In the tree lawn (i.e., city property between the sidewalk and street). Technically I don't know if I'm allowed to plant a tree there - but I also don't want to sit around and wait on the city for things, they've never once planted a tree in my neighborhood in the five years I've lived here.
Then it was probably the city. The city maintains those trees where I live. Don’t plant things on someone else’s property and get upset when someone else does something to that property. Plant 2 trees in your yard and don’t give up.
kind of a dismissive response to someone trying to improve their neighborhood. city land is managed by government, but it’s the collective property of all citizens
good cities allow residents to make use of park strips by planting trees, bushes, flowers, etc and they generally go unbothered, even in high traffic areas like LA, SF, and Sacramento; why discourage citizen stewardship of local nature?
op’s city may not even oppose it, because this seems more like random vandalism than official action.
While I think you are likely to have better outcomes if you do, I still support all my guerilla gardener comrades out there. These bureaucrats stopping people from making the world greener do more harm than good.
I would be very surprised if it was the city. If so, the city needs to get their shit together and not top trees. There are no overhead power lines. It's a neighborhood of apartment buildings, no yards.
I maintain street trees for s living. People will mutilate trees all up their street for many reasons. Some think they are helping, others don't want them growing too tall.
Yup, I work for a major municipality and people will fuck up trees just for the hell of it. We had one guy go into one of our most popular parks and just start frilling a bunch of trees with an axe, no one knows why because he wasn't caught. People will cut down trees to try to make fires with, only to learn it's really hard to burn green wood. Others will snap newly planted trees in half or rip off low-growing limbs just cause. We planted a bunch in a traditional Italian neighbourhood and all the old guys cut them down within a week because they were worried about them shading out their gardens (the old guys would have been long dead before that would have been an issue, but whatever). Vandalising trees is *very* common. Also, as someone who works in municipal forestry, if I came across a tree I knew for a fact the city hadn't planted, which I have, I wouldn't even think about getting rid of it unless it was a known invasive species. First of all, fuck it, let's see how it does, and second, we will absolutely get complaints about that so why bother? Hell, I've even come across little gardens people have planted in our tree pits or planter boxes and we'll remove whatever they've planted and keep it in moist soil until we've planted our city tree, and we then replant their 'guerrilla' planting because we're not dicks.
Municipal parks and open space manager here overseeing quite a bit of "natural" woods screafe containing trails.
I can't tell you how many beautiful saplings, usually shagbark hickory, 10-25 feet off the trail that I've seen hacked apart with a machete for no reason. I get so pissed. Whatever native hardwood saplings the bucks don't shred, the vandalizing idiots cut down.
These are just random wild native hardwood saplings being vandalized here and there now and then throughout the woods and not specifically planted specimens in more formal park landscaped areas.
We actually do have trail cams to watch our DPW road construction equipment on big jobs where it has to be left overnight along the road.
I know I'm just sad, sorry for being angsty in my message. LA is the land of topped trees - for some reason gardeners here think it's the right move. I'd estimate 25-40% of trees are topped, even when not under power lines.
If it had happened when the tree was 15 feet tall I'd be a lot less upset. Taking the top foot off a six foot tall tree guarantees it won't ever be a tree, it'll just be a bush.
Actually you might be able to save this if it's still that small. You can use a method called 'splinting' where you will cut the top of the tree back to the next lateral branch below the current cut, then take a piece of bamboo or other light, rigid material, (this is called a splint) and tie that to the upper 1/3 of the trunk with the splint sticking up a foot or two above the cut you just made. You can then bend the selected lateral branch upward and tie it to your splint. Over time this branch will become the new 'leader', and over years you'll only ever be able to tell something happened to it by a very slight kink in the tree at that spot, but who doesn't like a kinky tree? To tie you want to use a broad or soft material to avoid damaging the bark. Tree nurseries have a special tape they use, but I've also seen ~1/8" black rubber tubing used for this tying.
Scroll to the bottom of this article for more info
https://extension.umn.edu/planting-and-growing-guides/staking-and-guying-trees
edit: Just re-read and realised your splint should go into the soil on a tree that small, it likely won't be able to support a splint only in the top 1/3.
