daltontrees

Have a look at the attached chart of hybrids. Not even a complete list. Dirty stop-outs, the lot of them. willow hybrids.pdf

Looks pure goat. But it's a messy genus.

Almost 100% it's goat willow (salix caprea)

British Mycological Society has recently been discussing various Phaeolus finds on Sorbus. Incidentally, Sorbus intermedia has recently been reclassified as Scandosorbus intermedia.

No-one can answer this completely. Perhaps there is just a vague fear of shrinkable clay issues. For heave, there is such a combination of factors that ALL have to be present that it is statistically unlikely. If the surveyor is in possession of all the facts (geology, foundation depths, history, tree species/age/distances) nothing we can say is of any use. If he isn't, then we don't have the facts and nothing we can say is of any use.

If you pass your PTI you might be in a for a bit of a shock when you start doing surveys, its a bit like passing your driving test then getting into a car on your own and straight onto a busy motorway. The question is what are you doing surveys for? If it is risk surveys then alll you fundamentally need is a dot to show where the tree is and maybe a splodge to show where groups are. Millions of chap ways of doing that. If you're doing development surveys , anything short of CAD mappig with accurate protrayal of posiiton, 4 way crown spread and root protecton areas will be worse than useless. For a start, the client will usually send you a CAD site plan to use and to add your data to. There is an interpla between how cheap your maps are, how good they are, how easy to use in the field, how easy in teh office, and how helpful they are to clients. You coud steal OS mapping from the internet, print it out, take it on a clipboard and mark trees with a pen. At the other end of the spectrum you can buy or use CAD OS or topo survey drawings, put them on a GPS device, plot accurately in the field with facilites to record heights diameters etc, take these to office and download and present in reports and export modified CAD to client. The latter is best and most expensive but also most effcient and most useful to client, but the initial set-up costs only pay dividends after several uses. I use PT Mapper, QCAD and Pocket GIS and I am probably at the equivalent of £1 a report by now.

Depends what software you are using. OS Vectormap in CAD is dirt cheap but lacks fine detail, I have used it for large rural estates. Mastermap usually out of the question for anything big.

High Hedges bring out the worst.

Sorry to be a pain , but have you got the right legislation there? 1986 Act only allowed for restocking on conviction.

The phrase "simmering resentment" comes to mind. No-one likes a freeloader.

Getting into specifics here without the relevant dimensions. Private message sent.

That's never going to work. All bits of the 'hedge' are going to affect all 3 properties, not just the bits on their boundary.. There will be a single speciefication that gives all at least the minimum daylighting. Some will exceed it. Property 4 may not wish to lose any more than absolutely necessary. It's inevitable that property 4 has to invite opinions then offer a compromise single solution with or without requirements for contributions. If all agree, good. If just one refuses, do nothing.

The legislation is different in different parts of the UK. The deciduous content can have only one of a few effects on the outcome. Firstly if they are the majority of the hedge, it doesn't qualify for a High Hedge notice, no matter how bad the shade. Secondly if it is a high hedge the deciduous content will give the neighbour some relief from shade in the winter. This can be significant but will not be percevied as such, especially for sunlight. Thirdly if there is a high hedge notice it most certainly can be part of the actions to have it reduced. It is the effect on enjoyment that matters, not that it is deciduous. Which way it goes is matter of degree. Mostly to do with height. It's not a binary decision. Mixed hedges are impossible to predict. The HHLL calculation is not appropriate for most situations and makes no sense for partly deciduous hedges. It is possible to split the assessment, for example assess only the laurels and ignores trees amongst them. Rather poorly written legisaltion, badly written guidance and generally poor understanding of the technical issues by Councils and Reporters. Bit of a lottery really.

What country are you in?

That growth is Cerioporus squamosus. Yes decay has set in. Early days and not a fast mover. Maybe a decade or so before structrual integrity is compromised. Worrying about tree decay is pointless, you can't stop it. Worrying about harm or damage to people or property is a different matter. You haven't given any context, so the risk can't be assessed.