19
My dad, a landscaper for 40 years, told me topping a tree is sometimes the only option a homeowner will pay for.
Honestly, that hit different because I've always been taught it's the worst sin in the book, but now I'm debating if doing a bad job safely for $800 is better than them hiring a hack who'll destroy it for $300.
3 comments
Log in to join the discussion
Log In3 Comments
schmidt.amy1mo ago
Lol honestly I read a study once about how topped trees actually cost homeowners more in the long run because the regrowth is weak and dangerous. @ninab95 I get where you're coming from but it kinda is like surgery when you think about what happens to the tree's structure. That $300 hack will just leave a jagged mess that rots and falls apart in a few years, then they gotta pay way more to take it down. Your dad's point makes sense though, if the customer refuses to listen, doing a cleaner topping job with proper cuts is better than letting someone with no clue destroy it. But man, it still sucks having to choose between your reputation and a paycheck.
6
ivan_fisher992mo ago
It's a brutal choice between your professional pride and the tree's actual survival. Sometimes the ethical move is to do the lesser harm yourself, knowing you'll at least minimize the damage. A homeowner set on that path won't be talked out of it, they'll just find someone with no standards. You can try to steer the cut towards something that might recover, where a hack would just butcher it.
4