Chris at eden

They can use any condition as long as it passes the six tests. This is why I think planting prior to felling is a no no, I don't think it passes test 1 and 6, i.e. necessary and reasonable in all other aspects. I spoke with a PINS inspector about the positioning a couple of years ago. What the regs say is at the same location, not in the same location which to me means the same address not the same spot. He seemed to think it was a reasonable approach. Cheers

Asking for the replant on the same day is over the top in my opinion. Remember you have the option to appeal the condition or any resulting TRN at which point the PINS turnaround is 27 weeks I think. They are supposed to give a reasonable amount of time for replanting which is why I think the condition to replace before felling is inappropriate. Cheers

Trees planted pursuant of a condition are not automatically protected by the original order. The LPA would either have to vary the order or serve a new one. Trees are only protected by the original order if they were, felled in contravention, felled because they were dead, or felled due to an immediate risk of serious harm (i.e. they were exempt due to condition). I'm not convinced they can condition that you replant before felling either although I'm not sure about this. I would appeal the condition just to see what happens. Regards

Its volume of material over 8cm diameter @ 1.3m or 10cm for thinning. It relates to the trunks as lopping and topping is exempt so no problem with large branches. So therefore your 8" trunks would be covered. As in your scenario you have LPA consent this would be an exemption. Works to implement full planning consent are exempt in the same way as with TPOs. Cheers

It's not just about woodlands or large numbers of trees. Check to see if you fit one of the exemptions. If not you will need one.

Yes that is about right. Places to be aware of is things like industrial estates, they require a felling licence if the volume is exceeded. Cheers

I think that is about non-determination. As far as I am aware the appeal still needs to be made within the 28 days but the PINS wont proceed until it has been confirmed. The PINS send a questionnaire to the LPA asking for the appeal documents, the bit about confirmation says: Evidence that the TPO was confirmed - This is a mandatory requirement. If the TPO has not yet been confirmed, you should advise us of the anticipated date of confirmation. We cannot proceed with the case until the TPO is confirmed. If you are unable to supply evidence that the TPO was confirmed, its is likely that we will decide that the appeal is invalid and the tree not protected. The last bit is obviously about older TPO where the LPA have no record of confirmation - that is more common than you would think. Doesn't really say anything about not being able to supply an anticipated date for confirmation or how long they are prepared to wait. I suppose its the 6 months.

I heard a while ago that the one of the PINS inspectors was attending the Tech Cert sessions with Treelife with a view to getting an arb qualification. Good idea I would think but it made me wonder why the arbs wouldn't do the same in getting a planning qualification to better position themselves. I was told by one of the inspectors that the reason the arbs don't do hearings is that they don't have a formal planning qualification which is a pre-requisite. Seems like a no brainer to me. Bit late now I suppose.

I've done dozens of fast track appeals and a few hearings when working as a TO and only ever been overruled once by the PIN inspector. I knew I would as well and only refused the application on someone higher ups instruction. I always think if the PINS inspector is going to give it then why bother refusing, its a waste of everyone's time. I take your point about some TOs though but they are not all bad.

You can also appeal consent subject to conditions, e.g. tree replacement, or TRNs for that matter.

I think a little confusion in terminology. There is no appeal route against the making of a TPO but you can make an objection within 28 days. The council then need to consider your objections when making decision on confirmation. As for appeals. I know it says 27 weeks on the PINS website but they don't usually take that long, especially if you go fast track. If you go fast track you will get an arb consultant, if you go hearing you will get a planning inspector. In my experience anyway.

