Wild Apple Collected

[Poink88]

Let's put it in human perspective.

Say you need to have your intestine shortened by 4 feet...you ask your doctor to do the operation but shorten it only by 2 feet for now and when your body recovered and adjusted you will come back a year or two to have another operation to cut the other 2 feet. Is that logical?

Really doesn't make sense to me.

 

[rockm]

But trees are not human, don't react like humans and are, in fact, NOT human...

"Lignan is not the same as you are doing though. Cutting to shorten a branch/trunk to create taper is TOTALLY DIFFERENT from completely REMOVING it (and more ). Sorry. "

Um, how? Sorry? The tree doesn't understand the difference...I don't think you really understand the process or the practice of lignan or clip and grow. It is a series of SEVERE reductions of the trunk/branches--to induce taper. In Lignan, trunks are chopped repeatedly-- relatively COMPLETE or up to 99.9 percent removal of the upper section--to force taper. Same for branches.

It is not a really a process of gradual reduction leaving some sections --at least at the beginning. It is a process of removing the vast bulk of a trunk or branch to build taper.

Branches, for instance, are allowed to grow ten feet or more to get AN INCH of initial thickness. The remainder is completely chopped off and the resulting back budding is selected to continue the process an inch (or whatever) from the trunk. This process is repeated until a branch with gradual taper is achieved. The same process is used on trunks, COMPLETE removal for a relatively small subsequent gain.

The tree knows no difference between this and its first trunk chop.

"I am going to assume what Mr Poink means, is that it would be redundant to stress the tree with two chops, when a single cut to the desired height would yield the same results"

That's what he's hoping you believe. The truth is that a single chop to the desired "bonsai" height WON'T yield the same results. Dario hasn't got any real experience with how the process plays out, but based on his year doing bonsai mainatains his way is best.

 

[Dirty Nails]

Not to get in the middle here but...

Dario when you collect those fat boxwoods and azeleas, you chop hard and they grow out. At some point you will have to refine those cut ends in order to achive a smooth taper right? So won't you in effect be doing a double chop? Just asking...

 

[Poink88]

Trees might not feel or know (I don't know if that is accurate) but they do get stressed by chops. What I am saying is why subject them to 2 if you can do it once? If there is something to be gained yes do it (like in Lignan) but if you'll remove all that growth eventually, I don't know.

Now you are preaching what you think my motive is LOL. As usual nothing changed...

 

[Poink88]

Not to get in the middle here but...

Dario when you collect those fat boxwoods and azeleas, you chop hard and they grow out. At some point you will have to refine those cut ends in order to achive a smooth taper right? So won't you in effect be doing a double chop? Just asking...

I will chop but on the new growth...not removing them and more of the old trunks (trunk chop). That is the big difference.

BTW, at that point it is branch pruning...not a trunk chop.

 

[frozenlarch]

Well then... Since I have effectively stirred up the hornets nest, I am going to throw a stick back in and get everyone's opinion on feeding after major work.
Some sources are against it, some say it's a must.

Thoughts?



Add-on:
Set up in its new residence...

 

[Poink88]

I use rooting hormone (liquid) which I believe have some trace elements & vitamins (not sure of the real contents). Other than that I do not fertilize until I have growth which usually happens within a month.

BTW, if you decide not to chop lower now, stick with it...please do not chop again until next year. You do not want to disturb the new roots once they started growing.

Good luck!

 

[rockm]

Feed if you want. The compromised root system will take up what it can...

FWIW, if you dug this within a week or so, you can chop all you want. It isn't settled enough to be pushing new roots in that time. If you've had the lower temperatures we've had in the last few weeks, I would extend that time to a week and a half. I've noticed that stuff I've collected this spring has taken a long time to push anything, as temperatures have been averaging in the 40's at night and 60's in the daytime. I've taken to placing newly dug trees in direct sun to get some bottom heat to push growth.

