combined tree services

i know a guy using on to move static caravans and he has put it up for sale and has gone back to using his old u1000 , he says the sprinter engine is most of what letts it down when towing , oh and that the lack of power does not help when towing off road

from what i have heard from western power they are not all that guttsy and not overly great off road , what are you thinking of fitting on the front/back and how off road do you need to go ? Personally i would look at a u5000 , nice bit of kit !!!!!!!

can you not leave one of the trucks in the yard for the utility co ? thats what we tend to do if we are working away

I thought it read that you though it was a load of tosh tat you can get a shock from lv through a tree . Also your network guidelines will comply with G55/2 thus meaning that at no point should you be in a position of cutting open wire lv where there is an imediate risk of shock .

sorry to burst your bubble but it is pretty easy to get a shock from 240 volts , i have been on sigh when this has happened .

As far as im aware no where is it stated that the use of a top handled saw one handed is banned , in fact i seem to remember reading that the only time that it should be considered is when a work position can not be achieved safely without the use of one hand

imo tree work is as dangerous as you want it to be , es years ago the money was a bit better but then climbers were pretty thin on the ground , now colleges are turning out hundreads per year .

cheeky git

yeah all sounds about right , i dont know why i has 2.8 in my head for firewood !! Have you ever used or seen a Vimek 606 mini forwarder in action ? if so what are your opinions ?

i guess we will have to wait and see what happens . I have just been looking on line to refresh my memmory on cuting lengths and diamiters but can not find anything for the life of me , i once knew the basics but i guess its one of thos things that if you dont use if regularly you tend to forget !!! lol must be the age too !!

something like this ? Mitsubishi 4x4's Go Into Action With The Environment Agency

this is part of the reason that i want to try and get into the smaller plantations where a harvester is not an option , ha also because i dont have one lmao , but with a bit of luck the hand cut timber should stay pretty steady when it comes to £

I guess thats not to bad considdering the demmand for timber at the moment , i wonder how long it will be before prices start to drop off a little

my other halfs young bro has just got a 4x4 , he got a shogun pinni , and in all honesty its not too bad for what it is , just be carefull insuring a 4x4 it aint cheep !!

have you a snow plough lined up for your new wee mog ?

what are the soft wood prices like up there Andy ?

hmmm well sell the timber trailer to me and get a smaller tractor lmao . there was a half decent looking ford on fleabay under forestry if it helps but not sure how much it was up for .

im not aware of a vertical limmit in relation to trees , yes withing the town and county planning rules there are when it comes to construction but i may be wrong

Never the less , willfuly cutting a tree back to such extent it causes the demise of the tree resulting in the death and or failure of the tree would still be classed as criminal dammage . i have had to deal with such action for clients and reccomended legal action should be taken . on overhanging branch does not constitute trespass in any way shape or form , it has not entered your propperty it is simply using airspace over your property to which you do not have any ownership of as far as i am aware .

hmmm that does sound rather attractive to me

you would have been better off with the insa turbo special track

I will contact Jack at merrist wood tomorrow and see if he would be so kind to forward me some examples of such cases in which he has has to stand as exper witness . I hear what you saying huck but truth is that if you were to cut one side off of a boundary tree and it does fail with the most dire circustances being that some is killed do you honestly think that the owners legal team will not knock on your door ? Im pretty sure if it was one of ust that this happened too we would all be out to see the culpret in court for knowingly imballence a tree thus aiding it the trees failing , It does not have to be that the tree fails purely because the tree has been cut back to the boundary and a gale of wind blows it over , there could be many more contributing factore that have not been considdered . For example the tree has a large pocket of decay on the other sider of the boundary that you had not seen because you did not have access to the owners property , the person your working for had some construction works carried out a year or so ago to build a new garden wall ttand the roots were dammaged in the process by the building contractor etc etc the list of options goes on and on , i do not believe that any court in the land would look and say that it was no my falt that the tee had blown over because i had cut one side off of the tree , Be assured there are no shortage of consultants that would give evidence to prove this . This may help to clarify my above rant lmao Visual Tree Assessment (VTA) A tree is a self-optimising mechanical structure (Mattheck and Breloer 1994 *). A generating system which reacts to mechanical and physiological stresses by growing more vigorously to re-enforce weak areas, while depriving less stressed parts. This precept is described by Claus Mattheck as the axiom of uniform stress. An understanding of the axiom of uniform stress allows an Arborist to make informed judgements about the condition of a tree. Claus Mattheck introduced a biomechanically based system of visual tree assessment (VTA), which uses the reactive nature of tree growth. The basis behind VTA is the identification of symptoms, which the tree produces in reaction to a weak spot, or area of mechanical stress. Although, Claus Mattheck stresses the limitations of this system by saying; "We can use VTA to state to what extent a defective tree is at greater risk of breaking, compared with a completely sound one. However, since nature’s principle of lightweight structures allows a natural failure rate to occur even without defects, there can be no absolute guarantee of safety." It is essential that any arborist using VTA has a broad range of experience of different tree species, as individuals and in groups, to enable them to make informed and reasoned decisions about ‘tree safety’.

some of the above my clarify thisng a little but i will endevour to find a specific case that i remember reading about

