TPO Consultation

[Amelanchier]

Peter Annett (a.k.a. the lone Govt. Arboriculturalist) has posted a link on UKTC to a consultation paper on changes to the TPO legislation. Most of this is streamlining and is unlikely to affect people outside of local Govt. but hey - its nice to be asked right?

 

Heres the link:

Tree preservation orders: proposals for streamlining - Consultation - Planning, building and the environment - Communities and Local Government

 

Oh that's weird. It worked first time...

[common lime]

I had a quick look today and the Government are proposing to remove the dying out of the current DDD exemption. Not sure that this is a good idea:confused1:

[Bundle 2]

I know but it's hard to give a tuss(le)/.....like what I did there?

There isnt an LPA itn he land gonna risk spending out on treecare legislation.....

[monkeypuzzle22]

I had a quick look today and the Government are proposing to remove the dying out of the current DDD exemption. Not sure that this is a good idea - Common Lime

 

I agree..to some degree.

[Amelanchier]

I think its a reasonable move - define dying!

[monkeypuzzle22]

Thats my 'to a degree' if it is to be kept there needs to be more emphasis placed on the term "Dying". I would imagine at current Jo Bloggs applys to fell a tree or heavily reduce a tree subject to a TPO due to a fungi/fruiting body at the base, without really knowing the science behind it.

 

A tree can be easily misconstrued as dying when it is in a state of low vigour, to which symptoms/characterisitcs are similar to dying. Low vigour does not mean that the tree is dying, it can be associated with many things, age and natural crown retrenchment being one of them.

 

So yeah, the term needs to be clearly defined if it is kept within the reformed TPO.

[Amelanchier]

I think the issue is more about pulling that out of the exemptions and bringing those borderline trees into the application procedure. I'm more than happy to see it go!

[Wolfie]

Shouldn't be a problem, I'm sure that the tree officers would still give "deemed consent" on any dangerous tree as long as you provide sufficient proof.