Jon Heuch

The system works like this where a felling licence is required and a TPO applies: 1) If you tick the box on the felling licence form, the FC liaises with the LA and the felling licence trumps the TPO, if the felling licence is given. 2) You don't tick the box, so the FC makes the decision without consulting the LA and without taking the TPO into account and any resulting felling licence doesn't trump the TPO. Implement the felling licence in such conditions and you're felling protected tree(s) without permission......we all know the consequences of that. Egg on face for the applicant; no defence for the contractor......if it's as clear cut as above.

Sure does. I have a site where the LA served a woodland TPO (on a woodland) knowing that the site was in their local plan for development purposes. Most of the trees have been cut down as a result.....but the woodland TPO remains and all the landscape trees planted with the development are now covered by the TPO. It's a really silly situation and a great disincentive for planting trees but I expect few people will wake up to the legal reality until it's too late. As for serving new TPOs prior to the tree being planted, you need to look at regulation 3 from 2012 which references the model order at the end of the regulations. Section 4 of the model order covers the situation.

If you think you have clarified what you meant, it hasn't come clearly across! What do you mean? Immortal (biological or otherwise) means "living forever; never dying or decaying". Well, we know trees decay whilst still remaining alive so that is one weakness. Trees don't live forever - can you point me in the direction of single tree that is an example? There are of course some very long lived trees about - some single stem specimens (red woods that are large & have lots of rings). No doubt they are very resilient. There are groves of trees where vegetative regeneration has led to new shoots, whilst the older shoots have decayed. The organism has effectively stayed alive even though older parts have died. Not very common though. Most trees however accumulate dysfunctional tissue. Most of the trees we know in the UK have to generate new tissue for conduction every spring - the older xylem becomes dysfunctional due to embolism. An obvious feature in our countryside is the die back of oak. Quite what causes it is a matter for discussion but the tree cannot support its mass of leaves from the conducting tissue and roots available. I am sure most of us have found completely dead oak trees around. There may be many reasons for death......

>> Well you did raise a red rag to a bull...... What can one tell from a single visit to a tree......probably a lot less than if one has had the benefit of two or more visits with seasons and time intervening, but we are often asked for our opinions and decisions may need to be taken, rightly or wrongly, from individual visits. I don't need to list observations that may suggest a tree is in decline. Dieback from Chalara is an obvious topical one. Dieback doesn't mean it is going to die but it is reasonable, based on current evidence, that more than 50% may die (i.e. more likely than not)…..but it's probably better to wait and see now. Weeping stem wounds on a sickly horse chestnut...….well how long a list do you want? I doubt whether you can justify your statement that trees are immortal....we have very few really old trees and, using your argument, because the environment is constantly changing - whether it be wind, drought, flooding, competition, insects and disease etc. Those old trees that we do have are only a few hundred years old with very very raw exceptions.

It's a bit of a moving target.....things are in development & BGS would prefer you to go through a third party (who currently doesn't exist) who would take out a licence with the BGS and take away the administrative hassle. A cost of as low as £3 was mentioned the last time I talked to them (before Xmas)......until that third party is available (& who would if BGS is willing to offer the same for £3) it's a little up in the air. I would make contact with them and see what they have to say.

Gary That sort of schedule (T2 is so many metres from T1 etc) becomes extremely difficult to work out when trees T4, T5 and T6 have been lost and you want to find T7 (or you don't have access as they are now in separate gardens!

I would forget the telephone, just write to the head of planning (or CEO.....but you will know it will get passed on). If the Council has put their misunderstanding in writing you can attach this. If you really want to wind them up put a FOI request to ask how many such errors has the council made over a certain period......... I have an ever increasing collection of decision notices (and other correspondence) from Councils with very clear mistakes. If I have time I write back informing of their errors and pointing out the consequence of them. I sometimes get an acknowledgement with a suggestion that they will do something about it. Here are some examples: 1) reference to the 1969 regulations (I jest not) in a 2015 decision.....with reference to compensation clauses in the order (i.e. someone hadn't woken up to the 2012 regulations. I have just checked a January 2018 decision notice for the same council......and yes, it still refers to the 1969 regulations! However, they have removed all reference to compensation. 2) statements to say that appeals can be lodged from 8 weeks to 6 months (variable between decision notices but all in 2015). 3) reference to Article 5 certificates (in 2015) Now that more planning officers are dealing with tree work applications the text of some correspondence matches the words for a planning application for development........& that leads to a few problems!

