RichSutherland

1 hour ago, Mick Dempsey said:

It’ll look crap.

That's that then! haha

Hi - me again!  

The current owners of the property have had a quote from someone before that sounds a bit cheap to me, but he has quite good reviews. I'll call and discuss with him but he had a suggestion where the trunk was turned into seating. I was quietly wondering if there was a use for the tree trunk - given the honey fungus, is this a terrible idea or actually could it be a good idea as I read that dead wood can prevent the fungus from spreading? 

Thanks!

Thanks all! Going to get a couple of quotes (not looking forward to seeing the figures) and will just try and keep an eye on nearby trees to make sure they're healthy. Will need to all be discussed with the council, as it has a TPO, Jerry said they will want a new tree planted - we would too of course, but not sure how flexible they are if there is honey fungus, or perhaps it is an argument to choose a tree species that is more resilient to it, like a Yew? 

This has been a deeper dive into trees than I ever thought I would do!

3 minutes ago, Mick Dempsey said:

No, don’t worry about it.

Thanks! RHS website almost maks me feel like it will kill everything nearby!

Should I be very concerned that this disease is there? This is a fully mature large Beech tree, I imagine removing all of the roots is next to impossible. 

Thanks Kevin - sorry to keep triggering new topics  

To be honest we really wouldn't want a big dead tree stump right at the front of the house anyway, also as part of the TPO we may be required to plant another (although we would want to do this ourselves regardless). 

Hi All, 

We asked Jerry Ross, who was recommended by Cobbs Tree & Estate (thank you) on this thread, to complete a survey and he has just sent an update over by email. Unfortunately the tree is 2/3rds dead and definitely needs to come down. It also has traces of honey fungus which he says potentially could spread to the other mature Beech tree, to minimise the chances of this the stump should be grinded down. 

I've just sent the bad news over to the estate agents to pass on to the owners, hopefully we can take on responsibility for this financial burden together and get the issue resolved, but it's pretty sad news.

I was wondering if there are any recommendations in the Hereford area for surgeons to quote to cut the tree back and grind the stump out. Traffic management will definitely be needed so looking for someone who can factor that in. Ideally would like a couple of reputable people to quote to satisfy both us and the current owners as I expect it will not be cheap. 

Appreciate any help/recommendations!

Thanks,
Rich

6 minutes ago, Mick Dempsey said:

Good idea, it would be nice if you came back to tell us what the report says and your decision.

 

It gives us a kind of closure.

 

Mick

Absolutely - will do!

6 hours ago, Dan Maynard said:

You can see the driveway but don't know what they dug or indeed what heavy plant they parked on the roots. Big problem with root damage and secondary infection etc is it takes years to develop.

I had a discussion with a builder on Friday, cedar being kept on a site being developed. He mentioned bringing soil levels up round the tree which I tried my best to put him off. The lawn in your photo could have been higher or lower before, either of which not great for the tree.

In the end like everyone else said, you need a really good impartial opinion from someone who looks at the tree and the site to get all those factors weighed in, can't really be done from photos.

Absolutely - thanks!

6 hours ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

In reverse order, the side discussion isn’t always helpful to the originator but such situations often give rise to more in depth debate. 
 

Also often the case that a homeowner asks a question, sets the hares running, then never looks in again to see if anyone actually answered their question. 
 

There’s probably an element of the first causing the second to be fair 😂

 

I think someone summed it up quite well earlier. 
 

A ‘tree surgeon’ makes their living from reducing / removing trees. They may not always be the best source of informed, independent, objective advice. 
 

That said, a good one will tell you what they are not prepared to do and why. 
 

A not so good one may advise reduction / removal because it’s in their interest rather than yours. 

Ah of course, I'm a guest in this house and I've found all of the information interesting and incredibly valuable - if it sparks a secondary debate then I don't mind  

I will absolutely get a report done and will follow the advice of the people on this thread. 

Thanks

Just now, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

Rich, my comments were purely hypothetical rather than intended to contribute directly to your specific circumstances. Apologies for that. 

Ah no worries  Sorry just trying to give as much information from my side as possible - there does seem to be a very valid side discussion going on as well! 

I'm not sure what the root zone would be but hopefully the tree is far away enough that the house build didn't impact it. The drive is also not tarmac or anything, just stone chippings but of course I have no idea what it looked like prior to what is there currently so I am not in any way dismissing the observation that root damage has happened!

35 minutes ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

That’s an interesting point Chris. 
 

Are you saying local knowledge should be separated out of a set of observations / recommendations?

 

Whats the difference between an assumed fact and a discussion with a tree owner which seeks to establish local influences which may have effected observable implications?

 

Ive always sought to try and understand what may have happened in the vicinity of a tree through interrogation of any source of local knowledge that might be available. 
 

I might see that a new drive is ‘probably’ X years old, but the landowner can tell me it’s Y. 
 

Is that what you’d define as an assumed fact - and sideline it?

 

That seems absurd to me. 

Sorry - maybe more specifically to my case, I know the drive was at least there in 2011 in its current form from Google maps which says when the images were taken at the bottom. At least in this case it is definitely at least 10 years old but probably older. 

35 minutes ago, agg221 said:

A couple of observations which I hope the other contributors to this thread will agree with.

