I got my tree reduced has it been done well?

[monkeybusiness]

6 minutes ago, lux said:

That’s partly my point.
2m is an irrelevant figure when you don’t know the crown size though.

If 50% is too hefty, which for many many species it is, guide your customer to say 25 to 30% done properly. They will get plenty of benefits from that and the tree will go on for years to come.

The worst cash cow is the ones the council give you on TPO’s
Spec like 1.8 metre reduction on a vast oak or beech that invariably costs a lot due to loads of climbing getting right out to the tips of a huge crown. Customer is always frustrated that’s what the council would allow and they get little benefit of a tiny reduction on a tree shading out their house or garden.
 

So talk them out of spending the money then - it’s protected for a reason and such a tiny reduction benefits nobody, does nothing for the health of the tree and is spec’d by the TO to get it off their desk and be seen to have allowed some pruning work. 

[MattyF]

I’ll try and talk them out of butchery unless that’s 100% what they want and then I’d rather walk away if the tree is prominent anyway...

If You have convinced them then most over 50 need glasses and can’t see what you have taken off anyway and are more concerned that if the tree is not looking at a totem pole you have not done the job.... I’m definitely in the habit of making sure we don’t chip up until the client sees the finished tree and is happy , if they say you haven’t taken any off you can give the old “can you tell when some ones had a good hair cut?? “ line and show them the volume of brash that’s overflowing off the drive and around the corner.

 

 

[Khriss]

6 minutes ago, lux said:

Bugger. I was just about to throw ugly 80s architecture into the mix as well

Brutalism is a dying architecture  🙁  K

[lux]

So talk them out of spending the money then - it’s protected for a reason and such a tiny reduction benefits nobody, does nothing for the health of the tree and is spec’d by the TO to get it off their desk and be seen to have allowed some pruning work. 

No I’m happy to keep earning. It’s not going to be detrimental to the tree done properly. The customer wants it reduced and there is no reason not to do it properly. The TPO may well of been placed on it 30 years ago when it was causing no issue, 30 years later it could well be. Do the work to the right standards though.

[lux]

Brutalism is a dying architecture  [emoji853]  K

Ha. Many a ‘mock Tudor’ estate around here built in the 80s and retained some huge trees that now require work to strike the balance of retaining , still looking nice and being more attractive than the house under them ....
I’m happy doing it. Puts bread on the table as they say.

[Khriss]

1 minute ago, lux said:

Ha. Many a ‘mock Tudor’ estate around here built in the 80s and retained some huge trees that now require work to strike the balance of retaining , still looking nice and being more attractive than the house under them ....
I’m happy doing it. Puts bread on the table as they say.

Anywhere around Town has those, some good woodland got chopped down to provide space for them. Sadly many of the retained trees from the 80s are now beyond saving. K

[lux]

Anywhere around Town has those, some good woodland got chopped down to provide space for them. Sadly many of the retained trees from the 80s are now beyond saving. K

Definitely a lot of crown cleaning to be done on them for sure khriss.

[Khriss]

5 minutes ago, lux said:

Definitely a lot of crown cleaning to be done on them for sure khriss.

They would be more suited to  habitats program now with underplanting or replanting, far too much grass land, expensive to keep climbing all over them, but thats a strategy program not an individual case issue. K

[Martin du Preez]

So talk them out of spending the money then - it’s protected for a reason and such a tiny reduction benefits nobody, does nothing for the health of the tree and is spec’d by the TO to get it off their desk and be seen to have allowed some pruning work. 

Ok but If the customer still wants it doing then why not? It pays? We are businesses to that sense and it isn’t causing a detrimental effect to the tree? 1.8/2m on certain species like an oak do make a difference. And it goes back to my point that if they leave it to continually grow one will still only be able to remove the spec.

Ok admittedly on certain species like limes tree officers expect that we can effing levitate

[Con]

Do what the customer wants...  Or, if you don't agree, walk away. 

Someone else will probably so the job anyway. 

But I've given up trying to educate the public a long time ago. 

Christ, we even argue amongst ourselves about what is right, throw a member of the public in the mix and it's chaos!