daltontrees

Maybe, but what a joyless, sterile, grim world that would be. My fees add to cost but this is more than outweighed by the value that is added.

Thanks all, I will get some 10mm, try it at a few lengths with a VT and if it works I'll get a Teufelberger E2E.

I stand corrected. Much sharpening saved there.

Not true, the Barratt box I am currently reluctantly calling home has at least 6 inches of soil on top of the rubble.

Different experiences. I represent just about every volume house builder in the country and have a good constructive rapport with most of the TOs. Somehow we manage to get about 5,000 units a year squeezed in amongst the trees.

I want to start using my hitch climber which I have had for yonks but never bothered with. I climb on chunky 13mm ropes and am used to a swabisch hitch for general occasional DdRT. I now only really do climbing surveys for bats and risk. What would be a good eye to eye to use with 13mm and hitch climber, and what knot? There seem to be loads available at a range of prices from £10 to 50. First time I tried a 8mm and distel and ended up on the ground at walking pace, quite unsettling. Tried this week with someone elses kit and the VT kept failing to bite because it couldn't slide past the krab. I expect the hitch and e2e should end up being quite short to ease tending, but it's all a bloody mystery to me. Any quick advice welcome.

Cheap metal detectors are crap. You need at least one that allows you to adjust the sensitivity, as dense wet wood may be hard to penetrate. And of course for it to be of any practical use in avoiding wrecked chains it needs to be precise too. Maybe look at one of the multi detectors that builders use to detect pipes, wires, studs etc. in walls? That at least gives you a chance of direction being quite narrow. If I couldn't pin down the location of a nail well enough to avoid hitting it, I'd rather not know it's there, otherwise you're just waiting for that sickening impact as you plough through a vague foot length that has something metal somewhere in it. Like russian roulette. This looks good. Bosch Professional GMS 120 Multi Detector | Wickes.co.uk WWW.WICKES.CO.UK Bosch Professional GMS 120 Multi Detector

But not the ideal starting point for a development site. Established trees give ready-made amenity which it has been demonstrated increase sales value of completed developments. And who would buy a house on a sterile site that cannot be gardened? It's not that hard to get trees and development right. Pissing off planners for sport is only going to make it harder.

Like shooting fish in a barrel.

Save yourself a lot of grief and try grafting onto a well established beech seedling.

Cockscomb Beech. Exciting rare find.

Big difference between advising him on strategy and advising on tree constraints. BS5837 is fairly clear that decisions on retention are for the designer, using the survey info and other criteria. I need to get paids a whole lot extra to advise on strategy, and I would only do it if I had already done (and been paid to do) the survey, because only then could I advise on whether the Council would resist (on a tree by tree basis) removals and/or trees could feasibly be retained.

In this situation I would verbally advise potential client as a matter of professionalism that he is within his rights to pre-emptively fell (it's true, and no charge for this). I'd also offer as part of my commission to look at the development proposals to see if felling is likely to be needed and/or if existing trees are suitable for retention even without development plans and/or would enhance the value of the development if retained. A good client will take this, as it gives him an informed basis for pre-emptive felling. A bad one won't because he has other reasons for removal. If it's the latter, happy days I won't have to work with him.

According to Woodland Trust, H hibernica does not climb. I think this could be helix. It switches from lobed creeping stage to unlodbed climbing and flowering stage. Can look like a totally different plant.

Why?

Unlike the intimate relationship between some fungi and trees, or between mistletoe and trees, I don't think ivy shares any phisiology with tree roots. I think a lot of water intake is through tendrils with which ivy holds on the trees. So there migt be root contact between ivy and trees but it will just be physical contact, nothing invasive. Glyphosate makers say glyphosate breaks down to notrates in soil. So I wouldn't be worried about it.

