't hurt, and I understand why they get installed, but IMO (just in slight disagreement with Andy), stabilizing the crotch is usually enough when the two major trunks are strong and sturdy, as these seem to be.

Two other options.

1. Leave it as it is, enjoy it as it is and grows until eventually the tree splits, which will happen sooner or later (hopefully much later). Cost: Free.

2. Take it out and put in a tree that has a growth habit you like better. Cost: Probably somewhere around $500-$600 for removal, stump grinding, site prep and replating a new tree. Could be more expensive if you want a larger ball-and-burlap tree with thicker trunk.

That's how I would approach it if you'd asked me to consult. Which option you end up with is really based on your own preference, and there are plenty of good folks down in the Cities who do that kind of work.

[lindy rig]

Cool. Well, thank you all very much for the time / input!

Fish on

[Powerstroke]

I'm in complete agreement with Steve. I say keep it, maybe do the rod if you want, but otherwise I think its fine.

[LwnmwnMan2]

Like I said, I'm not a tree guy.

I'd keep it as it is in my yard too.

A quick story that somewhat ties into this.....

For the last 3 winters, I've been clearing a friend's 40 acres that pretty heavily decimated by Oak Wilt.

This 40 undeveloped acres is landlocked by state land.

So far I've hit 4 nails in trees, a large spike, and last winter barb wire fence that was through the middle of a 14" oak tree.

The fencing was on the corner of the property, running diagonal, nowhere near "today's" property lines.

I asked my buddy (who knows quite a bit of the history around here) if he had any idea what was going on, but he didn't either, that he was going to have to look into it.

Makes a guy wonder what / who has been here before us.

[Huskie]

Can ash trees be trimmed now or is it best to wait until fall or winter

[Steve Foss]

Are you trimming dead wood? You can do that any time. For live wood on ash and similar trees, I like to do it in spring before the leaves pop. This gives the tree a full growing season to work on healing the pruning/trimming cuts, which can take a few years to scar over fully, depending on size. Probably you'll be fine doing it now, but if you can wait until next spring, it'd be better.