Another fine Ash reduction

[Gary Prentice]

IT IS NOT A POLLARD

:thumbup:

[combined tree services]

Was there a putrid green transit parked outside lol ??

[tomshiell]

No David!

[thecaptain]

maybe its what the customer wanted? and the tree man gets paid. granted not the prettiest.

[Old Mill Tree Care]

Repeat after me.....

 

IT IS NOT A POLLARD!!!.....

 

 

No it's not but sadly, very few tree workers truly understand precisely what a pollard is.

They just think it means removing the branches to a required height at any time in the trees life.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk mobile app.

[Gary Prentice]

No it's not but sadly, very few tree workers truly understand precisely what a pollard is.

They just think it means removing the branches to a required height at any time in the trees life.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk mobile app.

 

I'm not so sure if it's lack of knowledge or the attitude that "if I don't do it someone else will" and then calling it a pollard as a salve to the conscience.

 

I predict that in the future, the regrowth from a tree like this will fail, cause damage, injury or a death. In court, the claimants barrister will say that the failure was foreseeable and a result of decay at a internodal/topping cut.

 

The tree surgeon will be asked if the cut was current best practice or recommended in the Brit Standard. There will be no defence that that was what the client wanted, as the tree surgeon is the specialist and should have either a) persuaded the client to remove the tree or do something else or b)refused the job.

 

Can you imagine a Corgi registered gas fitter doing something wrong, just cos that was how the client wanted it?

 

Sorry if it sounds like I'm on a soapbox, but I hate this practice, I think it's harmful to the industry to continue to do it. How do we proclaim ourselves surgeons when we practice butchery?

[Mountain man]

Were not surgeons, we trim and fell trees.

"I predict this will cause injury, damage or death"

Lol

[skyhuck]

Were not surgeons, we trim and fell trees.

"I predict this will cause injury, damage or death"

Lol

 

I detest the term "surgeon" when applied to us

[skyhuck]

I'm not so sure if it's lack of knowledge or the attitude that "if I don't do it someone else will" and then calling it a pollard as a salve to the conscience.

 

I predict that in the future, the regrowth from a tree like this will fail, cause damage, injury or a death. In court, the claimants barrister will say that the failure was foreseeable and a result of decay at a internodal/topping cut.

 

The tree surgeon will be asked if the cut was current best practice or recommended in the Brit Standard. There will be no defence that that was what the client wanted, as the tree surgeon is the specialist and should have either a) persuaded the client to remove the tree or do something else or b)refused the job.

Can you imagine a Corgi registered gas fitter doing something wrong, just cos that was how the client wanted it?

 

Sorry if it sounds like I'm on a soapbox, but I hate this practice, I think it's harmful to the industry to continue to do it. How do we proclaim ourselves surgeons when we practice butchery?

 

Do you genuinely believe this?

[Gary Prentice]

Do you genuinely believe this?

 

Think i'm going to get ridiculed, but yes I do. Have a look at Stagecoach V Hinds and Steel. https://tinyurl.com/kno42gp

 

In that case the claimant (Stagecoach) were trying to blame a tree surgeon for failing in his duty of care as a 'specialist' in trees. It took Barrell to argue that the decay wouldn't have been visible without a determined inspection - which was outside of the tree surgeons remit in the particular circumstances.

 

We have guidelines or recomendations within BS3998. When we fail to adhere to them at what stage do we become negligent or liable?

 

It's okay to claim that the owner was informed that it's a poor practice and will need repeating to manage the regrowth, but a barrister would argue (IMO) that something was done which required further action outside the control of the practicioner. What happens when the original owner moves and the new owner stops managing the tree?

 

I believe that the customer, generally expects the tree surgeon to provide information and do work that is right. We are, supposedly, the specialists in the care, study and management of amenity trees. It's not a great step forward that eventually the legal profession we look at us the same way, so when we do something wrong and against best practice/recommendation/standard - we will be held accountable.