Veteran tree management in the urban environment

[sean]

Firstly I would like to say how pleasing it was to see a London Borough’s tree officer adopt a very inspired approach to there tree management in the is urban environment. Not only have they made an inspired and brave decision but they have also had the foresight to explain to the public exactly what they are hoping to achieve by doing so. My problem with it is hopefully apparent when viewing the following images.

 

How exactly have they alleviated a “significant public safety hazard”? The Horsechestnut in the first 8 images is around 13mtrs tall. It has been dead for quite some time with the 2 remaining limbs extending from a decaying fork. As can be seen it is on a well used public green with a footpath very close by. Only last week there was a funfair on this green. As a wildlife habitat this tree is fantastic with cracks, decay holes etc and could be used as a vital resource for the education of local children and the community at large but it needs to be reduced in size drastically.

By their own admission the tree posed a “significant public safety hazard” AS IT STILL DOES!! By making such an admission to the public through the attached notice surely they are leaving themselves wide open for litigation should any failure occur with any injuries or damage?

 

The 2nd HC is also a tree with valuable wildlife habitat potential. It has already put on a lot of regrowth and I just hope they have taken this into consideration with regards future management time and costs this tree will obviously need in the future. TOP MARKS for not felling it however!!

 

And the pine…..once again the sign has been attached saying that “remedial tree works” have been undertaken to make the tree safe! Ummmmm I’m glad I’m not living in that house.

 

These works have been carried out by a contractor working for the borough. Whether the spec has been interpreted wrongly or not carried out correctly or possibly the tree officer, although commendably, has tried to initiate such a programme without being knowledgeable enough about this type of tree management. I don’t know but I feel contact should be made and a chat about it had. Maybe they haven’t even seen the finished results?

 

 

Once again though I have to take my hat off to them for initiating it in the first place.

 

Would be interested to hear what others think about it.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Oh theres some lovely flaky bark for bats and a few decent cavaties though maybe not high enough for summer roosts.

 

The pine is still overly heavy, the first twin stem chestnut needs the left limb brought down to half length and the other in another year or twos time, maybe reduce to a 5 mtr monolith in 18 months say. The re shooting chestnut will be fine for at least 5 years.

 

Round of appluse to the local authority on many counts, but a word is indeed needed as to the liabilities offered by two of these.

[sean]

Oh theres some lovely flaky bark for bats and a few decent cavaties though maybe not high enough for summer roosts.

 

The pine is still overly heavy, the first twin stem chestnut needs the left limb brought down to half length and the other in another year or twos time, maybe reduce to a 5 mtr monolith in 18 months say. The re shooting chestnut will be fine for at least 5 years.

 

Round of appluse to the local authority on many counts, but a word is indeed needed as to the liabilities offered by two of these.

 

Is it not better to reduce down to a monlith now be best option? Leaving the right hand limb for another 18 months will result in the removal of any invertebrates, bats, fungi that have utilised it. Monolith it now and enjoy its development?

[David Humphries]

I'm pondering on what resource that LA may have.

 

Presuming/hoping that these trees are placed within an survey schedule of some kind.

 

Cost of reworking/reducing is a significant factor for sure, but not exuberant.

Any subsequent arrisings (if hosting niche inhabitatants) could be habitated either in a pile or reserected.

 

I like the interpretation placed at these trees

 

But would have had the first Chesi left much lower than that.

 

 

Really good thread sean.

 

 

 

We re-reduce some of our Sdt's, depending on target at the time of creation and again at every annual assesment.

 

This ash was originaly reduced & left as a Sdt about 8 years ago, then re-reduced 3 years ago.

Will re-assess & possibly bring it down to the bare trunk in the next few years.

 

.

Edited July 4, 2010 by Monkey-D

[janey]

I would be very dubious about ever putting a sign on a tree saying it is safe, as it is simply something that you cannot 100% guarantee.

 

I theory, what this LA has done is commendable as over sanitation has removed so much valuable habitat. However, I think the execution leaves much to be desired.

[Bundle 2]

Look, it's not always easy to know just how "fooked" they are from the pictures. David is right to query the allocation of resources, imo.So too the assertion that the trees are included within an adequate survey schedule.

Janey sums it up well. Execution is , well, as you seem to be suggesting Sean, a bit of a worry.

The pine is defo bad judgement imo, and indicates that the others may well be the result of similar bad judgement...?

Good thread....Good ol' arbtalk!!

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

It is all too easy to be critical of such endevours, but there is always a risk in doing so.

 

i would want to offer some constructive suggestions without setting back this descission making.

 

The arbor ecology movement is cleary happening, but if we are overly harsh on those that are cleary making the effort we risk jeopordising the movements progress.

 

Standing dead is not just about great thick trunks, the ever finer scales of twigs and all stem diameters inbetween are food and home to many specialists. if all we generate are thick stemmed monoliths, we exclude a great variety of life and may as well have not bothered at all.

 

The diversity of habitat is essential, this is the key to maintaining biodiversity.

 

The pine wood make a fine monolith and does need doing, the first chestnut, well chestnut is a fast rotter so i worry about the left hand stem but NOT the top, and 18 months would provide enough time for most things to have had their fill due to the higher rate of degradation in chestnut.

 

To be highly commended for effort, with as paul smith puts it "some advisories"

[Bundle 2]

Your point is well made Tony. To counter that argument however, an incident related to the safety of these structures would surely set back their inclusion in tree strategies. Its as much about perception as anything else in the public arena Im afraid!

Now I must off and do some essential "safety" motorcycle maintenance!

[sean freeman]

I don’t disagree with the points made about Local Government resources and that perhaps the works are not quite what others would be able to achieve.

 

I really hope the LA has managed to engage with some community/school groups to highlight not only why they have carried out these works but to raise the profile and the value of standing deadwood and declining trees retained in the urban environment.

 

As for the points about risk…….Provided the trees were assessed by a competent qualified person with an auditable methodology….and target exposure to large part or total tree failure was determined not to be unacceptable…then I see no major intrinsic problem in retaining the trees like photographed.

[Will Hinchliffe]

Certainly some good habitat in the decaying wood, but any suggestion that the above trees are Vetrans or come close to simultaing the habitats offered by true vetrans is way off the mark.

 

Quite brave keeping them in the locations they are but they are never going to be left alone and the full array of niches that the decaying stems will provide will be interupted as further works are carried out.

 

Good post Sean