no plant ever really stops growing ...

if you wanted it to stay at the 3 feet claimed.. then you should have been rejuvenating or coppicing it all along ...

i dont have your cultivars.. but i left a common red twig at the old house.. at 12 to 15 feet tall ... lol ... i think i missed cutting that one also ... also.. i seem to think.. as the trunks age.. they dont red up .. as the bark matures... another reason to keep cutting it back ....

ken

Often if you cut the whole thing down it is dwarfed for a time afterward. Thus the 1/3 at a time recommendation. And the recommendation to wait until the plant is established and of some size before pruning. And the idea that you don't want to cut a lot off every year.

I cut an entire red-twig dogwood cultivar off once and it grew like maybe a foot tall at most the following summer - stumps with a tuft on top was not an appealing outcome!

Jackbet, we've done both, depending on a range of factors. Ideally, the renewal-pruning method is best, and this is indeed the one where you remove the oldest, largest "canes" down as near to ground as possible. Sometimes though, things are just so overgrown and the workload is such that it may make more sense to get the gas saw out and just mow them down. I've not seen the dwarfing Emb mentioned. We're in especially a good location for this shrub though, and maybe that matters. It is an extremely common native plant here in E. Wisconsin.

I'd say do whichever feels right for your situation. Neither is "wrong".

+oM

I have had 'Arctic Fire' for several years now. I cut it to stubs, just as I do with Buddleia. I don't care if it doesn't bloom; I grow it for the winter red.

I'm confused by any mention of coppicing in the care of multi-stemmed shrubs. Maybe I don't understand the term, but to me it indicates much heading-back-to the same point-I guess, but that's just not the way to go with such things. Renewal pruning is your friend, even though not exactly an easy task. I like describing the method-it makes so much sense-way more than actually crawling around in the muddy snow doing it!

+oM

Coppicing certainly refers to multi-stemmed shrubs/trees in my world and means cutting the whole lot back at once. Also known as stooling - the resultant multiple stubs being the stool. It's a traditional woodland management technique for the production of poles. Not to be confused with pollarding.

OK Floral, thank you. I still don't like it in this context for the simple reason that in renewal pruning-the correct way to handle overgrown multistemmed shrubs, one wishes to cut as close to the ground as possible. I'm not here saying one never ends up leaving a stub, but I am saying the goal is to not do so. In any case, I got you now.

+oM

I use renewal pruning on shrubs where it's appropriate, and cutting back to stubs (call it whatever you want--stooling, coppicing) when that's the appropriate technique. Buddlieas are cut to stubs. I like the red winter stems on my red twig dogwood, so I cut them to stubs too. I renewal prune the ninebarks.

Not to flog a dead horse but imo the difference between coppicing and renewal pruning isn't the presence or absence of stubs. It's whether you cut back all the stems or selected stems. For a good winter show on a red twig dogwood I'd agree with laceyvail and cut the lot back in one go. Otherwise you get a mishmash of straight and twiggy growth and a variety of colour when what you're aiming for is a uniform splash of intense red. Coppicing Dogwood

Hmmm...further departure from long-held practice then, IMO. Red-twiiged dogwood is, of course, at its best all through the winter months. If you are continually removing these stems before their time of best show, you lose the primary reason for this plant's being in the landscape (beyond its ecological benefits, that is). By simply removing larges and oldest stems-in early spring, as recommended, you avoid all of this confusion and always have a great looking plant. If, on the other hand, you're dealing with one that has gotten away, just too large to deal with, that's when the power saw comes out, and that too works very well. All this other is just obscuring the simple treatment that is available to us.

+oM

Maybe it depends on your growing conditions and climate. Here coppicing is the long held practice. But the RHS advice mentions that coppicing should be less frequent in less than optimum growing conditions. And it is done in late March/April as new growth is beginning the Winter show. Obviously if you are still under snow in March you want the red stems to carry on longer. But if you are already up to your ears in daffodils and Spring flowers you can prune away. Vigorous shrubs in mild wet climates will grow new stems in time for the next winter's show.

Well - I'm getting out of my depth here. There are a lot of red twigged dogwoods and not all are C stolonifera. The ones we grow for Winter colour are cultivars of C alba, C sericea and C sanguinea. Our native is C sanguinea and that's the one we see wild glowing red in Winter. The OP was asking about 'Arctic Fire' which seems to be listed as both C stolonifera, C sericiea and even C sanguinea. So I don't know which it is.

However, whatever the cultivar or species the suggestion that "here young, well-colored stems being deemed worth retaining, there, evidently not" isn't accurate. The red stems are not only deemed worthy, they're really the only reason for growing this otherwise very ordinary looking shrub. But by April the new leaves are growing and there's a lot of other colour and interest to look at in the garden so cutting them right down every couple of years is not a big issue. Obviously both coppicing and rejuvenation pruning appear to work under different conditions, so if it works it works. Here's an unknown Cornus growing by the River Thames near Oxford and clearly happy with its treatment - whatever it might have been. Photo taken 29th December 2014.

As far as I can tell C. sericea and C. stolonifera are now used interchangeably. Not suggesting this is accurate, only that it is commonplace. I actually like this plant throughout the year. The foliage usually looks good, the fruits are attractive, and then you get the bright red stems. Not a bad, nor uninteresting look at any time of year, IMO.

+oM

ps....I will freely admit my lack of familiarity with the word coppicing. I knew of its existence, just not its definition. Yes of course, it is the complete cutting-at the ground or as near as practicable-of whatever woody plant you are discussing, including within purely forestry-related contexts, ie "clear-cutting". Just after this thread got going, was reading some forestry bulletins I receive monthly, and saw the word used there, in italics, and with supporting definition! Clearly not as often-used here as perhaps in Merry Old.

"Not a bad, nor uninteresting look at any time of year, IMO." I don't dislike this shrub for the rest of the year, it's just that there are so many other choices. Maybe it depends on one's climate as to what is available. I reckon we'll just have to agree to differ on this one.

If one has the space Cornus are generally put into winter gardens here along with plants with winter flowers and showy barks.

I've drifted away from "landscaping" within my career towards a more holistic, native-restoration mode in recent years. I suppose that informs my views as much as anything. I still like amenity gardening and all that world. It's just not my main focus. And finally, few, if any shrubs, give the lasting beauty of red-stemmed dogwood in a land where fall and winter definitely take up more than half the year!

+oM