daltontrees

(Assuming you are in England) The exact wording of the law is "the cutting down, uprooting, topping or lopping of a tree, to the extent that such works are urgently necessary to remove an immediate risk of serious harm" is permitted. Note, if branches are in danger of falling off, that is not an excuse to cut the whole tree down. There needs to be - a. a defined extent, no more than necessary b. urgency and c. necessity, there being no other way to reduce the risk And if the Council doesn't get to see the tree beforehand, the onus is on the tree owner to justify the works retrospectively. That means at least photographic evidence, but as Paul has said, ideally an objective professional written assessment. If you think you have a vindictive TO, do this one properly as there could be an attempted prosecution. It might also be worth seeking compensation for property damage due to unreasonable past Council refusal. This is covered in the legislation.

Thanks, all. I will wait to see if the leaves lose their downiness and-or develop a cuticle. Also flowers/fruit. Mental note made to follow this up here.

Couple of points of clarification that I think are relevant and may help onlookers on this subject. In the Cavanagh case, the judge said that that, "on the balance of probability, Mr Shepherd's inspection was carried out negligently". It did not say that this was because he was only a tree surgeon. I expect the court's perception of his competence was tainted by him having been considerably less than honest in his evidence. In the end he was lucky to have escaped because his negligence by fluke didn't affect the outcome of the case. But this case, although it didn't make any new law, was useful becasue it shows what courts do and don't look at in terms of inspector competence. And I didn't think any of it is inconsistent with the advice that I personally have given to the OP. kevinjohnsonmbe's post covers the various levels of competence of inspectors. And I see now the source of ongoing confusion about whether tree surgeons should be doing tree surveys. You don't need to be qualified to inspect trees, but if you find something that is an ordinary cause for concern, you need to be qualified in some way to make decisions about what to do, unless the appropriate action is screamingly obvious. But certainly my clients don't want to appoint an amateur and have him come back with recommendations that some of the trees he has looked at be checked properly by a professional. They want one person, overqualified to look for defects but qualified to know what to do when they find them. I think that a lot of 'tree surgeons' are good enough to identify defects but are rarely (in my direct experience) able to give objective proportionate advice on risk management. On the other hand, tree consultants are probably guilty of looking harder than they need to if there are no obvious defects. That's why unqualified tree surgeons shouldn't be doing tree surveys that are anything more than spotting obvious defects and passing these on to someone qualified. I believe tree owners want a one-stop-shop service that includes risk assessment competence and that it is as efficient in the end to have overkill on some of the trees for the beenfit of getting the full service on the few tree that need action. In my embittered opinion, there are a lot less trees needing action that way round, as (amongst other things) the consultant has no financial interest in whether tree works are required. A long post, I know, but I'm glad I've said it and I hope it helps someone get it.

This comes up about once a month on Arbtalk. Set the bravado of others aside and follow this bottom line. If you're not insured don't do it. And don't do it just because you have insurance, see what the limitations and pre-qualifications are in the insurance cover. It may say that you're not covered if you're not qualified. Insurers will take your money, and drop you like a stone if you claim and haven't complied with the policy. A bit like getting car insurance, not having a license and expecting them to pay up if you kill someone on the roads. A lot of expereinced tree surgeons are good at spotting tree defects, our lives depend on it. But there's a lot more to tree risk assessment than spotting defects. A lot lot more. A lot of reports I see are pure rubbish, the tree surgeon recommends unnecessary work, putting costs on the customer/client and causing unnecessary or premature loss of trees. Sometimes to get work, sometimes to cover their rear ends by erring on the ridiculously safe side, some out of pure ignorance. I have more than once (and that's just this month) overturned the recommendations of tree surgeons' reports, saving clients thousands of pounds. All backed not by me guaranteeing that the trees won't cause harm but by striking the right balance on their legal duty of care, giving them a credible defence in the event of the unforeseeable.

I feel I should know this one. Lower shoots hang down but the leaves are turned up. This tree/shrub has been heavily topped in the past (not me, honest!) and has goen a bit mad so I'm not sure what it's normal growth habit is. Any suggestions appreciated.

Not quite fine enough for Aspen, more like Populus x canescens which is a hybrid of tremula and alba.