I just wonder how much time is spent finding out details about TPOs. Let's do some back of the envelope calculations (Enrico Fermi style): There are 418 councils in the UK (I may be counting 22 county councils unnecessarily) There were at least 1700 tree surgery firms advertising in Yellow Pages in 2011 covering most of southern England.....we might put that up to 2500-3000 for the whole of the UK. 3000 firms working 200 days a year possibly leads to 300,000 separate jobs (each job 2 days)......so is that 300,000 checks with councils as to whether trees are protected or not? Clearly this is a right back of the envelope calculation but it's not just a few people both seeking the information and councils having to answer..... Those checks will need to go ahead regardless of how the council provides the information......what a waste of time and money if it has to be done manually with a council employee having to search a GIS on the telephone. I am just setting up an auditable TPO search work activity......all via email so we have a trail covering all councils......nightmare!

Gary I've never had this specific problem but I would be happy to provide this information if the council were able and willing to: a) allow a reasonable way to find out whether a tree is protected, or not. b) when the answer to a) is yes then to provide free and ready access to the necessary plans & schedules. If the answer to both is No then they don't get it! If I got what you are getting on a regular basis and provided your client is prepared for the wait I would just appeal the application (yes non validation is a reason for appeal but PINS may not have to accept it) and then seek costs when the appeal is decided. Remember costs from a planning appeal do not have to follow the decision - they are justified on the grounds of being unreasonable. Just get the council to document their demands. I would prefer to go to a hearing rather than the fast track. It's much easier to put your argument forward and to counter anything that is raised face to face. Once the council has a costs decision against it it is likely to think twice before doing it again. An alternative approach is to seek the electronic copy of TPO schedule and plan via FOI/Environmental Regs. There really is no justification for a council not to have all its TPOs scanned as PDFs and readily available. What does the tree officer do to check an incoming tree work application? Do they open the council solicitor's safe and root through several hundred legal orders or do they have some simpler method for checking? The orders may not be downloadable from a council website due to that being a bigger project but this transfer of information really should be on the list of things to do, unless tree officers like to waste their time answering simple questions like "is there a TPO on my property?"

Any pictures you can share?

Going on the course is a beginning - it provides the basic information, shares the pitfalls, highlights the risks and I hope provides you with a greater level of confidence about what you are doing; the new course provides a means of accreditation - it hasn't worked its way through yet so we are still trialling it.....but it's a lot more thorough than it was. Do you need to go on the course to provide such reports? Of course not - there is no minimum qualification for any arboricultural report, & you don't need to have insurance either. If you don't have insurance you are much less likely to be pursued for damages too....so there is something to think about! The lack of minimum standards in providing arboricultural advice is a subject that is "hot" at the moment as there are a lot of duff reports out there. The question is are you being professional? Do you know what you might get wrong, for starters? Will client's suffer.......we simply don't know....and will the trickle of professional indemnity claims develop into something more significant?

Well.....as one of the people who has spent the past year reviewing the syllabus and updating the course handouts I hope you would not offer to provide services without getting some evidence that you are competent to provide them (?) Providing a "template" report will not tell you much about what is required and why you need to be careful about what you say in such a report. As for geology and risk you can start off with the British Geological Viewer at the BGS website and you should be able to get them to produce a risk profile for your site (£10?); alternatively/additionally, try the iGeology and/or the mySoil apps. Landmark do something similar.......but the big question for you is what are you going to do with this information? As for the location of the course this is pretty much on a demand basis - if there is enough demand the course can be held anywhere........find a suitable location, drum up some support and attendees & hey presto the course can be on your doorstep!

