kevinjohnsonmbe

Naaaaah..... Get tanked up in the pub, whip up a fury amongst the local firebrands, deputise a posse and ride him out of dodge! Job done. But still get the topless girls chained to the tree...... Tourism hits a new high, parish council approve plans for a theme park on the parish boundary, green field site sacrificed for the development and new dual carriageway to cope with increased traffic. Pub gets bought out by a hedge fund chain and turned into a carvery diner with kids soft play area and village green gets tarmac'ed over for a car park!

Littlemore....... Anyone familiar with the area might reasonably think this householder was a former patient of the nearby facility......

Close, but not quite. A tree owner should 'notify' the local authority of their intention to conduct certain works to trees in a conservation area. It's often the same form used for a TPO works 'application' for ease of presentation of the necessary information. The local authority will consider the nature, extent and reason for proposed works to trees in CA. If they don't object, they may issue an acknowledgement or simply leave it to run past it's time limit for a reply to the person making the notification. If the LA objects or wishes to exert authority over how or to what extent the works should be, they may issue a TPO which would mean the tree owner would have to seek, and gain, consent for all but exempted work.

Contact your County council planning department / tree officer and express your concern. It may be possible to initiate a TPO if the tree warrants it.

If you ask the question, you have to be prepared for an answer you might not like! Made me chuckle......

You were sucked into a sink hole in St Paul's which opened up a parallel universe where cars run on surplus dairy products, the ocean is cizzer and there's a woodland show every weekend?

You doing the Plymouth one Sean?

Reckon the operator must have over stayed in the coffee shop!!

Seen this clip Paul? http://news.sky.com/story/1529970/giant-cranes-topple-over-and-crush-homes Not a good day at the office!

Right on Pete. Hopefully they can help, give 'em a call - Allen is the boss.

25th Anniversary Forums Anyone going SW forum 14 Nov??

Lynher training at Gunnislake may be able to help! http://www.lynhertraining.com/about-us/

Is that the D810 touch Paul? I tried one, all looked fantastic in the brochure and in the show room. I bought it, got it home, gave it a bit of a workout and found that it was actually too good (I mean too accurate / precise / sensitive) Great features, diameter, measure from picture all that sort of stuff but when I got out in the woods with it I found ivy, moving branches, irregularities of nature were just too 'clumsy' for the incredibly accurate tool that was the D810. Maybe I was hasty in giving up on it but I was keen to get it back to the dealer as soon as possible so as not to lose the opportunity to return it. Too pricey to just have it sitting around gathering dust.

Treat it like you own it...... Simple really. If I saw somebody mistreating my kit I'd probably treat them the same.

Legend!

Nobody else can tell you what you're capable of, do your checks, do what you are comfortable with (even if that includes stretching your confidence to or beyond what you think is ok)

Sadly, not uncommon....

Don't hold your breath waiting for the enlightenment! Mrs Migging's husband has busted his ball sack for 50 years to provide that postage stamp of grass.... Even Swampy would have his work cut out trying to convince her "shade tolerant grass" is an acceptable alternative....

Not wishing to declare either for or against just yet, (not that it would make any difference of course) and purely to play devil's advocate, do you know either the tree, the circumstances and/or the people described in this brief scenario? The reason I ask is that without more detailed knowledge than has been relayed in the thread so far, I'd find it a bit of a stretch to classify the situation as picked out in red above. There are 2 reasons for my reticence, firstly the "amenity value" tools available to us take no account of the imagined or actual emotional, physiological or psychological impact upon the person(s) who feels the need the remove or reduce tree(s) that impact upon them. And second, how can "we" who are unaffected by a tree make a qualified judgement of the effect (either imagined or real) on the person claiming to be adversely affected? Reasons for disallowing work to TPO trees is often cited as "amenity value" but I've yet to really find these elusive individuals that derive such pleasure from other peoples' trees. There are quite often those habitual complainers who like to barrack the parish council and often have more to say about other peoples' business than they would probably like other people to have say about their own. I have (quite often) found people that have genuine, real and measurable example of hazard from example tree(s) who are required to suffer-on due to "amenity value." I agree that the macro ideal would be a more densely populated urban (and rural) forrest, but macro ideals have micro impacts and I don't believe the cause is best advanced by over use of the catch-all "amenity value" or that phrase popular with some members - which came first, the house or the tree. Hopefully we'll hear more as the scenario develops.....

Pretty awesome!!

Like that one (and particularly timely / relevant right now!)

Took Mrs J to Falmouth last weekend (cracking place by the way, parks & gardens dept earning their keep and the town is buzzing with activity) But you can only walk around looking at stuff for so long.... Day 1 fine, day 2 bit repetitive, day 3..... Ready to go home for my own cooking!

I hear that Ted! At least the channels are open again, jaw-jaw better than war-war. We can have that discussion at another time/place, Jon wants to keep it on track and I reckon he's more to be feared that Castro! Hoping for a 🍺 at Confor Jon!

Off topic, good to see "old Glory" flying in Havana again Ted.

Ted, I can't say my suggestion was thoroughly thought through or even entirely serious. I'm no fan of nationalised industry ( for exactly the reasons you mention just above) but if we hit a point where cumulative annual subsidy exceeds the original purchase value surely the business MUST belong to the tax payer (it happened with the bank bailout.)