Jump to content

Log in or register to remove this advert

Bird nesting season vs potentially dangerous tree


warren
 Share

Recommended Posts

Log in or register to remove this advert

20 hours ago, donnk said:

are you geniunely saying a pidgeon trumps the life of a human being ?

 

Only a grade A cretin public servant would side with a pidgeon on that and i'd want the twit with a A sat under that tree with his wife and kids until said bird was gone.

 

 

Read it again. I'm saying that felling a protected tree because it's dangerous doesn not exempt prosecution under the Wildlife and Countryside Act. That's the law, and that was Scottish Natural Heritage's position. No-one's saying it makes sense or that it's fair and reasonable, but that IS the law.

 

We couldn't move the pigeon, but we could move the people. It was fortunate tha the owner was able to reschedule some renovation of the hotel dining area and use another room for the guests meantime, so no-one was at risk. I put a Beaufort Scale threshold in place anad not even the workies were allowed in on windy days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, westphalian said:

I meant the tree was the danger. But...hear me out...you are cycling along...a woodie flies over the road, shits and it lands in your eye...blinds you and you ride into an oncoming lorry. They should be shot on site IMO

Is that scenaria being added to the highway code? :lol:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, EdwardC said:

Managing trees is not always fell or leave the risk. Risk can be managed in many ways, but it is best managed with the cooperation of the parties involved. Managing client expectations is the hardest bit of arboricuture.

Ain't is just!

 

Nobody, at least not to my knowledge, has ever accused me of having a sense of humour. Just for the record and the avoidance of doubt, I don't.

That's a surprise :lol:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, daltontrees said:

Read it again. I'm saying that felling a protected tree because it's dangerous doesn not exempt prosecution under the Wildlife and Countryside Act. That's the law, and that was Scottish Natural Heritage's position. No-one's saying it makes sense or that it's fair and reasonable, but that IS the law.

 

We couldn't move the pigeon, but we could move the people. It was fortunate tha the owner was able to reschedule some renovation of the hotel dining area and use another room for the guests meantime, so no-one was at risk. I put a Beaufort Scale threshold in place anad not even the workies were allowed in on windy days.

I wondered how you'd got on with that situation when this post started. 

 

So there's no over riding extenuating circumstance, what soever?

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.