Tree Officers and Reductions.....

[josharb87]

I believe trees in the urban environment that are going to out grow their position should be maintained, and that regular minimal reductions, like giant bonsi are better than letting it get out of control...

 

2M on a small tree like that is not a minimal reduction imo!

 

The tree is in my view going to benifit from the work specified, and give it a more balanced profile and canopy.

 

I hate thins, its just not in keeping with tree physiology, we need to get away from this disdain for reductions, it really does enhance tree form, mechanics and resource distribution.

 

How is the tree going to benifit? and why are light thins bad??

 

2M is too much in my ideal world, theres a beautifull crown line from the view in the pic- the left side is more evident

 

tip end reduction to formativly shape (silky work on the top), crown clean incorporating a very light thin, reduce away from objects, crown lift

 

re reduce every 3-5 years keeping the shape/size

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

Hmmm, upto reading Josh's comments above I was reacting thinking 2m reduction isn't excessive. However when you think that equates to 4m off the lateral spread it gives a different perspective...still!

 

I often hear form contractors that LA TOs don't allow reductions 'carte blanche' but I don't understand this, it should be each applictaion on it's merits and consent/refusal individually. Collectively contractors within a tree officer area could challenge this as a Counicl policy. Obvioulsy reductions,by there very nature, reduce the associated tree visual amenity, and hence I can understand their reluctance, BUT in certain situations (such as this one) a 'light' reduction, perhaps 1-2m, would/should be acceptable...hmmm!

 

Anyway a couple of additional comments. You would not / should not need to apply if the Council has indicated 'selective reduction' would be acceptable as this, I would (strongly) suggest, is a lesser form of what you have applied for and they could conditionally consent to this. Thereby avoiding the delays of another application. Also, you don't need to apply to deadwood...but it is useful to notify them out of courtesy.

 

Lastly, as Tony indicated, you could let the aplication run its course and receive the refusal and then appeal. Not that I'm advocating appealing 'whilly nilly' but where you've got a carte blanche applied rule to challenge a run of appeals could be just what's required.

 

Hoping this to be of help.

 

Good luck.

Paul

[Bundle 2]

Thinning has it's place but I am not a big fan....It should be used SPARINGLY imo and in conjunction with tip reduction to balance hormone stimulation. 2m is a lot for this canopy...

I agree the ash needs looking at ( not saying it hasn't been suggested..just not mentioned on the spec in this thread)

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Whats all the fuss about? he specified no cuts above 100mm (should add excluding deadwood removal cuts) thats just 4 inch cuts, thats NOTHING to an oak of this health vigour or Vitality!

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

If anything due to the rooting environment those limbs now reaching out as projections will probably decline to stags head at a later date, 30 years say.