Spruce Pirate

In that case, I stand corrected. Thanks for the update.

I think the wording of the exemption is "dangerous or to prevent a nuisance". You will go a long way before you meet a Woodland Officer who does not consider a dead/diseased/dying tree that does not fall into either of these categories! For one thing the FC very rarely stick their neck on the block and say something where there is a risk that they will be proved wrong - it is much easier for them to agree with an exemption than challenge it and have the tree fall (1-Civil Service always prefer route of least resistance and 2-They might be held liable or at least perceive that they could be held liable). Please note - I do not mean trees that have two dead branches can be considered as "dying", it has to be a genuine case of a tree on the edge of mortality and it is an extremely good idea to document and photograph this. Fundamentally you are right though, it might depend on how pedantic your local Woodland Officer is and how well you get on with them. I'm still convinced the school grounds constitute a garden or other public open space and are exempt. Garden does not necessarily imply a domestic garden. Hodge is right though, for the time and price of a phone call it would be well worth it.

Get that in writing!

They might be interested if they were felled because they were dead/diseased/dying as this is an exemption. Other than that, yes, volume of timber is what they are interested in, BUT, only in a forest/woodland environment. If a school has grounds that are woodlands (as many do) FC would be interested, if they are part of a 'park' or driveway or such FC are not interested it would be a LA matter IMO.

Think so, as CTS says:

Garden / public open space should cover school grounds. This would certainly have been my understanding when I worked for the FC in grants and licenses. I could be wrong though, but if they're open grown I don't think the FC would be interested.

Big winch plus a low loading trailer on the back of a big tractor? If the ground is hard plus a frost? Winch it onto the low loader?

Most importantly - are they in a wood? If its school grounds they shouldn't need a license, regardless of size. If they form part of a wood then they might depending on size.

Looks good to me. I like the vice, a really useful thing to have in a vehicle. As it's a bespoke item, designed and built by yourself, the question is really what do you think? Be interesting to see if you've changed it any in 3 months, 6 months or a year as your design adapts and progresses.

That seems pretty reasonable then. For some reason I thought they were more expensive. How do you find it?

I've both a 395 and a 3120. 395 is a far easier saw to use every day - I used it all day today felling. I like having the 3120 in the tool box, but realistically it only gets used every now and again, mostly I use it if I need to off-root a big blown stem and want to do it in one cut rather than having to do a reduction cut. Also ringing up big stuff it's pretty useful, but I think I've only ever felled one standing tree with it! If you're on a limited budget I'd go for the 395 every time.

Have a look on these: 4x4 Pickup Accessories | Aluminium Boxes | N & J Aluminium Linings Ltd They're not cheap but they seem to be quite good. I think there's been a thread on here before. Cheaper way (probably) is to do it yourself - I've lined things myself before, gives you a lot of scope to set things up just the way you want it.

I've heard rates for self employed cutters from £70 to about £150 a day supplying own kit and fuel. Low end of that you're very inexperienced, only got basic tickets and probably undervaluing yourself. Top end of that you'd better have a lot of experience, ALL the tickets - big trees and windblow - and be able to justify your rate to the main contractor.

Try these for gas springs, I think they've got a fair range. CBF | Commercial Body Fittings Ltd. Assuming the link works that is.

Not on purpose!!! :lol:

I find a big shot invaluable, even on small trees. This probably says much more about my skills with a throw-line than anything else. The big shot saves much time and heart-ache. Money well spent in my case, but if you have any sort of degree of hand - eye co-ordination you might think differently.

Totally agree with all of the above. Sometimes you have to be adaptable and figure out how to do things as they arise. College and training courses tend to only deal with the ideal situation, not always easy to apply ideal world techniques to the real world. All that said, I've seen us looking at an awkward tree for ages trying to figure out the best way to getting it down safely without mullahing the summerhouse and wall underneath, including going to get more kit and lots of head scratching. In the end we took it down pretty much as the book said to. Always worth remembering that you have the "right" way of doing things in the toolbox too. Getting back to topic, this is why its so important to get young guys straight from college/tickets in with more experienced folks. Both can learn from each other IMHO.

Cheers. All done by hand, amazing what you can do with a big cant hook, a bit of gravity and a bit of sweat.

A bit of windblow clearance from across a forest road. New on top of old - joy. Got the same to do round the corner on Monday.

Nowt wrong with that (provided obviously there's no TPO's or the like and the trees are coming down anyway). Think I'd use rails rather than panels though. Done a few fences in the woods that way, small scale felling and restock. Fell the trees, ones round the outside fell at about 6' - 7', top wire, bottom wire, roll of temporary net: job done, cheap temporary deer fence. Sometimes need to put in a few extra stabs between, and need to trim the strainers/turners a couple of times if its the likes of ash or sycamores but does a good job.

Back up? Fail safe? Nothing would surprise me these days! Mind you, in this literal world, all the signs will need changed to "wait here when red lights show"! The confusion otherwise....

For the record, I was certainly not trying to suggest that sycamore is native or indigenous, but it can be considered naturalised. There seems to be debate as to whether it was introduced in the 16th or 17th centuries, the middle ages or by the romans. Categorising species as native or non-native will always cause the debate as to whether we count humankind as a part of the natural order, and at what point in time do we remove ourselves from nature, however, in it's current accepted use, I see no reason that the meaning of native should become diluted: it is a species which made it to a locality without human intervention.

Good advice.

From the blue book: Volume from Length and Mid-diameter : V = ( π dm² / 40000) * L V is volume in cubic meters π is pi (3.1415927) dm is mid diameter in centimeters L is length in meters So: V = ((3.1415927 * (75 * 75)) / 40000) * 12 = ((3.1415927 * 5625) / 40000) * 12 = (17671.458 / 40000) * 12 = 0.4417864 * 12 = 5.3m3

Indigenous would normally be referred to as native here as, JLA says. Also correct that the normal definition of native for the UK is that a species has to have arrived after the last ice age and before the land-bridge linking us to the continent eroded to form the English Channel. Some species are only native to certain areas however; beech, for example, is only native to the south-west of the UK, it is not considered native in north England or Scotland. Naturalised refers to species which have been introduced by humans, but have been here for so long that they have effectively carved out their own niche. The only one I can think of is sycamore, a Roman introduction, which is considered naturalised. It will grown in natural rotation with ash: sycamore regenerating under ash, then ash under sycamore, then sycamore under ash..., you get the idea. They will also form part of the wider eco-system, supporting other organisms. I think hard-core conservationists/environmentalists have a problem with "naturalised", tending to see things as either native or non-native. Daythe trees, I've never heard of domesticated in relation to plants, but I suppose it is a good enough term for species which we grow agriculturally (just because I've never heard of it doesn't mean it isn't used or valid). or even silviculturally. I think you are confusing GM and breeding.