Apex

Word for word this advice is on one local council's advice page. But is it right ? "TREE WORKS THAT ARE ROUTINELY REFUSED BY THIS AUTHORITY • Crown reduction. This work will usually only be permitted where there are clearly identified health and safety implications of not carrying out the work. Proposed crown reductions of healthy trees for reasons of improving sunlight/daylight penetration, creating or improving views or imprecise tree management reasons are unlikely to be approved. • Crown thinning. This work will usually only be permitted where there are clearly identified health and safety implications of not carrying out the work i.e. management of a lapsed pollard or a previously crown reduced tree. ........Having read this it would appear the council's advice contradict the guidance in BS3998:2010. This was recently addressed with the Council in a local Arb working group meeting. The Council requested I put this to the wider Arb community and receive feedback before they will consider making any possible changes to the Council's policy. Any comments would be gratefully received ....

We are having problems with a local authority refusing to register works unless individual branches are specified on every application relating to thinning or just general removal of crossing, structurally weak, or hazardous branches. Example of what they require: Branch 1. On the south side of the crown, 2nd main branch from ground level and 8th branch along the stem going north, remove crossing branch. Branch 2 and so on.... Below an example of one of our applications that would not be adequate. " 1. Crown thin - upto 10% to leave a well-spaced and balanced branch structure, including removal of 'structurally weak or hazardous branches' where necessary (see BS3998:2010 sect. 7.5) Formative prune - involving the removal of one of two crossing-branches, where necessary (Approximately 10 in number), and involving smaller branches upto 100mm dia. at the point of crossing (see BS3998:2010 sect. 7.4) Collectively, the above works will not exceed removal of more than 1/3rd of the foliage bearing material throughout the tree and it is deemed to have adequate vitality" Unfortunately this decryption is not adequate enough for this council and they are not happy with this explanation and are saying it is too generic ? Our recommendations accord with Table B1 of BS3998:2010 Management objectives and commonly applied pruning options To maintain health or longevity by means of: good structural integrity by removing individual dead, defective or diseased parts. We feel without carrying out a climbing inspection we cannot realistically identify all branches from ground level and there has to be a certain amount of responsibility left with the climber to identify these branches as he carries out his work from the tree. Also the additional admin to achieve this for all parties would be horrendous and unrealistic on larger mature trees with many defects. Any comments would be welcome to gain a general feeling out there on this?