 

[gergwebber]

I think here lies my problem with this tree... I'm so accustomed to working with smaller Shohin Tamarack, that I'm having a difficult time envisioning a future for this larger, bare naked stump. The Larch that I collect and work with all have some sort of predefined style, or character that I try to accentuate. With this, I seem to lack any foresight.

As any artist knows, a blank slate often leaves an overwhelmingly infinite number of possibilities, and choosing a direction can be challenging. Hopefully some doors will open once it recovers.

Thank you again for the replies.

I would go to youtube and watch (or re-watch) every Graham Potter video with carving you can find. I like the one on the privet: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72-glgsc0HA

For this tree, I think you have a great opportunity to hollow out the trunk by carving or rotting. What a great piece to work on!

.... but they do get stressed by chops. What I am saying is why subject them to 2 if you can do it once?.... but if you'll remove all that growth eventually, I don't know.

I am currently subscribing to the whole root to shoot, balanced hormone theory. Basically we are debating the ability of excess trunk material to contribute to the recovery of a collected tree. What others are saying is that those last several inches of the tree do in fact speed recovery and effectively save time though the resulting growth will be lost down the road. In other words: What is more stressful a greater chop, or two lesser chops?

I have left all of this years collections longer than ever, and have been happy with the results so far. (real summer will be the test) Anyway, in my case it may lengthen the training process greatly as I start seeing airlayer potential in all the various stovepipe joints 18" off the base.

this is not a hobby for the hasty.

 

[Poink88]

I am currently subscribing to the whole root to shoot, balanced hormone theory. Basically we are debating the ability of excess trunk material to contribute to the recovery of a collected tree. What others are saying is that those last several inches of the tree do in fact speed recovery and effectively save time though the resulting growth will be lost down the road. In other words: What is more stressful a greater chop, or two lesser chops?

I have left all of this years collections longer than ever, and have been happy with the results so far. (real summer will be the test) Anyway, in my case it may lengthen the training process greatly as I start seeing airlayer potential in all the various stovepipe joints 18" off the base.

In that theory, it is best to take the whole top of the tree then? I am on the opposite "higher root to trunk ratio" theory. I believe that the more trunk you take, the more the tree have to feed until the shoots come out. Even then, the more those leaves have to feed later. I believe in conserving resources by having less to maintain until it recovers and less trauma by doing it once...when the tree is strongest to take it. We may never agree since I am very happy with my results as well.

Airlayering the top is a separate issue. If that is your goal then by all means leave it longer but at the risk of the survival of the tree IMHO is not worth it.

...this is not a hobby for the hasty.

I agree 100%.

As slow as it is, I wonder why some elect to do it even slower. (kidding with spice of truth)

 

[Bill S]

I use rooting hormone (liquid) which I believe have some trace elements & vitamins (not sure of the real contents). Other than that I do not fertilize until I have growth which usually happens within a month.

BTW, if you decide not to chop lower now, stick with it...please do not chop again until next year. You do not want to disturb the new roots once they started growing.

Good luck!

Further chops wouldn't be in the same year, you let the new growth, grow out, often several years, then chop more, it's probably a branch at that point, but becomes the trunk line. Cutting off the died back section at the top isn't going to affect the tree. At that point with carving/cleaning up the dieback you have small wounds to the cambium layer, possibly large wounds to cover though, but at this point the tree should be growing well and be in a better place to heal the new wounds. With carving the area to heal is the edges of the cuts, and is relatively small area, no big deal

 

[coh]

In that theory, it is best to take the whole top of the tree then? I am on the opposite "higher root to trunk ratio" theory. I believe that the more trunk you take, the more the tree have to feed until the shoots come out. Even then, the more those leaves have to feed later. I believe in conserving resources by having less to maintain until it recovers and less trauma by doing it once...when the tree is strongest to take it. We may never agree since I am very happy with my results as well.

I believe a counter argument to your statement would be - there can be considerable resources stored in that trunk segment, especially in the spring after the roots have started pushing stored nutrients upward. I had a box elder tree cut down last summer, and they left behind some substantial pieces of trunk for our use. These logs (about a foot thick, a foot or so long) sat out all winter and a couple of them are actually pushing out growth this spring.

