arb culture
-
Posts
402 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Classifieds
Tip Site Directory
Blogs
Articles
News
Arborist Reviews
Arbtalk Knot Guide
Gallery
Store
Calendar
Freelancers directory
Everything posted by arb culture
-
I know, but they do go hand in hand, and it all becomes a bit foggy sometimes. See Jones v Portsmouth for an example of where a power and a duty overlap. Basically, if you have a power over something, you also have a duty to make sure it doesn't cause harm. The legal people are better placed to discuss this, but I just wanted to make sure that people are not being told something is certain, when it isn't. At the end of the day, Dean has a real world problem, which I have sugested a possible solution to. If my suggestion doesn't work then it will have cost the price of some paper and a stamp, and if it does, the problem will be solved. Good luck with it Dean.
-
Don't be so sure about the discretionary power thing. There's some very learned legal people debating this and it seems that it's a bit of a grey area. Like I say, some LAs assume it's discretionary and some don't. Some will use the power readily, and some will not use it at all. There is no harm in trying. If the LA don't want to get involved they will say so. If they do then they'll deal with it and that will be an end to the matter. It costs virtually nothing to send them a letter and then just wait and see.
-
Re Glyn, very strange. I don't understand - I suggest people ask him about his opinion rather than rely on hearsay. Re TI, like I said, I think it has some merit. But as I've said all along, there is no way of knowing whether the calculations used are any good unless they are made available for discussion - and for various reasons, that seems like it's never going to happen. On a seperate subject, investigating sound wood is good, but is this not the same as investigating not sound wood (ie decay) and seeing what's left? Perhaps this should be a new thread?
-
Dean, Just get your client to report it to the LA who'll probaby deal with it under the misc provisions act. There is considerable debate among the legal people about whether an LA has an obligation under this act, but at the moment most LAs assume that they do have an obligation. I know the LA won't thank me for saying this (cos it gives them extra work), but they will usually deal with it once it's reported.
-
If you're talking about Harrogate, then I agree, they're usually extremely good at making sure trees are protected properly. At the end of the day, every one of us has made a mistake at one time or another, so let's not be too harsh on the planner in question, none of us has the full story about this case.
-
I've done multi choice questions at level 6. Don't be fooled, multi-choice exams can be extremely tough, especially when written properly. Once again, sorry for going off topic.
-
Thanks for that Bundle. I'm well aware of the 'parameters for risk' as you call them. I think we all agree that the overall risks from trees are tiny, and partly this is because trees are so often 'managed'. My concerns are that in asking under-qualified people to make an assessment of trees there will be two false management options occurring far more frequently than they do now. The first is that dangerous trees will be retained, and the second is that safe trees will be removed. If we as an industry are happy to accept that, then there is something wrong, because that is definitely not good tree care.
-
Iain, on balance I think thermal imaging has its merits, but when I spoke with Glyn the other day, and he didn't seem to rate Thermal imaging as a method of detecting decay at all. What makes you say he's using it?
-
Just trying to make sure people are aware if it. Some poeple said they couldn't be bothered to read it all, so I was just pulling out some of the points I'd noticed. I'm not sure I've met any 60mph tree surveyors, but maybe I'm being naive.
-
:confused1:"Bill has no formal qualifications":confused1:
-
It's a bit academic now, but I'll try and answer as best I can. a) The acceptable risk the HSE are talking about are societal. They are the average risks from the average tree to the average person. An individual tree in an individual location may pose an exceedingly high risk to an individual person (or group of people). It is quite common to come across a tree which is quite likely to fail within the next 12 months, which is big enought to kill people, and which it would fairly likely to land on someone if it did fail. Whilst I agree that the overall risk from trees is well within the levels which it is acceptable, there are many individual trees which are clearly dangerous. b) One of the stated aims of the document in question is to prevent excessive felling of trees. Do I need to explain this one further? c) I think we agree on this one.
-
Do you want to expand Bundle? I'm deeply frustrated as well, but are we frustrated about the same things, or with each other?
-
It makes little difference anyway. An unqualified gardener is now considered capable of tree assessments, so if they can also write they can also do tree reports. So I wouldn't worry about the distinction between a consultant and a contractor, there's not even any need to worry about whether anyone has any qualifications any more.
-
Oh, and I've also seen children nearly killed by a large tree which collapsed after an under qualified tree officer said it was safe and refused permission to fell.
-
Paul, I don't think I've yet come across any land owners who have felled all their trees because of the Poll v Bartholemhew judgement. I've met quite a lot that have felled trees on the back of dodgy advice from gardeners and dodgy tree surgeons though.
-
I agree to point, but, a) what about the 25% of stuff that's not obvious, b) what about the stuff that's obvious but not actually hazardous, and, c) do you seriously think that the average unqualified gardener is going to give good arboricultural advice?
-
That's one of the things I'm worried about.
-
Paul, the basic tree inspection is a form of training. The NTSG draft doesn't even mention that the gardener should have done it. If the basic training included a very basic assessment at the end of it to prove competence, then I would agree that this would indeed be sufficient in spotting most tree hazards. Using the term 'unqualified gardener' raises far more questions than it answers. Does the chap who cuts the grass once a week meet the criteria of an unqualified gardener? If so, are they now qualified to undertake the intitial assessment of trees?
-
... to do tree surveys. According to the National Tree Safety Group a few years experience as a gardener is all that's required. A chainsaw ticket might be handy as well.
-
What's the height v dbh programme?
-
Ooo, I've just noticed I've been promoted to 'Senior member'. Sorry for going off topic.
-
Tony, I've done it and found it really interesting. Having been through the process I reckon that if a contractor has this badge, it shows that they probably will understand my recommendations as a consultant, and because of the CEU/time lapse aspect, I can be fairly confident that their knowledge will be reasonably up to date. Also, Joe Public seem to respond well to the 'Certified Arborist' badge. And having done it myself, it shouldn't be a level 2, it's a lot harder than GCSE's.
-
Help needed to identify problem with oak tree's!!!!
arb culture replied to TonyP's topic in Tree health care
I could be imagining it (it's not clear from the photo) but this also looks a bit like herbicide damage. -
Well said! And like I said before, if the whole document is a bit much to take in in one go, start with the case studies at the end. These give a flavour of what is likely to be expected.
-
Dean, Up at the Yorkshire Sculpture Park there are some really dense mature yew hedges with plants at over a metre spacing. I'm sure 18" will be fine, but it might take a little bit longer for the hedge to fill out. By the way Dean, if you start selling local provenance planting stock let us know.
