into the bark and outer wood with little resistance. Later, cross sections con- firmed solid heartwood surrounded by significantly weakened sapwood — a hazardous combination that creates the illusion of stability. A tree might pass a mallet test and show no external cracks yet still fail under rigging loads. With that in mind, the crew adopted a conservative ap- proach from the outset. The first major decision was to select a primary rigging anchor. A large red pine at the edge of the infestation ap- peared structurally sound and passed both spur testing and detailed inspec- tion. It became the main anchor for the first phase of work. The crew opted to use this single anchor as long as safe- ly possible; every transition to a new rigging point would introduce unneces- sary risk in a stand filled with compro- mised wood. Two climbers ascended the affected trees adjacent to the anchor. Before any cuts were made, each rigging point was confirmed alo, the landing zone was cleared and established, and both rigging lines and taglines were secured to lowering devices on separate trees. No piece was cut on assumption — only aer rigging was set. Tip ties (in which the butt of the limb will swing out when cut) and the re- verse, butt ties, were used strategical- ly to maintain full control of tops and large limbs. Butt ties offered better control of long pieces with heavy lower weight, while tip ties were more effec- tive for shorter or top-heavy sections. Variable-friction lowering devices op- erated alo helped manage descent speed and minimize shock loading on already suspect wood. This control was especially critical, and piece sizes remained purposefully smaller than what the crew would typically cut in healthy timber. Removals progressed from the outer edges of the cluster inward. Each dis- mantled tree created more space and
The team accessed an adjacent tree to set the rigging.
Whereas emerald ash borer–damaged ash tends to become brittle and con- sistently fracturable, red pines suffer- ing from scale experience early and extensive sapwood decay. This loss of structural strength begins long before visible signs appear, making the wood deceptively unreliable. For arborists, that means treating every anchor — even one that appears sound — as sus- picious until proven otherwise. PUTTING THE PLAN IN ACTION To protect the understory, the crew chose to rig every removal rather than fell any trees conventionally. But an- other challenge quickly became clear: climbers found that their spurs sank
bark beetles. Taken together, the symp- toms pointed unmistakably to red pine scale . The dead trees were clustered tightly within the woodlot, a pattern consistent with the pest’s dispersal via wind and birds. Most of these pines measured between 20 and 24 inches in diameter and were estimated at 60 to 70 years old — mature trees with little to no chance of recovery. Addressing the problem would not be straightforward. The operation re- quired careful reading of the stand, meticulous planning, and an adaptive rigging strategy. Every decision on this site demanded restraint. RECON OF THE RED PINES Before starting any removals, the crew performed a detailed site assessment. The woodlot supported a healthy un- derstory of sugar maples and oaks that the property owner was determined to preserve. Each dead or dying pine was evaluated for lean, fall potential, and proximity to targets both natural and structur- al. From there, the crew mapped drop zones and tested the structural sound- ness of every potential rigging anchor through mallet sounding and close vi- sual inspection. Red pines, unlike ash trees, behave unpredictably when compromised.
Removal trees were clearly marked with orange ribbons.
42 | Spring 2026 ArborTIMES ™
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online