kevinjohnsonmbe
-
Posts
12,034 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
73
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Classifieds
Tip Site Directory
Blogs
Articles
News
Arborist Reviews
Arbtalk Knot Guide
Gallery
Store
Calendar
Freelancers directory
Everything posted by kevinjohnsonmbe
-
It's a real travesty, a perfect example of bureaucracy gone mad and a complete disincentive to move away from fossil fuels, but totally agree Monster!
-
Looking for a chainsaw carver
kevinjohnsonmbe replied to Treemoose's topic in Chainsaw Carving Forum
I will! One day I'll find someone with the vision (and spare cash) to do it. In the right place, how can it not be an asset! -
Looking for a chainsaw carver
kevinjohnsonmbe replied to Treemoose's topic in Chainsaw Carving Forum
Great to see there is a homeowner out there that's open to that option! I've tried several times, when the right stem in the right place presents itself, to suggest retention and a carving commission but never had anyone that would even entertain the option. Not that I could do it, but I'd love to see it done! -
His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama will be smiling tonight!
-
Developed by a team? Not summarised in 10 minutes from this 4 year old document then? http://www.forestry.gov.uk/pdf/FC_Biosecurity_Guidance.pdf/$FILE/FC_Biosecurity_Guidance.pdf (note to self..... must stop thinking out loud!)
-
Ahhhhh! The value of sharing! Lessons HAVE been leant - they kept the big yellow truck on the end of that baler twine out of screen shot!
-
Great post! Appreciate that!!
-
Just spent 10 minutes on the ridiculous links in the email and the subsequent pages which simply link back to stuff I'd already read. Pointless waste of time! Didn't get far with the survey either.... Wrong questions and even worse answer options that didn't work from a producer supplier perspective. That questionnaire must have been designed by some clown that isn't familiar with the practicalities of being registered.
-
-
Please don't take my questions as disrespectful, I have a more direct style of typing than conversation which can be misinterpreted as confrontational or argumentative, it's not my intention but I'm typing as I'm thinking and it may come across as more direct than I'd like. I take immense personal value from your comments (without attaching any liability Jules!) and find this a really useful exchange. I fully appreciate, as treequip points out in post 24, that there is a risk of developers just getting the digger in if they don't like what the arb does / says, and if it was just a run-of-the-mill site (rather than exceptional / amazing) there'd be no need for this discussion.... But since we're here
-
and the truck goes with it..... Now that would have been a grand finale!
-
Biomass Suppliers List - Scheme Changes
kevinjohnsonmbe replied to kevinjohnsonmbe's topic in General chat
If not designed that way, it's certainly having that effect! -
Just to re-cap: Post 1 - "amazing trees" Post 7 - "some of the best trees I've ever seen" "report will say build / access impossible" So perhaps not a routine or run of the mill situation? Perhaps a situation where chasing the $ might not be the right path?
-
Just saying.....
-
Biomass Suppliers List - Scheme Changes
kevinjohnsonmbe replied to kevinjohnsonmbe's topic in General chat
:lol: -
Biomass Suppliers List - Scheme Changes
kevinjohnsonmbe replied to kevinjohnsonmbe's topic in General chat
It's a farcical administrative merry-go-round! RHI payments are available to incentivise folks into alternative energy production, then charges are applied to cover the cost of administering it.... The only gain is a job for a shiny assed civil servant to sit in an office looking at a computer screen and adding no value. Phefff! -
Don't know the boiler, but there are 2 recent BSL threads which indicate that there is likely to be a registration fee for producer / supplier of accredited fuels. Worth remembering when you run the feasibility figures....
-
I got the email today, haven't done the survey, seen the figures or read the text yet but already thinking what a total waste of money. Damned if I'm going to pay for the privilege of some desk monkey having his job funded.
-
I genuinely chuckled then! It's a valid (real world) point you make!
-
I'm not sure it's quite that 'joined-up' Paul.... When I phone in a query about TPO/CA it goes to a call handler who does a screen check. I'd be really surprised if that enquiry is passed on for any further action.
-
It would be reckless to undertake any tree works without first checking if there are TPO/CA constraints. If a customer complained about a contractor doing that they must be having something to hide or trying to pull a fast one. For a complaint to even be acknowledged under those circumstances would be bizarre surely? As for being instrumental - requesting consideration of implementation of a TPO is not perhaps instrumental (semantics perhaps.) The executive authority for implementing a TPO rests with the LA alone.
-
For me, I see the latter as the more professional route.... (but it comes with potential consequences.)
-
It's a teaser! Similarly, if you asked a builder to quote for works and they subsequently objected to your planning application does the fact you've asked them to quote preclude them from public consultation on a planning app? I can't see how it could (although not sure it's a perfect comparison of circumstances.) If they are visible from a public vantage point would it be a breach of confidence?
-
Seems like a faf for a 2.7m single storey extension? Expense and hassle of constructing within RPA and probably under canopy (if not now but in the future?) Is it worth the hassle?
-
There's the answer!