See from 5:59 onwards [ame] [/ame]

It's going to rain tomorrow for the first time in 3 weeks, should kick-start even the reluctant ones.

Agreed. Looks most like Prunus cerasus.

I can now. That's something like I have out the back of my place.

Did you mean to attach a pic?

That's incorrect. The tree owner has a duty of care to the neighbour, and if his tree causes damage to the neighbour's property he is negligent and the cost of making good can uually be recovered. There is lots of established law to that effect. Whether the insurance policy of the tree owner would cover him is a different matter. Don't believe insurance salesmen, they are considerably better at taking money than paying it back out. The claim is gainst the owner, not the insurer. If he's insured agains that sort of risk that's good for him, but it doesn't affect the validity of the claim. I woudld just add, it was good of you to follow this up and share your experience on Arbtalk. So many people come on looking for advice and then don't even let us know what came of it, it's tiresome and it puts me off trying to help. Good on you. I'm sorry your dream house didn't happen but it's better than being sold an expensive problem. Hmm, definitely don't believe house salesmen either....

Like you, I have rock climbing experience. It's useful to be familiar with ropes and knots and some of the kit, but be aware form teh outset rocvk climbing set-ups and tree set-ups are substantially different. The former is about fall-arrest, the harnesses are light and not meant for sitting in for long, the ropes are stretchy to absorb falls. The latter is about work positioning, basically being able to sit in harnesses for longer periods and not moving at all. The maximum permitted fall is about 1/2 a metre. The ropes are unstretchable. There should eb 2 separate attachments when you are cutting. So go cautiously if using rock climbing kit or mentality when working on trees. Others can go on about specific rope techniques. But simply the usual DdRT is like top-roping and the SRT is more like abseiling.

Point taken (again) Gary. I'm always in such a hurry.

Umm, I really ought to proof read my postings. I thnk I meant 'rapid', but not as iteresting as your guess. By opportunistic I mean Ash put out zillions of keys, not targeted, and whatever germinates can hunker down in poor light for years waiting for an opening in the woodland canopy, then they're off. I have current first-hand knowledge of this. Out the back of my house, 20m from here, is a strip of land owned by the Council, until last year dominated by some 20-30m high Poplar. Last year the Council succcumbed to the residents' desparate please to have them removed. Now what is happening is tha thte understorey Ash and all its latest progeny are coming out of the ground at an unbelievable rate. Seedling density is about 50 per m2. Ash that are possibly 10 yearrs old but only a couple of metres high are goig straight up. Meantime the semi-mature stuff (5-7 m) that was at the centre and must have been very very shaded has just about died, I'm guessing a combination of too much light and too much water.

Coulda done with a picture of the underside. At the minute the list is too long to even bother speculating.

And let me guess, you've just read somewhere else that it's the opposite? For anyone that didn't read the article, basically Oak flushing is accelerated quite a lot by daily temperature, Ash not so much so. So a warm spring brings the Oak on before the Ash. In cooler springs the Ash is hardly affected by the temperature and beats the sluggish Oak to it.

If in doubt, do nothng. The tree knows how many leaves it needs.

In my experience Ash germinate absolutely anywhere, without necessarily havign a stategy for the next move. They are really opportunistic.

Thanks, a good wee read, that,

And what's it doing fruiting at this time?

It wold be nice to fidn out for sure. The fruit looks more Prunus than Malus, mainly due to the lack of remains of the flower body. BUt I've looked at the book for about 3o species of Prunus and I can't see any that have this waxier, roundly serrated leaf and no basal glands.

This does not look like Prunus, it looks like Malus. If you can, open one of the fruit. It will be plain even in the unripe state whether it has a stone (Prunus and other genera) or pips (Malus/Pyrus and a few other genera).

Cambuslang, south east edge of Glasgow. Absulutely standard for Ash not to be in leaf until May. Round here they were in flower 6 or 7 weeks ago. Young seedlings all popped into leaf last week. Semi matures popped out during this week, some of the older or weaker trees just starting to flush. There has been a serious lack of rain just when I was expecting Ash leaf last week, perhaps it's a micro determining factor in leafing time. Also dryish northerly winds. Yes Ash is ring porous, suggests a requirement for raid water uptake at and just after leafing for good extension and a decent annual increment.

Sure looks like Zelkova serata