I agree 100%....with the world waking up (after Blue Planet II it appears) that plastic pollution is a problem (not just in the seas) perhaps we need to wake up to the fact that planting trees is not always 100% environmentally friendly. What about the stakes and ties that remain for ever, showing that no-one has ever anticipated the need for removal. A year or two ago I sat down with a supplier of these tubes and asked what the procedure is for disposal.....he didn't even have an answer suggesting he hadn't even thought of it. More recently we removed the tubes from an old planting scheme of ours. It is amazing how bulky they are and the fact that you need some form of commercial vehicle to take them off site.

I am afraid there is the norm and then what you actually have for insurance. The norm is this: i) you may have insurance that covers both your building and your contents. In which case you need read no further. ii) you have separate buildings and contents cover (different policies either with the same insurer or with different insurers). In this case your buildings insurer would cover damage to your property but the third party/public liability risk clause is likely to be in your contents insurance. This is not the case with ALL policies but is the norm (or was the last time I looked!). So your tree falling and causing damage/injury to a third party is a matter for your contents insurer. If you don't have contents insurance you don't have insurance to cover this.

Why not?

The simple answer to your question is that what is covered and what is excluded in an insurance contract depends on what is in the contract and how it is phrased. Rather than me just copy you would be as well to look up Act of God on Wikipedia...it gives a good case (flooding) where the possibility of an act of god is the prime reason for you taking out insurance in the first place. With regards to trees falling on buildings your house insurance may cover your house but is less likely to cover your shed; if your tree falls on your neighbour's shed it will be the liability clause in your contents insurance (yes!) that is likely to cover your neighbour's claim and your legal cover that might assist you in fighting any liability if you didn't have contents cover.

Depends on how "unsuitable" they were! Did they have "insurance" & was it the right type of insurance? Well the Cavanagh V Witley & Shepherd judgment is an interesting one......but it doesn't seem to be fully in the public domain yet and it's heading to appeal so I am led to believe. The tree surgeon who apparently is named as one of the parties doesn't exactly come out with a glowing reference from the judge "...deliberately untruthful..." were his words "aided and abetted by his wife...." Strangely this isn't given much attention on his website! However, he didn't have professional indemnity insurance so essentially got away with it, leaving the parish council as tree owner to "hold the can". I wonder whether he will doing much more tree inspection with or without insurance? The outcome: i) a seriously injured person ii) months of uncertainty whilst the case was prepared.....management time diverted to all that preparation iii) a very uncomfortable day or two at court with cross examination, egg on face iv) a permanent record of their performance in court....as above. v) their name indelibly quoted in arboricultural circles to show us what can go wrong Qualifications & experience? It's a difficult one but the PTI course would be a minimum to do this type of work on any regular basis.

Welcome to much of London........

