AA Teccie (Paul)

Option 4. = pour yourself a cup of tea and enjoy the view of your tree. The surveyor is misinformed and the phrase meaning "covering one's posterior" comes to mind. Its a lovely tree but if you have other reasons for wanting it removed 'crack on." Heave is rare and only occurs where tree significantly pre-dates the structure such that it is built on desiccated sub-soils. This is clearly not the case here. IN 12 years of managing +20k trees I encountered heave once where a development was built on land that was previously established woodland and yes the damage was massive and the cost to the insurers similar. Paul

I would suggest 'previous' to be a better and more commonly used term rather than last which could infer the last branch junction in the tree crown...appen I think I would also say to re-pollard to previous pruning / pollard points in this particular case...that's if my eye-sight serves me correctly. Cheers, Paul

This is quite useful, alternative, guidance too with some useful links included see Felling Licences quick guide (England) Cheers, Paul

If it is considered to be a tree = YES, if not = NO or N/A.

Really, that's surprising...but not unknown. Assuming the Laurel belongs to the outbuilding owner too, then you would need to go through the TPO application process. Ideally discuss with the Tree Officer beforehand but there's nothing to stop you citing two options on the application, e.g. one to do overall reduction, including the offending branches to achieve "X" metres clearance, and a second just to do the clearance work (although technically they could consent the first option to only allow the clearance as a condition....I think.) Good luck, Paul PS Are you sure it's TPO'd? (if as part of an Area or Woodland, as opposed to individually or part of a group, where it clearly state to include 1x Cherry Laurel, again I'd enquire with the Tree Officer whether they consider it's included...and confirm by email requesting a reply if they say naah.)

In the first instance I'd enquire whether they (the LPA / Council) consider the CHERRY Laurel, as opposed to Portugese Laurel which is often more "tree-ish", to be covered as previously I view it as a shrub...albeit a very big one in your case. Cheers, Paul

Hopefully another effect of your honesty n integrity will be that they then understand trees need a bit more root system than what they've retained this time round which may save some better trees elsewhere....I know, "don't hold yer breath!" Cheers, Paul

Do your job. Produce the report on the basis of the site and facts as you found them. Presumably only your client will receive the report. Cheers

Good morning all, and sorry I'm late to the party here. However in so being at least I haven't stifled conversation, not that I would anyway of course , and I think that overall there has been a balanced view on the pro's and con's of the scheme. The scheme does cater for smaller businesses these days, including sole traders, and we have several who seem to benefit from such. Because it's been mentioned specifically, the Bartlett's scenario is still being investigated by other parties and with no conclusive outcome it would be wrong of the Association to strip a company approval because of the actions of one individual. We are working closely with them and will take any appropriate action when / if the time is right...and we will also offer help and support to improve where required. If you would like to know more and understand the scheme better please do try to get along to the workshops, they're free, but I know there's still a cost to you as a non-productive day and travel etc., but then you can better judge for yourself. For small/smaller businesses the amount / depth of 'paperwork' we require is far less than previously and most of what we do require is available on the website to help. Yes, there is still paperwork to be done, and sometimes we need to see a little bit more, but this is because the world of (commercial) contracting and 'compliance' is more complex these days and hence the scheme has to reflect that need. Thank you for everyone's posts here in contributing to a healthy debate. Best regards, Paul

CHAS = no barriers really, particularly for a smaller business, i.e. "fewer than 5 employees", which involves sending them your H&S portfolio which they do a desk-top audit and then, hopefully, yer in (albeit too often with much to'ing and fro'ing of stuff according to others.) Many contractors attain CHAS 'en route' to ARB Approved Contractor, i.e. as a steeping stone in effect. Trustmark = a significant barrier in so far as we are the only scheme operator currently and hence you have to become ARB Approved in the first instance. There's no exclusivity for scheme operators but we just happen to be the only one for the tree surgery sector currently. Hope this answers the question okay, but post back if not or more questions...I'm not rushing off anywhere. Cheers, Paul

...okay, okay, so 'marketing' isn't my strong point, but then again what is , and I'm not suggesting working "in the buff", certainly not with these temperatures anyway, but if you do work in a region that's awash with tree surgery contractors maybe 'ARB Approved Contractor' is worth a punt REMEMBER once approved you can also directly access the CHAS Scheme, potentially beneficial in commercial contracting, and Trustmark, potentially beneficial in the domestic market. Further ARB Approved Contractor is a registered safety scheme with SSiP so, at least in theory, you shouldn't need any other safety scheme memberships..."don't hold yer breath tho!" So, don't ferget, if you wanna know more just ask OR get along to one of the FREE workshops see Arboricultural Association - Course Cheers all, n I make no apology for keeping posting about the scheme because, without exception, every contractor I've assessed has always considered it hugely beneficial...but once approved it seems to become the industry's best kept secret Thanks, Paul PS Reaseheath (Cheshire) in March has lots of spaces available.