Well I'm probably the wrong one to ask, as in Scotland ePlanning is not mandatory. But I was going on the basis that Councils make you do everything through the portal because it makes their life easier. Similarly their life will be easier if no-one makes representations on a TPO. Call me cynical, but... And think about the Council's role. In TPO/CAs apps/notices it is being asked to use its discretionary powers to decide to approve or allow something to happen. In a TPO it has already decided. Challenges on anything other than legal grounds are invalid. So why would representations be sought or make any difference? The Council is deciding that it is expedient for the amenity of the area that the trees be preserved. End of story, barring judicial review. JR by persons having an ownership interest in the land. Or anyone who wants to as long as they hear about the TPO quickly enough. The Council only has to make it available for inspection etc. etc. and as we know this nearly never happens even with confirmed Orders. Granted, a Council (elected members) could refuse to confirm an order made by officials under delegated powers, but do they ever?

I've only really done it in gardens, and for customers it had to be pet and child friendly so I have stuck to Glyphosate.

Regulation s only say (3) A copy of the order shall be made available for inspection, free of charge, at all reasonable hours, at the offices of the authority by whom the order was made; I doubt if Councils will post it on planning portal. No reason to.

Looks to be C. candensis, one of the varieties. Maybe 'Merlot'.

Find the biggest stem you can. Trace it back as far as you can. Kill it from that point. Spraying is useless, the leaves have a waxy coating. Best result ever I had was I severed the ivy on a riddled tree at vertical stem just above ground, wrapped duck tape tightly around the cut end to create a tube of tape above the cut then filled it with Glyphosate. Every last drop of Glyphosate was taken in. Beautiful. I've done this subsequently with stubborn Ash saplings (it only works with smooth bark where the tape can create a tight seal) and it works wonderfully. Don't think increasing the concentration of Glyphosate will help. Keep it dilute for maximum uptake. It will concentrate itself in the roots.

The burning of commercial waste is illegal and an offence under the Clean Air Act 1993 and Environmental Protection Act 1990. ... Failure to comply with the requirements is an offence contrary to the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and is punishable by a fixed penalty notice or prosecution. Whilst it is not against the law to have a bonfire to dispose of garden waste and there are no set times when bonfires are allowed, residents should be aware thatt he council can take legal action if the smoke causes what is described as a ‘statutory nuisance’, taking into account how dense the smoke is, how long the fire lasts and how often it happens.

Looks like Acacia dealbata to me ('Mimosa')

Attached is the Microguide that was produced to accompany the British Standard BS8596. Please note it requires the user to have undergone basic bat awareness training. For me this took less than a day and cost less than £150. As I see it the training is needed to understand the habits of bats and the guide is needed to form a systematic basis for inspection and recording of findings. Legal requirements, tick! I would commend it to anyone who wants to consolidate their understanding and approach. Especially if you think you already know, because you probably don't. BSI-Bat-Microguide-UK-EN.pdf

We've probably all had good and bad experiences. It is parliament that has chosen to protect bats. On the whole that's a good thing. Ecologists can really make a meal of it. I had a site where the client asked me to sign off the trees for bats (which I am qualified to do) but also asked the ecologist to do the same. It was all that Planning wanted. I surveyed the trees for bat roost features at the same time as BS5838 survey. I charged an extra £60 for the supplementary report, and indemnified the client agaist claims and prosecution for destruction or disturbance. I was absolutely satisfied that there was low or negligible risk, all per the British Stnadard, amd I confirmed it in writing. The ecologists, on the other hand, camped out (2 of them) doing dawn and dusk emergence surveys for 3 nights (after a delay of 2 months to allow hibernation to end) and monitored activity in a 100m radius with heterodyne detectors and mist nets and god knows what else. Charged £1,200. Reached the same conclusion, buried deep in lots of irrelevant stuff about foraging. I like bats, I believe they should be protected, and I provide an inexpensive service that gets straight to the point because I find it results in less resentment when there is realistic and practical advice about solutions. The thing is, the law is the law and in most situations bats don't get in the way unless you ask an ecologist, they can be very risk averse and very pro-wildlife even when it is not present. The greatest risk I perceive to bats is contractors who think they know all there is to know and are exposing customers ot risk of prosecution by letting their judgment be clouded by inverted snobbery about bat consultants. There's a perfectly good, free, standard for contractors to use to sign off on bats in trees. I would urge all contractors to use it. It is an easy conversion from thinking they know it all to knowing enough to protect themselves, customers and bats. You can even charge for it.