Tree law As an arborist it is important to be aware of the legal constraints or precedents set within the legal system with regard to trees. Clients in turn can be made aware of them and can then take appropriate action. There is no statutory definition of a tree, the best a High Court could come up with was: A tree is anything that one ordinarily would call a tree. Common Law - this is made by decisions in court called judgements. These judgements set precedents. Trees can often be a cause of dispute, common issues include: Trees & boundaries, light, overhanging branches, poisonous trees, views, nuisance, negligence. Focus is directed onto WHO HAS RESPONSIBILITY OR DUTY to look after the land / tree. Tree Ownership Trees grow wherever the conditions permit, they have no comprehension of boundaries. Boundaries are not always clearly defined. A fence, hedge or wall does not always delineate a true boundary. English Law recognises that there are many types of land ownership: Freeholders, tenants, lease’s, covenants, custodians, highways, crown, Forestry Commission, Parochial Church Council, Local Authorities, County Councils etc The basic principle is :Any plant, regardless of type, is part of the land in which it stands, whether deliberately planted or self-seeded. The plant belongs to the owner of the soil surrounding the base of the stem. Trees and boundaries A has no responsibility to prevent branches growing into B’s land. A has no obligation to clear leaves that fall onto B’s land. B can prune branches back to the boundary. (as long as it is done from B’s land) B does not have to give prior notice. (would be polite and neighbourly to do so though) A or B may not enter each others land without consent. If B were to prune the tree in such a way that the tree became unstable, B could be liable in the event of the tree falling and causing injury or damage. Debris & arisings from the tree belongs to A. (and should be offered back) Fruit trees: A owns all the fruit in the tree and on the ground on their land and B’s land. A has no obligation to remove the fallen fruit from B’s land. A cannot enter B’s land to collect the fruit without B’s consent. B will be committing theft if they take A’s fruit without consent. If B placed a greenhouse under the falling fruit of A’s tree then its B’s own problem. Tree roots: Tree roots do not respect boundaries. Roots crossing boundaries may be cut back. The tree owner may have a claim against the neighbour if the tree dies or falls as a result of cutting. This is the most simplistic explanation of common law rights, complications arise when tree roots and branches cross boundaries and cause damage, wether direct or indirect, or when trees fail and cause damage. In common law, direct or indirect damage caused by a tree could be known as an actionable nuisance which would come under ‘The Law of Tort’ ie: A civil wrong or injury arising out of an act or failure to act, independently of any contract, for which an action for damages may be brought. The essential factor in determining liability for nuisance is - wether the damage is of such a kind as a reasonable person should have foreseen it. The most important piece of legislation a tree owner should be aware of is - ‘The Owners & Occupiers Liability Act 1957 & 1984’ this concerns a tree owners ‘Duty of Care’. The person responsible for any tree has a duty, known in law as ‘duty of care’ to take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which they can reasonably foresee would be likely to cause harm The duty is owed to occupiers, visitors and (as amended in 1984) trespassers of: -Neighbouring land -Those using ‘highway’ land -Land under contract -Property Whilst trees are not in themselves dangerous things, their owner has a duty to others to ensure that they are not endangered by his / her negligence. Negligence may be described as omitting to do what a prudent or reasonable person would do, or doing what a prudent or reasonable person would not do. Where one fails to take any necessary action or undertake any action, resulting in harm to people, animals or property, and if that harm is foreseeable then you may be found negligent. Negligence may include: - Failing to have trees inspected on a regular basis. - Omitting to remedy a problem that has been draw to ones attention. - Failing to identify a foreseeable problem during an inspection. - Undertaking incompetent pruning. - Destabilising a tree by root severance. A tree owner is not expected to have the knowledge of a qualified arboriculturist, but is expected to appoint a competent person to act on their behalf. One would not be found negligent in the event of an ‘Act of God’: - Failure of a tree after being subject to a ‘reasonably careful inspection’ and appropriate action had been taken - Failure of a tree as a result of a disease or weakness that would not have been visible on a proper examination - Failure of a tree as a result of exceptionally severe weather Statute Law – law of the sovereign power & made by acts of parliament Statute Law Legislation includes: The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 – Tree preservation orders. Trees in conservation areas Forestry Act 1967 – Felling licences Highways Act 1980 – Trees and highways Plant Health Act 1967 – Import & export of plant material Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 – Protection of wild animals Countryside Rights of Way Act 2000 – Greater protection of SSSI’S & AONB’s Hedgerow regulations 1997 – Protection of hedgerows Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 Control of Pesticides Regulations 1986 Owners & occupiers liability Act 1957 & 1984 – Duty of Care Neighbouring Land Act 1992 – Court orders for rights to access when dealing with dangerous trees Miscellaneous provisions Act – The Local Authority’s power to deal with dangerous trees on private Land

never the less huck , it thi day in age it is expected that a tre surgeon should have enough knowlege that causing an imballence by removing half of the trees crown is not acceptable and that you are leaving a potential risk , this has been proven several times over in several courts throughout the country , this is simple law and is taught to ten week students at merrist wood and was explained in depth by Jack Kenyon when i was there in 2003/2004 . gone are the days of carrying out such works that end in the failure of a tree and nothing happening to the tree surgeon .