Replanting after tpo'd tree removal

[JLA Arborists]

IMHO very disappointing that the same peole willing to fight tooth and nail to get the fell, do not put as much effort in to getting the replant,

 

We should all be willing to plant as much as possible. It's future work for starters, if not for us but the next gen' of Arborists

[treequip]

This is probable one of the most disappointing parts of this post.

 

when you read through arb talk its full of things about the remoal of 'big trees' 'the big climb' the big fell, but when I look for , a great planting scheme, a real treat of raer tree planting etc, I find almost 0.

 

For an industry that goes to great pains to shout its green credentials, It is, IMHO very disappointing that the same peole willing to fight tooth and nail to get the fell, do not put as much effort in to getting the replant, even when its a legal obligation.

 

A moral question........

 

Not really a fair comparison there, I think you are maligning the industry and imposing a set of values industry wide that probably don't apply.

 

Any legal obligation goes with the land and by extension the land owner so its a moot point to the contractor.

 

As far as green goes, I don't think so. 2 stroke engines are among the most inefficient and polluting, diesel powered trucks and chippers and all this in the name of cutting (damaging) trees to make them comply with our needs????

 

I don't consider myself green at all, quite the opposite in fact. Its a service industry plain and simple.

 

Tree work usually involves the client parting with a chunk of change and asking a tree surgeon to do the re plant can look like asking a barrister to do a house conveyance.

 

You can buy a tree in a garden centre and dig your own hole and that's generally what happens, or not if the matter isn't policed.

 

The amount of removals that are obligated with a re plant are minimal compared to those without a re plant obligation so as an industry we just don't get asked for re plants.

 

And................lets face it, re plants just don't have the sex appeal so wont get reported.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

Not really a fair comparison there, I think you are maligning the industry and imposing a set of values industry wide that probably don't apply.

 

Any legal obligation goes with the land and by extension the land owner so its a moot point to the contractor.

 

As far as green goes, I don't think so. 2 stroke engines are among the most inefficient and polluting, diesel powered trucks and chippers and all this in the name of cutting (damaging) trees to make them comply with our needs????

 

I don't consider myself green at all, quite the opposite in fact. Its a service industry plain and simple.

 

Tree work usually involves the client parting with a chunk of change and asking a tree surgeon to do the re plant can look like asking a barrister to do a house conveyance.

 

You can buy a tree in a garden centre and dig your own hole and that's generally what happens, or not if the matter isn't policed.

 

The amount of removals that are obligated with a re plant are minimal compared to those without a re plant obligation so as an industry we just don't get asked for re plants.

 

And................lets face it, re plants just don't have the sex appeal so wont get reported.

 

All very fair and reasonable points in my view. On a personal level, I'll always inform / advise on suitable replacements and take some pleasure in the customer taking that advice but frankly, they are usually more interested in what can be reduced out of the work spec to save money rather than asking what can be added to it to raise the final cost. As Treequip says, we do as we're told (and get paid for), not what we want - we can do what we want on our own time in our own space - that's why, for example, I've got rows of acorns planted each year at home but I can't impose that on a customer.

[Arborowen]

Some sound words to the tune of "you'll be long dead before they give you any worry love"

[Kev Stephenson]

Copied from the acknowledgement of a 5 day special when I notified the council of a large ash that had fallen blocking a road and smashing up a house on Christmas eve.

 

(Quote start)

I acknowledge receipt of your five day notification of your intent to carry out work to a dead or dangerous protected tree, received by us on 02-Jan-2014. From the photo you have submitted I can confirm this tree does fall under the dead or dangerous exemption and that your notification is acceptable.

 

Please note when removing trees using this exemption there is a legal obligation to plant a replacement tree at the same place.

(Quote end)

 

I always state on invoices for jobs where a replant is required "As discussed during our consultation a replant is required by the council. By paying this invoice you accept the liability to replant a tree as per the details outlined in the copy of the TPO paperwork attached. Should you wish for us to replant on your behalf please contact us."

 

Again on the rare occasion I have been asked to replant I state that "The newly planted tree must be cared for as outlined in the council paperwork (attached). You have contracted us to provide and plant a tree as per the councils specification, we do not accept liability for the future of the tree should it not be suitably cared for. By paying the invoice you accept these conditions."

 

In this sueing society where there must be someone to blame for a short coming then I find it best to ensure the jobs I finish are suitably closed out or if there is further work to be done to satisfy someone (e.g a replant for the council/stump to be ground) my client knows they are responsible for this and my involvement has ended unless further contact is made.

[Arbocop]

I completely understand the points made regarding what we are paid to do, ive spent 30 years learning to be an arboricultralist, a mix of so many disaplines including tree surgury, nursary practice, horticulture etc (but clearly not spelling lol).

 

I also understand the issues of al lthe kit we use and how it impacts on the environment, the point i was trying to make , whic I acctually think tree equip summed up very nicley at the very end when he said "just not sexy"

 

Why do we not put as much effort in to persuading replanting as we do persuading all the other things??? if you think about the pages and pages on her debating if wood chip is waste, compared with the decided lack of 'guess what tree i planted' I feel that gives a fair barometer to my point.......

 

kev

[felixthelogchopper]

Not really a fair comparison there, I think you are maligning the industry and imposing a set of values industry wide that probably don't apply.

 

Any legal obligation goes with the land and by extension the land owner so its a moot point to the contractor.

 

As far as green goes, I don't think so. 2 stroke engines are among the most inefficient and polluting, diesel powered trucks and chippers and all this in the name of cutting (damaging) trees to make them comply with our needs????

 

I don't consider myself green at all, quite the opposite in fact. Its a service industry plain and simple.

 

Tree work usually involves the client parting with a chunk of change and asking a tree surgeon to do the re plant can look like asking a barrister to do a house conveyance.

 

You can buy a tree in a garden centre and dig your own hole and that's generally what happens, or not if the matter isn't policed.

 

The amount of removals that are obligated with a re plant are minimal compared to those without a re plant obligation so as an industry we just don't get asked for re plants.

 

And................lets face it, re plants just don't have the sex appeal so wont get reported.

 

I know exactly what you mean, Andy. When I used to do subby work, some teams I worked for seemed to view tree planting as punishment duty. Personally, I take a very real pleasure in seeing the trees and woodlands I have planted all over Essex and bore the backside off people with me by pointing them out whenever we see them.

[Roz]

Hi the devil will be in the detail of what was in the condition and why the trees were condemned, you are right in that the condition cant be enforced BUT in the event of non compliance the planning authority can serve a tree replacement notice which can be appealed. Once a notice has been served and comes into effect if all else fails the LA can enter the land and take the necessary action.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

if all else fails the LA can enter the land and take the necessary action.

 

Perhaps, technically & legally, but in reality would it ever actually happen Roz?

 

LA's (generally) seem to be struggling to meet statutory outputs within budget, I can't see a tree planting storm trooper squad being deployed any time soon.

 

Anyone able to reference a recent example??

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

Enforcement is not a public matter so getting an example might be difficult. I have done enforcements where I, along with others, have entered onto the land to do the works. Usually though tree replacement notice does the trick.

 

OK Edward, thanks. Don't suppose you could share the scenario or would that be inappropriate? Just out of interest, understand if not possible.