On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 16:05:05 GMT, figaro wrote:



Always remember that trees are living things. Their roots are very
important to them. Use caution and common sense when removing roots. If
you remove 30% of the roots, you will need to remove 30% of the branches or
you risk killing the tree. Good luck.
Once again, this is a myth. The tree needs those branches to produce
energy to recover from the root damage. Never remove a live tree
branch without a good reason.

Meanwhile, removing 30% of roots or branches is stretching the limits
of what the tree can tolerate. Especially if the roots are very large
(say, 2" diam or larger, depending on trunk diam) or very close to the
trunk.

I reiterate, the solution is to add mulch on top of the roots.

Keith Babberney
ISA Certified Arborist

Treedweller wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 16:05:05 GMT, figaro wrote:



Always remember that trees are living things. Their roots are very
important to them. Use caution and common sense when removing
roots. If you remove 30% of the roots, you will need to remove
30% of the branches or you risk killing the tree. Good luck.
Once again, this is a myth. The tree needs those branches to
produce energy to recover from the root damage. Never remove a
live tree branch without a good reason.

Meanwhile, removing 30% of roots or branches is stretching the
limits of what the tree can tolerate. Especially if the roots are
very large (say, 2" diam or larger, depending on trunk diam) or
very close to the trunk.

I reiterate, the solution is to add mulch on top of the roots.

Keith Babberney
ISA Certified Arborist

......but only a couple of inches or you risk smothering the roots.

--

Travis in Shoreline (just North of Seattle) Washington
USDA Zone 8b
Sunset Zone 5
Not a certified anything

Always remember that trees are living things. Their roots are very
important to them. Use caution and common sense when removing roots. If
you remove 30% of the roots, you will need to remove 30% of the branches or
you risk killing the tree. Good luck.
Once again, this is a myth. The tree needs those branches to produce
energy to recover from the root damage. Never remove a live tree
branch without a good reason.

Meanwhile, removing 30% of roots or branches is stretching the limits
of what the tree can tolerate. Especially if the roots are very large
(say, 2" diam or larger, depending on trunk diam) or very close to the
trunk.

I reiterate, the solution is to add mulch on top of the roots.

Keith Babberney
ISA Certified Arborist

Calling it a myth is a little arrogant.

While I bow to your professional expertise, there is scientific evidence to
support both claims.

My tree experience has been mostly with bonsai where it is accepted practice
to significantly trim the tree roots to keep the plant in a dwarf form--and
this, in turn, requires an equal trimming of the foliage or it is very
likely the plant will die. I agree that in landscape trees where you are
removing only a few roots there is usually not a need to trim the branches.
However, if you are removing significant roots, even from a landscape tree,
I'm sure you will agree that the drought stress may be too much for a tree
to recover and the tree will die. I have found, through personal
experience, that trimming the branches of a tree that has been
root-compromised is an excellent way to prevent death. I am not the only
person who feels this way; many professional horticulturists agree with this
assessment.

In the future, I would appreciate it if you disagreed politely instead of
throwing around your "ISA Certified Arborist" as if nobody else could
possibly have anything of substance to say. I have met many professional
horticulturists who were dead wrong about many issues, mostly because they
were following old beliefs and not keeping current with the science.

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 00:27:41 GMT, figaro wrote:


Calling it a myth is a little arrogant.

While I bow to your professional expertise, there is scientific evidence to
support both claims.

My tree experience has been mostly with bonsai where it is accepted practice
to significantly trim the tree roots to keep the plant in a dwarf form--and
this, in turn, requires an equal trimming of the foliage or it is very
likely the plant will die. I agree that in landscape trees where you are
removing only a few roots there is usually not a need to trim the branches.
However, if you are removing significant roots, even from a landscape tree,
I'm sure you will agree that the drought stress may be too much for a tree
to recover and the tree will die. I have found, through personal
experience, that trimming the branches of a tree that has been
root-compromised is an excellent way to prevent death. I am not the only
person who feels this way; many professional horticulturists agree with this
assessment.

In the future, I would appreciate it if you disagreed politely instead of
throwing around your "ISA Certified Arborist" as if nobody else could
possibly have anything of substance to say. I have met many professional
horticulturists who were dead wrong about many issues, mostly because they
were following old beliefs and not keeping current with the science.

I'm sorry if you felt this was rude or arrogant. In a discussion, I
generally feel free to add my opinion as I see fit. If you disagree,
you are obviously able to say so.

A few decades ago, arborists were taught that branches should be
removed flush to the trunk and all wounds should be sealed, among
other now discredited notions. I may be wrong. Surely we all know
that's the chance you take when you get info from Usenet.

I add my CA credential to posts about trees to let people know I have
studied research, attended seminars, and otherwise educated myself
about trees. I do not claim that makes me infallible, but I do
believe I am more reliable when it comes to trees than Farmer Joe who
tops trees cuz his daddy did. I also include my sig with a link to
the ISA's consumer info site, where you can check up on me if you care
to (though I don't think this specific question is addressed there).
I do not know what your level of expertise is, nor do I discount your
oipinions out of hand, but I have been taught that this "take off
branches to compensate for root loss" thing is a myth. Your comments
about bonsai are intriguing and I am rethinking the whole thing in
light of them, but I still think landscape trees are a whole nuther
world. I'm inclined to think if you remove enough roots to cause this
sort of response in a landscape tree, you're looking at trouble
regardless of what you do to the branches. I'm not quite willing to
retract my statements yet, but I apologize if you felt I was
suggesting you had nothing of value to say. Stay tuned.

