Warning signage

[Gary Prentice]

With a proper hazard assessment, it would probably be safe NOT to deadwood trees adjacent to a private path. The probability that someone would be underneath (trespassing) when a dead branch fell would be so low, that measures to reduce the risk would be unnecessary and even disproportionate to the risk involved.

 

But in the extremely unlikely case that it did occur, without a hazard assessment having been made, again negligence may raise its head. It's often okay to do nothing as long as it can be shown that risks have been considered and a reasoned decision has been made to do nothing. Of course if you invite the local shoot to beat the woods every weekend the site usage has changed - the number of targets, and everything has to be reconsidered.

[Paul in the woods]

Thank you Gary. I assume we're not talking hiring a professional to carry out a hazard assessment as the woods are fairly remote? Rather, a bit of common sense, so if I notice anything that worries me I need to sort it but if I'm happy to walk through it then that wouldn't be negligent? Realistically I expect hardly any private woodland gets risked assessed unless work is done or it's close to people?

[Stubby]

The . I could almost see the wild boar sign encouraging people in!

 

With a .308 probably !

[Paul in the woods]

With a .308 probably !

 

You may jest, but...

[Stubby]

You may jest, but...

 

No jest . It happens .

[Paul in the woods]

No jest . It happens .

 

I know, well deer poaching round here as we don't, yet, have wild boar.

 

But where do I stand if a poacher hurts himself on a log pile whilst he's trying to conceal himself whilst poaching?

[Gary Prentice]

Thank you Gary. I assume we're not talking hiring a professional to carry out a hazard assessment as the woods are fairly remote? Rather, a bit of common sense, so if I notice anything that worries me I need to sort it but if I'm happy to walk through it then that wouldn't be negligent? Realistically I expect hardly any private woodland gets risked assessed unless work is done or it's close to people?

 

Do a search for the NTSG - The National Tree Safety Group and download their Common Sense titles for landowners. If you have any difficulty, PM me your email address and I'll send you copies.

 

In most cases you're fine to look at your own wood, but the law does take the means of the owner into account. But unless you've holdings like the NT or Duke of Westminster, do your own. But you are better to record things, in case the need arises to show you've taken reasonable steps. If you see a partly uprooted tree and you deal with, make a note of the date. It builds a record of the management and steps you've taken. It's not meant to be onerous and needn't be - just common sense risk management.

[Paul in the woods]

Do a search for the NTSG - The National Tree Safety Group and download their Common Sense titles for landowners.

 

Many thanks for that, I've not heard of them before but have downloaded their guide and will give it a good read. My holdings are a tad smaller, roughly 15 acres.

[aspenarb]

I can only think of one woodland that we work thats not got a problem with dog walkers and general public. The guy has enclosed the entire woodland with deer fencing, if and when he leaves the gate open is the only time anyone gets in. The forestry op signage is a must but totally ineffective at keeping anyone from wandering into the work zone. Despite footpath closed signs at the woodland carpark and warning signs each end of a track we were mulching you can just see a hapless walker wandering down the track in the distance. You need eyes in the back of your head.

 

Bob

 

 

[gooseflight]

Sorry Gooseflight, I'd disagree in custom signage being necessary. If warning signs are present and removed at the end of works, I can't see why they would be inadequate.

 

No apology needed. My point was that if the signs are to prevent access over a period of time then it makes sense to indicate the duration -- belt and braces. People might assume that the signs had been left in place in error. That said, the duty of care would still have been exercised.