 

If a tree is not likely to fail from the base (in a way which presents an unacceptable risk if it did which I would think is likely to be the case here) then it does not -need- to be removed. Everything beyond that is a balance of cost and likely outcome. Different people will view this in different ways, depending on how much the tree is worth to them. For some people, it would not be worth the cost and effort of trying the techniques Chris has suggested when weighed against the probability of success. A lot of tree work is driven to a budget and the likely outcome from just cutting back a beech is not going to be positive, so for them the most cost-effective approach would be to take it out. However, that does not take into account the value of a particular tree to a particular individual, so to you it  may well be worth enough to make the investment.

 

If on balance after a proper inspection you conclude it is preferable to remove it, you would have options for replanting. You cannot replace a tree of that size in a short timeframe, but you could invest in a large, heavy standard (not the kind of thing you buy at the garden centre) and with proper aftercare it would make a reasonable statement within a few years. This would also give you the choice of some specific varieties. Personally, I always think copper beech looks gloomy and I really like the appearance of the fern-leaved beech (Asplenifolia) and quite like Fagus engleriana but that's my opinion - yours will no doubt differ. The point is that there would be choices that you could make if you find yourself in that unfortunate position.

 

Alec

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thank you very much - we would invest money to save the tree if it stands a good/realistic chance. If it doesn't stand a chance then we would definitely be looking at planting a new mature tree. I would very much be coming back to this forum for advice in such a case as so far the information/discussion has been invaluable! 

My understanding is this variety of tree is very slow growing so we'd certainly be looking for a variety that we can buy in as large a size as possible and which will, as you say, make an impact as soon as possible. 

6 minutes ago, Cobbs tree&estate service said:

I know the tree. It's local to me. The tree has been in decline for the past few years. Probably around 1/3rd of the tree is dead. I wouldn't trust it to climb and to rig it off itself. My view is the damage was done when the house was built. No tree protection put in place. The driveway construction destroyed a large proportion of the root structure. Its another common case of no planning enforcement. To remove the tree. As well as the dead material. You also have the house, the main road and a busy junction to be dealt with. I can't see that the tree could be saved.

This is really sad to hear - sorry I'm completely new to this forum, are you someone who can do an arb report? Was the drive not done when the house was built around 2005 or was it done more recently? The drive seemed to be as is back in 2011 at least (as per images from google maps). I thought the tree looked perhaps like it had an infection rather than was dead based on looking at it. Does it not all bloom? 

I think we'd ideally like to get a specialist in and see if there is anything we can do to save it. Even if we have to cut some off, get rid of ivy and improve ground conditions somehow. 

18 minutes ago, agg221 said:

Think of the difference between an arb report and a tree surgeon having a look at it as similar to the difference between a surveyor and a builder having a look at a building. Both can probably tell you what needs doing to an extent, but they are not the same thing.

 

Do you know the tree surgeon you have asked to have a look at it well and have reason to trust them? If they are highly experienced and you have a good relationship then it might be what you need but bear in mind that a tree surgeon generally makes most money by doing most work, which could create a conflict of interest.

 

Whereabouts in the country is this? There may be some arb consultants on this site who are suitably located to help.

 

I should add, I am not a professional in this field but the only thing I can see that I would definitely do is remove the ivy, partly because I wouldn't want it going any further and partly because the lower down there are problems, the more significant they are likely to be and ivy on the trunk can hide a multitude of sins. I think it's a positive approach to want to retain large trees - so often people want to remove them or hack them back due to fear of what might happen, so buying a property, getting proper advice regarding options and enjoying the trees is a good thing!

 

Alec

Thanks so much, the property is just outside Hereford.

Thanks all - this is making me think there is hope and that the tree doesn't actually need to come down. I'm attaching the only images I've got of the tree, the original images are quite high quality so you can zoom in but not sure if the upload will drop the quality. The surveyor thought it was no threat to the house because of the distance I suppose (at least not at present size). 

Forgive my ignorance - is an Arb report something special or is it just to have a tree surgeon look at it (as I've arranged for a tree surgeon to go look). If not a tree surgeon, who would I google to have one carried out?

Thanks!

Rich

Also sorry, just to clarify we're not concerned for the mortgage valuation - the surveyor who flagged it to us said it represented no danger to the house, but as it overhangs a public road it is dangerous. He didn't even know the tree had an infection which assuming it does from these images could compromise its strength?

Hi All,

Thanks so much for the responses! 

We know already cutting it back will be expensive, the money is a big factor but actually at the moment our biggest worry is that it indeed needs to be cut down at all - we really love it and feel that it adds a lot of character to the property (the house is actually called Beech House). It is a very mature tree, perhaps 20 meters tall and provides some lovely shade and privacy to the front. We'd be so sad to cut it down, but the concern is that someone has already looked at it and flagged it has an infection and so we're just very concerned now that not only are we likely to need to pay thousands to cut it down but it will also make the property a little worse in doing so. 

Does anyone recognise the disease from the images? We'll definitely keep investigating but it has both me and my wife quite sad this weekend and worried for the other large Beech tree 10-15 meters away from it. 

Thanks,
Rich

Hi All,

We are in the process of buying a house and there are some beautiful Beech trees out the front. Our surveyor said they could do with cutting back so I called a local tree surgeon to get a quote and a colleague of his was familiar with one of the trees and said it had an infection and would likely need to come down. It overhangs a main road and so we are keen to know where we stand before the sale completes and costs etc. 

We were really sad to hear this news as it is a beautiful old tree and it adds a lot of character to the house. I was wondering if there may be any way to save it - I've taken a picture, not sure if this is Beech Bark disease. Whatever it is can it spread to other trees nearby?

Any advice or information would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Rich