Authority refusing to register any works unless individual branches are specified.

[Apex]

We are having problems with a local authority refusing to register works unless individual branches are specified on every application relating to thinning or just general removal of crossing, structurally weak, or hazardous branches.

 

Example of what they require: Branch 1. On the south side of the crown, 2nd main branch from ground level and 8th branch along the stem going north, remove crossing branch. Branch 2 and so on....

 

Below an example of one of our applications that would not be adequate.

" 1. Crown thin - upto 10% to leave a well-spaced and balanced branch

structure, including removal of 'structurally weak or hazardous branches'

where necessary (see BS3998:2010 sect. 7.5)

Formative prune - involving the removal of one of two crossing-branches, where necessary (Approximately 10 in number),

and involving smaller branches upto 100mm dia. at the point of crossing (see

BS3998:2010 sect. 7.4)

Collectively, the above works will not exceed removal of more than 1/3rd

of the foliage bearing material throughout the tree and it is deemed to have

adequate vitality"

 

Unfortunately this decryption is not adequate enough for this council and they are not happy with this explanation and are saying it is too generic ?

 

Our recommendations accord with Table B1 of BS3998:2010 Management objectives and commonly applied pruning options

To maintain health or longevity by means of: good structural integrity by

removing individual dead, defective or diseased parts.

 

We feel without carrying out a climbing inspection we cannot realistically identify all branches from ground level and there has to be a certain amount of responsibility left with the climber to identify these branches as he carries out his work from the tree.

Also the additional admin to achieve this for all parties would be horrendous and unrealistic on larger mature trees with many defects.

 

Any comments would be welcome to gain a general feeling out there on this?

[hazzygawa]

Are they serious. Stick to your description and get a site visit perhaps.

[Le Sanglier]

Jeez! what a nightmare! unbelievable overcomplication of something very simple.

[High Scale]

Visit local authority.

 

Find out who's responsible for the stupidity.

 

Rapp them on the head repeatedly whilst loudly shouting Mcfly!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Actually don't do that.

[Nick Gardiner]

As it seems to be just the one local tree officer insisting on these ridiculous procedures to be carried out is there anybody who is in a higher chain of command which you could arrange a meeting with to discuss these issues?

 

As you have already stated arranging a site visit with a climber to carry out an aerial inspection then documenting every limb to be pruned is not only ludicrous but will end up affecting the client significantly as quotes will have to reflect the time and effort gone into getting consent.

[shillo]

My TO is getting very fussy about this recently. I had a simple crown lift to 4m, all of it was regrowth from previous pruning wounds. Refused. Had to be more specific and list every branch!

 

They had a complaint from a town councillor who 'loves trees' he claimed we would be ruining a local landmark, veteran tree. It was about 50yrs old!

 

It makes me feel really annoyed that the TO listens to these people more than they listen to a tree surgeon. Especially when you have to try to explain to the client.

[Gary Prentice]

There's no requirement to be as specific as they are demanding. If the authority repeatedly request/demand unnecessary information you may appeal on the grounds of non-confirmation.

I think I've understood this correctly, but there will be other members with more knowledge.

 

I'd also be ask for copies of the specification for works that the council supplies to its own arborists. Can you imagine that the LA lads get an identification of every limb they have to remove on every tree, every day?

[Marc Lewis]

Absolutely ludicrous. Hope it gets resolved mate

[likeitorlumpit]

There's no requirement to be as specific as they are demanding. If the authority repeatedly request/demand unnecessary information you may appeal on the grounds of non-confirmation.

I think I've understood this correctly, but there will be other members with more knowledge.

 

I'd also be ask for copies of the specification for works that the council supplies to its own arborists. Can you imagine that the LA lads get an identification of every limb they have to remove on every tree, every day?

 

That should do it:thumbup1:

[Craig Johnson]

which area?