Advice On Cutting Large Trees?(Includes discussion of personal hang-ups) (Trees!)

[Carl Russell]

Geoff you are right. We do increase our risk by the work we do, but within that window, the possibility that you get hit is less a factor than the degree of injury that the errant hit can cause. This in fact is the source of complacency. If we got hit every time we cut a tree, we would be much more alert.

My point is more that if you KNOW you can get killed by something from above, then that has got to be part of what you try to control. One of the best things about GOL is that they have put a lot of time into trying to develop a routine that can be replicated over and over, taking into consideration the common risks.

I have been hit too. Like Mitch, I was lucky enough to learn from it. The branch was 1.5″ Dia. and about 2 feet long, probably less than a pound. It hit me on the shoulder, and at first I thought it had broke my shoulder blade and collar bone. Actually no injury other than a bruise, but a significant lesson learned.

My father was a munitions instructor when he was in the armed forces. A lesson he drilled home to me was about never tripping your own wire. He actually saw many men, including instructors be dismissed from the program because they hit their trip wires while setting up dummy rounds. There were no second chances.

I’m not saying I won’t get killed from the fall of a tree, but I have always kept that lesson in the back of my mind. One of the intriguing things for me about working in the woods, is putting all these pieces together into a successful endeavor.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

near horse;23059 wrote:

…..Okay – to seem even dumber, can you tell me what your paint mark down low is for? Does it mark something in particular?

Like Mitch says. I mark at breast height for the cutter, and at the stump for the landowner. Upon inspection, we can see if tree were cut that weren’t marked.

Carl

[near horse]

@Carl Russell 23068 wrote:

Like Mitch says. I mark at breast height for the cutter, and at the stump for the landowner. Upon inspection, we can see if tree were cut that weren’t marked.

Carl

Interesting – I’ve never seen the stump marks here. Maybe just haven’t visited enough private landowner sites – makes sense.

I’ll fess up to one personal issue I run into – maybe(?) I’m just strange but I get into trouble when I get “tunnel vision” being so into the particular nuance of the job at hand that I lose perspective of what else is going on around me. Bad Bad Bad. Whether in farming or in the woods, it can result in extra work (trips to get this or that) that in turn creates the “hurried” syndrome that can be so dangerous.

I’m working on it but “stuff” happens that redirects your plans (and focus) – all the more reason to slow down and realize “if it don’t get done today, it might tomorrow.”

During the crazy springs we see here everyone stresses about getting stuff in the ground before “x, y, z” – an old timer said “I don’t recall a year that the farming didn’t get done.” Perspective.

[Tim Harrigan]

@Carl Russell 22841 wrote:

I also don’t just go for it. I usually will put a rolling hitch on the tree and try to roll it out of the tree it is lodged in with a few moderate and short even pulls. If that doesn’t work, I usually will give a few short pulls to see if I can get the tree to come down by itself.

Carl

Carl, what do you mean by a rolling hitch? Sometimes I pull the butt sideways to see if I can dislodge it, and I have rolled them off by hand, but I am not sure what exactly a rolling hitch is.

[Carl Russell]

Hitch the choker so that the slip hook is on the back side of the log or tree, so that when you pull, the log has to roll toward you before it starts to slide.

Carl

[near horse]

I want to ask about the Carl’s first pic in post #42 showing the face cut. I’ve never seen one with depth so shallow and the “height” so “tall” if you get my drift. Is that a GOL thing? I’m used to about a 1/3 of the tree’s diameter as the depth of the cut and a much lower starting point for the angled cut. In fact, I’ve seen where guys make the angled cut so it comes out of the stump rather than the log itself – thinking that you’re not impacting the log itself .

So, if you can decipher what I’ve described so badly, what are the thoughts/reasons for this difference?

[Carl Russell]

Yes Geoff, your cut is the more traditional. I used to use it too. In that case the front cut needs to be a lower angle to minimize impact on the butt log. The problem with that style is that the hinge wood breaks as soon as the mouth closes, which can affect the directional control.

With the high open face cut, the cut comes out of what would be the slab, and the hinge wood should hold all the way till the log hits the ground.

This is the method taught in GOL.

The face cut coming out of the stump was a solution in really large wood, when using the older style, the butt log would be impacted significantly…. more commonly known as the Humboldt Cut, for timber being cut in Humboldt County, such as redwoods.

Carl

[mitchmaine]

there was a variation of those cuts used around here by a few choppers. my neighbor for one. it was an undercut like carls humbolt cut with a short angled top cut like geoffs making a wide 90 degree open face that literally fell out of the cut. if you cut the top cut first you could look into it while cutting up under and see when the chain cut into the topcut so you weren’t cutting too deep into your hinge from the front. you could make a deeper face without wrecking too much wood and have a wider hinge. but it was a lot of work and meant a slightly taller stump. just another method that i’m not necessarily recomending. just for the record.
mitch

[Scott G]

I was wondering about that butt log. The bottom end looked pretty nice without much/any taper.

If the bottom end of the bottom log really matters or you are bailing straight down a very steep slope the Humboldt, as Carl mentioned, is the way to go. It is an absolute mirror of a traditional facecut. It helps if you have some decent butt swell to work with and your stumps will typically be higher.

For your jack, George, same thing. Referring back to what I said several posts ago; mirror your cubby on the bottom side of your backcut.

Looking at that pic you posted, if you were to increase the depth of your facecut just a bit you would have a lot easier time wedging trees over.

[near horse]

IMHO – the sawyers here open a face cut as I described then make the backcut up to very close to the hinge, pulling out when the tree starts to tip. They only use wedges for odd leaners and to keep their bar from getting pinched. Also, they hardly take a step or two out of the way when the tree starts to fall – and it’s usually just heading for the next tree.

I see lots of guys sacrificing safety for speed ($$$). Not a good excuse but a real one.

Thanks for the info.

[Tim Harrigan]

@Scott G 24127 wrote:

Looking at that pic you posted, if you were to increase the depth of your facecut just a bit you would have a lot easier time wedging trees over.

That is a good point, Scott. This interests me because it seems like I give a lot of thought to setting the face and getting the hinge right. Most of the trees I cut don’t come down easy, usually trying to drop them away from the lean to get them to fall without hanging up or banging up others. It is fun, though, when you get them drop and swing and land right where you want it to.:D

[Author]

Posts