Warning: I still think topping that big oak was the right call, even if the whole neighborhood hated it

Last week in Springfield, a client had a 60 foot pin oak with major decay in the main trunk, right over their house. The popular opinion was to try a huge reduction, but three years ago I saw a similar tree fail after a light storm, costing over $15k in roof damage. So last month, I told them we had to take it down to a 20 foot stub for safety. The neighbors complained about the look, but sometimes a full removal is the only safe option, even if it's not pretty. Has anyone else faced major pushback for making a safety-first call that looked bad?

3 comments

3 Comments

jakejones1mo ago

Full removal is the only safe option" changed my mind too.

william_garcia1mo ago

Yeah, the "only safe option" line really hits home... my buddy tried a partial fix on his place last year to save some cash. They said they got it all, but a few months later the problem came back worse, spreading behind the walls. He ended up paying way more for the full removal in the end, plus all the extra damage. Watching him go through that mess convinced me to just do it right the first time.

anderson.piper1mo ago

Man, I was totally the guy arguing for the big reduction to save the tree. Then my crew and I had to clean up after a silver maple that split right down the middle of a saved trunk. The homeowner showed us the pictures from the arborist who said it was fine two years prior. Seeing that mess of splintered wood on a kid's swing set just flipped a switch for me. Now I get why a stub can be the kinder cut.