This type of situation is often complex and the only test of importance is whether the building continues to move (& cracks)....or not. A property seller with any gumption will redecorate shortly before the house goes on the market with the hope that the seriousness of the situation can be hidden from view.......but does the redecoration reflect a stable house or something else? In the short term, you have no way of knowing - forget seeking "expert" advice, it won't really be of much use as you will get a range of views. What it might be useful to have in the medium term, but of no use to you now, is level monitoring (3-6 months worth of data) but this will only come to its own when we have a hot dry summer (that's when the property will be tested by the actions of the tree). Your question to this arboricultural forum is whether oak roots will get below 3.3 metres; in natural soil in SE London, the answer is yes but there won't be a huge amount of activity at that depth. In disturbed soil, where a trench has been dug for underpinning, there will have been greater aeration and changed circumstances for root growth. Who knows what impact that will have had on rooting - none of us were there when the trench was dug and refilled - but if the tree is mature and not growing a lot the root growth should not be too vigorous (that's a positive factor). If the tree still has some potential to grow larger, there is a greater chance of the roots growing under the underpinning. Your real challenge will be getting insurance; the current insurer should offer to continue cover which should include "subsidence, landslip and heave". If it doesn't, certainly walk away. If it does, compare the cost of insurance offered against a price comparison website cost for the same property where there is no subsidence reported. You will be stuck with the same insurer & that annual difference for life (or whilst you own the property!) & it could get worse if the subsidence re-occurs. You might be able to get an alternative insurance supplier but that will require a specialist broker (possibly ££££). Next problem:.......(oh dear!): semi-detached house with your property partially underpinned.......a recipe for a disaster. The underpinned part of the property will be relatively stable, the rest (including your neighbour's property attached to yours) will be less stable so may continue to move if the oak roots extend that far...... A key factor will be the location of the tree relative to the two properties. All I can say is proceed with caution and if you do decide to go ahead that the price you pay reflects the issues above; remember, when you want to sell the same questions may be asked, making it more difficult to sell. The only consoling factor I can give is that compensation may be payable by the Council for loss or damage that occurs AFTER they refuse any application to fell in the protected oak in the future (this is a complex timing issue and not a blank cheque for anything that happens). Councils don't give up their cash too willingly, rarely pay 100% of a claim & it typically requires both perseverance and the ability to wait a year or two (or much more) whilst the cogs of justice rotate.....so compensation is very much a consolation prize.

British Geological Viewer (on line) is the easiest source. Search the BGS website for borehole records - they are there in profusion.

Sounds like you need to seek public liability insurance as an ecological consultant.....after all that is what you are doing as a bat inspector. Goggle will give you various options. Won't your tree surgery public liability insurance cover you for aerial inspections? As for what might happen, well there is the person driving a landrover and trailer who landed on the railway line and caused a train accident......the insurance has to cover all trees in all locations & they don't see the numerous low risk situations, only the high risk ones.

I wouldn't state accuracy of a geology map as +/- 20 miles; that suggests that they are accurate but that the position may be out. That is misleading. You have to understand how the data was gathered in the first place (initially just observations from outcrops/road and railway excavations but enhanced by borehole records) and what newer information has been collected that has modified/confirmed findings. Also that sampling can be at very different intensities: thus the whole route of the M25 is well documented from boreholes; go 100 metres away from the M25 and there can be next to nothing, other than from observation of the soil. Considering that materials were dumped by glaciers, rainfall, rivers, sea and man have moved stuff around for a long time there is no reason to suppose that the nice lines of a geology map represent exactly what is around street by street......... As for heave, it is primarily a problem for NHBC where new houses/foundations are constructed on recently cleared land. I wouldn't worry about staged removals for the reasons described. As for whether an old walnut is removed, if the tree has to be removed (or if a tree dies or if it is dangerous) you have little choice - it has to be removed. Make sure the owner has appropriate insurance for heave!

Well Robert, my advice to you is this: if you want to understand the law you firstly have to know what the law is. s.199.......you probably want to start at the Planning Act 2008 s 192(3)........s.199 evaporated then and came into law with the 2012 Regs s.201....Planning Act 2008 s 192(4)......the same So you need to look at Part 2 of the 2012 Regs to work out how the system changed. It is annoying that the legislation.gov.uk website provides access to clauses which are longer valid but if you open up the options under "Changes to legislation" the situation becomes a little clearer. It should make your head hurt less!

ummmmmmmmm.......Tree of Heaven.......ash (not!)

It depends what you are doing - what do you mean by "carried out"? You can view a .dwg or .dxf file (provided from a topo survey or from an architect) in autocad LT, annotate it, and produce a pdf plan; you can underlay a pdf plan if you are smart enough to scale it properly and draw over it and/or produce a plan showing the pdf underlay...... You can take the plan into the field on a tablet with autocad 360 but you might want to use a more arbfocused piece of software. You most certainly don't need to go for the 3D CAD software if you are just starting out.