Cable brace a hornbeam?

[Mesterh]

All fair and valid points and I suppose I should take more of an interest in 'natural' trees.

 

Still though in a school yard full of kids.

 

Hornbeams are 10 a penny, fell it and plant something nicer.

[Buzz]

I used to think like this, being an arborist i'm usually working on trees that have gone bad shall we say, failed unions, hazard beams, lifted roots plates, structual failures because of fungal pathogeons etc.

 

Recently i'm fascinated by trees with historic defects, wish i used my camera more to take photos of these trees, trees do have an uncanny ability to adapt and stay standing even with defects we class as a serious hazard, like Matt say there are shed loads of trees around with included unions that will outlive us all.

Somtimes its good to get out into the woods to look at trees that have had little human intervention, often i see trees that anywhere else would be served a letter of condemenation.

 

Obviously though in the urban enviroment its different you can't just leave trees to naturally do there thing. Lessons can still be learned from how trees adapt and continue growing in other areas it can and does make you look at trees differently.

 

Its been mentioned the financial implication of retaining a tree that will need constant monitoring, i'm all for retaining a tree as long as possible, financially it makes more sense for us!

Being a school they'll need to have there tree inspected regularly anyway along with the rest of the trees on the site, given that its a Hornbeam and not very vigourous i'd say put a strong non invasive brace in at the appropiate height if the union fails and the brace is installed appropiatly then it should catch the limb, also replant now with a view to fell the tree in the future when its replacement is a decent size, space permitting.

 

 

 

 

You have truly become a wise man Marc...I wish i could have been bothered typingout a good post such as yours !

[caledonian bob]

Fell & replant, you've already admitted there's a problem with the tree and that's how a court of law will look at it if, it ever came to that. Remember this is a school and these are peoples sons and daughters which could (heaven forbid) be affected. I would try to preserve a tree where possible but not here.

[Bundle 2]

My comments that fell and replant may be the way forward are in no way based on the estimated risk so far.....Too many arbos think the buck stops with them and so recommend drastic measures that belie an altogether flawed grasp of the issues.......

[Catweazle]

Will the brace provide an opportunity for the kids to climb up and possibly injure themselves ?

 

It's a sad situation when you have to think of every legal aspect and the law doesn't always work the way you expect.

 

For example, I'm told that by putting no-trespassing signs up I prove that I am aware that people trespass, if one of these trespassers then bangs his head or something I can be liable for not providing a duty of care to the trespassers that I knew were there. Conversely, if I regard a path as dangerous and make improvements to it but a trespasser still trips on a pothole and injures himself I can be held liable for not keeping the path in safe condition, even though it's better than a slippery path and they have no right to be there anyway.

 

Crazy.

[Mesterh]

Will the brace provide an opportunity for the kids to climb up and possibly injure themselves ?

 

It's a sad situation when you have to think of every legal aspect and the law doesn't always work the way you expect.

 

For example, I'm told that by putting no-trespassing signs up I prove that I am aware that people trespass, if one of these trespassers then bangs his head or something I can be liable for not providing a duty of care to the trespassers that I knew were there. Conversely, if I regard a path as dangerous and make improvements to it but a trespasser still trips on a pothole and injures himself I can be held liable for not keeping the path in safe condition, even though it's better than a slippery path and they have no right to be there anyway.

 

Crazy.

Could you put 'although I am unaware of any trespassers if there are......'

 

Lol a great country we live in eh?

[Catweazle]

Could you put 'although I am unaware of any trespassers if there are......'

 

Lol a great country we live in eh?

 

I currently have;

 

No Entry - Forestry Operations and Pest Control In Progress .

 

It seems to work except for one or two mountain bikers who seem to think that they own the place and that fences are just for show. I'm thinking of putting up building site signs designating the woods as a Hi-Viz and Hard-Hat area too.

[Paul Barton]

Ok, here are the pics.

 

Thanks for your replies so far - it is interesting to hear the varied points of view.

 

I agree that the 'safest' and most risk free course of action is to fell and replant, but I am trying to steer away from over-cautious knee jerk reactions where possible and learn a bit more about how we can effectively try and manage trees with defects instead of going for the chop as a first option.

 

It may well be that in this high target zone that is the best thing to do but I am interested in other possibilities first.

[Marc]

My comments that fell and replant may be the way forward are in no way based on the estimated risk so far.....Too many arbos think the buck stops with them and so recommend drastic measures that belie an altogether flawed grasp of the issues.......

 

I think the same, Mister Tree is only asking advice and opinions, we have not seen the tree i'm sure if it was an immediate risk Mr tree would fell and replant without hesitation. As it is it sounds like he has spotted a potential problem and has noted it but doesn't believe it will fail in the near future but has reduced the trees safe usefull life.

 

So to me the question is fell it now even though it appears (without seeing pictures!) not to be an immediate risk, or retain it but carry out some remidial action?

I'm all for not taking drastic action if an alternative is possible, so without knowing the tree i'd still reccomend bracing not a fell and if possible plant a replacement now! ready for the future.

 

 

Food for thought, i went to Longleat safari park during the bank holiday weekend the park was packed with visitors, anyone who knows the park will know its full of fantastic mature and veteran trees, most of the trees near the house are roped off or have signs informing visitors to not picnic or sit under the trees as the are old and liable to fall apart!!

I've also seen this at several National Trust sites which have many visitors a year. Should these sites feel all there dodgy old trees in the intrest of public safety??

[Bundle 2]

Hang on Marc...i thought Mr Tee's opening comment was that because of the nature of the target he felt he should err on the side of caution....Judging from his last post......

 

"I agree that the 'safest' and most risk free course of action is to fell and replant, but I am trying to steer away from over-cautious knee jerk reactions..."

He wants to play with other options now....

 

Now I see the pics...at last. Fell and replant.

Its not a good tree.Its not well placed. Its not gonna be worth the repeated "high maintenence" involved....It will be nothing but trouble in the future..I would say it really should have no future. Why even consider this as an example for bracing and faffing about...

I dont get it...If you cant see that Mr Tee, I gotta wonder why you got the job...or do you just want to shoot the breeze on forum space?

I d recommend removal and replace...Good stock, right tree, right place...good form. A tree with a decent SULE.

Please dont miss opportunities like this to use your work to influence the way our amenity trees are managed. Not from a misplaced passion for trees . Do the right thing!

Had my say...