MJ Trees & Logs

But would they need to pay more?  If a greater acreage of home woodland was put back into management there would surely be economies of scale coming into play (machinery in use 5 days a week instead of 2?).  Transport costs could be kept down by using locally sourced firewood so would the retail price need to rise?
 
Debate please!  I'm just throwing my own ideas about.

Just buy British wood, there’s enough of it and as long as COMPANIES keep buying from abroad, it ruins our local domestic businesses. It all has a knock on effect. Too many deals done at the expense of us all! X

Just wanted to spread a feeler. Got decent gauge and meterage of wood from your take downs, dismantled and etceteras? If you’re Hampshire based why not contact us at MJ Trees and Logs? We’re a good duo that does not mind a bit of hard graft to make a living.

 

Factor is in on a day rate with proviso we can have the wood, make some money on other people’s shoulders and lets all hell stimulate our industry!

 

Please contact us at [email protected] or take a look at our website www.mjtreesandlogs.uk

 

Big thanks and love in advance!

 

Your friendly neighbourhood Tree Spider-Men [emoji268] [emoji887] [emoji67] [emoji67]

I’m not one for shaming on people but this tree is easily 100+ years and someone’s done this.
Whoever did this you need to take a step back and think if this is the job for you. Pecked common

I bet she only needed a bloody good thinning from centre originally. And now all those branch ends will coppice out.... a trick to generate more work but shape looks proper shittttingzzzzzz to be fair....

Lets find out who did it and DOX them!!

[emoji23][emoji106][emoji122]

Think I’d argue for removal there. The wall cannot be rebuilt further out and take up part of the highway. 
 
The wall will always be an issue. The roots on the cherry tree will always be ever expanding and spoil the structure again further down the line. Possible roots causing issues at the clients side also.
 
tree could be retained with small reduction maybe and keep an eye on the union? But still wall issue. Not sensible nor feasible imo
 
to be fair surely this tree has given its best and is no longer suitable for its location and it would be better to establish a new tree in a better location for future generations. 
 
Just my thoughts from a photo

Agree with everything you said (Know I’m a bit to the conversation) I’d also throw in regarding root damage to the foot path on the other side of wall. If anyone has a trip or an old lady falls and busts her hip, then the Council will be liable as this contributes to Trip Hazards under Health & Safety practices.

Also, the Council absorbs all costs for Destruction to Private Property regarding the tree to further damage and destabilise the wall.

I would remove the tree based on the size occupying the space. I don’t like the split in the bark, it’s damaging the wall and the footpath.

If you get denied permission then the Council must accept the responsibilities for any negative outcomes of their decision, especially when “Professionals” have offered their advice and many Planners have never worked the trade and only have textbook insight.

If you are denied permission, return a phone call to them saying you accept their decision, and presume that the Council will continue to maintain the wall at the tax payers expense and that they absolve all liabilities from yourself as the tree owner, should somebody trip on the pavement and injure themselves or the tree split and etc occurs.

Risk minimalisation Damage limitation! Hope this might help.