I have two apples trees that are a bit bigger than I would like - a Cox's Orange Pippen and an Elstar - and I vowed to keep any new ones under control. But while I was paying insufficient attention, my 6-years-or-so-old Ambrosia reached about 13 feet (I also have a Lord Lambourne and a Poppy's Pride - if I recall correctly - that I bought at the UBC Applefest a few years ago but they are both only about 6' tall). I spoke recently to an old guy in the neighbourhood who said that he keeps his trees at 6 feet or shorter and they produce plenty of apples. Makes me think of topping my Ambrosia at 6 feet - meaning that I'd have to cut off 60% of it and would be left with only a few branches plus the trunk. Sounds like a good way to kill it. Anyone have any thoughts about the wisdom/stupidity of doing this?
Apples take to pruning exceptionally well, and it is possible to cut them back drastically, but a 60% reduction at once is too much. I would cut it back in stages, over the space of a year at least to reduce the size that much. But if you want trees that small, you really should be using dwarf root stock, which will keep the size that small without drastic pruning.
