Beech trees and pruning.. opinions please

[Dom]

Hello tree people,

 

A client of mine whom I've submitted a TPO application on behalf of, has just received a letter from the residents association of the village that the tree, and property is in.

 

It's a mature beech tree, part of a long line of copper beeches, all protected by TPOs. The work spec was to lift to 5m, which wasn't to include cutting back any limbs to the trunk, as the branches dont start until above this point. So just to cut back a couple of swooping low hanging limbs.

 

The letter my client has received quotes a local arboriculturalist as saying (in regards to another tree protected by a separate TPO) "Beech is a rather temperamental species, and where you can get away with significant pruning and even pollarding in certain species, Beech are intolerant of any work."

 

 

In my opinion this is a very flawed statement, to say that beech are intolerable of any work, is just plainly incorrect, and to be saying this in writing as a supposed expert is pretty shoddy.

 

Anyways, my client is now annoyed and believes the application won't be accepted.

Any thoughts or opinions about the quote, I'd be happy to read them.

 

Cheers

Dom

[Paul Barton]

You probably already know that Beech don't like to be pruned hard, but minor crown lifting shouldn't cause a serious issue.

 

See what the app comes back like - if you get your permission then you can happily ignore the other arb!

[detritus21]

The reality is crown lifting of secondary branches could be seen as safety and clearance works. In my opinion beech won't tolerate a severe bashing but will take lifting and thinning well and also sensitive reductions.

[Tom10]

Hello tree people,

 

A client of mine whom I've submitted a TPO application on behalf of, has just received a letter from the residents association of the village that the tree, and property is in.

 

It's a mature beech tree, part of a long line of copper beeches, all protected by TPOs. The work spec was to lift to 5m, which wasn't to include cutting back any limbs to the trunk, as the branches dont start until above this point. So just to cut back a couple of swooping low hanging limbs.

 

The letter my client has received quotes a local arboriculturalist as saying (in regards to another tree protected by a separate TPO) "Beech is a rather temperamental species, and where you can get away with significant pruning and even pollarding in certain species, Beech are intolerant of any work."

 

 

In my opinion this is a very flawed statement, to say that beech are intolerable of any work, is just plainly incorrect, and to be saying this in writing as a supposed expert is pretty shoddy.

 

Anyways, my client is now annoyed and believes the application won't be accepted.

Any thoughts or opinions about the quote, I'd be happy to read them.

 

Cheers

Dom

 

Blatent load of tosh. Dont worry about it - your application will surely be passed for a 5m crown lift of secondary branches! The tree will take no harm at all - nor would it if you reduced the whole crown if you done it properly.

 

To note - you can pollard a beech - wouldn't be a first choice obviously but many a forest and woodland consist of beech pollards.

 

The fact the 'arboriculturalist' says ''even pollarding in certain species'' is naive - you can pollard an awful amount of species! just the nanny state, red tape tip toe land we live in that its not done more.

 

Uneducated busy bodies. - they're everywhere in England - good luck

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

You probably already know that Beech don't like to be pruned hard, but minor crown lifting shouldn't cause a serious issue.

 

See what the app comes back like - if you get your permission then you can happily ignore the other arb!

 

Not my personal experience in 25 years of reducing beech and studying veteran beeches fro john o groats to lands end

 

The reality is crown lifting of secondary branches could be seen as safety and clearance works. In my opinion beech won't tolerate a severe bashing but will take lifting and thinning well and also sensitive reductions.

 

see above

 

Blatent load of tosh. Dont worry about it - your application will surely be passed for a 5m crown lift of secondary branches! The tree will take no harm at all - nor would it if you reduced the whole crown if you done it properly.

 

To note - you can pollard a beech - wouldn't be a first choice obviously but many a forest and woodland consist of beech pollards.

 

The fact the 'arboriculturalist' says ''even pollarding in certain species'' is naive - you can pollard an awful amount of species! just the nanny state, red tape tip toe land we live in that its not done more.

 

Uneducated busy bodies. - they're everywhere in England - good luck

 

whilst i wouldnt have put it this way i would say that the problem is that the people that write best practice guidelines (I will go and get back up from the powers that be if needs be!) do not work WITH trees and have only limited information in which to base this largely "studied" perception.

 

There are several issues with regards to beech pruning which can be avoided with care and a well thought out approach to crown modifications and timing is crucial for beech.

 

There is going to be many changes in established dogma surrounding many issues and it is the arbs experience and documentation that will lead the way here. The industry is finally ready to listen to the voice of experience in such matters, but it needs carefull consideration and formal/peer review to end the dogma.

[treeseer]

Dom, unfortunate that the spec was not written clearly enough for the arborist to follow. If the wording was clear about "lift to 5m" then no cuts would be made above that point...unless there was other wording somewhere heeded about removal cuts being better than reduction cuts, go to the collar when you can, etc etc perhaps? That tripe leaks into boilerplate templates here too--codswallop.