I think it’s just a tribal knowledge phenomenon. Most gardeners are old school, they learn from older gardeners they apprentice with. The city needs to do more to spread awareness about the dangers of topping and encourage better practices.
Depending on the city you may just want to ask for permission or give them a heads up. Look to see if yours has a public works dept. they are typically the ones who handle parkways and city maintenance.
Was it planted on your section of the parkway? I can’t imagine the city would mow your parkway that typically is the home owners responsibility.
NYC Parks natural areas ecologist here. If you planted on city property, as much as it’s upsetting to see a living being mistreated like that, there are few things you can do to protect them. The issue is that you likely need a permit to plant in city property. There maybe underground gas lines, overhead flight paths, and other resident grievances to deal with. While it’s fun to guerrilla garden, it’s important to “read the room”, so to speak. It’s better in many cases not to plant than it is to plant a tree without having gotten buy-in from neighbors and city agencies (through permitting). More often than not, you’re going to watch your baby get taken out or otherwise damaged, and it’s out of your control.
What I’d suggest you do in future is to get involved with an environmental stewardship group and volunteer with tree planting with them. They have the go ahead with the city and in some cases, have access to city resources and reporting so your tree will have protections against damage, both physical and legal. For example, any tree over 6” DBH that gets taken down in NYC requires restitution, and if done illegally, is a $1500 Arbicide fine.
TL;DR - don’t plant your own trees on not your property and not expect it to get f’ed up in a city. Join a tree planting group that do it the right way in the right place.
those tree planting groups get official approval? it really feels like we shouldn’t have to fight against the city’s budget interests during a time where diminishing urban heat islands is more vital than ever
im not sure what it’s like in nyc, but we’re getting baked alive in the 110° CA central valley summers while someone sits in their air conditioned office putting in another work order to cut down a 250 year old street tree, probably getting a nice kick back from the contractor that keeps all that valuable old wood
"valuable old wood" that's a good one.
it is the exception not rule that urban lumber has high value. In most cases the cost of removal and transport vastly exceeds any timber value. and thats before you even consider sawing costs and kiln drying.
not to mention most Sawyers won't even touch urban logs because of the amount of included metal.
do you have any thoughts on the heart of what I was saying about city trees?
I dont know much about wood value, but theres a lot to be gained for a company simultaneously being paid to perform a job and getting to sell what’s left over. The tree isnt gonna get cut down and trucked away for free, the city’s paying for that and then some.
wouldnt a large oak tree have lots of usable wood in the branches? also polished cross sections of the trunk are sold for thousands of dollars each to law offices and lake cabins across the country
For someone who is self professed to not have knowledge about the subject, you seem to have drawn some sweeping conclusions.
The issue is handling and processing costs. For the vast majority of urban wood it is not economical to mill into lumber. More likely to be cut up as firewood, or dropped off at a business that will put it through a grinder and turn it into woodchips for compost/mulch/biofuel.
Those recycling/salvage business models are not sustainable if they have to pay for material input, in some cases they even charge a disposal fee to subsidize the handling costs, so it's not like the tree service has people bidding to buy the material.
As to your second point about some pieces being sold for high value, yes absolutely, but that is a very small % of overall material, at a guess I would say less than 1/10th of 1%.
It's also a niche market. not many people can afford/want to purchase a live edge slab table at $4000-40000.
It feels unproductive to have this entire conversation hinging on the last couple words of my original statement. What’s the motivation to downplay the role of tree poaching in the diminishing of city tree canopies?
There’s good reason to think trees are being cut down frivolously and short-sightedly, whether or not theres a conspiracy around selling the wood.
It isn’t a stretch to believe contractors may be deceiving cities into cutting down healthy trees, or causing health issues themselves, to get the payday from removal.
I also feel like your last few sentences are essentially agreeing with me. Between Lake Tahoe, the Bay Area, Sacramento, and wealthy farmers, there are plenty of huge markets to incentivize poaching old oaks in my vicinity even if the gain is only 4 grand a piece plus removal fees.
The issue is that you're misusing the term 'tree poaching' which specifically refers to illegally removing trees for their timber resale value. Otherwise yes, there are absolutely shady arborists (no pun intended) who will write arborist reports claiming a tree is unhealthy and needs to be removed for clients who just want a tree gone for whatever reason. This is why, at least for the municipality I work for, we have officers whose job it is to investigate these kinds of issues and levy fines against homeowners who allow this to happen.