Keith

I'm not quite willing to
retract my statements yet, but I apologize if you felt I was
suggesting you had nothing of value to say. Stay tuned.

Keith



I am sorry about the tone of my response to you. I have a really hard time
deciphering people's attitudes from their posts and I generally assume the
worst because that has been my experience with people in general. I agree
that there are extreme differences between bonsai and landscape trees but I
think the biology is the same. I also agree with you that if you remove as
many roots from a landscape tree as a bonsai, you are in BIG trouble and
branch trimming may do no good at all. I had difficulty understanding the
original poster's situation without knowing the tree species or the age and
size of the tree in relation to the size of the roots to be cut and was just
trying to impart some general caution about trimming tree roots. I really
appreciate the respectful response you gave me. I guess I should give
people more credit but the lack of ethics in American politics and
corporations have spilled over into my personal expectation of the
population in general.

figaro wrote:

I have a really hard time
deciphering people's attitudes from their posts and I generally assume the
worst because that has been my experience with people in general.

May I suggest for your consideration the following?

"I always prefer to believe the best of everybody, it saves so
much trouble." --Rudyard Kipling

I agree
that there are extreme differences between bonsai and landscape trees but I
think the biology is the same.

Biological principles are the same for all living organisms.
However, scale is very important in biology. Landscape trees
are living more or less at the scale and in the environment in
which they evolved, and to which they are thus adapted. Bonsai
are living in quite different conditions from those in which
the organisms evolved and to which they are adapted. It seems
to me that the latter are much more delicately balanced at the
edge of survival than the former.


Mike Prager
On the North Carolina coast - Zone 8a
(Remove spam traps from email address to reply.)

With the surface roots you describe, it sounds like they could be maple
trees.
#1: Don't cut or otherwise injure the roots.
#2: If the roots look more like the bark on the tree and aren't creamy
white in-ground roots, do not cover them with sod or soil. They need to be
exposed or they will rot and eventually kill the tree. It may take 20 or
more years, but it will rot the roots and kill the tree.
#3: Do not plant under the tree, as you will most likely have to add soil
to do so.
#4: Your best bet is to remove the existing soil/grass over the roots so
they can "breathe", and replace with 2" of bark mulch of your choice. Just
be sure to keep the mulch 2-3" away from the trunk of the tree. This is the
easiest solution in terms of cutting the lawn without whacking the roots,
and far better for the tree in the long run. The University of Wisconsin
has an InfoSource message on surface roots at:
http://infosource.uwex.edu/recorddet...pe&headingid=2

Hope this helps!
Suzy in Wisconsin



"Leon Trollski" wrote in message
news89Yd.637133$Xk.277234@pd7tw3no...

"Suzanne D." wrote in message
...
We have several large shade trees in our yard. Around the trees,
numerous
small thin roots are exposed. They are from pencil-thickness to a couple
of
inches, and they tend to come up, lay flat over the ground (or slightly
elevated from the ground) for 5-10 inches, then go back down. This makes
it
very difficult to mow the lawn (grass is growing between the roots).

Can someone tell me the feasibility of any of these ideas:

1. Removing the exposed roots. If so, how?
2. Re-sodding. Would this be terribly expensive? Would I have to do it
to
the whole lawn, or just the rooty areas?
3. Giving up that part of the lawn and planting big circles of
wildflowers
around the trees.
4. Anything I am missing?

Thanks in advance.
--S.



Drill some holes and fill them with Roundup from your local hardware.

Then douse the rest of your lawn and garden.

On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 15:18:05 GMT, figaro wrote:

I'm not quite willing to
retract my statements yet, but I apologize if you felt I was
suggesting you had nothing of value to say. Stay tuned.

Keith



I am sorry about the tone of my response to you. I have a really hard time
deciphering people's attitudes from their posts and I generally assume the
worst because that has been my experience with people in general. I agree
that there are extreme differences between bonsai and landscape trees but I
think the biology is the same. I also agree with you that if you remove as
many roots from a landscape tree as a bonsai, you are in BIG trouble and
branch trimming may do no good at all. I had difficulty understanding the
original poster's situation without knowing the tree species or the age and
size of the tree in relation to the size of the roots to be cut and was just
trying to impart some general caution about trimming tree roots. I really
appreciate the respectful response you gave me. I guess I should give
people more credit but the lack of ethics in American politics and
corporations have spilled over into my personal expectation of the
population in general.
Don't worry about the tone of your msg--I have a thick skin by now.
I, too, misinterpret email and usenet sometimes. It's all part of the
game.

As for the roots-and-pruning question, I've only given it cursory
attention (been out of town a few days). The initial response I got
from tree guys was to agree with me that pruning should not be done to
compensate root loss, but that they have no source material at hand to
refer to. I hope to dredge up a little something soon.
k