it’s not bad for the tree, necessarily. Most horticultural monstrosities have been selected to basically depend on occasional massive prunings to keep themselves from ripping themselves to shreds over the years.
Even very large species can benefit immensely from an extreme prune, which simulates the kinds of massive catastrophic defoliation evens that happen in nature all the time (fires, hurricanes, tornadoes). It gives the fire branches of the tree more time to and get big with less load to bear.
Sorry this is misinformation. Crape myrtles do tolerate this better than most species but I’ve seen trees killed by this type of “pruning”.
New branches that grow will be poorly attached and become hazards in future years. If the branches are large in diameter or if it’s a species that compartmentalizes decay poorly, then the cut end will rot, often into the main trunk and can cause catastrophic failure in future years. So this is not only ill advised, it’s dangerous to do to a large tree.
There are some cultivars that grow in odd, unstable forms and can benefit from pruning, but that requires carefully guiding the tree’s growth through selective cuts. Not indiscriminate hacking that only makes the problem worse.
Misinformation? As in… you are/ were putting out misinformation?
Its not misinformation whatsoever to suggest that skeleton pruning is an important practice, and what you are doing is deceptive. Skeleton pruning isn’t just a regular horticultural practice, but quite literally, hundreds and thousands of species simply will tear themselves apart without regular, extreme pruning.
We’re not talking about native plants in some particular ecological context where… well… plants just die some times. And thats fine.
We’re talking about human planted, human managed trees, completely outside of the ecological context they evolved in.
These are parking lot trees. We’re talking about species that are expected to survive in the equivalent of an ecological toilet. And yeah, they’ll destroy themselves without regular management. That’s how plants work.
I already provided a source from the ISA, which is the leading authority on this topic. Please provide a source to back your claims or misinformation is an accurate summation of what you’ve written.
PS: I’m an arborist and if you ask any arborist you will get the same opinion because this is a well established principle in arboriculture at this point, and has been for years. I’m not sure why you’re trying to die on this hill which you evidently don’t have any real knowledge about.
I wouldn’t call that an authoritative source, and its clearly got its own bias. I’m not suggesting all trees are well supported by the skeleton prune, but for things like crape myrtles, and specifically, species that are selected for harsh environments, like where you would plant a crape myrtle, are species that not only can survive or even benefit from a skeleton prune, but that you literally can’t manage a tree into “old age” with out the kind of de-limbing that something like a skeleton prune offers in these specific environments.
Trees didn’t evolve to live in parking lots or tiny strips of soil between a sidewalk and the street. We select for species that can survive these extreme conditions. Those species generally can handle/ or even thrive with a skeleton prune. The case in point is the example this post is about, the crape myrtle.
Another example is citrus trees, especially the more heavily cultivated/ more heavily selected varieties. You quite literally need to skeleton prune these trees, maybe every 5-10 years to keep them productive. This is because we’ve taken them far away from whatever evolutionary trajectory they are on and turned them into basically pets. They don’t self prune or self manage effectively.
all crape myrtles are crap myrtles
True but some are more crap than others.
but alternatively, why do you have a problem with the skeleton prune?
It’s not good for the tree and also it’s just ugly.
it’s not bad for the tree, necessarily. Most horticultural monstrosities have been selected to basically depend on occasional massive prunings to keep themselves from ripping themselves to shreds over the years.
Even very large species can benefit immensely from an extreme prune, which simulates the kinds of massive catastrophic defoliation evens that happen in nature all the time (fires, hurricanes, tornadoes). It gives the fire branches of the tree more time to and get big with less load to bear.
Sorry this is misinformation. Crape myrtles do tolerate this better than most species but I’ve seen trees killed by this type of “pruning”.
New branches that grow will be poorly attached and become hazards in future years. If the branches are large in diameter or if it’s a species that compartmentalizes decay poorly, then the cut end will rot, often into the main trunk and can cause catastrophic failure in future years. So this is not only ill advised, it’s dangerous to do to a large tree.
Source: https://www.treesaregood.org/Portals/0/TreesAreGood_Why Topping Hurts_0321.pdf
There are some cultivars that grow in odd, unstable forms and can benefit from pruning, but that requires carefully guiding the tree’s growth through selective cuts. Not indiscriminate hacking that only makes the problem worse.
Misinformation? As in… you are/ were putting out misinformation?
Its not misinformation whatsoever to suggest that skeleton pruning is an important practice, and what you are doing is deceptive. Skeleton pruning isn’t just a regular horticultural practice, but quite literally, hundreds and thousands of species simply will tear themselves apart without regular, extreme pruning.
We’re not talking about native plants in some particular ecological context where… well… plants just die some times. And thats fine.
We’re talking about human planted, human managed trees, completely outside of the ecological context they evolved in.
These are parking lot trees. We’re talking about species that are expected to survive in the equivalent of an ecological toilet. And yeah, they’ll destroy themselves without regular management. That’s how plants work.
I already provided a source from the ISA, which is the leading authority on this topic. Please provide a source to back your claims or misinformation is an accurate summation of what you’ve written.
PS: I’m an arborist and if you ask any arborist you will get the same opinion because this is a well established principle in arboriculture at this point, and has been for years. I’m not sure why you’re trying to die on this hill which you evidently don’t have any real knowledge about.
I wouldn’t call that an authoritative source, and its clearly got its own bias. I’m not suggesting all trees are well supported by the skeleton prune, but for things like crape myrtles, and specifically, species that are selected for harsh environments, like where you would plant a crape myrtle, are species that not only can survive or even benefit from a skeleton prune, but that you literally can’t manage a tree into “old age” with out the kind of de-limbing that something like a skeleton prune offers in these specific environments.
Trees didn’t evolve to live in parking lots or tiny strips of soil between a sidewalk and the street. We select for species that can survive these extreme conditions. Those species generally can handle/ or even thrive with a skeleton prune. The case in point is the example this post is about, the crape myrtle.
Another example is citrus trees, especially the more heavily cultivated/ more heavily selected varieties. You quite literally need to skeleton prune these trees, maybe every 5-10 years to keep them productive. This is because we’ve taken them far away from whatever evolutionary trajectory they are on and turned them into basically pets. They don’t self prune or self manage effectively.