Hey, last week I submitted a request to clean up a ripped up tree branch on a zelkova that got clipped by a bus or truck and is dangling off. Not your department, but man tell those guys to get on it.
Likely Central Forestry, who are getting a big overhaul at the moment. It’s also spring planting season for street trees so between in-house and contract work, you’re looking at a 30-day minimum wait if it’s not an imminent threat. Even if it is an imminent threat, come to think of it.
Assuming it’s a not recently planted tree, this would have nothing to do with central. They should put in a 311 request for a borough forester to look at the tree.
Don't get too attached to things you grow that aren't on property you own. Guerilla gardener can be fun but I would recommend focusing more on either property that you own or other private property with friends/family.
Do you know anyone who would want a free tree in their yard? You could help them plant it and maintain it,
Pretty sad to see everyone assume whatever municipal forestry program this is would top a young tree because it is a private planting without a permit. If they were going to do anything they’d just remove the tree entirely/cut down to a stump, likely it was some random asshole that did this.
Hard to know without seeing pictures, but trees sometimes put too much growth into their central leaders which leads to a very tall straight tree that gets too tall before you can be guaranteed that it has anchor roots to match the height (think of it getting top heavy and easily brought down in a windstorm). So, in some circles of thought, cutting the top off the central leader gives more potential for the lateral branches to grow and roots as well. The tree roots have the energy, and this energy will now go to a more balanced distribution for the entire system.
Also, if the tree isn't on you property, as is in an area tended to by landscapers from either the city or some other owner, it may have been a fools errand to invest too much heart into it. To keep the weed-whackers away from the base, you need to remove any and all weeds yourself within a foot from the trunk so that they have no reason to get close to it.
Welcome to r/arborists! Help Us Help You: If you have questions about the health of your tree, please see our [Posting Guidelines](https://old.reddit.com/r/arborists/wiki/posting_guidance) wiki page for help with effective posting. **Please answer the questions listed there to the best of your ability.** ***Insufficient pics/info could result in the removal of your post!!*** ([See rule 3](https://www.reddit.com/r/arborists/about/rules).)
Visit the main wiki page for [Critical Planting/Care tips and Common Errors to Avoid](https://old.reddit.com/r/arborists/wiki/index); there's sections on why planting depth/root flare exposure is so vital, along with sections on proper mulching, watering, pruning and more that I hope will be useful to you.
If you're posting about a tree ID (not permitted here; [see rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/arborists/about/rules)), see that wiki page for other subs and smartphone apps to try.
Here is how you can arrange a [consult with a local ISA arborist in your area](http://www.treesaregood.org/findanarborist/findanarborist) (NOT a 'tree company guy' unless they're ISA certified) or a [consulting arborist](https://www.asca-consultants.org/search/custom.asp?id=3818) for an on-site evaluation. A competent arborist should be happy to walk you through how to care for the trees on your property and answer any questions. If you're in the U.S. or Canada, your Extension (or master gardener provincial program) may have a list of local recommended arborists on file. If you're in the U.S., you should also consider searching for arborist associations under your state.
If you are one of our regulars and/or you work in the industry and do not want this message in your future posts, please pick an appropriate user flair (options available in the sub sidebar on PC, and on moble if using a browser).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/arborists) if you have any questions or concerns.*
In your neighborhood? On whose property?
In the tree lawn (i.e., city property between the sidewalk and street). Technically I don't know if I'm allowed to plant a tree there - but I also don't want to sit around and wait on the city for things, they've never once planted a tree in my neighborhood in the five years I've lived here.
Then it was probably the city. The city maintains those trees where I live. Don’t plant things on someone else’s property and get upset when someone else does something to that property. Plant 2 trees in your yard and don’t give up.
kind of a dismissive response to someone trying to improve their neighborhood. city land is managed by government, but it’s the collective property of all citizens good cities allow residents to make use of park strips by planting trees, bushes, flowers, etc and they generally go unbothered, even in high traffic areas like LA, SF, and Sacramento; why discourage citizen stewardship of local nature? op’s city may not even oppose it, because this seems more like random vandalism than official action.
