Jump to content

Log in or register to remove this advert

Man fined £112k for illegally felling trees


Steve Bullman
 Share

Recommended Posts

Log in or register to remove this advert

I think it's about right.

 

I had a chat with a person this week who was looking to make some space for a developer and would have resulted in a similar situation to this and he as these people just could not appreciate the value, importance and benefits of the trees.

 

I think it's good that situations like this are being taken as seriously as they should be.

 

Its good for us as an industry as it highlights the importance of getting proper arboricultural advice and good for the wider public as they will get a better service from an industry that acts in a responsible manner

 

it helps add weight to the increasing argument about the value and importance of trees which can only be a good thing in my opinion 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not too harsh...

 

Goes nowhere near recovering the financial value which would have been apportioned to the trees if they had been assessed for financial "worth" under one of the available systems, nor does it appear that the level of the fine would act as a sufficient deterrent to future occurrences of a similar nature - when measured against the potential financial gain achieved from the development.  Neither is what might be assumed from the reporting as the 'ignorant act of a farmer' [my assumption based on previous experience] any excuse.

 

Perhaps a proceeds of crime order measured against the total value of the sale value of the land / development would be more appropriate?

 

That said, well done NRW, FC - perhaps you might try and follow suit?

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So a TPO is made to protect a local amenity, is lost, the LA get involved in a prosecution and then   Central Govt coffers benefit.  It's no wonder some legal departments are reluctant to prosecute contraventions.

 

wouldn't it make more sense to funnel the penalties for loss of amenity back into the local area, in the form of ring fenced funding for planting and an increase in local canopy cover?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Gary Prentice said:

So a TPO is made to protect a local amenity, is lost, the LA get involved in a prosecution and then   Central Govt coffers benefit.  It's no wonder some legal departments are reluctant to prosecute contraventions.

 

wouldn't it make more sense to funnel the penalties for loss of amenity back into the local area, in the form of ring fenced funding for planting and an increase in local canopy cover?

Good point Gary, why take the hit to departmental resources + the risk of costs if things go wrong for no financial gain....

 

you could argue, it's for the public good, but that might not be a strong enough reason to convince the LA budgeteers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  •  

  • Featured Adverts

About

Arbtalk.co.uk is a hub for the arboriculture industry in the UK.  
If you're just starting out and you need business, equipment, tech or training support you're in the right place.  If you've done it, made it, got a van load of oily t-shirts and have decided to give something back by sharing your knowledge or wisdom,  then you're welcome too.
If you would like to contribute to making this industry more effective and safe then welcome.
Just like a living tree, it'll always be a work in progress.
Please have a look around, sign up, share and contribute the best you have.

See you inside.

The Arbtalk Team

Follow us

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.