Termination of Pollarding street trees.

[Mick Dempsey]

Sure, money is tight, trees are an easy thing to delay, trees don't storm council offices or vote.

 

It's the new reality though. Maybe the idea of residents associations who maintain their own trees (which add to their environment and house value) is not so far fetched.

[richy_B]

I read today Bristol is cutting it's funding for parks is being cut to zero from 2019 for all but H&S items.

[SteveA]

Madness. Maybe DUP can do something about it?... cuz the Tories certainly aren't!

cheers, steve

[daltontrees]

Bristol Tree Forum website says

 

"We are a group of volunteers dedicated to increasing the tree canopy cover of Bristol."

 

At least they're going to get that.

[daltontrees]

Anyone interested should read what was recorded about the meeting. https://bristoltreeforum.org/2017/07/05/bristol-trees-in-crisis-notes-of-04-july-public-meeting/

 

I see a representative of the Sheffield debacle was present.

 

Personally I would conclude that the Council's decision is short-sighted, irresponsible and ill-informed. But councilllors who vote omn budgets may not be there in 3 or 5 or 7 years when weak pollard attachments fall on cars and people, when epicormics hide the sudden failure of trees form Kretzschmaria and when retrospective claims for subsidence start coming in.

 

I only hope for the sake of the Council that it has consulted with its risk managers (insurers) before making this decision. It's premia must go up, and since insurers are not in the business of making losses or insuring just for fun, the premia should go up be more than the cost of claims.

 

I think the real misery, though, is going to be for residents whose gardens and houses could be plunged into darkness by unpollarded trees. Since this is not a 'nuisance' that they can do anything about except pay for repollarding themselves, I can see why this sad decision might be justified by the Council. Don't use public money when you can make neighbours so desperate for basic light that they pay for tree works themselves.

 

I hope the first claim against the Council is for damage to an inanimate object rather than a person, and it would be nice if the decision makers were found responsible for failing to take professional advice on the implications.

 

I've never been in Bristol in my life, but I still find this decision and the way it has been taken really pathetic. The industry knows by now what is right and wrong in urban tree management, but the bean counters always override it. Just another symptom of society in the UK.

[David Humphries]

Good post Jules:thumbup1:

 

 

 

 

 

.

[sean]

The latest.

 

https://bristoltreeforum.org/2017/07/11/bristol-trees-in-crisis-conservatives-press-release/

[daltontrees]

The latest.

 

https://bristoltreeforum.org/2017/07/11/bristol-trees-in-crisis-conservatives-press-release/

 

Good, I hope they're squirming or even better resigning.

[Gary Prentice]

It beggars belief that these situations occur. I-tree is becoming more widely used in the U.K. To demonstrate the financial benefits of urban tree canopy cover, in pounds and pence for the bean counters. This, coupled with well publicised court decisions about the duty of care regarding LA tree management and they still look to cut the Arb budget! Idiots.

[Goaty]

I read today Bristol is cutting it's funding for parks is being cut to zero from 2019 for all but H&S items.

Are they going to let farmers graze livestock to keep the grass down as well?

 

Sent from my LG-K100 using Arbtalk mobile app