Chris at eden

Yes they will. European legislation makes it a requirement that all spatial data is available online, that includes TPO's. Council's are allowed to charge for it though, but the TPO guidance states that the register must be available free of charge so thats a bit contradictory. It may take a while for them to get up to speed but it should happen in the nearish future. Cheers,

If in doubt, speak with the TO.

Don't see how that could ever be enforced, its not in accordance with the legislation.

That is correct. Trees which grew after the date on which the order was served are not covered. Back in 2008 the government advised all LPA's to re-survey all of their area TPO's for this very reason, they are difficult to enforce if old. They shouldn't really list species, that is for groups and woodlands. The proper way to describe an area on the schedule was always, 'all trees growing within the area whatever the species'.

The post isn't about topping its about pollarding. The chap from Oregon seems to think they are the same thing to which you were agreeing. I just don't agree. You kind of missed the end of that paragraph also where it says 'this (topping) is not the same as pollarding'. There is nothing ambiguous there. The reason the bs uses words such as should is because its recommendations or guidance, I can't say anything else. When writing an instruction or specification the tree advisor should change the wording to must or shall. If David Lonsdale thought it was a good idea to pollard 25m trees then why is it not in the standard. I agree though that the terminology used is not helpful. The chap who first posted is asking what pollarding is. Essentially it's what the current bs says it is in the uk. If he turns up to meet a tree officer and asks if he can pollard a 25m tree he is going to look a bit daft especially as TPO officers will always condition compliance with bs3998. I'm not saying you can't top trees higher up as some times you may have to, but I just don't think that is pollarding.

When definitions are vague, misunderstanding is inevitable. BS says it's the removal of most or all of the crown of a mature tree by indiscriminately cutting through the main stem. US says it's excessive cutting, often internodal (used to say 'predetermined'), and done without regard for the the health and structure of the tree. I have no idea what the ANSI (if thats the correct name) says about pollarding but i am pretty confident the BS (British Standard) does not say that! If you can point me tho the page where it states that i will be happy to check my facts and get back to you. Sorry but i dont agree.

It seems that pollarding may be something different in the UK to the USA. We have a British standard that clearly details it as a professional pruning standard and only to be initiated on young trees with a stem diameter of less than 200mm. I dont personally think it can be done to mature trees and still called pollarding, that would be topping. The effect on the mass/energy ratio would be more severe, surely???? Additionally you have to think about the original use of this technique. I doubt whether medievil woodland owners were harvesting pollard re-growth from 25m!!! It would have been done just high enough to prevent cattle grazing of the fresh shoots.

Yes I agree, especially now all the a5 certs have gone.

Hi Paul, Yes that would be my view also. The words actionable suggest that someone is taking action and that must be against someone else so therefore two parties. Whether you could consider the taking of action against the LPA should they refuse is another consideration but i doubt this would count as its based on them refusing an application so it becomes a bit contradictory. More to the point though, its discussed in Charles Mynors book under the heading of to prevent or abate a nuisance. Page 462 of the 2002 version. I dont have the new one as i am too much of a tight wad to buy it but i'm not aware that its changed. To be fair though he doesn't seem 100% sure. I also saw a PINS appeal decision recently where the applicant wanted to fell a tree as it was damaging his own wall. The LPA refused and when it went to the PINS they upheld the decision. I think this adds weight to the assumption. Hope this help, Cheers,

Princeton elm is supposedly resistant. Ulmus Americana Princeton.

This would depend on the situation. I.e. Not if the car park is under the same ownership as the trees. You can't claim actionable nuisance against yourself. That would still be application.

It is unlikley that the LA will want to get involved in serving a notice under Mis Provisions as the powers are descretionary and the duty owner is clearly the tree owner. Addionally section 23 also makes reference to the tree being imminently danagerous but this varies with each subsection. They may be swayed by the fact that the tree is threatening a school. Its not straight forward hence many LA's not wishing to get involved. Additionally, if the owner refuses to fell the tree subject to a notice the LA would then need to go in and fell and seek to recover the costs otherwise they would take on liabillity should something happen. Whether they are successful is anyones guess! Also the powers are to make the tree safe, if the council went in and felled the owner could argue that the tree only needed to be topped so that it could not reach the school even if it fell. As i said, not straight forward. The real bizzare bit for me is those who receive a notice have the right to appeal to the county court within 21 days so that also kind of blows a whole in the imminently dangerous bit. Its a bonkers bit of legislation but worth ago. Speak with the tree officer at the relevent LA. You never know! Obviously the above is a tree consultant's take on legislation and should not be considered an expert opinion. Bit of a discalimer - sorry. If in doubt refer to a solicitor. Cheers,