My personal feeling - when you collect a tree, you lose a lot of feeder roots, sometimes almost all of them. What builds roots? Foliage. So having a little extra trunk with a little extra stored energy may give new shoots and leaves an extra boost, which in turn could help recover the root system more quickly.

Or maybe not...

 

[Poink88]

I believe a counter argument to your statement would be - there can be considerable resources stored in that trunk segment, especially in the spring after the roots have started pushing stored nutrients upward. I had a box elder tree cut down last summer, and they left behind some substantial pieces of trunk for our use. These logs (about a foot thick, a foot or so long) sat out all winter and a couple of them are actually pushing out growth this spring.

My personal feeling - when you collect a tree, you lose a lot of feeder roots, sometimes almost all of them. What builds roots? Foliage. So having a little extra trunk with a little extra stored energy may give new shoots and leaves an extra boost, which in turn could help recover the root system more quickly.

Or maybe not...

Chris, very valid point. But I believe stored energy is there inch by inch. What you have left proportionately have same stored energy. Stored energy however is finite...it need to be replenished eventually. Which does that? The root and leaves, the more you have to replenish later taxes the plant more IMHO.

My analogy is a household with great income and savings (the healthy tree)... then it lost income and have to live with their savings (tree got dug up, have to use stored energy). The smaller the family, the longer the household can stay afloat given their savings (shorter trunk). Bigger house cost more, use more utilities, etc. More people need more food, use more resources, etc.

Maybe I am mistaken but as I said, it works for me and will continue doing it until I find something better.

It is is not for everyone or for every tree. For example, my boxwood are kept much longer than I like just because I need foliage at the ends (or the branch/trunk/tree) will die (in my experience). Others may have unavoidable die back (again other than my azalea) I did not have this problem so I cannot relate too much...so it has to be adjusted for those. Apple however is not on the exception group IMHO.

Just sharing my style (and reasoning why) as an option...definitely not being forced to anyone.

I guess I am more passionate about this because instead of being encouraged, from the very beginning I was told by almost everyone all the following negative stuff;
You cannot do that.
Don't do that.
Shouldn't do that.
Never do that.
(about chopping hard, pinching newly collected plants, bending big branches, working on trees less than a year from collection, etc. etc.)

Well I am very happy I did because it works (for me). To me, it all depends on the health/vigor of each particular tree (when in doubt about health don't tinker with the tree).

 

[mcpesq817]

I guess I am more passionate about this because instead of being encouraged, from the very beginning I was told by almost everyone all the following negative stuff;
You cannot do that.
Don't do that.
Shouldn't do that.
Never do that.
(about chopping hard, pinching newly collected plants, bending big branches, working on trees less than a year from collection, etc. etc.)

Since you opened the door on this...

Nobody here from what I have seen has ever intended to discourage you. Instead, folks have been very generous in taking the time to offer bits of advice based on their experience - in some cases, correcting bad advice that you are giving to others under the air of being an expert. Instead of keeping an open mind and listening, you claim that people are discouraging you. And rather than take back what you said when folks correct you and offer advice based on actual experience, you say things like "multiple views, all valid" etc.

Most deciduous material does not act like shrub material like boxwoods and azaleas. If there is any risk of dieback, why would you counsel someone to chop at where they think/hope the eventual chop site will be? If they do that and get dieback, then they may end up ruining a good piece of material. So why would you tell them to take that risk? To save a year or two of time? Anyone who has been doing bonsai a while will tell you that you should be thinking in terms of many years, especially when working with nice material. An extra year or two of letting the collected material settle in and sprout new leaders is not that big of a deal when you look at the big picture of how many years you are likely going to be working on that tree.

I don't know plant physiology as well as I'd like to. But guessing on physiology using analogies like operations on human intestines and household wealth seems to me to be inapt.

