Jon Heuch

News | Corpus Christi College | Corpus Christi College TinyURL.com - shorten that long URL into a tiny URL Sad news. Jon

Phytophthora lateralis survey You don't need to be an AA member to get involved. If you have found any lawson cypress (not leylandii) that are looking a bit sick can you provide some details on this survey? There are links on the AA website for more information on the disease. If you have already removed the diseased trees you can still report them as we are attempting to find out where the disease is. Tell your friends - it will be open until the end of March 2015. Thanks!

I assume you are interested in maximising the value of the property but the TPO amongst other planning matters creates uncertainty over current market value? Many developers cope with type of situation by purchasing an option over the property. If planning permission is granted the existing owner gets a higher price and if no planning permission is granted the developer can walk away or purchase at a reduced price. Both seller and purchaser get a better deal, as long as both can wait while the planning process proceeds. You need a lawyer and preferably an experienced developer who understands this type of arrangement.

I started to write a paper to answer the question "What is a tree?" once. It started with a quote: “...answers are best found when the question itself is well put. ‘What is...?’ doesn’t normally provide a good prompt. It usually leads you headlong into hair-splitting disputes about the meanings of words” Bellos D (2011) Is that a Fish in Your Ear? The Amazing Adventure of Translation. Penguin Books. 390 pps. The quote gives you some idea of the quagmire you will get in when you try to define the word "tree". If you want to explore where the question "What is a tree?" leads you I suggest you look at Philip Wilson's Arb Terminology book or the recent short snippet he published in Arb News (not the most recent one but the one before) which had a What is a tree? title I think. Is a palm tree a tree? It depends how you define the word "tree", doesn't it? It clearly is in common parlance - you really would get yourself in knots if you tried to argue it was not. If however you want to define a tree as a woody plant, you need to define what you mean by wood and then assume that your palm tree doesn't produce wood.....which I am led to believe is one of these assumptions that is now not considered strictly true (some palms do actually have secondary thickening....which produces wood.......do you see the slippery slope above the quagmire, yet?) Jon

How much as in how cheaply can you do it? 1and1: buy a domain name: £1.99 per year for a .co.uk URL Buy a instant website package....a few pounds per month Enter and manage the content yourself - you only need a few pages to get your message across. Add automated SEO and with a little understanding of what you need to put into the content to get a reasonable ranking you will be away. For the key phrases I want people to find me on I am still on the first page of Google and have done very little on my website for 5 years. If you're spending more than £100-150 per year you may be spending more than you need to. Jon

The judgment is available to all from the baillii website. https://tinyurl.com/kno42gp The judgment does have some interesting comments (professional arboriculturalist or tree surgeon?) but also a useful summary of a landowner's duty that I will think we will see again, even it doesn't provide a legal precedent: From a tree surgery point of view the issue seemed to be whether the tree surgeon had undertaken an inspection or not, and the duty of the tree surgeon under contract to undertake limited work. 67 "there is no obligation to call in an expert to examine trees, unless there is reason to believe that they may be unsafe" 68 "Accordingly, I consider that the principles relating to a landowner's duty in respect of trees can be summarised as follows: (a) The owner of a tree owes a duty to act as a reasonable and prudent landowner (Caminer); (b) Such a duty must not amount to an unreasonable burden (Lambourn) or force the landowner to act as the insurer of nature (Noble). But he has a duty to act where there is a danger which is apparent to him and which he can see with his own eyes (Brown); © A reasonable and prudent landowner should carry out preliminary/informal inspections or observations on a regular basis (Micklewright and the first instance cases noted in paragraph 66 above); (d) In certain circumstances, the landowner should arrange for fuller inspections by arboriculturalists (Caminer, Quinn). This will usually be because preliminary/informal inspections or observations have revealed a potential problem (Micklewright, Charlesworth and Percy), although it could also arise because of a lack of knowledge or capacity on the part of the landowner to carry out preliminary/informal inspections (Caminer). A general approach that requires a close/formal inspection only if there is some form of 'trigger' is also in accordance with the published guidance referred to in paragraphs 53-55 above. (e) The resources available to the householder may have a relevance (Leakey) to the way in which the duty is discharged." Paras 88 + ..tree surgeon or professional arboriculturalist ?.. well that will get the chattering classes going! Paras 99+...duty to warn..some interesting comments. Jon

You might want to dwell on the first two words of Mynors 3.2.3...."Perhaps paradoxically..." for it's just not that simple - one owner or two? There may be a difference between "ownership" and "rights". If the tree is owned by one neighbour with no dispute the roots of that tree can cause a nuisance to the next neighbour - the tree roots belong to the tree owner. If the tree is considered to be under joint ownership, possibly as a result of it growing across the boundary line the affected party might find it difficult to claim the tree was causing a nuisance if he also claimed part ownership or was told he was the part-owner. Who owns the tree roots growing under the ground of the affected party if the tree grows over the boundary? Surely ownership of the tree roots can't suddenly change as the tree stem grows over the magical boundary line?

of the highest level? firstly you need to consider what subject areas you are competent in and how you gain competence in them. It's normally a mixture of qualifications and experience. Experience should be under the guidance of someone who is competent themselves. That's why most professions ask for two years or more experience in a firm of qualified people. That makes it difficult for most arborists on the tools for they're gaining experience but not really in the right areas for consultancy. Useful experience all the same. My advice would be a) seek higher level qualifications as you can afford financially and as time allows b) seek work under the wing of more experienced people. You will gain confidence and then have a reasonable idea of when you can be a consultant but inevitably you will need to invest in software, equipment and business tools so a bit of cash helps too!

