If you think about it from a CODIT-esque prospective, torn roots would be at a significant healing disadvantage compared to reasonably well cut roots. I can imagine that using the air-spade might be somewhat more effective than using the dig-then-recut method, because of possible damage back deep into the non-cut soil. BUT, another big reason might be money. Can the guy with the tree spade sell his "high-tech/cutting-edge" solution for more bucks than you can sell your possibly more practical solution?

He did in this case. I manage the pruning and general care of the trees but was not consulted on this issue, or wouldn't have been if I hadn't shown up by coincidence.

I well understand the theory of surgical cuts of roots as opposed to torn ends, but air spades only became part of the trade in very recent years. I think they're great when being used to save roots but it seems to me like major over-kill to use them when roots are being cut anyway.

First of all, I would like to see research showing that torn and broken roots are often an entry point to pathogens. As I said, in my experience they haven't been in the northeast. When I googled for actual research on the subject I could find nothing.

Hundreds of thousands of construction jobs are done in this country every year where roots of trees are mercilessly torn up by powerful equipment. Has any research ever been done that evaluates the results of this treatment specifically to the question of rough cut roots?

From my perspective, you might as well have the back hoe cut into the soil a few inches back from final cut- find the big roots and cut them cleanly before the back hoe does its final work. I could have done that in an hour- the back hoe was sitting on the site anyway. Blowing away all that soil requires a major input of time and money and seems totally unnecessary to me.

Harvestman, I agree with your approach. Rip the ditch with a backhoe and then cut the roots clean before refilling the ditch. I have done it many times as a landscape contractor doing yard makeovers. Even here in the nursery and garden.
No negative feedback, and I've had the same phone number for over 30 years.
Mike

Of the things that have been foisted off on the horticultural community over the years, this one is probably one of the more gentle things.

If someone is able to sell the value of the service, and get someone to buy it, great, more power to them.

When someone wants to put their money behind the value of a tree, rather than just provide platitudes about how people should be more careful, respectful, and properly value the contributions of plants and that people that work with them, I say, Yes. Thank you.

That being said, would I go through the expense and effort of the extra step involved in air excavation? Nope. Grunt and groan and power.

A little off-topic, but I had the chance to see the air spade at work at a seminar a few years back. They sure do a good job of exposing a root system.....for whatever that's worth.

OP, I think I would genrally agree with you that the added expense may not contribute in any meaningful way to a better outcome for the trees.

+oM

Some might even seal the wounds after the roots were pruned. The only way you would know effective these treatments are would be to dig the roots many years later. Maybe E. Gilman might have something out there?

I have seen lots of rough root cuts years after the injury. I always see plenty of fresh new roots behind the walled off wounds and never any signs of infection or disease. I've seen it many time on huge roots that I axed while installing whips- I do this all the time in my nursery as there are lots of forest trees in the background. When I come back to dig up the trees I planted several years later I get to see the results. I think it's not a very likely way to kill a tree by butchering a few roots unless you destroy enough roots to kill the tree directly.

As I said earlier- compressed air soil removal is great when you are trying to save roots but it seems quite a dubious service for roots that are being removed.

It is not of much worry to the client who paid for this though- it was a very minor part of what must be a multi-million dollar remodel. There's been thirty men or more on the site for over a year.

If anything, I'm surprised to read 'specimen apple tree'. Really.....apple tree? I guess.

+oM

In Wisconsin a specimen apple tree might be unusual, but the hill country outside of NY City used to be full of productive seedling rootstocked apple trees that produced apples for NYC for a century or two before the industry headed northwest and west.

Now this hill country- not too steep- not too flat, is the location of millionaire and billionaire alley, where many of our nations 1% and .1% reside in their mansions. Where the ancient apple trees haven't been cut down they are often maintained as expensive ornament in highly labor intensive landscapes not seen since the guilded age.

I'm the maintenance guy.

Recently in one of the home remodeling programs used and air spade to move a tree. It seems if they were going to the trouble of using the air spade they would have repositioned the roots rather than cut them off.

H-man, I get that. There's lots of old, sometimes picturesque apple trees scattered about around here. I just never placed that much value on them myself. But yeah, where maintenance costs are no object, I suppose, why not.

+oM

Knut, repositioning was not possible because the grade has been lowered 3 feet.

I know of no tree more beautiful than an ancient and huge apple tree that is pruned to an attractive shape. Sometimes trees left to their own growth are equally beautiful but if they are shaped artificially and then neglected- watch out.

In addition to being gorgeous trees they are steeped in our history as a nation and have been our intimate allies in survival and pleasure (think cider!) since before we were a nation.

Sure, I sometimes see an amazing oak tree that spans the height and length of several small houses that is so beautiful I could weep for the pleasure of its existence but there is no relationship between plant and man more meaningful and intimate than what we enjoy with malus.

But then, I make my living carving them and making sure they are strung with fine fruit so I'm not the most objective of observers.

I used to prune a lot of fl. crabs. I considered it-still do in fact-desirable to go for a somewhat more "sculpted" look and structure with these than say, maples and ash.

Balance is the key. Removing ALL suckers, for example, while often looking the best right at that moment, sets the stage for profuse re-suckering, so a bit of judiciousness is called for, IMO. I always really enjoyed that work.

+oM

I would also keep in mind that other areas of the country may have more soil born pathogens. (I'm guessing the southern U.S.) I've seen half the root systems of live oaks being cut off for one reason or another without any immediate problems that the eye could see.

Now that I think of it, where I live, and everywhere there is a lot of forest, most every time a road, driveway or foundation is built, huge roots of old trees are completely butchered. Once again, they only seem to suffer if the grade is changed or just too much root is destroyed.

Let's hear it for the ingenious corporate tree care companies that have come up with a new plan to save trees from all this abuse and keep their crews busy.

I thank you all for your input, you've helped me clarify the whole thing in my mind.

I'd say that whoever starts to make attempts to mitigate the damage caused by construction around trees should be encouraged. There's still far too much mindless, needless damage being done to trees in the name of progress. It's just that, in this one specific example, the attempt may be off the mark a bit.

I'll add too that at least where I live, most tree care companies are on the small side. Asplundh-one of the biggies-does do much line clearance for the power company, but aside from them, it's all small-time stuff. The range of training and expertise is enormous though. If anything, it is the rise of the two man company with a pickup truck and a saw, that is dragging the collective quality level down. A lot of those guys have NO idea what they're doing.

+oM

On the other hand, I work where there are plenty of corporate type tree care companies. The salesmen are certified arborists, not the guys actually in the trees. I believe that the buyer must beware with these companies as their salesmen are like salesmen in any business where the salaries are at least partly based on commissions.

The idea is always to sell as much work as possible, but they prey mostly on people with plenty of money, of course. It is easy to find trees abused by butchers because it stands out for years after. All the absolutely unnecessary work is not reported and not noticeable. I would wager that there's a hell of a lot more of that than butchery.

I have saved customers thousands of dollars by advising against this kind of work- whether it be compost tea sprays or injection fertilization or even blanket spray programs that are pretend based on diagnostics- Insects and diseases "targeted" that were nonexistent.

I suppose this kind of stuff goes on in most every business to some degree. This just happens to be the only one where I'm remotely qualified to spot it.

Yeah, I get that, H-Man. I do also agree that there are a fair number of practices performed by tree care firms-even ones with educated staff-that are of questionable value. One of the really good ones here did, at least the last time I checked, still sell a service called "deep-root fertilization" which was just injecting fertilizer solution into the ground. Meanwhile, everything that has been learned about fertilizing trees would seem to suggest that IF fertilizer is actually needed by the trees for some reason, a simple top dressing of granular would get it to the up-turned feeder roots just fine. But that doesn't seem "technical" enough I guess.

I don't see these as bad guys though. They're in a tough business with cyclical workloads and slack periods. But their expenses keep coming. So I'm not unsympathetic to their plight. The key is continuing education-of practitioners and customers-as to what actually constitutes good tree care. And here I'm talking about relatively good outfits, not two guys and a truck.

+oM

Tom, you are a wise man. I used to get very annoyed with injection fertilization, but it gives them something to do when it rains and no spraying can be accomplished. Any kind of fertilization of trees shouldn't be based on the idea that more vigor is always better.

If one company doesn't do it it would have to charge more for their other work and their model would probably fail. That is a problem with really big companies. They have to keep people working every day to keep them on and stay viable. A man with one truck has a little easier time of keeping all hands busy. I do believe that smaller companies are more likely to only do useful work.

It is a terrible thing that huge businesses often cannot be both comptetitive and ethical. The corruption of false advertising permeates modern society and creates a cynical culture. If there is dishonesty all around you, you have to be dishonest to avoid losing your competitive edge.

I guess the last paragraph isn't really appropriate for this forum but if you are depending on tree care professionals to take care of your trees, you best know the score.

Agreed. I have been fortunate to spend the last 31 years of my working life for a govt. agency. We have the ability....and luxury, in a sense....of being able to not only stay abreast of up-to-date knowledge, but to only do those things that actually have a sound scientific basis. Not so for the private guys. They have a need for this thing called profit.

The practices that get me the most steamed up are those where doing it the right way would be as cost-effective as doing it the wrong way. Tree planting is the biggest offender. We-the city I work for-have been at the cutting edge of proper planting since the early 1980's. Meanwhile, it is completely normal to still see private nurseries and landscapers planting trees improperly....more than thirty years later! And there's not even a monetary reason NOT to do it correctly. Just a mixture of stubbornness and lack of knowledge.

+oM

Tom, when I plant container trees from my nursery I have to spend a good deal of extra time pulling circling roots out and making large enough holes to allow these roots to extend outward and well into the soil on site. After about mid-day I get tempted just to do the easy thing- stick them in a smaller hole and leave the roots as they are. I could charge exactly the same for my work.

Because it is my company and because my model is based on word of mouth advertising and results over the long haul (I usually maintain the fruit trees I produce in my small nursery), I have the incentive to do things right and ignore the temptation to do it the easy way.

It is easier to plant trees at the right depth instead of too deep or to dig a hole wider rather than deeper, but a lot of things that make a positive difference do take more effort. That includes educating yourself.

Alan

^^^ Quite right. The thought process we use in justifying a little more care taken in planting trees and shrubs is along the lines of "What's a few more minutes spent planting a tree when that tree could conceivably be around for one hundred years"? kind of thing. Most folks can understand that if so told. But yes, there is a problem when most projects are bid out time and materials.

I oversee lots of bid-out projects for our local stormwater utility. The range of quality and care taken by different landscaping firms is huge. As these are usually subs hired by the main contractor for the project, we don't always have a lot of control over who we end up with on the landscaping end. We can use language to sway things a bit, but ultimately, bottom dollar still rules much of the time.

I'm on vacation through the end of the year, but in keeping in touch with the engineers I work with, I've learned that our least favorite landscaper is installing trees this week yet! That's very late for this part of the world. There is a warranty period, so in that sense, we'll be okay, but it could easily be a lot of wasted motion!

+oM

When I got into this business all the literature suggested fall planting, especially late fall planting, of anything besides container grown stock was risky business.

I never believed it, and after over twenty years of transplanting trees in Zs 5-7 using every production method and always guaranteeing success, I move more trees this way than ever.

I can imagine that other species may not like to be moved around at this time of the year but, of the many types of fruit and nut trees that I have moved- often bare root- the only problem I've had is with mulberries. Never fatal winter injury but ocassionally some die back.

90% of my installations are done in Nov. and Dec right up to first early snow or extreme cold. Generally I think it gives the trees a bit of a head start, although I've no data to support that. The worst thing is to transplant trees after they start to bud out and miss establishing them with that first surge of root growth. Lose that and lose a year.

My worst-case late fall plantings were potted plants with poor, circling root systems. I think that because I messed with the roots so late, they were delivered a blow that was hard to overcome. Other than that, over the long haul, I have been involved with some very late plantings a number of times, including right into December. Varying degrees of success, mostly good. But then, I would never be using an auger (We have clay subsoil), digging the holes about twice as deep as needed and half as wide, etc, etc!

+oM

I also use mulch which insulates against freeze-thaw heaving. That may be the largest danger of fall planting, IMO.