kevinjohnsonmbe

🤨

I added some text (green) within the original OPs question which I quoted. I realised afterwards that that might not have been visible unless you 'expand' (read more) the original question within the post where I quoted it. That green text included the link which states that a dead tree, whilst exempt from the need to 'apply', still requires a notification of intent to remove and, unless subject to a woodland TPO, would require a replacement and that the replacement takes on the former tree's TPO. There are a few 'mystery' parts of the equation which would only be resolved by seeing the original application and knowing fully what happened subsequently.

Best cut would be +/- 500mm above ground level at the stem of the tree....

"smooth" video 👍🏻 Some people have no idea of the value, or any inclination to want to, of what they throw away. Adding value to that which is considered 'waste' is a skill.

There are a few elements of this which give rise to potential 'confusion' especially since the available information is sketchy. Yew tree dying due to ivy? Heavily suppressed perhaps, suffering limb breakaway perhaps, but actually dying due to the ivy...? Possible I suppose depending upon the circumstances, but at best probably unlikely. If there were a picture of the tree pre-reduction that would help. Academic anyway since that part is already done & dusted. TPO approval for a 'reduction' to a 1m stump? That also has elements of the unrealistic about it. Who in their right mind thought that if the tree was "dying" that a reduction to 1m stump would be the best course of action? (well, obviously the LA did, but that is also, at best, a dubious expectation.) Did you submit a second app to remove the 1m stump or just 'notify' the LA that you intended to? You don't have to 'apply', just notify if dead. They agreed but conditioned a replacement - that's about the only part which seems "regular." If you remove it you have to replace it and the TPO applies to the replacement. If you don't remove the stump and it simply decays away to nothing then the TPO dissolves when the tree decays to nothing. So, your options could be: Retain the stump (maybe plant a climbing rose around it and forget about it until it decays to nothing.) or Pull the stump out and pony up with a replacement tree (which will be subject to the original TPO) in a close location to the original.

Don’t like shade, don’t like direct sunlight, don’t like drought, don’t like waterlogging... (bit like myself really) Bit of a bleak out look unless measured in 100s rather than 10s of years 😂

Ive been crook for a week with it. Bloody horrible!

That’s quite funny. Saw something that apportioned some of the reason for the ‘crisis’ to fuel stations running down stocks of the ‘old’ type unleaded ready to restock with the new stuff. That wouldn’t account for the diesel issues though but it might have been 1 of several concurrent contributory factors which resulted in a shambles.

The seminar is available to view now at Recording now available! ATF Autumn Forum 2021- “Tree Diseases and Veteran Trees” 8.10.21 | Ancient Tree Forum WWW.ANCIENTTREEFORUM.ORG.UK Recording now available- "Tree diseases and veteran trees" 8.10.21 The ADB feature is in the first briefing - well worth a watch. I kind of got the impression from the 2nd briefing that (situation dependant) there might be the signs of a shift away from Ash removal towards Ash retention.

“...every submission will get a response ranging from acknowledgement, assessment and where appropriate, a site visit and we encourage people to get in touch...” Not exactly the words but pretty much what I interpreted from what was said this morning by Dr Ana Perez-Sierra, Head of Tree Health Diagnostic and Advisory Service. Like you say though, be interesting to hear what people’s experiences are if / when they do make submissions.

But too readily, everyone seems willing to fall into line. Whether that be NPTC tickets, refreshers and or the FISA schedules. Whilst NPTC / LANTRA provide an ‘oven ready’ basis for supposed competence there has never been anything that dictates those routes should be taken in preference to other methods. Except it appears to have been embraced as the ‘standard’ by which jobs are offered and pay scales determined. We’ve only got ourselves to blame perhaps?

Training and competence - Work equipment and machinery WWW.HSE.GOV.UK

There is an online seminar with ATF taking place right now (09:30-11:30) and the discussion is currently focused on ADB. There is always the option to 'flag' your concerns via the FC 'tree alert' system and FC THDAS are saying they will respond to every input. It would provide you with a qualitative analysis and diagnosis. The seminar slides will be available via ATF website later

Stefan? Stephan?

Are you the guy that used to do stumps?

Quite appropriate perhaps in a large organisation where people of different abilities / skill / motivation would apply. The more people on the workforce the more likely there is to be a requirement for standardisation and, using your amaz on example, a natural extension of the production line efficiencies of LEAN principles. The larger the workforce, the greater the likelihood that ‘someone’ will take the piss - be that thieving, loafing or dicking around which leads to discontent across the whole. In a smaller team natural group cohesion and understanding of each other’s ability / needs keeps things sane.

It was a slow starter E🍳🍳er, but it’s covered some ground today 😂 Tinned peaches to rice paddies, hippy commune to the new world order! This could be the next generation of Dempsey’s “Making the News” unstoppable thread 😂

Crazy! All the transshipment and processing costs and it is still sold for pennies. Simply must be scale and slave labour.

Legend! 👍🏻🤣👊🏻

How about this.... 'Energy' is, and has been for a long time, too cheap - hence people are wasteful in their consumption of it. The (small) example I'd use is the MiL moaning about her bills on a fixed income but seemingly incapable of behavioural change to ameliorate consumption. Example, fill the kettle to the 'king top for 2 cups of tea. Or, since we only have hot water once a day in this house (and when it's gone its gone) (she hates it, I love it 😆) boiling the kettle (again, topped off to the brim) to wash up 2 cups. Just leave it all until there is a load - but no, that's not behaviourally possible. There are many ways consumption should / must be reduced if 'we' (humankind) are to live within the means of the planet. That leads us nicely into the fuel shortage you reference. You know what it means when you run out of something right? You're using too much. Good, I'm glad there was a fuel shortage, maybe it will make people treat what they take for granted with a bit more respect and restraint. And finally, yes, it is the fault of business if business fails just like it is the benefit of a business if business succeeds. 27 applicants from the EU is 27 too many whilst there are slackers on the giro that should be doing the work.

Put the Coolade down E🍳🍳er! Yome starting to sound like James O'Brien (twat)

Amen!

Yup 😧

Of course your point absolutely stands. Everybody pays tax. What I, probably quite clumsily, failed to articulate might best be described by example. A chap living ‘off grid’ in the small woodland plot he purchased from woodlandsforsale.scam with solar panels and a compost shitter walking his bin bags the mile or so to the roadside every week for them to be collected by council tax funded bin men. Not ‘off grid’ just off paying for his share of what the grid provides. On the one hand - who can criticise him when the rich and powerful are doing it on a much greater scale but what happens when ‘the squeezed middle’ decides *uck it, if the rich and greedy as well as the poor and needy can all take the piss - who’s left to pick up the tab?

Yeah, remarkable - 53k on nothing more than a vanity tag. Must be some extreme disposable income in that household.