Are you plotting density or number of seedlings found at the distances plotted? Either you're not, or you've labelled your y axis incorrectly. I presume your question is: what statistical test do I apply to show that one graph is different from the other? And your specific question, if you really want an answer suggests that you want to normalise both graphs, as you're interested in the rate of reduction from a peak. However, since both graphs have significant outliers (even if you have removed them from Fig 12) which define the peak, I would use a bit of common sense first before attempting to hide behind statistical analysis. Why the outliers? Is your data saying anything at all, or have you chosen a site/picked up data that confounds variables?

Two different processes - an area order is legal for all its faults; it is an AREA order i.e. defined by the area. the CA issue provides one with a defence i.e. if you were to be prosecuted. If you can show you have followed the procedure you have a defence. That defence specifically states you have to be able to identify the tree on which you intend to work. Hiding the tree you want to work on as a needle in a haystack of trees would go at least against the spirit of the law but might have to be matched with an area order TPO if it went to the limit. Bear in mind that Area orders are frowned up for the very reason that prosecution presents some difficulties

I suggest you don't give any more legal advice - cutting down a protected tree will lead to a criminal offence; tort involves injuries between two members of the public - a civil matter.

The situation between insurance and legal liability is different. Typically a houseowner may have two different insurance policies - one for contents and one for his/her own property. They cover different things, and of course some people have both with the same company. The property insurance covers just that - your property; in many cases the shed, walls etc are not covered by this, but may be for example if subsidence affects both main property and shed/walls. If your tree falls over and damages YOUR property the property insurer may pay for repair to YOUR property but not neighbours. Your contents insurance typically has a third party liability aspect - but it will depend on the nature of the policy. If the property owner has no contents insurance he has no third party insurance. It is this insurance that covers claims from subsidence from neighbours, just as it covers claims for trees falling over and damaging neighbour's property. It has nothing to do with forseeability or negligence and the policy may be invalid if negligence could be proven i.e. the tree owner should have done something and thus the insurer states that the owner is not insured for that peril. As for legal liability, I once interviewed a property owner whose garage (& car) was demolished by an estate owned tree (large lime) that fell in the 1987 storm (i.e. the tree was on the edge of the estate and of little concern to the estate owner). The estate owner refused to have anything to do with it and told the old man to arrange for the tree to be removed by themselves, at their own expense. Such tree owners do exist! 3 days at least he was stuck in his house before he could get anyone to look at it. A tree owner has not duty to invoke his insurance, but if he fails to inform an insurer of a risk and then later attempts to make a claim he is likely to be sent packing. So the above tree owner might think "act of god" - I can ignore, only to find a claim against him once the facts are gathered...which the insurance company will walk away from. So such an approach is risky.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/tree-preservation-orders-guidance Tony's link is to the public booklet, not the Blue Book. It comes in two parts - the old one and the addendum

) the LA will write back and say please identify the tree - read T&CP Act 1990 211(3)(a) "that he served notice of his intention to do the act in question (with sufficient particulars to identify the tree) on the local planning authority in whose area the tree is or was situated". A basic aspect of this is to give the address at which the tree is located - and if there is more than one tree at a particular address then one would need to identify each tree on which work is planned. If one were to list, say, 100 properties and identify 100 trees - one in each property (or some combination) and include the tree you wanted to cut down then you would present the LA with a problem that they could only resolve (as in preventing any of the trees' removal) with a TPO. ii) if you have identified the tree then your strategy seems to have no merit - a similarly listed TPO would cover it - in the circumstances an Area TPO could be justified; if you have not then you have no defence, and the Council may or may not point this out in a letter before you cut the tree down.

You'll probably guarantee a large legal bill for the tree surgeon when they/you get prosecuted! i) the LA will write back and say please identify the tree - read T&CP Act 1990 211(3)(a) "that he served notice of his intention to do the act in question (with sufficient particulars to identify the tree) on the local planning authority in whose area the tree is or was situated" ii) if you have identified the tree then your strategy seems to have no merit; if you have not then you have no defence, and the Council may or may not point this out in a letter before you cut the tree down.

i) do you have professional indemnity insurance and does your insurer know that they are covering you for writing reports? If no to either the little bit of extra money you may get from writing a report may be gobbled up some time later by the legal bills if things go wrong. Is the risk worth it? ii) be clear on what advice you are being asked for. Clarify it, write it down and pass it back to your client for their agreement. Are you confident that a) you can provide that advice and b) if you passed your report in front of another consultant they would agree with you (in broad terms)? That includes what you don't write in your report just as much as what you do, so omissions from your report can be just as important as anything you commit to paper. ii) what are the risks if you get it wrong? how bad could it get? The less letters you have after your name the less seriously you will be taken and the less likely you are to be sued so you might get away with it....there is logic in this argument but the explanation is too long to write it out here. Just a few things to think about! Jon

AA, ISA, CAS, RFS, ICF...and if you do other things there are other trade and professional bodies to join....BALI, IEEM etc etc. You could spend significant sums keeping abreast with them all. Some competition is good but few of the "tree" organisations are of a sufficient size to provide a complete range of services needed. The AA/ISA overlap is perhaps the most obvious area where there is some room for consolidation...something that is easier to say than achieve to date. Not through lack of trying. The two bodies need to be given clear feedback from members as to what members want. A forum such is this (open, transparent) is a useful means for helping this process. Jon

First time here but yes, we are listening and others have been made aware of comments made both on this thread and others. Feedback, positive or negative, is always welcome but if it's criticism that's offered, it's useful to make it constructive criticism i.e. rather than just stating a problem, try to identify a way forward or solution. Jon Heuch, Director/Trustee AA:wave: