daltontrees

Well yes Jon it very much depends, but mostly on whether there is a genuine desire to protect trees or whether the AMS was a shelf-filling box-ticking requirement by the Council. Someone involved in the project has to have budget and clout. If it's the Council that wants one and nobody else does, conditions have to be waterproof, the TO has to be seen on the site regularly and have the enforcement officer primed and willing to act. The most important thing becomes the monitoring reporting arrangements, so that the TO can ease off when things are underway and rely on monitor reporting. If it's the site owner that wants one, the AMS has to be realistic and has to be enforceable against the contractor. If the contractor has it imposed on him, it will not go well, so it is more than useful to involve the contractor in the drafting. This is not always easy, as the contractor has to have been appointed at least provisionally. Best to involve a contractor when he has preferred bidder status, and programming is underway, otherwise there will be uncontrolled cost implications. Finally, if you find it's the contractor that wants the AMS, stop taking pills or snorting or smoking whatever you're on, because you've drifted off into fantasy land.

Short answer - we bother because we're paid to. The Arb is not the tree police and if Council/client/contractor aren't taking is seriously that's their problem. AMSs are mostly a waste of time. I write them as contract documents, so the client or council only has to append them to a legally enforceable build contract. If they're not precise enough to be enforceable, they really are pointless.

No, the 'fruits' in the original post are actually unopened flower buds.

Gorgeous looking

Maybe European Puss Moth?

Horrible tp work on, my first one snapped from under me fortunately I had a good top anchor.

Ah yes, I reacted quite strongly because it was the OP's first post and I hoped he might get some genuine considered advice. I occasionally look at Arbtalk Facebook and it's quite shocking how crass and unhelpul, not to mention downright illegal the advice there is. They all think they they are sooo funny. It's like the difference between the Times and the Sun if you're looking for actual news. I take your point, I have had a few situations where advantage of lockdown has been taken by doing all sorts of illegal tree works under the defence of plausible deniability, knowing the Council isn't out and about spotting things and would find it hard to prove when and by whom the deeds had been done.

It has been discussed before and I believe it was shown that if the Council authorises work that wasn't applied for, it's not a consent. There is a mechanism for this type of authorisation but I haven't the Acts to hand. I think it is implicit that the Council requires some trees to stay. If it's not a consent, then there doesn't need to be a mechanism to revoke it, the Council might just have to remove its authorisation. It does seem likely that taking advantage of the possible loophole and felling the hornbeams now would consolidate the protection on the sycamores. If the trees are in multiple ownership, someone's going to get pissed off. If they are in shared ownership, the party standing to come out of it worst could veto the work.

Your first post on Arbtalk. Welcome. We don't have all the details so my advice would be to be very cautious. Technically the application that was made has not been approved, since the application didn't ask for consent for the works that the Council has said can take place. If anything it sounds like the Council has either made a mistake or has considered the situation and has concluded that some trees on the boundary most remain and that the Sycamore are more deserving. If it's the latter, felling the Hornbeams will reduce rather than increase the chance of getting approval for anything on the Sycamores. And you say the trees are shared. That legally is a rare situation but if one supposed consent covers all of them it can only be implemented with the agreement of all the owners.It may suit one owner to interpret the go-ahead as not in their best interests and they could veto its implementation. I'd advise against assuming it can be implemented in part without all owners agreeing, and to answer your questions, the Council could indeed withdraw the existing approval for the hornbeams if a new application to lift or fell the sycamores is submitted.

Have I inadvertently stumbled into the Arbtalk Facebollocks forum?

I'd take the owners' word for it, with a bit of a spell check. Phellodendron (possibly amurense) Cork Tree

Mountain Ash/Rowan is not an Ash and cannot be affected by ADB. ADB affects several species of Fraxinus, none immune so far but some with useful tolerance.

That pattern of racking of brickwork looks thermal to me. I can't see round conrers but I cannot imagine a scenario where it's subsidence or heave related. If I'm wrong, you can add to your list that the clay soils have to be shrinkable. not all clay soils are significantly shrinkable. Boulder clays notably aren't often shrinkable. Also add tha tthere has to be a climat ethat would resoult in persistent soil moisture deficits. Also add that the foundations need to be substandard in depth relative to modern standards. Also add the buiding needs to be within the zone of influence of the trees, with regard to species, size, age and water demand. I believe the estabished view is that gradual removal of trees will not reduce heave. If anything oyu could say you're better to do it in one go, experience the heave then make good. Slow recovery delays the time when you can safely do final repairs. And repairing too early follwng by seasonal movements can make the situation worse. As such, there's no best time.

Looks like Ash Bark Beetle Hylesinus varius.

This is a lovely informative and thought-provoking thread, and so far free from pathogenic postings. Long may it last. Some random observations. Walnut is a thoroughly antisocial tree, it enforces distancing by being allelopathic, poisoning the roots of anything near it including its own offspring. Granted, if the spacing could be worked out it could be planted in stands but it probably can't be an efficient use of land. Several years ago I got some Leylandii poles I had felled at a job, 40 foot and dead straight. I used it for fence posts, and 15 years on it has barely discoloured. It's an improbable choice for commercial planting but I can see it paying dividends. I have built my office out of Western Red, it has been mostly trouble-free and was a pleasure to work with. Another good candidate if it can be kept fork-free. Personally I dislike monoculture, and when given an opportunity to specify planting I usually alternate and mix to build in resilience and buffers against pathogen spread. I would even admit that it is insurance against poor planting choices too. In controllable urban settings some diversification into non-natives is a good thing provided it can be reversed if it goes badly wrong. What I see often is the inevitable consequences of obligatory mixed native planting, with predictable succession and climaxing interspersed with incompatible runts and failures. Poor choices are very often made. The theory is all well but a recent experience said it all for me, I was to specify replacements for a large housing site where lots of native trees were being removed. The ecologist and I wanted the existing mix to be emulated in the replanting scheme. Meantime the landscape architects, demonstrating a shameful lack of understanding, specified for the same client mostly inappropriate cultivars and species based on their looks. I can guarantee that about 60% won't see out 2 decades and 20% more will be detested by the residents within the same time (because of shading) and that the existent bird population will be entirely and almost permanently displaced. The planning officer was persuaded based on the landscape architect's reputation. So there you have it, the client didn't care, the landscape architect didn't understand and the planner didn't know better and voila another 25 acres of ailing urban sticks, empty planting pits and mullered skyscrapers, lost to nature.

Chicken of the Woods, Laetiporus sulfureus, common on Yew.

A couple more form the same site, Ganoderma at work on the underside of a fallen large Beech and Kretzschmaria on the side of it.

Nice Laetiporus on top of fallen (but still growing) old Sweet Chestnut. Unfortunately the light was poor.

Got to be Ganoderma, maybe adspersum?

What's going on, peeps? This is a Beech, of that there is no doubt whatsoever. It is common in woodland settings for them to develop fluted flared buttresses like that.

I did a survey for a large organisation a couple of years ago, a few thousand urban trees, updating a survey from 6 or 7 years before that by someone else. The organisation had in the meantime lost about 30% of its tree stock, mostly young and semi mature. The most common cause was strimming at the bases, the second most common was overpruning or pruning at the wrong time of year. Only a couple of percent had been windthrown, and all that died of pathogens could have this attributed to human damage. The best trees were in shrub beds.

That's my experience too. There's some good contractors who give good advice (including if appropriate doing nothing) for all the right reasons, but there's also a lot of chancers who hide behind the mystique of tree surgery to sell owners unnecessary and unwise tree work. Free verbal advice often isn't worth the paper it's written on.

I'm not particularly wound up. I won't be meeting up with Mr Evans any time soon, I've never met him, probably just as well because if he spoke to me face to face the way he does on here and UKTC it would end abruptly. Plus as he has demonstrated on here and UKTC he seems to be a bit of a creepy pervert, and if he came near me or my family I probably wouldn't stop to ask why he was there. To me he lacks the dignity to be an ambassador for our industry.

As I have told you repeatedly, I have no vested interest in QTRA. And this thread is about your VALID, not about QTRA or anything else, or me or anyone else. As I recall QTRA doesn't recommend a strategy for duty holders. You do.

I did a big survey for National Grid a couple of years ago, and there were quite a few in the stretch from Meifod to Lllanymynech. Don't know if that counts as north.