TPO tree fell in the storm yesterday

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

4 hours ago, Khriss said:

Thats a very commonly used pic Kev.... Maybe that tree should have a TPO on it 😋 K

Top of the Google search K - I have better examples of my own but didn’t have time to find them. 

[Jon Heuch]

On 23/02/2022 at 13:17, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

Genuinely interested in the view here.

Mindful it was reported as being a Poplar, I’m not so sure it would be safe (even with all / significant about of root plate lifted) to declare the tree dead simply on the basis that it has fallen over. 
 

I’m pretty sure I’d be reluctant (subject to assessing on site) to declare the tree dead simply on the basis it is horizontal. 

Funny that. How many tree work applications (i.e. please wait 8 weeks whilst we have a think about it) have you made to remove a horizontal tree that was covered by any sort of TPO (woodland, area, or listed either as part of a group or as an individual). Do I hear you say 0? How many tree work appeals have there been where a council has refused to allow the removal of a horizontal tree? I am not aware of any. How many TPOs include a horizontal live tree when served (i.e. listed as an individual tree or as part of a group)? Would a tree officer  step forward please and say, for example, that a horizontal live tree in an Area of a TPO was protected to the extent that they would prosecute someone undertaking unauthorised works that may damage the tree?

 

So yes,  it is possible (unlikely, but possible) that a tree falls over and remains alive; a shadow of its former self. Typically taking up a lot more land than it did before. Is it still providing the amenity that it did when the TPO was justified? Probably not. Might it be of interest as a horizontal "tree". Possibly, However, how many trees fall safely i.e. the final resting position (yes, it's only resting) is sufficiently robust and firm to allow the public around it and kids to play underneath it. In a woodland perhaps (where branches are small).  So works are required to make it safe. Exempt works.

 

For both the legal exceptions and the practical reality of a fallen tree I doubt whether a council has any practical control of what happens after a protected tree falls. I am happy to stand corrected if someone finds an example of a council proceeding otherwise.

 

 

 

 

[Johnelle]

Most of the tree is laying in the churchyard so the tree surgeon will have to cut the trunk, leaving about 10 foot of it in our garden. I’d be amazed if it was still alive given that it’s massive roots have been severed and are hanging vertically down from the trunk.

All we want to do is remove the TPO and not have to plant another tree which would automatically have a TPO on it

Apparently a TPO is forever…

[John Shutler]

what exactly is the issue with having a replacement tree with a TPO on? 

The other route is you plant a replacement tree, unfortunately it "dies" within 3 years so you duly plant another to replace it, which "dies" within 3 years so you replace it again etc etc etc. 

[Mick Dempsey]

Agreed, plant a small tree, if you really, really don’t want a tree there in 40 years no one will notice it die and disappear. 

[Paul in the woods]

I assume you'd have some form of choice? If the site is suitable a nice oak would be a good bet, doesn't seem to get going for 10+ years in my experience.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

5 hours ago, Jon Heuch said:

Funny that. How many tree work applications (i.e. please wait 8 weeks whilst we have a think about it) have you made to remove a horizontal tree that was covered by any sort of TPO (woodland, area, or listed either as part of a group or as an individual). Do I hear you say 0? How many tree work appeals have there been where a council has refused to allow the removal of a horizontal tree? I am not aware of any. How many TPOs include a horizontal live tree when served (i.e. listed as an individual tree or as part of a group)? Would a tree officer  step forward please and say, for example, that a horizontal live tree in an Area of a TPO was protected to the extent that they would prosecute someone undertaking unauthorised works that may damage the tree?

 

So yes,  it is possible (unlikely, but possible) that a tree falls over and remains alive; a shadow of its former self. Typically taking up a lot more land than it did before. Is it still providing the amenity that it did when the TPO was justified? Probably not. Might it be of interest as a horizontal "tree". Possibly, However, how many trees fall safely i.e. the final resting position (yes, it's only resting) is sufficiently robust and firm to allow the public around it and kids to play underneath it. In a woodland perhaps (where branches are small).  So works are required to make it safe. Exempt works.

 

For both the legal exceptions and the practical reality of a fallen tree I doubt whether a council has any practical control of what happens after a protected tree falls. I am happy to stand corrected if someone finds an example of a council proceeding otherwise.

 

 

 

 

You’d be bang on the money - zero number of TPO apps for a fallen tree. 
 

From memory, I could dig around and find something with 5 day notice for a half failed twin stem Mont Pine which might partially meet the spec but it’s not really worth progressing.  

 

For ease, happy to agree - zero.
 

Exactly the same as the number of meteorites I’ve seen strike the earth. That’s not to say I believe meteorites have never / will never again strike the earth. But either way, that is wholly irrelevant. 
 

I was raising the point that a ‘dead’ exemption being claimed solely on the basis that the tree was horizontal would be inherently hazardous and inappropriate but we seem to have skirted around that part. 
 

Perhaps there are no examples of TPO prosecutions for applying a ‘dead’ exemption to a fallen tree because nobody has been daft enough to do it....?