daltontrees

And none of this mayhem applies to Scotland. I can't stand even looking to see the situation for Northern Ireland.

The Legislation website does not even have the Regulations as enacted, just the draft undated version. I cannot find any published dated version, stating when the Regulations come into effect.

Sorry, I misunderstood. The Regulations can't change primary legislation but I didn't appreciate that the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 gave the Sec of State powers to change any Act that specifies fines. This has not shown up on the Legislation website yet. Which is quite worrying. Ignorance of the law is not a defence, but how is a member of society to know where he stands? The 1990 Act seems now the be as follows - "210 Penalties for non-compliance with tree preservation order. (1) If any person, in contravention of a tree preservation order— (a) cuts down, uproots or wilfully destroys a tree, or (b) wilfully damages, tops or lops a tree in such a manner as to be likely to destroy it, he shall be guilty of an offence. (2) A person guilty of an offence under subsection (1) shall be liable on summary conviction, or on conviction on indictment, to a fine. (3) In determining the amount of any fine to be imposed on a person convicted of an offence under subsection (1), the court shall in particular have regard to any financial benefit which has accrued or appears likely to accrue to him in consequence of the offence. (4) If any person contravenes the provisions of a tree preservation order otherwise than as mentioned in subsection (1), he shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale." Apologies again for confusion.

Seriousness. Everything heard by High Court (or english Crown Court) is indictment. Magistrates/Sherrifs/Justices of Peace can hear cases on indictment, but more usually deal with lesser crimes by summary conviction following pleadings. I've never understood it properly, because I've never seen it explained well enough.

So am I.

That was the point I was making to Jon Heuch, the Regulations only apply to Summary Convictions, so there's no point looking there for proof that fines can be unlimited. The lack of upper limit for fines comes from the Act, and can only arise from Indictment. Regardless what the Regulations say, the Act still limits penalties for Summary Conviction. It's a lot simpler than everyone seems to think.

The Act still limits the fine on summary conviction. It's fines on indictment that are unlimited. The fines on summary convition are further subdivided into those that cause or are likely to cause destruction of the tree and those lesser offences such as topping or lopping. Whoever distils it into English will have to distil it into Scots too, because we have different legislation, we have sherrifs instead of magistrates, procurators fiscal instead of crown prosecutors etc. etc.

I was involved in one a couple of months ago, the police caught him at it, it went to sherrif court, reparation had to be paid (which is what I did a report for) and he got 150 hours community service and apparently misssed getting a custodial sentence by a bohair.

I thnk you can get a waterproof Otterbox for it, might get over the temperature an delicacy problem too.

You'll regret it!

Junos are OK but a bit false accurate. Never used SC, not much use to me as it is not waterproof, won't work in the cold and is too delicate (I drop my Geo at least twice a day). Only 5 metres accuracy or precision, OK for finding out roughly where you are but unless you are snapping to trees on a topo plan the plotting won't be accurate enough to create a tree plan overlay for architects and the like. Cheap though... I don't think it works with Pocket GIS, which is what I use. Would need a TerraSync license and software. Maybe worth asking Pear if they could set you up?

Ok, I shall dingy the TRAQ/QTRA thing for now, having just signed up for CAS based on PTI. I'll see what the requirements for valuation accreditaiton are, but I suppose there will be some requirement for an assessed CTLA course, even though I could (and unfortunately sometimes involuntarily do) do valuations in my sleep.

Aye, best 'split' longitudinally with a chainsaw. Or binned. Been there, spent mos tof the time hammering wedges back out of the rings, in to the hilt but ring showing no sign of giving up.

I suppose that brings me neatly back to my earlier reference to teh definition in the Standard "3.3 arboriculturist -person who has, through relevant education, training and experience, gained expertise in the field of trees in relation to construction." Expert is a strong word, but if it equates to 'expertise' I think that's a reasonable test of whether someone should be undertaking 5837 surveys unassisted. The word 'and' I think is important, if it meant to say 'or' or 'and/or' it would have done so.

Booked.

Just got a copy on eBay for £3.90, yeehah! Just going back online to look for a cheap copy of 'Book shelves and their reinforcement'...

I'd say Birch too, those bands (which I think nare called lenticel bands) are quite characteristic of some species including birch but I wouldn't asssociate them with Poplar. Colour is'nt a ideal clue, but again I'd go with Birch. If' as David says, therre's no Cherry currently or recently nearby. Because they do look cherry-like.

Sad but true!

Oh my Lord, I clean forgot. Will try and remember to book tomorrow.

I'm sure it'll make us all better people. Me, I wasn't doing anything else more interesting today...

Shereen Nanjiani, minor celebriy scottish newsreader and more famously the origin of scottish rhyming slang for a person of questionable judgement? Also part of female anatomy, as in "She gied her a boot in the Shereen, an' legged it".

Nah not really, it's a bit distant from the current consultation subject. But onthe otehr hand if TDAG wants to know if the planning system is working and if not why not, the whole issue of inadequate resourcing of LA tree remits is the herd of elephants in the room.

Lucky you, I usually get a blank stare, or an embarrased silence a the end of the phone as the planner vaguely begins to remember that they were/are meant by law periodically to review their TPOs.

I don't misunderstand you, Tom, I'm just trying to address generalisations for the benefit of the OP. The pressure to bend the truth is ALWAYS there, and there's some right Shereens out there who don't resist it and are even all too fast to suggest to a client how it can be bent. Not you obviously... There's another analogy witht he legal profession that might be applicable here, and that is the role of the expert witness in court proceedings. Although appointed by one of the parties the expert becomes answerable to the court and any partisan leanings will be straightened up sharpish by the judge. And I think I have mentioned before on Arbtalk that I make my tricky decisions under a momentary imaginary cross-examination. I tell you what I really do agree with you on. Anyone using their role as a 5837 categoriser to protect trees contrary to the plain facts is all wrong. Straight down the middle is where to aim. Let the system take it from there (even if it then gets lost in the long long grass).

Get your consultation response in, Gaz. Don't educate, put up barriers. That's the only way that really works.