 

[Poink88]

Aren't these different views and all valid? Of course in your view mine is not valid so I won't argue with you on that.

If you want to waste extra 2 years on a tree, by all means do it your way. But as I said ...

- higher root to trunk ratio = less die back
- higher root to trunk ratio = higher chances of survival
- single chop = less stress to the tree
- single chop = safer (less risk)
- single chop = faster development
- I believe tree is strongest at initial collection time, stronger than 2 years after in a pot so give it the worst at this time and not later.

I MAY BE MISTAKEN, but this is what I believe. Take it or leave it.

I do not know why I even bother explaining to someone who chose to not listen anyway...sigh

Please tell me...of the six that I listed above...which ones are (in your opinion) wrong assumptions?

 

[Dav4]

If you want to waste extra 2 years on a tree, by all means do it your way....

QUOTE]

I've done a wonderful job staying out of this argument...until now.

I just want to say this....if it takes an extra 2 years to reach a certain goal with your stock, so what? I would never call the time "wasted". Now, if I chopped a tree with a nice lower trunk too hard, and all I got were sprouts from the base...that's a waste (for the record, I've done this). There is nothing wrong with taking the slower, safer route when developing stock.

 

[mcpesq817]

Different views, sure. Were your views, for example, on tenting a JBP valid? Very doubtful.

Your assumption on the single chop is that you won't get dieback. If that is the case, then sure, why wouldn't everyone chop back to their ultimate intended/hoped chop point? But, there is always the chance that material will get some dieback. If that is the case, isn't it better to have the chop a little higher so that if there is any dieback, you can carve it down to the eventual leader you want to use (which is probably not stressful to the tree if that section is dead). Otherwise, by chopping it much lower at the get go, if you end up with dieback, there is a good chance of ruining the material.

This is a good pictorial resource on how trunk chops are generally handled:

http://bonsaijournal.com/beginners-trunk-chop-101.php

And what is an extra 2 years when it comes to not screwing up potentially nice material? I don't get it.

 

[Poink88]

I've done a wonderful job staying out of this argument...until now.

I just want to say this....if it takes an extra 2 years to reach a certain goal with your stock, so what? I would never call the time "wasted". Now, if I chopped a tree with a nice lower trunk too hard, and all I got were sprouts from the base...that's a waste (for the record, I've done this). There is nothing wrong with taking the slower, sfare route when developing stock.

There is the big disconnect...I believe I am actually following a safer route doing it my way (please see my 6 point above).

 

[Poink88]

Different views, sure. Were your views, for example, on tenting a JBP valid? Very doubtful.

Hey that's what I did and it worked. I have a JBP cutting right now...tented. I will tell you later if it dies. It is just a branch I chopped and decided to stick in a small pot. Tented to increase humidity. A big disadvantage to me but hey, I will report to you what happens.

Your assumption on the single chop is that you won't get dieback. If that is the case, then sure, why wouldn't everyone chop back to their ultimate intended/hoped chop point? But, there is always the chance that material will get some dieback. If that is the case, isn't it better to have the chop a little higher so that if there is any dieback, you can carve it down to the eventual leader you want to use (which is probably not stressful to the tree if that section is dead). Otherwise, by chopping it much lower at the get go, if you end up with dieback, there is a good chance of ruining the material.

This is a good pictorial resource on how trunk chops are generally handled:

http://bonsaijournal.com/beginners-trunk-chop-101.php

And what is an extra 2 years when it comes to not screwing up potentially nice material? I don't get it.

If you want to account for all the possible chances, do not do this hobby. Again, maybe I am just extremely lucky for not having as much die back as I am reading. If and when my luck runs out, I will reconsider.

That link shows exactly what I do so I am confused what your point is. They do not show leaving 8" stub did they?

 

[Dav4]

There is the big disconnect...I believe I am actually following a safer route doing it my way (please see my 6 point above).

You've listed hypotheses...they are far from proven. The one time I chopped too aggressively at collection, I only got sprouts from the base of a very promising stump...lesson learned.