HCR

Impressive

I'm not sure how you can be given the responsibility for maintaining trees on land you don't own. You can register your interest in the land (a private right of way, or easement, by the sound of things) but that doesn't change anything to do with the trees. For a right to exist there must be a dominant and a servient tenement, which in simple English means an owner and a person who exercises that right, or more accurately an estate that enjoys the benefit of the right. So that suggests that there is an owner somewhere. Do you mean registering your interest or claiming title? Apologies if I've completely misunderstood what you were saying.

There are a lot of factors to consider: the type of soil, how wet the area is, what sort of foundations you have, what species of willow they are, how you manage them. Roots need food to grow, and that food comes from the leaves. Restrict leaf growth (by pruning) and the roots won't grow as quickly or to such a great extent. Sallows tend to be slightly less expeditionary with their roots - these include goat willow, grey willow etc (i.e. the ones with broader leaves). Willows are fantastic trees, and amongst the most productive in terms of the biodiversity they support. Don't rush into digging them up, let them grow and manage them by pollarding or coppicing. If you can do it on a rotation so that you maintain the all the stages of growth then so much the better.

Not all land is registered - even though the current process was established in 1925 (and registration began in 1862). Registration was optional in many areas until relatively recently, the 60s or 70s in a lot of places. It only became mandatory everywhere in 1990 and if it hasn't changed hands during a period of compulsory registration it could be unregistered. If land isn't registered you will have to be more inventive. The chainsaw method can work, as can pinning a note to the gate. Asking neighbours might help, of the local FC woodland officer might be able to contact them for you. Check for planning applications affecting the site, they are public documents and may shed light. Be inventive.

How come? I don't remember any difference based on the surface - as soon as reverse movement of the wheels is detected, the brakes are released I can only think that they need adjusting if it's sticking due to the traction not being enough to apply sufficient pressure to release it.

Yes, you can - allowing for the provisos mentioned above. While the arisings remain the property of the tree owner, that doesn't mean you can deposit them on his land without his consent. Chances are he won't want them so it's up to you to dispose of them.

Fair one, we all live in the real world and make our own judgements. There are plenty of times when I have bent/broken the rules to make practical sense for the job in hand, so I'm not going to get all preachy.

Very true indeed. I hope nothing I said suggested otherwise.

Not sure that gives the right impression... Just sayin' like.

A little u-shaped collar? Caravan places might sell one that fits. How old is the trailer? Recent ones have auto-reverse brakes. They might need a service...

It's not just collateral damage, it's a criminal offence. It's up to individuals to operate that way if they choose, but (a) they have to be prepared to face the consequences and (b) they shouldn't really advocate it on a public forum.

An FdSc is designed for people with little or no prior subject matter expertise - everything you need to know is covered on the course.

It won't be common land - commons are owned by someone and registered on the commons register as commons. It's a frequent misconception that common land is land that is 'owned by the people' or some such thing. A clearly defined set of people (the commoners) has certain benefits/rights, such as grazing, pannage, turbary etc but unless you are a defined commoner it doesn't mean much. Urban commons have had public access for quite a while and accesss to rural commons was granted under the CRoW Act. That's only for basic access though, not to cut trees down or anything else along those lines. There's no problem serving a TPO on land that's owner cannot be traced - the LPA will be aware of the process for this. Not wishing to invoke this process might be why they don't want to serve a TPO though... Your client has to make all reasonable efforts to trace the title holder. He can manage it as his own while he is doing this, but of course he does it at risk. After 12 years he can then apply to register it in his name, providing no one shows up with a title deed in the mean time.

Why do you want to clear brambles? They are a totally natural part of woodland ecology, though of course you might have perfectly good logistical reasons for wanting to be rid of them. It sounds like the type of woodland that wants to exist there is the National Vegetation Classification W10 Oak-Bracken-Bramble woodland, so you might want to manage it with the appropriate species in mind ( Woodland Habitats - Mark Frater, Helen J. Read - Google Books ) Planting trees should be the less preferred option - natural generation is far better but it does sometimes need a helping hand. Small clearings in the bramble can help, but most trees can fight through them. Think about the ground flora as well - look up what should be there and if it isn't there already check out somewhere like Shipton Bulbs or look on Supplier Directory | Flora locale for details of suppliers of guaranteed native origin plants.

Useful and interesting, thank you.

I've used nylon coach screws for owl boxes in the past. Can't remember the size but M10 ish.

I'd guess that it could be older - maybe even as much as 180 - as it looks quite stunted. But as sloth said, it's not that easy to tell from a photo. A couple of the lower branches look relatively young, suggesting that a level of retrenchment has been taking place for maybe as much as 50 years, probably less but at least 15-20.

My apologies, I thought you were being tongue in cheek and my answer followed in that vein. Having looked at the pictures again, I can see that reduction could well be a viable option if it's not a desperately target rich environment. Standing deadwood rocks.

Reduction, surely.

If there's a management plan, what did it say about the ancient ash? Essentially though, the landowner can do what he wants but I wouldn't want to pay for a management plan just to ignore it.

What percentage of the fir would you have to fell to allow the ash the light they need? What benefit would felling the ash bring to the landowner? Will the ash survive without work to the fir? What is the woodland being managed for? (i.e. what are the management objectives?)

Yes. And apparently just typing 'yes' means the message is too short to submit, so here's some pointless extraneous information that does nothing to add value to what I actually wanted to say.

Springer, it has to be. Stupid, but incredibly loving dogs.

Have a look at this page to get some ideas on how to clear the site: Tree clearance gallery - Practicality Brown Ltd If you fell the trees and flail the rootplates in situ, you won't be able to use resulting byproduct as it will be a blend of wood, soil and stone. Even if you put root-plates through a grinder, the results will be contaminated.

I'd suggest going with the advice for coppice - physiologically coppicing and pollarding are very similar. Forestry Commission - Pests and diseases - Chalara - managing ash trees