I completely agree. I know a tree can often survive with the basket on, but is it better? Only if the alternative is that the ball falls apart removing it. Seeing how rough a lot of these guys handle the tree getting to the hole, there is a good change you run of the mill brute laborer would potentially do more harm than good.

I think landscapers don't remove it because of (1) time, (2) risk of ball falling apart (lack of skill or careful removal) and (3) laziness ... and honestly they aren't around years later when the tree could have complications ... the tree survives the 1 year warranty period most often with or without the wire basket removed, so they don't care. Maybe on a business level, it just doesn't pay to care or take the time, financially speaking.

I have been planting a lot of trees lately and it seems like careful removal of the burlap and wire is certainly possible, even on bigger trees ... but requires a lot more time to do it safely.

I've been using oversized holes, which should be used anyways. That makes removal a LOT easier. Most landscapers I've seen around here make it just big enough an no bigger, so removal is nearly impossible in such a minimal sized hole.

I also like to get the tree upright as much as possible and then remove a 1/4 or 1/6 of the burlap and wire at a time, then partially backfill to stabilize the rootball after each section is removed. My biggest problem has been having whimpy wire cutters than are way too hard to use. Good bolt cutters would have been that smart thing to have used (but didn't have any, and too cheap to buy them!). I know its insanely labor-intensive, but it seems like the cage removal can be accomplished with minimum risk to the rootball doing the removal in sections and with care. Typically, with the last section removed, I can yank 80-100% of the remaining burlap out with a good pull ... and the cage it either completely removed or again 80-100% removed, which must be better than 0% removed, IMHO.

The flipside to this argument is -- how could the cage be beneficial? I don't see how it could be except for initial rootball stabilization and preservation benefits.

We've planted over 300 trees and I insisted all twine, wire, burlap, tags, ANYTHING be completely removed. Never had a problem with any root balls collapsing. In fact most trees have had circling stuffed roots, which we slice to try to prevent girdling. Recently saw a landscape plan that stated to leave wires and twine and burlap on, mentioned to architect manager this is incorrect; he exploded and said that's for the expert landscapers to decide. No, it is for science to decide, not those pressured to rush and maximize profits.

It does no good to hypothesize and imagine what you think might happen with roots and wire baskets. The research has been done which allows us to wade through the nonsense and see what is really going on. Paul Kramer of Duke University, Dr. Lumis and Stroger all studied the effects of wire baskets on root systems. Dr. Carl Whitcomb quotes Lumis "If vascular and cambial function is partially or fully restored, the concern about the detrimental effects of wire baskets may be overstated." I know Dr. Lumis personally and have spoken with him specifically about this subject and he concludes;

1. Roots of landscape trees grow around basket wire forming a complete union of bark and wood tissue. Roots are not permanently girdled.

2. Root tissue formed after growing over the wire is functional for translocation.

3. There appears to be no break in, or injury to, the root periderm that would allow invasion of disease organisms.

4. Basket wire remains intact for many years in the soil. Wire strength diminishes slowly.

5. Removing the wire basket at planting time is not necessary to assure growth and survival of large tree roots. However, any rope across the top of the ball should be removed, and the basket loops should be bent back or removed.

6. Use a basket correctly sized for the root ball. The top horizontal wire should be at least several inches below the top of the soil ball.

I have some of his papers handy if anyone is interested.

Root problem worry would be much better directed at conventional container grown plants. Now there are some problems!

Nate

"If vascular and cambial function is partially or fully restored, the concern about the detrimental effects of wire baskets may be overstated."

Well I guess the only thing we have to worry about is the word 'If'....

I knew here would be pros and cons regarding this issue. Each one of us will have to decide individually on what course of action to take when planting our own plants.

Dave

I agree, it's up to the individual. If I were planting my favourite specimen tree that I just paid an arm and a leg for I may be inclined to remove the basket (assuming the ball is stable) just because it will reduce my worrying.

