Just started using this and so far seems to be holding up really well to the rain and it sure sticks well to my hands (in a good way). It's pliable and easier than toilet bowl wax seal. Contains beeswax (and you can smell it - which is awesome) http://www.canadiantire.ca/en/pdp/green-earth-pruning-sealer-400-g-0592472p.html#.VtYsxyhn8qY Just started using it. Seems great for cleft grafts and sealing off big branches when bark grafting. I've been grafting apples and pears and some plums too Anyone have any info to add?

A picture would be nice just to help explain the damage, but the advice might not change much. First, NO, don't paint it with something (caveat to follow). The goop that is usually sold for this purpose is much more likely to cause problems than to solve them! Remove any loose bark. Carefully and conservatively clean up the edges of ragged or ripped bark. From there, leave the tree alone and let it take care of itself. It is MUCH better at doing that than we are. caveat: There is one thing you might consider that could be of help. One of the regular contributors to the Tree Forum, Spruceman, has come up with a novel idea (one of the best I've seen on Gardenweb). I will provide a link to his idea and explanation below. Here is a link that might be useful: Preventing Wood Rot in Trees - Liquid Copper Fungicide

Ramble: If you can post a picture, I could give you some specific instructions on how to prepare this wound for the application of liquid copper fungicide to prevent wood rot from entering this tree. When a branch is torn away from the trunk of a tree, the wound can be ugly--very ragged and can include a cavity in the tree trunk. Some trimming/surgery on this wound would be needed before the liquid copper fungicide can be effectively used. Hortster: As for Dr. Shigo: a couple of years ago I posted a summary of an article published in the Journal of Forestry by Professor Kevin O'Hara. This article focused on the issue of the branch collar when pruning tree limbs. AS part of the discussion focused on the "work" of Dr. Shigo, and reported that Dr. Shigo's "research" was essentially non-existant, or at the very least was seldom, if ever peer reviewed. Also, Dr. Shigo seemed completely unaware of something like 150 years of research on the issue of pruning limbs and cutting or not cutting into the branch collar. I conclude from what Professor O'Hara included in his scholarly article on this issue, that Dr. Shigo was more or less (I think more) of a fraud. I think his assertion that trees do not need any treatment for wounds to be completely incorrect. In his defense, there can be some "walling off" in trees to prevent wood rot from spreading into a tree, but from my years of timber growing, timber cutting cutting, and log grading, I can report that the effect is at best only partial, and substantial wounds to trees often result in rot entering and spreading inside trees, often resulting in their descruction. His assertion that nothing should be done to treat tree wounds has done more harm to trees than anything I can think of. It is true that some of the more "traditional" tree wound treatments can do more harm than good, but that does not mean that some treatments, such as the one I have been using for over 20 years, are worthless or harmful. I know Dr. Shigo has over the years become something of a cult figure, and it will take the work of many more people like Professor Kevin O'Hara to finally undo all the damage this man has done. Here is the reference for Dr. O'Hara's article: OÂHara, K.L. 2007. Pruning wounds and occlusion: A long-standing conundrum in forestry. Journal of Forestry 105(3): 131-138. --Spruce

Dave, I think the problem is that you have little to no practical experience. I don't think for a minute that you are lying; I just think you are very unfamiliar with the topic. If you were out "getting your hands dirty" more often you'd surely have a much greater appreciation for the advancements made in horticulture over the last century. I haven't directly addressed the particular instance of your tree because (a) I am not familiar with all the facts of the case and (b) I highly doubt you had enough controls on your experiment for it to have any meaning at all. In any case, your one trial would in no way discount or lessen the impact of the many carefully conducted trials that demonstrated the complete worthlessness of the various tree goops, such as the one you mentioned. Probably the most disappointing thing about all this is that there are still people who fall victim to the snake oil salesmen because they are too lazy or too set in their ways to research the topic. One does have to be willing in order to learn. One has to learn in order not to be a duped.