Hit 2000 tree risk assessments this month and I'm split on how we do them

I hit 2000 tree risk assessments this month. The number surprised me because I started doing them back in 2021 just to pick up side work. Now I see two camps: the visual assessment crowd who think climbing every tree is a waste of time and the guys who say you gotta get hands on to find hidden decay. I found a nasty crack in a big oak last week that a ground-level look missed completely. What side do you lean on for routine checks, visual only or full climb?

2 comments

2 Comments

adam_hernandez4d ago

Honestly that's wild, 2000 is no joke. Ngl I've had the same thing happen with a maple that looked fine from the ground but had a hollow spot the size of a basketball inside once I got up there. So yeah I'm leaning with the climb crew every time.

smith.ray4d ago

Yeah I gotta disagree a little. "Looks fine from the ground but hollow inside" that's the thing though, you can usually spot rot from the ground if you know what to look for. Mushrooms growing at the base, dead branches in the crown, bark peeling off in weird ways. A good climber can read those signs without even getting in the tree. Plus dropping two grand just because of a maybe is rough. I've talked to a few older arborists who say most of those decay pockets are just a few inches thick, not the whole trunk. I'd want a second opinion before signing that check.