However, I was a little unclear in my last post.
Dr. Lumis stated "If vascular and cambial function is partially or fully restored, the concern about the detrimental effects of wire baskets may be overstated." in an earlier study before research had been done to determine "the anatomical nature of the tissue or the extent to which the embedded wire may affect vascular tissue function for water, nutrient, and photosynthate transport". His conclusions that I listed are from the study he did later after he determined that there was no affect on the roots.

It's still up to you, they are your trees....

Nate

One of the few trees I ever lost was Eastern White Bud. >Cercis canadensis albaI had been cleverly up-potted to 25 gal. pot, with wire basket intact and concealed with added dirt and burlap to the point I didn't notice it when taken out of the pot to plant. It was Spring and it was in bloom. After blooms dried up it produced very few leaves. In two months it was dead.

I have never seen such a mass of gnarled root confusion encompassing the wire basket as I dug into the root ball.

This was one beautiful tree with balance unsurpassed. I really hated to loose it. I believe if the wire basket was removed when up potted it would have had a better chance of making it. I am so against this method of planting with wire baskets intact. They have their purpose in the trade by maintaining the integrity the root ball when transporting. We all know why they are left on when planting. The almighty $$$$. A buck saved is a buck earned and who will ever know.

Dave

Often the field soil may need to be washed off anyway, the texture of the soil on the new site being different. Recent memorable struggles with trees planted here have all been ones grown in a heavy soil and planted with the clay rootballs intact.

Here is a link that might be useful: B&B root ball.pdf

I come down on the side of Nate and the research he cites--these findings follow what my logic has always told me. Thanks, Nate.

If you have a heavy gauge wire encircling a trunk of a tree, and as the tree grows it presses against the wire evenly all the way around, the tree will be girdled and die. If you take a piece of stiff wire of the same heavy gauge and form it into an inflexible square shape, the tree trunk will not be girdled. The flat sides will press into the trunk first and the wood will grow around them. Later the corners will be pressed hard against the growing trunk, which will then grow around those, already having grown over the wire at the flat sides. A tree is girdled when the wire presses equally against all sides at once. I have seen tree trunks that have grown over wire fencing and all manner of other things that did not girdle the tree by pressing all around at once. I have never seen any rot or other disease enter the places where the tree is growing over the wire or other metal objects. As a timber cutter I take special note of any wire or metal objects that a tree is growing around, so I am basing this on years of careful observations motivated by no wanting my chain saw dulled by hitting these things. I also note carefully any sign of rot that may have entered a tree--it greatly affects the value, and I don't like wasting my time cutting a tree that has rot in it.

It is the same with roots. As a root grows through a wire basket there is really no chance that it will be girdled by any of the wire pressing on all sides of the growing root at the same time. And little chance--maybe, as far as I know, no chance--of these points where the tree root is growing over the wire providing any entrance point for pathogens.

But all that said, if I can remove a wire basket without giving undue disturbance to the root ball, I will do it. But I think my reason for doing so comes down to some aesthetic sense of having a kind of "pure" environment for the roots. I don't believe I have any logical reason for doing so.

But as I commented on before under an earlier topic about this, I would absolutely remove all plastic "baskets" or fabric of any kind. The flexibility of the plastic would make it more likely to girdle growing roots, especially if the plastic is not only flexible but very tough.

--Spruce

Time for me to trot out my views on this, probably more or less verbatim from earlier threads. Incidentally, I've been professionally involved in tree installation since 1975.

I was long in the camp that roots could easily grow around, or through if need be, any section of basket wire encountered. What changed my mind was a series of Wisconsin Arborist Association seminars where a group of dedicated individuals, many of whom then were with the Milwaukee crew, would set up a large display of disinterred specimens that had died. The objective was to be able to SEE the gross malformations of roots caused by wire baskets. These did include girdling directly by wire, girdling caused by redirected roots growing over and around each other, and a smattering of related grotesqueries caused by synthetic twine left in place.

