What to do with this tree?

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

 

I guess the reason they are worried about it is that 2 tree have blown over in that area in the last 5 years. One was a diseased Beech and a leylandii, so the owners have seen other tree go and are worried about this one.

 

 

Why is it not already 'safe'?

 

 

The client is worried, it affects their life, by re topping it it will make them happier and less worried, plus cost an awful lot less than taking it out.

 

We're managing clients as well as trees. You would have to be to be "supremely ignorant" not to factor that into it.

 

Your car use thing is so stupid it's embarrassing but I'll continue the analogy anyway.

 

The use of cars and the existence of trees near houses is something that won't change, but that's no reason not to fasten your seat belt, get the brakes checked and drive carefully is there?

 

Just observations....

 

The home owner has seen other trees fail....

 

As described by Ball & Ball-King in Public Safety and Risk Assessment – Improving Decision Making (2011), exposure to a memorable accident either directly or indirectly through a recent news story may lead to an inclination to rate the probability of a recurrence as higher than it actually is.

 

They've seen other trees fail so perhaps assume "that's what trees do?"

 

It could be that the tree IS "safe" (relatively speaking)

 

Maybe the "client management" could take the form of reassuring them of the relative safety (after a duly diligent inspection) and assuming there are no indicators to the contrary.

 

I think the car analogy is a reasonably sound and relevant one - I think you kind of argue against it's irrelevance by referencing the seat belt / service checks comparison.

 

In the 2 examples, 1 has the car as the potential hazard, the other the tree. Amelioration of risk for the car is the seat belt / service checks, for the tree it would be an inspection and action based upon observable defect no?

 

Anyway, just thinking out loud....

[Mick Dempsey]

The inspection/report is what we're doing here.

All of these "what should I do?" threads are all just theoretical exercises.

Same as the "what should I charge?" threads.

 

I've never seen the point of just saying "get an inspection" he gives us a picture, a scenario and the clients feelings. We then pass judgement and argue/discuss it.

 

I'll take your point that I followed the car analogy, it just gets used so often whenever there's perceived danger with trees, guns, terrorist bombs, airplane crashes etc.

The cry goes up "cars are more dangerous, you're not going to ban them are you?"

 

Lazy thinking IMO.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

The inspection/report is what we're doing here.

All of these "what should I do?" threads are all just theoretical exercises.

Same as the "what should I charge?" threads.

 

I've never seen the point of just saying "get an inspection" he gives us a picture, a scenario and the clients feelings. We then pass judgement and argue/discuss it.

 

I'll take your point that I followed the car analogy, it just gets used so often whenever there's perceived danger with trees, guns, terrorist bombs, airplane crashes etc.

The cry goes up "cars are more dangerous, you're not going to ban them are you?"

 

Lazy thinking IMO.

 

Brilliant....! Made me chuckle!! Often way past the point where the OP has lost interest, disappeared off the thread, changed career and someone else has been in and boshed the tree over!

 

:lol:

[Mick Dempsey]

I remember an American posted a picture of a tree and we were still arguing about it two years later!

[Kveldssanger]

I remember an American posted a picture of a tree and we were still arguing about it two years later!

 

As long as you don't bring any Russian football fans into the debate, it's probably something one can handle!

[Mick Dempsey]

Another thread Kveld:001_smile:

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

Another thread Kveld:001_smile:

 

I have a theory.......