Chestnut reduction..........

[sean]

The trouble with correct and more specificaly SPECIFIC terms and specs is they tend to be absolute, and nothing is ever absolute in this game. allowing for SOME but not too much interpretation for the contractor means he can give or take a little as and when he is in his work position and more suitably placed to make acurate assumptions on "best form and function"

 

scenario- remove deadwood over 50mm diamerter only

 

but what if decay pockets exist at the base of 30mm deadwood? or a bit of 10 mm deadwood is over a green house?

 

what if the climbers a freshly qualified student legaly able but not so sure of himself, hes going to stick to the speck isnt he.

 

just to balance out the rigidity of spec

 

good points Hama.....specs should be open to interpretation and have an element of flexibility. People are writing specs from what they see from the ground! It can change once seen from up in the canopy.

[tommer9]

good points Hama.....specs should be open to interpretation and have an element of flexibility. People are writing specs from what they see from the ground! It can change once seen from up in the canopy.

 

I agree. I think that is why in this case the spec was fairly exacting, but allowed a useful ammount of leeway; '.....no more than 2 metres' etc, and back to suitable growth points, any more specific would have been unrealistic. We were to deadwood aswell, so that was allowed to be flexible on the branch length etc. Two tree officers climbed this tree so they had a good understanding of its condition.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

What cheeses me off though on spec specifics is ive NEVER seen a spec on a birch stipulating no cuts to be above 50mm, when we all know a cut over this is not going to occlude and will form a pocket. O.K if were lucky it develops a water pocket and goes anaerobic, but even so!

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

Hi Tommer, thanks for the reply and apologies I wasn't sure if the spec was yours or the TOs and thanks also for seing the positive in my contribution.

 

My comments are offered purely for discussion as I try to come at things from a different perspective sometimes...perhaps part of my 'warped mind' approach, ha!

 

Cheers n keep up the (bl**dy) good work!

Paul

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

Hi all, thanks for the posts.

 

I fully acknowledge the diffculty, and limitations, is producing a spec that is too restrcitive. However at the same time one needs to ensure it is deatiled enough and seeks to protect you if challenged for the works that have been undertaken.

 

For instance, Hama mentioned about the small piece of deadwood over the greenhouse that would be below the 50mm dia. threshold maybe = good point, but my concern is when actually 'deadwood' means remoavl only of 'major' (larger) deadwood and that small piece falls off and causes damage. The client then has reasonable grounds to challenge what you've done, or rather not done, i.e. not removed the small piece over the greenhouse, but if the spec said 50mm dia. or greater you'd have a defense.

 

Now, in reality and as part of your professional service provision, you WOULD remove that smaller piece and you can them point that out to the client, i.e. I've done a bit more than spec'd. to protect the greenhouse AND hopefully get another cup of tea and maybe even a 'Milk Chocolate Digestive'.

 

Clearly there is alos a need to include a 'condition' in your Ts&Cs whihc says the work specification may change based on aerial observations when the tree is climbed but any additional costs incurred will be agreed beforehand...or summat to that effect, appen.

 

Cheers all..

Paul

 

PS Hama, re the 50mm wound dia. limit on Birch I wholly accept your point but this is very difficult to justify when a client wants a CL undertaken involving removal of primary branch which is 100mm. For me the key is education, i.e. advise the client of the consequences then they can make an informed decision being fully aware of the effects. Also where will all the 'bugs and beasties' hide if we don't make a few cavities...awwww!