Bottom line for me is simply this: Installing a tree is, or should be, a long-term prospect. If it takes 10 minutes longer to remove all the junk from the hole at planting time, this is miniscule compared to the length of time one hopes to derive benefits from that tree.

I wish I had pictures to post from those displays. I think it would change a few minds, the findings of one research team notwithstanding. Seeing is believing folks.

+oM

Tom:

When I was a freshman in college I took an introductory course in logic, and the first thing the professor said was "post hoc, ergo propter hoc." Funny that I, who never studied Latin in school, should still remember this. The professor began his discussion of logical fallacies with this. Basically the idea is that people commonly ascribe a cause to something that happens before some supposed result, even though there may be no causal connection. This logical fallacy, he explained, causes an incredible amount of grief for mankind.

In this case the observed root deformations, and the death of the trees, happened after the wire basket was placed around the root ball. But the does not mean that the wire basket caused the root deformations, or that the root deformations caused the death of the tree.

In this case I can think of other things that could have caused, and in my mind, very probably could have caused the root deformations. First, of course, the roots were cut at the same margin where the basket was placed to enclose the root ball. Second, the tree may have been stored for a time in the wire basket before planting, causing the ends of the cut roots to die back from drying out at the surface of the root ball. Third, the roots would, naturally, reverse their direction and begin growing towards he moisture in the interior of the root ball, where there would be more moisture. This may look like the roots were somehow repelled by the wire, but in fact the cause was something else.

Finally, the tree could have been planted in a soil that was very different form the soil from which the tree was dug, also affecting the growth of the roots out of the root ball and possibly causing them to grow even more unnaturally.

The problem I have with the idea that the wire basket theory of root deformation, is that I canÂt identify anything about the wire that could cause this. Nothing I know about galvanized wire, and nothing I know about roots and how they grow, suggests any possibilities to me.

I have not read any of the studies about this issue. I can imagine that any good study would have to control for a number of factors to ensure that what was discovered would be clearly an effect of the wire basket itself, and not other coincident factors.. When I have more time I will try to find out what I can about these studies. Maybe Nate could explain more about the study he cites and how it was designed and the factors that were controlled.

I take the observations about the synthetic twine to be a separate issue.

--Spruce

>Third, the roots would, naturally, reverse their direction and begin growing towards he moisture in the interior of the root ball, where there would be more moistureThis would be highly unnatural. Roots grow away from the center of the plant unless deflected by an uncrossable barrier. That's a big part of their mission - to constantly move outward and penetrate fresh ground.

Spruce

One of the things I strive for in these discussions is at least some degree of brevity. Not always successfully, I might add;^) But, those logical issues you cite did occur to me. The difficulty here is in trying to get across in text, those things that in actual observation stood out. That's why I said I wish I had pics to post from these displays. Suffice to say, it changed my mind. For the dept. I work for, it's now a moot point anyway. After years of my preaching the greater cost-effectiveness of bare-root stock, we've gone to only that for the main bulk of our street and park tree programs. 900 trees went in this spring, all bare-root.

But, as I said, my view on this has been changed. And while I made the statement that 10 more minutes spent planting a tree is minor in relation to its' expected lifespan, the truth is, for us, it took probably more like 1 minute additional, if that, to remove the baskets. It's just not that big a deal. When all the facts, suppositions, hunches, and experiences, are summed up, taking the wire off is the only reasonable thing left....IMO.

I agree that the twine issue is separate from this discussion. I also agree with Nate that the rootbound, circling root status of much potted material is an even greater problem. But we're talking about wire baskets in this one.

Wasn't there an old joke about the nursery man stating that the wire baskets should be left intact, thereby making it easier to attach a chain to yank the thing out when it died? ;^)

Have a good day all. It sure is a good one here today!

+oM

Tom:

To set the record straight, I have never planted a tree in a wire basket, AND, if I bought such a tree and could remove the basket I would. I did construct two baskets to help me move two NS trees that were too large for me to handle otherwise, and, I admit, I removed them before planting!

