Unauthorized pruning

[JonnyVine]

Jules

Very eloquant and emotionaly put and would have been spoiled by an animated icon.

Here in England we also have the high hedges bill which would not have helped this case one iota because there has to be two (evergreens) together to constititute being classed as a hedge, but getting anywhere with this is nigh on impossible.

 

I feel that your prediction of a curtain twtching police state is perhaps overeducated forsight in this instance because even a twenty foot surrounding of privet hedge is not going to stop the ubiquitous nosey neighbour and the very fact that a dispute has arisen indicates that any inter-neighbour relationships have broken down or never existed.

This was the very reason I initialy made my comment on this thread, in support of the "victim" on the shaded side of the fence and I will repeat that it is a growing trend that I get asked to look at some trees in a neighbouring garden thave grown beyond a civil, reasonable height, invariably I then contact the owner to try and resolve the issue as an independent party and 90% of the time conclude that it has nothing to do with privacy or trees, I usualy find that Ego is the driving force behind the exessive height and Mr nasty is going to fight it tooth and nail.

Air and light are so necessary to a healthy living environment and it is so easy to position trees so that they can not develop into a useful tool for bullies.

I am a vehement supporter of privacy and civil liberties, however peeping pervs are historic and will spy on the partners tits regardless.

 

Why apply the term " reasonable " to one issue but deprive it for another, anything above 7' is unreasonable and unnecessary

 

Jonny

[daltontrees]

Fair enough, Jonny. I'm not sure how I feel about coming across as overeducated, but I do like a debate and to look beyond knee-jerk reactions to problems.

As you say boundary tree disputes invariably turn out to be nothing to do with the trees, and trees are just the pawns in a mind-game between two parties. One phenomenon you haven't mentioned is the cost of tree works arising from a neighbour's request for light, many tree owners will not admit that they can't afford the work and would rather pass off their resistance as defence of the trees. Once attitudes crystallise they never really dissolve. Many disputes we resolve are eased considerably by tree work being at joint expense, hoewever reluctantly by one or both parties. Rarely disputes have ended up in court, too far gone to be resolved any other way.

The Scottish Parliament has just taken evidence on the new Bill, including from the English experience which has concluded the threat of Council intervention has encouraged resolution. I am in favour of Scottish legislation, and put in my tuppence worth to the Parliament saying so. Of the 88 written submissions, all but a couple were in favour of an Act. I am sure it will come to be. However, if the calls for the Act to cover deciduous trees are heeded it will be disastrous firstly for procedural reasons and secondly that the Bill has not been drafted in a way that would work for broadleaves.

Your 7' rule would make most garages, some sheds, a few pergolas, swings, climbing frames, the odd greenhouse, perhaps garden statues and definitely qite a lot of shrubs illegal. Surely this is not what you propose? You must be living in a very flat bit of the world to have reached ('scuse the pun) that view?

I am sympathetic to people who live in gloom. The pressure group wanting the new Act is asking for hedges to be cut down wher the intention behind the planting has been to piss off a neighbour. What a ludicrous premise, even the courts find it very very difficult to prove historic intent. Clearly there is a problem but the quality of thinking behind that suggestion is pretty poor.

Anywat, this thread is getting way off the original subject and other readers will be bored of it by now, but if I ever see a 'High Hedges Bill - does it work and should broadleaf trees be included?' thread started I will be in there cos I have lots more ideas on the subject.

[JonnyVine]

Don't know about boring Jules, I thought that was a profound and interesting post and debateable threads do tend to drift a little.

7' was just a starting height currently I am aware that anything under 6' can not be classed as a high hedge so I just added a foot for good measure, but I do believe that there is a difference between a hedge or tree and a climbing frame/garden shed etc, the latter somehow don't seem to be as intrusive.

For me the jury is still to deliver on the deciduous verdict as these also produce conflict, some neighbours loath having to tidy up the leaves from neighbouring trees every Autumn

 

Good luck with the lobbying of parliament

Jonny