That’s cool if you want to improve the area. Still need to go through the proper channels and can’t just go planting trees where you want to
While I think you are likely to have better outcomes if you do, I still support all my guerilla gardener comrades out there. These bureaucrats stopping people from making the world greener do more harm than good.
I would be very surprised if it was the city. If so, the city needs to get their shit together and not top trees. There are no overhead power lines. It's a neighborhood of apartment buildings, no yards.
It seems to be pretty common in california, to top off or pollard trees to keep them small.
 “Pollard”
What good reason would anyone else have for topping? You’d think the damage would be greater if it was vandalism. Idk though just spitballing with you
I maintain street trees for s living. People will mutilate trees all up their street for many reasons. Some think they are helping, others don't want them growing too tall.
Yup, I work for a major municipality and people will fuck up trees just for the hell of it. We had one guy go into one of our most popular parks and just start frilling a bunch of trees with an axe, no one knows why because he wasn't caught. People will cut down trees to try to make fires with, only to learn it's really hard to burn green wood. Others will snap newly planted trees in half or rip off low-growing limbs just cause. We planted a bunch in a traditional Italian neighbourhood and all the old guys cut them down within a week because they were worried about them shading out their gardens (the old guys would have been long dead before that would have been an issue, but whatever). Vandalising trees is *very* common. Also, as someone who works in municipal forestry, if I came across a tree I knew for a fact the city hadn't planted, which I have, I wouldn't even think about getting rid of it unless it was a known invasive species. First of all, fuck it, let's see how it does, and second, we will absolutely get complaints about that so why bother? Hell, I've even come across little gardens people have planted in our tree pits or planter boxes and we'll remove whatever they've planted and keep it in moist soil until we've planted our city tree, and we then replant their 'guerrilla' planting because we're not dicks.
This dude urban forests. Heard and seconded by another local government person just trying to grow some dang trees.
Haha, thanks my guy, it's a tough world for an urban tree out there. Here's to soft soil and cool air this coming planting season.
Municipal parks and open space manager here overseeing quite a bit of "natural" woods screafe containing trails. I can't tell you how many beautiful saplings, usually shagbark hickory, 10-25 feet off the trail that I've seen hacked apart with a machete for no reason. I get so pissed. Whatever native hardwood saplings the bucks don't shred, the vandalizing idiots cut down.
Would it be work investing in some trail cams on new plantings?
These are just random wild native hardwood saplings being vandalized here and there now and then throughout the woods and not specifically planted specimens in more formal park landscaped areas. We actually do have trail cams to watch our DPW road construction equipment on big jobs where it has to be left overnight along the road.
I’m sure it’s different in every jurisdiction but I appreciate the insight
I know I'm just sad, sorry for being angsty in my message. LA is the land of topped trees - for some reason gardeners here think it's the right move. I'd estimate 25-40% of trees are topped, even when not under power lines. If it had happened when the tree was 15 feet tall I'd be a lot less upset. Taking the top foot off a six foot tall tree guarantees it won't ever be a tree, it'll just be a bush.
Actually you might be able to save this if it's still that small. You can use a method called 'splinting' where you will cut the top of the tree back to the next lateral branch below the current cut, then take a piece of bamboo or other light, rigid material, (this is called a splint) and tie that to the upper 1/3 of the trunk with the splint sticking up a foot or two above the cut you just made. You can then bend the selected lateral branch upward and tie it to your splint. Over time this branch will become the new 'leader', and over years you'll only ever be able to tell something happened to it by a very slight kink in the tree at that spot, but who doesn't like a kinky tree? To tie you want to use a broad or soft material to avoid damaging the bark. Tree nurseries have a special tape they use, but I've also seen ~1/8" black rubber tubing used for this tying. Scroll to the bottom of this article for more info https://extension.umn.edu/planting-and-growing-guides/staking-and-guying-trees edit: Just re-read and realised your splint should go into the soil on a tree that small, it likely won't be able to support a splint only in the top 1/3.
Thanks for the idea, I think I can try this!
Sorry friend. A bush is better than nothing though don’t become discouraged
That's not true.