I stand corrected, maybe I should have read 211 before jumping in. Every day is a school day. Sorry but - just a slight derail here - I have a client at the moment who felled some trees in a CA without consent and was duly prosecuted. Got a fine from the magistrate. He has now been contact by the council to say he needs to replace the trees, not a TRN, just a letter at this point. He asked me if this is allowed as he has already been punished which is nonsense to be fair, section 213 requires replacement. Where it gets odd though is that the LPA have said if he doesn't plant them be February they will serve a TRN thus giving him 28 days to plant them, after the 28 days has passed they will send someone onto his land to plant the trees and recharge. This in my view is an incorrect interpretation. The 28 days is the objection period in which you can appeal a TRN to the PINS. Therefore the TRN cannot take effect until at least 28 days after it is served. The guidance then says that the TRN should give a date by when the tree replacement notice should be complied with and that the authority should consider what the landowner can reasonably do. In reality I suppose the LPA are thinking they will make the deadline 1 day after the notice takes affect and they can use the 28 day to plan, but does this really consider what the landowner can reasonably do? It will also be getting very close to the deadline. Additional to this the trees have no public visibility and so it may not be in the interests of amenity to replace them so we are probably looking at appealing the TRN within the 28 days and this would definitely be pushing the situation outside of the planting season. It seems a fair approach to me would be to serve the TRN saying trees to be planted by the end of December 2017. If they ignore then there is still 3 months left in the planting season to enforce and there would be plenty of time to process the appeal. Any thoughts people? Cheers

Hi Gary Yes the 2012 regs require that the order is confirmed within 6 months, you cant confirm later. You are correct about the old system in that it could be confirm after the 6 months but the tree would be unprotected for the period between the end of the 6 months and confirmation. Although you could confirm after 8 years as you say, the guidance specifically advised against this for the reasons you outlined so they shouldn't really be doing that. May even be a case for judicial review - don't quote me on this though. As for your situation, its unusual but I would say you need to serve a new 211 notice. Its a pain yes but the LPA responded to your original 211 and there are a number of reasons as to why they may not have confirmed. Long term sickness for example, or someone dropped the ball. I still think its a new 211. I see what you are saying but they couldn't simply keep serving new provisional orders every 6 months as this would end up with the ombudsmen, not to mention it would be a ridiculous amount of work to administer TPOs in this way. Cheers

The basic tree inspection course is for people such as highway engineers so they can spot obvious defects while doing their job. You need PTI really if you want to get in with tree surveying companies. 5837 is also a separate subject altogether. There is also UA5 you could look at although its not my thing really. Good luck

Have you tried linked in?

Where are you based?

Hi Dave If you search on Google enough you will probably find a comparison table but you will probably need to go through the European Qualifications Framework (EQF) rather than our RQF. I've had a quick look and they seem to have 10 levels whereas we have 8 plus 3 entry level at the bottom making 11. This splitting of the entry levels is a relatively new thing though from what I remember. Brought in when the old QCF changed to the RQF. The higher quals look relatively straight forward. L8 - PHDs are L8 in UK and L10 in NZ. L7 - Our L7 appear to be split in 2 over there - L9 for MSc and L8 for Post grad dips and cert. L6 - BSc is L7 in NZ. L4 and L5 - Higher education dips and certs in UK - these appear to be L5 and L6 over there. This leaves 4 levels at FE. This is probably equivalent to our L1, L2, and L3, plus the entry levels. So yours I would think would be either L3 or possibly L4 over there. This is just my opinion as I have only looked quickly. What is your L3? Cheers

What he said!!! I've tried PDAs and tablets and I'm not a fan.

Me too.

No maybe about it mate - spot on I would say.

Yes but HC is more prone to decay than say oak or beech. Mid summer is best as low spores and high response from the tree. The wound response of deciduous trees during winter is pretty low. That said, tree surgeons prune all year round and what is the impact really? Also, HC will probably decay anyway irrespective of what time of year you prune.

2nd for that one.

If it doesn't sound hollow it probably isn't so I doubt a picus will help much but it will sound different as the wood has a high moisture content. You wouldn't base fell or retain just on the info in the photo. What is the target? What is the vitality of the tree like? What is the exposure? Wetwood is usually insignificant unless there are canopy symptoms or other issues present. If you are unsure then by all means get it inspected but I wouldn't personally be breaking out the expensive Picus test at this point. Cheers

Sorry meant to say the white is when the forced sap dries out.

The black / orange are the exudates from the wetwood causing bacteria, the white is when it dries out. Pseudomonas bacteria which causes bleeding canker in horse chestnut is one of the main causes of bacterial wetwood but there are lesser known bacteria associated also. The presence of the bacteria within the wood raises CO2 levels which in turn increases internal pressure forcing out the sap - hence the wet appearance.