I agree with Paul. Additionally, even top tree consultants such as those on the AA list will consult with other professionals. For example, if you are specifying ground protection on a development site that has to support traffic exceeding 2t, you would need to do that to an engineering specification. This means involving an engineer. Tree consultants will also discuss legal aspects up to a certain point and then say this has become a legal question and you need to ask an expert, i.e. a solicitor. How far they will go will be based on their own level of competency and experience. e.g. expert witness will be more familiar with the courts. It works the other way as well. Tree consultants will make recommendations and pass that on to a tree surgeon as they are better equiped to do it. There is no shame in it mate.

Here is another one of those indicators. TEP have just posted a job for a surveyor on Arbtalk. It states that applicants must have a level 3 qualification. This is just for surveying work, that is then passed onto consultants for evaluation and analysis. Goes to show what they think they can justify and defend if they need to.

You can also take up to 5 years to complete the L6. Two years is the minmum timeframe and as Andrew already said an extreme amount of work. That said it is acheivable if you get stuck in as both me and Andrew have shown along with an additional 10 tree life students. Not sure how many of those were on year 3 though. Be warned though, there is only about 30% of the students making it in 2 years and a lot drop out in the first few weeks when they realise what the work load is. I was repeatedly told by treelife not to under estimate the amount of work and i still did. Big time. The thing i liked about the L6 was the fact that you have to meet the assessment criteria (AC) at 100%. With exam based and as far as i know with all academic, you only have to hit 50%. This means that if you do a 5837 impact assessment for L6 and it only hits 60% of the AC, you get it back with a few comments and get told to improve it. That will keep happening until you get it spot on. You then get the opportunity to increase your learing to a higher level. This would ultimatly result in you writting a better report which is a benefit if you want to do consultancy. Any report you ever write has the potential to end up in court, do you really want to defend smething which is only 50% correct? I dont see how you would get that on the academic side and that was always my concern and reason for going L6. That is just my view though, BSc is also a good qualification from what i hear. I wouldn't worry too much about if its recognised abroad, that is the whole point of QCF. The are nationally and internationally recognised and people within the industry are well aware of what the dip arb is.

I was thinking of the westonbirt group mate. I didn't really fit in so joined syston. Your group had a better bacon butty shop also which was the real Clincher.

Yeah may be missing the point slightly so sorry if i wasn't clear. What i mean is the Dip Arb is specifically written with consultancy in mind. The BSc isn't, its academic, so reseach and teaching more so. Didn't really want to say that but AA techie just did on another post so obviously not just my opinion. Not saying that one is better than the other, they are the same level so clearly not, just depends what you want from it. Also, the RFS dip arb has gone through many changes in its history. The one that finished in 2013 is nowt like the old 1960's version. That one still had chainsaw ops in the syllabus. The new dip arb is just the latest evolution of the same thing to meet modern teaching stadards. i.e. formative instead of summative assessment.

I agree that L6 is higher but the AA will allow access to its reg consultancy scheme with a level 5 as long as you meet the other requirements. If you look at their current list most of them have RFS PD Arb which is the old version of the L6. Make of this what you will but i think this speaks volumes. I have just finished L6 with Treelife and can't recommend it highly enough. You can also do it as a correspondance course that they call tree mail. My advice though would be to try to make the sessions if you can. There are 25 over 2 years. They do Westonbirt, Syston, and Harlow. Part of the learning and confidence comes from working with other professionals at the sessions and exchanging ideas. Good luck!

I know, nightmare. I read the other day that they are going to scrap Latin names for all new plants, algae and fungi. Not relevant anymore apparently. The new international language is English so that is what they are going to use. I hope its a spoof to be fair, I like the fancy names.

Yeah it was me that told ya. I knew I shouldn't have been reading those comments out to the group cos I thought they were funny. To be fair though mate I think he was saying that the majority of L6 students did not know what pollard was.

I thought Taxales had been scrapped as an order with Yew now included in Pinales

In general - broadleaf.

Good call. Knew someone would catch me out when i said it.