I think it’s just a tribal knowledge phenomenon. Most gardeners are old school, they learn from older gardeners they apprentice with. The city needs to do more to spread awareness about the dangers of topping and encourage better practices.
Because they don't know any better or wrongfully think that topping is actually good for the tree.
It actually sounds like someone took a graft of the tree to plant one of their own
I wish! That would be a very sweet outcome. There are bits of leaves and twigs all over the ground, I think they hit it with a hedge trimmer.
You mean a *cutting* to attempt a graft, surely.
Depending on the city you may just want to ask for permission or give them a heads up. Look to see if yours has a public works dept. they are typically the ones who handle parkways and city maintenance. Was it planted on your section of the parkway? I can’t imagine the city would mow your parkway that typically is the home owners responsibility.
So on your property within the city utility easement? I’m very confused about where this is in relation to your property boundaries.
NYC Parks natural areas ecologist here. If you planted on city property, as much as it’s upsetting to see a living being mistreated like that, there are few things you can do to protect them. The issue is that you likely need a permit to plant in city property. There maybe underground gas lines, overhead flight paths, and other resident grievances to deal with. While it’s fun to guerrilla garden, it’s important to “read the room”, so to speak. It’s better in many cases not to plant than it is to plant a tree without having gotten buy-in from neighbors and city agencies (through permitting). More often than not, you’re going to watch your baby get taken out or otherwise damaged, and it’s out of your control. What I’d suggest you do in future is to get involved with an environmental stewardship group and volunteer with tree planting with them. They have the go ahead with the city and in some cases, have access to city resources and reporting so your tree will have protections against damage, both physical and legal. For example, any tree over 6” DBH that gets taken down in NYC requires restitution, and if done illegally, is a $1500 Arbicide fine. TL;DR - don’t plant your own trees on not your property and not expect it to get f’ed up in a city. Join a tree planting group that do it the right way in the right place.
Would you happen to have any resources available to learn more about nyc tree law?
Can you recommend any good groups around nyc?
those tree planting groups get official approval? it really feels like we shouldn’t have to fight against the city’s budget interests during a time where diminishing urban heat islands is more vital than ever im not sure what it’s like in nyc, but we’re getting baked alive in the 110° CA central valley summers while someone sits in their air conditioned office putting in another work order to cut down a 250 year old street tree, probably getting a nice kick back from the contractor that keeps all that valuable old wood
"valuable old wood" that's a good one. it is the exception not rule that urban lumber has high value. In most cases the cost of removal and transport vastly exceeds any timber value. and thats before you even consider sawing costs and kiln drying. not to mention most Sawyers won't even touch urban logs because of the amount of included metal.
do you have any thoughts on the heart of what I was saying about city trees? I dont know much about wood value, but theres a lot to be gained for a company simultaneously being paid to perform a job and getting to sell what’s left over. The tree isnt gonna get cut down and trucked away for free, the city’s paying for that and then some. wouldnt a large oak tree have lots of usable wood in the branches? also polished cross sections of the trunk are sold for thousands of dollars each to law offices and lake cabins across the country
For someone who is self professed to not have knowledge about the subject, you seem to have drawn some sweeping conclusions. The issue is handling and processing costs. For the vast majority of urban wood it is not economical to mill into lumber. More likely to be cut up as firewood, or dropped off at a business that will put it through a grinder and turn it into woodchips for compost/mulch/biofuel. Those recycling/salvage business models are not sustainable if they have to pay for material input, in some cases they even charge a disposal fee to subsidize the handling costs, so it's not like the tree service has people bidding to buy the material. As to your second point about some pieces being sold for high value, yes absolutely, but that is a very small % of overall material, at a guess I would say less than 1/10th of 1%. It's also a niche market. not many people can afford/want to purchase a live edge slab table at $4000-40000.
It feels unproductive to have this entire conversation hinging on the last couple words of my original statement. What’s the motivation to downplay the role of tree poaching in the diminishing of city tree canopies? There’s good reason to think trees are being cut down frivolously and short-sightedly, whether or not theres a conspiracy around selling the wood. It isn’t a stretch to believe contractors may be deceiving cities into cutting down healthy trees, or causing health issues themselves, to get the payday from removal. I also feel like your last few sentences are essentially agreeing with me. Between Lake Tahoe, the Bay Area, Sacramento, and wealthy farmers, there are plenty of huge markets to incentivize poaching old oaks in my vicinity even if the gain is only 4 grand a piece plus removal fees.
