daltontrees

Good luck pinning that answer down. Mature Cedar are notoriously self-destructive, even without inclusions. I'd say wind exposure is the key factor but there have got to be many factors. And probability of failure will increase with wind speed. Why do you specifically need a probability of failure? Do you mean literally 1 in X chance numerical probability?

Oh good, I thought, a thread about the likely effects on the tree business in UK. A few pages in it is degenreating into another pointless tit-for-tat about Brexit. Up to that point it was quite interesting to hear a spectrum of considered insights into the economics of firewood. Can you Brexit squabblers please not just go back to the Brexit thread and leave this one to be about firewood?

Not even vaguely within the outer orbit of being funny. Not even in the same solar system of funny. I've just spent a few days in Nothern Ireland, occasionally remembering too much about when kneecapping was a neanderthalic way of imagining that differences could be resolved. Wanna take your riduculous suggestion somewhere else than a website that is largely the public face of arboriculture? Or next best thing unequivically clarify that you didn't really mean what you said? Or generally just go away? Or think again about your interface with civilisation? Have you anything whatsoever to contributre to arboricuture or the tree business on this question?

Don't Prune Me?

Respect, Treeation!

Maybe? Definitely!

Jeezo, lucky that lot didn't go up. I got told off for answering my mobile phone in the petrol station shop a couple of months ago. Apparently it could ignite fumes. Or something.

Begging to differ slightly with Edward C. The notice was correctly given originally, and there is surely no need to re-notify or adjust the date of notification to accommodate the Council's misunderstanding of the legislation? As for cherries, it's a bit reckless to suggest on a public forum that they are exempt, emoticons might not be enough to save someone from getting into serious trouble for accepting the 'advice' from a knowledgeable person at face value. I hope the OP has figured out that it was a joke. There would of course be nowhere to hide for felling an ornamental cherry in a residential setting under exemption.

Petrol Retail | Safety Pass Alliance

There is no requirement for replanting in a CA if you have given notification under s.211. The legislation for TPOs and CAs is similar enough that it i common for Councils to use the same form for both, but the legislation is fundamentally different in a couple of respects. You are not asking for permission, you are telling the Council that you propose to remove trees. You need only wait, either for 6 weeks to pass or for a TPO to be served. So your notification is valid and the Council cannot deem it invalid because of the replanting intentions not being stated. If I were you I'd let the Council know that you consider that in a CA you are not required to say anything about replanting and that you consider the notiication has been given with effect at the original date. And leave it at that.

Fair enough, the head is long enough.

The third one I think is the soldier beetle Cantharis rustica.

No. 2 is the click beetle Agriotes lineatus.

Possibly, but if she had come a cropper while driving because of cyanide poisoning it wold make for a very interesting court case. Would the duty holder be expected to have foreseen the circumstances and therefore guarded against it? It would be right up there with the famous 'Wagon Mound' case.

I did say 'could have led to ...'. I have no sympathy for her unless she was told it was safe to take the stuff and drive with the windows shut for an hour. With or without poly bags.

Sorry to disagree but a n hour in a car with P. laurocerasus chip with a lot of leaf in it and no ventilation could have led to the breathing in of enough hydrogen cyanide to cause dizziness or even unconsciousness for the driver. But note, I said leaf. Being evergreen, P. l. wood will usually get chipped with leaf. Should you have foreseen its theft and the consequences? That's a different matter. Or did you give someone permission to take it?

I suppose that has to be strictly correct, but it's a poor situation that would allow a notifier to wait 6 weeks then believe he had the right to remove a tree, and then have that right removed by the making of 'late' a TPO by a Council that didn'tt get its act together quickly enough. Put another way, the TPO has to be based on expediency including a real or pereived threat that the tree's amenity may be lost, but the Councils (inactions) suggest no such urgency. Mynors in the 1st edition refers to R. v North Hertfordshire District Council ex parte Hyde confirms that the tree is unprotected in the intervening period. If it were my tree and I had lined up a squad of guys to remove trees after the 6 weeks was up and then got a TPO I'd be fizzing. There may be a basis for compensation. Oh, and as usual don't rely on any of this stuff for Scotland. And if there's a lesson for the determined notifier, get the notification to stick with a reliably recorded dte a tthe Council's correct address and have the saws idling just before midnight 6 weeks later. it's a sad state of affairs that encourages this sort of attitude but 6 weeks should be long enough for any Council to make a TPO.

Well, who knows? Looking up pests that affect Cedar on the FC site throws up Bursaphelenchus xylophilus (Pine Wilt Disease) too, and americaln sites confirm this will kill a tree within weeks. Such rapid deaths are like nthe good old bad old DED, complete dysfunction of the vascular system. In PWD it is caused by nematodes rupturing the resin ducts, seemingly causing tracheid cavitation and as the American Phytopathological Society puts it 'just as a person cannot drink through a straw with holes in it, the tree cannot move water upward and consequently wilts and dies'. The US site does not list Cedar as a host, but the FC certainly suggests it. HF is a rank amateur compared to these instant killer diseases.

Hope rather than expectation by me, thought I'd ask anyway. I'm on the Sirococcus scent anyway.

I think Kveldssanger referred to it a while ago in his arb facts thread. I'd get it if I could pick up a used copy. It's a bit of a luxury at £40 new.

Which species of Phytopthora?

This appears more likely than Phytopthora. It's called Sirococcus tsugae. The best evidence that can be gathered is the distinctive pink dead needles, I read these then turn brown so it'll be important to observe them while still pink. I'd say Forestry research would be interested in following up a report of a suspected case.

More than opinion, that is the position in law. The history of analogous situations is that 6 weeks means 6 weeks and tim is 'of the essence'. A late TPO might be valid, but so would a notification that got no response within 6 weeks. Daughter thinks these emoticons are appropriate here.:fight:

A. I don't think there is a statutory answer to this. If the Act calls for written notification (s.211) to the LPA, it's not to the Plannign Dept. it's to the Council. Let its mail dept. redicrect it to the right dept. I always put mine in to the Council's registered address (HQ) unless the Council has published (usually on its website) where notifications are to be sent. If, however, the Council takes it a little further and individual TOs state that they accept emails directly to the TO, then the Council cannot subsequently say that a notification was late or wrongly submitted. The picture is a little blurry recently because of the use of emails. There is statute providing for what constitutes 'writing' and the like and whether emails count. But if an email is accepted, that's the end of it. Always ask for an acknowledgement. In my case I follow emails up with a letter. B. It doesn't state this anywhere, it doesn't have to. The legislation ust requires sufficient info to identify the tree(s). C. No. A safe bet is to assume a letter will take say 2 working days to get to the Council, and its response will take the same to come back. So if you allow 6 weeks and 2 working days and get no written response, you are immune from prosecution if you do the notified tree work. Even, dare i say it, if the Council subsequently TPOs the trees.

No picture