 

Beech are intolerant of any work.[/i]"

 

is indeed a reckless phrase--incorrect, flawed, shoddy, and all that. But let's look at the cultural context this attitude comes from. "Tree management intervention" is viewed with suspicion, somewhat scorned, something to be avoided. "Maiden" trees are revered like Santa Maria, their imaginary hymens guarded by the Gawains and Galahads of the arb consultant world. Shiny-pants consultants stand strong against the slings and arrows and saws brandished by the great unwashed, heathen tree cutters.

 

Add to that the hypothetical gyrations that are spun into the defensibility of proactive felling in the face of a weak and treatable parasite, DAFT though that may be. On a par with the smoke and mirrors, and banana peels and marbles cast before experts as they march toward desperate lawyers/barristers. They know their case is weak, hence the proactive attempt to fell the expert by contorting their record and their report.

 

With that context, it's no surprise that your client is now annoyed and believes the application won't be accepted. depends on the juice that exaggerating arb's got, the finesse of the other side, the known and unknown facts of the case, and the whistling winds of politics. It's a madhouse out there! But The Arborist formerly known as hamadryad brought in some sanity--excellent post!

Edited May 26, 2012 by treeseer

[Old Mill Tree Care]

In my experience a lot of Arbs hold the opinion that Beech don't like being cut, this is generally because they don't heal wounds very well.

However, lack of formal Arb education and general lack of observation in the field means they are blissfully unaware of how a Beech actually responds to cutting/tearing/breaking.

 

It's in cases like this that it's very important to ensure your TPO application is concise with plenty of detail and factual. The new BS3998 lends itself well to this as it requires measurements to describe proportions so it's less open to interpretation.

[Tom10]

whilst i wouldnt have put it this way i would say that the problem is that the people that write best practice guidelines (I will go and get back up from the powers that be if needs be!) do not work WITH trees and have only limited information in which to base this largely "studied" perception.

 

There are several issues with regards to beech pruning which can be avoided with care and a well thought out approach to crown modifications and timing is crucial for beech.

 

There is going to be many changes in established dogma surrounding many issues and it is the arbs experience and documentation that will lead the way here. The industry is finally ready to listen to the voice of experience in such matters, but it needs carefull consideration and formal/peer review to end the dogma.

 

I think your thinking too much into it Tony - The facts of the matter are this chap wants to do some perfectly acceptable, simple work to a beech and hes being shot down by people with a lack of knowledge.

 

For them to raise a problem with a secondary branch crown lift is laughable and to go on to say something along the lines of ''trees can even be pollarded'' is beyond laughable.

 

You know as well as i do (from looking at your reduction threads) that if done correctly most trees will take good quality pruning - including pollards (even in beech trees............)

 

You will have seen many a woodland full of beech pollards and you would have reduced many a beech that many a person would say is too harsh.

 

The difference is the same people who slate your 'harsh reductions' (which I think mostly look very good) are the same people making themselves busy moaning about someone trying to get on with his work with unjustified rambles.

 

Trying to change peoples opinion is nearly impossible - just have to crack on, and the tree flourishing after good work will speak for itself.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

I think your thinking too much into it Tony - The facts of the matter are this chap wants to do some perfectly acceptable, simple work to a beech and hes being shot down by people with a lack of knowledge.

 

For them to raise a problem with a secondary branch crown lift is laughable and to go on to say something along the lines of ''trees can even be pollarded'' is beyond laughable.

 

You know as well as i do (from looking at your reduction threads) that if done correctly most trees will take good quality pruning - including pollards (even in beech trees............)

 

You will have seen many a woodland full of beech pollards and you would have reduced many a beech that many a person would say is too harsh.

 

The difference is the same people who slate your 'harsh reductions' (which I think mostly look very good) are the same people making themselves busy moaning about someone trying to get on with his work with unjustified rambles.

 

Trying to change peoples opinion is nearly impossible - just have to crack on, and the tree flourishing after good work will speak for itself.

 

I know and your right, but It GRINDS! I just cant resist that urge to jump in when BS is talked! but im learning

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

I guess we don't really know within what context the 'other' arb made that statement and, to a greater or lesser extent, we can all kinda understand what he's/she's saying.

 

At the end of the day it is for the professional, i.e. qualified and experienced...or indeed qualified 'by' experience, to consider the tree and the situation and make a valid and appropriate recommendation. In many instances, ideally, with a mature Beech this may involve phase works over a number of years...now there lies a challenge (convincing the tree owner of that approach), afterall the tree didn;t get to that height overnight so why should it be 'heavily' reduced...overnight.

 

Hope you're all well and to see you at the ARB FAIR and/or ARB FEST (bloomin good speaker up there, epitomises above statement of (very) qualified BY experience...nice fella too!)

 

Cheers all..

Paul

 

PS As to the original issue, and with all due respect, I would expect the TPO consent to be suitably conditioned along the lines of "...to a height/clearance above ground level not exceeding '5.0m' and by removal of secondary and tertiary (third order) branches only, no primary branches, and with final pruning cuts not exceeding 75mm dia." (or similar)....hmmm, interesting!

Edited May 28, 2012 by AA Teccie (Paul)