The issue is that you're misusing the term 'tree poaching' which specifically refers to illegally removing trees for their timber resale value. Otherwise yes, there are absolutely shady arborists (no pun intended) who will write arborist reports claiming a tree is unhealthy and needs to be removed for clients who just want a tree gone for whatever reason. This is why, at least for the municipality I work for, we have officers whose job it is to investigate these kinds of issues and levy fines against homeowners who allow this to happen.
Hey, last week I submitted a request to clean up a ripped up tree branch on a zelkova that got clipped by a bus or truck and is dangling off. Not your department, but man tell those guys to get on it.
Likely Central Forestry, who are getting a big overhaul at the moment. It’s also spring planting season for street trees so between in-house and contract work, you’re looking at a 30-day minimum wait if it’s not an imminent threat. Even if it is an imminent threat, come to think of it.
Wow, the more you know. Thanks for the info!
Assuming it’s a not recently planted tree, this would have nothing to do with central. They should put in a 311 request for a borough forester to look at the tree.
Don't get too attached to things you grow that aren't on property you own. Guerilla gardener can be fun but I would recommend focusing more on either property that you own or other private property with friends/family. Do you know anyone who would want a free tree in their yard? You could help them plant it and maintain it,
Pretty sad to see everyone assume whatever municipal forestry program this is would top a young tree because it is a private planting without a permit. If they were going to do anything they’d just remove the tree entirely/cut down to a stump, likely it was some random asshole that did this.
Sucks, I'm sorry
What kind of tree is it?
I plant trees on my property and I have yet to have this problem. Did you call the police and make a report?
They’ve said it in another comment, but it’s not their property that’s being planted on, it’s the city’s.
Well there's the entire problem!
Hard to know without seeing pictures, but trees sometimes put too much growth into their central leaders which leads to a very tall straight tree that gets too tall before you can be guaranteed that it has anchor roots to match the height (think of it getting top heavy and easily brought down in a windstorm). So, in some circles of thought, cutting the top off the central leader gives more potential for the lateral branches to grow and roots as well. The tree roots have the energy, and this energy will now go to a more balanced distribution for the entire system. Also, if the tree isn't on you property, as is in an area tended to by landscapers from either the city or some other owner, it may have been a fools errand to invest too much heart into it. To keep the weed-whackers away from the base, you need to remove any and all weeds yourself within a foot from the trunk so that they have no reason to get close to it.
Welcome to r/arborists! Help Us Help You: If you have questions about the health of your tree, please see our [Posting Guidelines](https://old.reddit.com/r/arborists/wiki/posting_guidance) wiki page for help with effective posting. **Please answer the questions listed there to the best of your ability.** ***Insufficient pics/info could result in the removal of your post!!*** ([See rule 3](https://www.reddit.com/r/arborists/about/rules).) Visit the main wiki page for [Critical Planting/Care tips and Common Errors to Avoid](https://old.reddit.com/r/arborists/wiki/index); there's sections on why planting depth/root flare exposure is so vital, along with sections on proper mulching, watering, pruning and more that I hope will be useful to you. If you're posting about a tree ID (not permitted here; [see rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/arborists/about/rules)), see that wiki page for other subs and smartphone apps to try. Here is how you can arrange a [consult with a local ISA arborist in your area](http://www.treesaregood.org/findanarborist/findanarborist) (NOT a 'tree company guy' unless they're ISA certified) or a [consulting arborist](https://www.asca-consultants.org/search/custom.asp?id=3818) for an on-site evaluation. A competent arborist should be happy to walk you through how to care for the trees on your property and answer any questions. If you're in the U.S. or Canada, your Extension (or master gardener provincial program) may have a list of local recommended arborists on file. If you're in the U.S., you should also consider searching for arborist associations under your state. If you are one of our regulars and/or you work in the industry and do not want this message in your future posts, please pick an appropriate user flair (options available in the sub sidebar on PC, and on moble if using a browser). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/arborists) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Plant on your own property if you want a say in what happens to the things you plant.