Silver Birch topping!

[Dean Lofthouse]

Unless you've work coming out your ears and don't need the cash.

 

I am lucky in the fact that I can pick and choose ben, but non the less, I came into this game to do things right, if I am forced through lack of work to change my morals then I'll get out and start a new business doing something else, I can adapt.

 

very unethical!...we provide a service to home owners,pruning,felling etc...not to the trees.our forests need protection, not garden trees, they are decorative and replacable.

 

Perci, the public need protecting against ignorant, ill advised tree owners also. I have seen countless topped trees roadside weak unions an all. I find it hard to swallow that someone can buy a house with a 200 year old oak in the back garden and decide they don't like it or have decided they will have it out before they actually move in. They are barstewards in my opinion.

 

Trees need protecting against muppets

[Dean Lofthouse]

If you look closely at the trees on the Veteran list, more than half of them are old pollards, topped or coppiced trees.

 

 

In the right enviroment fine, but in a public area they need managing

[Mr Ed]

In the right enviroment fine, but in a public area they need managing

bollocks.

Tree's need 'managing' like fish need bicycles.

[skyhuck]

I worked on a (not for certain, but the owners checked church records and is very likely)600 hundred year old yew tree, rear garden, out of site from the road, and 'not in the public eye'. Beautiful tree, just removed a few bits of dead, very light re-shape, and slight crown raise. Checked before hand, and NO TPO...did it not warrent a tpo? Sure it did if some one was planning on felling it for no other reason than they didn't like it.

 

Why not contact the TO and get it TPO'd? It does not have to be in the "public eye".

 

Why not look out for nice trees and get them TPO'd, there is nothing to stop anyone from contacting the council and suggesting tree that should be protected. This is a great thing to do and is not an abuse of a contractor client relationship!!

[Pete Mctree]

Trees don't require managment!!!! We manage them for our own needs, be it a crop or part of our enviroment, or in the case of tree worker our income.

[Silverback]

I agree, you sound like my kind of bloke !

 

When I was training nearly fifteen years ago now, my lecturer said to me at the time " you can chop down a tree and pay for a bag of chips, or you don't and you go hungry !" wise words I've always felt at the end of the day. Moral fibre is a good thing to have, but common sense will pay your bills and feed your family. Anyway what ever happened to the customer being right ?

 

End of rant ! Thankyou !

[Dean Lofthouse]

bollocks.

Tree's need 'managing' like fish need bicycles.

 

Oh, right then, whatever

[Dean Lofthouse]

Trees don't require managment!!!! We manage them for our own needs, be it a crop or part of our enviroment, or in the case of tree worker our income.

 

Don't talk balls, do you not listen or read threads.

 

"Topped" trees need managing full stop. No arguing, end off.

 

Trees that are not topped do not.

[skyhuck]

Oh, right then, whatever

 

Good!, glad you agree Dean

[Simonsnr]

Why not contact the TO and get it TPO'd? It does not have to be in the "public eye".

 

Why not look out for nice trees and get them TPO'd, there is nothing to stop anyone from contacting the council and suggesting tree that should be protected. This is a great thing to do and is not an abuse of a contractor client relationship!!

 

I understand and agree with you skyhuck concerning client/contractor confidence. I do feel the need at this point to mention it wasn't me that contacted the TO, and it wasn't my job.

 

As for the yew, and other trees I've worked on that are in my eye 'specimens'. I've said to the owners that if they moved house they could consider getting a tpo added then.