Certainly in so far as specific advice being listed on the website but people / members can always give us a call. There is some general guidance here Arboricultural Association - Help & Advice and more specific information for landowners is published by the FC / National Tree Safety Group see The National Tree Safety Group (NTSG) is composed of a number of organisations with an interest in tree risk management Regards, Paul

Far from ideal, acknowledged, and extra expense and hassle, but where we have encountered this previously, i.e. through the ARB Approved Contractor Scheme whereby an engineer is inspecting 'arb' kit, we have required an additional inspection by someone suitably competent, including being familiar with the kit and how it is used, and 'qualified' (ACOP Feb. 2015) = "LOLER - thorough examination of arboricultural equipment." Cheers, Paul

My guess would be Dryad's Saddle (Polyporus squamosus) see Polyporus squamosus - Dryads saddle - David Humphries’s Fungi Directory - Arbtalk.co.uk | Discussion Forum for Arborists

There are so many, most people would probably have a copy of Mitchells guide but I like this too tree name trail - how to identify trees Cheers, Paul

So, would I class this as good tree surgery...depends how you measure such. 1. Does it accord with BS3998, i.e. "Best Practice" = NO, the stems have been 'truncated', i.e. internodal cuts, which is detrimental to the tree and has future management implications (see the ISA excellent leaflet below "Why Topping Hurts Trees.") 2. Does it meet the customers requirements / expectations = probably Of course no I don't consider it good tree surgery but, as many have said, you see it too often and I really do wonder IF whomever did understands why its problematic. Cheers, Paul WhyToppingHurts.pdf

Hi Ben, 28 days from being served the TPO to raise objections, in writing, and then the situation often goes to a planning committee for approval to confirm, or not. Thereafter, as has been said by Jules, you can only access an appeal after receiving a refusal to n application. Re- timescales, it could indeed by a while so make sure you have a caveat on your quote form saying valid for 30 days, or similar. Cheers, Paul

Indeed, prepare to be enlightened Welcome Paul, and to the industry if you're new there too. Good luck with everything, Paul

As with most things, "all things" even, it's about being competent, in the true sense of the word, and proficient (a term from the W@H ICoP.) Clearly training, information and instruction are important and, if you follow PUWER requirements, so is a 'qualification' that reflects the particular task / skill area you're performing (L3 award in aerial tree rigging IS listed in the PUWER ACOP.) The HSE view is that as rigging is a high risk activity training, and qualification, should be in place and, as such, the ARB Approved Contractor Scheme requires it. Insurers may also be keen to see it. Hence enough 'compliance' reasons I would suggest to get the qualification in addition to being competent. Cheers, Paul

Hi all, And this one for the "suvverners" See Arboricultural Association - Course Detail Cheers, Paul

Hi all, Just a quick heads up about this date / venue as we're not then "up north" again (and said acknowledging this is probably the 'southern parameter' of the North ) until July when we're in York (Askham Bryan College.) See Arboricultural Association - Course Detail for further info and booking. Thanks, n have a good weekend.. Paul

Yep, generally better to avoid long periods of frost, if you can, and not to exceed more than 1/3rd of the foliage bearing material in a single hit...also to keep wound sizes as small as possible and, ideally, no more than 1/3rd of the parent branch / stem. Otherwise "crack on".. Paul PS Unlikely to bleed in Spring anyway I would suggest but no evidence to say this is significant / detrimental to tree health.

Hi Gary, I'm not entirely sure but I'm sure Jon Heuch will be along shortly to be so. I too understood the situation as you outlined in the first para above. Further guidance states: The new regulations adopt one system where all new orders provide immediate provisional protection that lasts for six months and long-term protection once authorities confirm them after considering any objections or representations. ..which perhaps infers this still to be the case, i.e. you can confirm 'after' 6 months. However, presumably you would need to serve another sect. 211 notice as the actions of the LPA sought to retain the tree(s.) IN summary...DUNNO Paul

Of course I'm bound to say so but I do believe it is a good show and it's "arb" industry specific and it's been running now for about 15 years. Hope to see you there, Paul

Hi Ian, hopefully this should have everything you want / need...and more Arboricultural Association - The ARB Show Hope you're feeling better soon, Paul