Topping TPO'd pops...

[benedmonds]

Views on reducing by 25% (topping) pops in a back garden...

The end one is FUBARED and needs to come out, conifers being reduced, TO won't give permission to remove but will for 25% reduction..?

Is it just me who thinks it is a stupid idea... 

 

[Mark Bolam]

Ridiculous spec.

 

I would refuse the job without any hesitation.

[Dan Maynard]

Are there some hornet moth holes near the base of the others you could use as a persuader?

Massive lumps of regrowth falling off from up there as the tops decay, you don't want the job of removing them in 10 years either.

[Mick Dempsey]

Why wouldn’t you want the job of removing them in ten years?

[AHPP]

12 hours ago, Mark Bolam said:

Ridiculous spec.

 

I would refuse the job without any hesitation.

Absolutely this. Remove them or leave them. Fuck this regulatory nonsense. Let some other cunt play that game.

[Mick Dempsey]

I would do the job without any hesitation.

[Mark Bolam]

It’s funny, but as soon as I said I’d refuse it I thought ‘but I bet I know a bloke who wouldn’t’ !

[Tom D]

Stupid spec, topped pops always go rotten, and really quickly. One day there will be a court case where damage was caused by a topped tree failure.. and whoever specked it will be held liable.. I’ve seen topped pops rotten to the base within 10 years.

[Andrew McEwan]

Lets take a decay prone species and reduce it's crown so much that it knackers the ability to lay down new tissue around any basal defect, clever!

[Gary Prentice]

On 24/05/2019 at 10:03, Mark Bolam said:

Ridiculous spec.

 

I would refuse the job without any hesitation.

Why is it different to your normal crown reductions?