daltontrees

Verlry low chance of survival. You or the tree. BTW in teh shrinkable clay sense, soil does not mean topsoil. Where there are no superficial deposits (natural ones) then the subsoil is the bedrock. I use the word 'rock in its (literally) loosest sense, since most shrinkable clay rocks would lose out to a pair of scissors in the traditional game.

Aww, someone has attempted a crude coronet cut. Bless!

There is of course no such thing as a retrospective exemption. I think the application is simply a retrospective application for consent, with the unfortunate use of the word' exemption' (should have said 'TPO consent'). And yes it is an admission of guilt, but technically if it gets retrospective consent then there is no prosecutable offence. It still won't be 'exempt' though. I have always said (because it appears to be the correct interpretation of the law) that it is not legally competent to apply for consent for works that are justified by circumstances that make the works exempt. Councils shouldn't even validate such applications. So there's another good reason why this cannot be an application for exemption.

Parts of Bristol are on shrinkable clays. Susceptibility to subsidence is based on your locatwion being on such clays and the foundations being not deep enough to avoid influence of shrinkage and thirsty trees being present. Shrinkage is becuase trees are taking up water from around them, I don't thnk it's practical to put in what would have to be a waterproof barrier to a depth of as much as a couple of metres. If clays are present, not only do you want to avoid subsidence but you want to be able to recover repair costs from an insurer if it does happen. Key point A, get insurance, key point B follow the engineer's advice or you might be in bother later. Or be really brave and check for the existence of shrinkable clays at your exact location. Personally I can't see a magnolia that size being an issue but in the future possibly. Who knows what the foundations are like, it is more likely that the outside levels have been raised than the inside being lowered. Plan C. manage the Magnoia by frequent pruning. I've always found them really difficult to get to heal pruning wounds, there's a gap of about 2 weeks to prune in. Plan D, try pruning and if it destroys the tree then start again by planting in a buried container.

Don't remove the sap. It's gum, part of the tree's defences.

And where is this? When was the house built?

A sad sight.

I am going to guess at Cupressus macrocarpa, Monterey Cypress

That said I would always use a cinched sling. It seems unwise to be left in a situation where you can't unclip or untie the rope to add extra length. The alpine butterfly is a good idea too.

A timber hitch cinches better around a stem (when pulled form above) than a running bowline does. Add a stopper knot to it and there's no way it will work loose.

That's a fallacious argument. Say you had an accident and you hadn't obeyed the Highway Code (which is not law). Your insurer could quite rightly decline to pay out because you could have and should have done something better and safer but didn't, and the accident was the result of that choice or omission.

Yell is dire. I left them a few years ago because the service was atrocious and many mistakes) but they still harangue me, making out as if my listing is still live and just needs upgraded for free, so generous of them. I used to have my website through Moonfruit, which then had to chuck it in because it relied on a program called Flash. Yell bought up all the licenses and said it would transfer the website content to Wix for free. Then it said no editing would be allowed for 4 months. Then it lost my website, deleted it completely. I only found out because a potential client called me, said he got my numebr off someone but couldn't find my website to check me out. Website had been gone for nearly 2 months! Who knows how much business I lost? So I paid someone local to do me and host me a new website. Then Yell started pestering me for website hosting fees. Then appointed a debt collection agency to pursue me and threated court action. 20 letters I got. I think they have finally given up. Total amateurs. Can I coin a new word for the english language? "Cuntrustworthy".

2 things. The Access to Neighbouring Land Act only applies to England & Wales. Court will only grant access if (among other things) it is satisfied "that they cannot be carried out, or would be substantially more difficult to carry out, without entry" to the neighbour's land. In theory if an accident happened or damage was done that could have been avoided by obtaining a court order for access, there might be repercussions. Either way, don't delay.

That's not true. Given time I could possibly explain quantum mechanics or relativity, but it would be impossible to do it simply and to do it justice at the same time. Sometimes the explanation is that it's complicated and that there isn't a simple explanation. Have I made myself clear? Your statement is therefore patently untrue, although trying for a simple explanation is usually worthwhile if trying to reach a wider audience, knowing that you will bore or provoke those who want a deeper understanding or who itch to dig you up for your sweeping generalisations. Or oversimplification, as it's known. Internet fora thrive on it. Someone will be reaching right now for the keyboard to point out that 'fora' as a plural of 'forum' is antiquate and is discriminating against those who did not study latin. The appeal to ignorance is the stalwart of the keyboard warrior. So very f****** tiresome. I don't think the Plain English campaign would like the use of 'thus avoiding Pierrepoint', by the way. DOes it have any relevance to whether AA Approved status is good or bad?

Fab resource, thanks.

ooft, that's a loty of Kd for a top-heavy walnut. Electricity substation in the background. Walnut seems to carry on for ages when there's not a lot left but Kd takes no prisoners. Is that more Kd at the right just beside the clipboard behind the ivy? Looks about ready to snap... If you reduce it so much that there are no targets left but grass, could keep to the bitter end, which with that much crown removed won't be to long. OR remove completely, salvage as much wood as possible and replant. Good thing about Walnut's aggressive allelopathy is that it clears the whole area of competing vegetation, but if you remove and replant you might want to leave a season until the juglone in the soil breaks down. Otherwise it could impede establishment of new planting. I have no evidence base for that except that Walnut really is fabulous at excluding everything else around it.

PT Mapper.

I used QCAD (not for surveys but general CAD work and fiel conversion), moved to LibreCAD which I found to be pretty poor, so went back to QCAD. About 30 euros I recall. Great wee programme but a tad slow somtimes and spits the dummy at 50Mb, sometimes less than that.

It's a fight you can't win. Every Laburnum htat I have attended that has been ill has had this orange bark. Which means the bark is dead. There's a long list of possible culprits, notably Phytophthora. So it could be manifestation of root rot. Or in your case it could be bark death caused by compression of wood against bark at those ugly looking forks. Looks like a mature tree, at a goodly age for a Laburnum. They only last a few decades. They're rarely a risk even when they are jsut about dead, so I'd say don't prune of fstuff until completely dead and de-barked. Soil drainage might be the main issue. Give it good hard shoogle, if it moves then I suspect root rot.

Quitre right, I thought I had said that. 10kN=1 tonne.

Someone was fined £150k a couple of years ago for one TPO'd tree removed illegally. The systems are only as good as the resourcing that's put in to enforcing them.

The answer is yes, but use a screwgate krab and just check that it isn't cross-loaded. This assumes both ropes have a spliced eye. In this configuration everything is being used exactly as designed and the strength limit is that of the weakest component. 3kN ropes and krabs (i.e 3 tonnes) are standard and you'd need to eat a lot of pies before you would be worrying about strength limits.

A novel concept, the 'revenge TPO'.

Not really grey, the legislation is completely clear. As the Stones sang "You can't always get what you want". Now I've got that song stuck in my head for the rest of the day...

If you make a CA notification, the Council can only prevent felling by making a TPO. It can state that it will make a TPO unless the notification is withdrawn, as a way of negotiating a re-notification for a lesser extent of works. It can say if it thinnks tha the notice is invalid (if the works haven't been clearly specified, or the plan is inadequate). But it can't object on principle and then use that as a way of preventing the works.