What I was thinking of is the very large trees I see in those baskets--15 or 20 feet tall with a root ball weighing something huge--God knows! In a case like that where I could imagine some severe disturbance to the roots attempting to remove the thing, I, personally, would not worry much about having it around the roots. On a scale of one to ten, I think the potential for damage from the basket would be very low--maybe a one. But I donÂt like the idea of those things in the ground anyway.

As for bareroot--yes, if that can be done when trees are fully dormant, that may be the best thing. The roots get into the "native" soil and it eliminates the issue of having one soil around the roots and another where the roots are supposed to grow. I think Ken has given us some good lessons on this. The potted trees for me have been the worst and take the longest to get established. Dug trees are better than those.

--Spruce

I know in my yard, when they put underground drainage structures 15' under and through my side yard ... they removed a couple trees that had been planted there when the house was new (a couple years earlier) ... and both trees came out of the hole with complete burlap and wire cage still on them ... and not one single bit of burlap had begin to disintigrate and not one single root had grown beyond the original rootball. But it did make it handy for removal, no doubt! They hooked the tree up to the 70 ton excavator with tow straps and lifted it through the mud pit that was through my yard ... and set it down into my lawn tractor utility trailer in the backyard. Pretty cool. THe good part is I removed the cages and burlap when I transplanted them into much bigger holes in the backyard and they are doing much better now. I also feel much better knowing these trees are not planted incorrectly anymore. I'm convinced the whether is matter a lot or not, the reason the pros don't is because of time and money ... just much easier not to remove it ... but if you watched what they did at their own home, you might be surprised!

Cascadians, good for you! I wish I could have done that with all the trees we planted in our once barren yard. I tried a few times, believe me. But the tree guys always seem to laugh it off -- like THEY know more, and I don't know what I'm talking about. It is very frustrating, but I don't have much choice other than to just let them do it their way. Although I do now insist that at least the twine is cut off and burlap opened up and cut away some. The trees we have planted are always in the 7-12 ft. range, and therefore way too large/heavy of a rootball for them to do anything more than just plop it into the hole. I am hoping all our trees are still healthy years from now.

Bunkers, way to go! Glad you at least had the opportunity to get those cages off!

This post is coming up on 9 years old but has some good info. I only went searching out of curiosity as its been 6 years since I planted b&b.

I purchased from 2 different long standing local nurseries in the area and interesting to see the difference in opinion still to this day.

One told me to remove all burlap and the entire wire cage. The other said leave everything in place but remove the twine by the end of summer. Both use natural burlap by the way.

Likely a combination of getting older and having less time to garden I left some cages in tact and others I removed based on stability of tree, exposure, etc. Planting depth has remained to me and others as an non debatable topic for critical plant health.

Driving by my previous two residences had me thinking too. The first house with 15 year old b&b plants where incredibly large and almost obnoxiously vigorous for their age. At the time planting height was key but I left all cages on not knowing. So I wondered if those welds would have loosed or the roots grew around the wire for at this point how could the trees have so much vigor and be as big as they are. Just an observation at this point.

None the less I personally believe its a good idea to remove the cage if you can. As long as you stake you're doing no harm but at least some good. Although I wonder if some cases if it really matters or not and can do more harm for large trees with large leaves on exposed sites.

Anyone have any new experiences or studies worth sharing?

For me I'm digging the hole and dropping the plant in myself. So it basically saves time by not needing to dig a very wide hole to get access to snipping the cage with a bolt cutter. Especially the bottom half.

Many times the soil starts to push around the cage making it more difficult to cut as well. This of course all depends on soil quality. Some have clay, rocky, sandy or soil that cuts like butter which in that case is easy to dig a wider hole.

In can also aide in stability of the tree. I have a couple I took the cage off and with the wicked winds the tree is no longer stable even with several stakes. These particular trees didn't have laterals with enough caliper to anchor to the ground.

Otherwise it serves no value.

I'm not advocating any particular direction. Just curious if there are new studies or experiences out there.