Re: uktc Digest Wed, 07 Dec 2005
| Subject: | Re: uktc Digest Wed, 07 Dec 2005 |
|---|---|
| From: | Adam Hollis |
| Date: | Dec 08 2005 19:14:26 |
On 7 Dec 2005, at 21:26, uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info wrote:
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2005 13:37:48 +0000 From: Edmund Hopkins <Edmund.Hopkins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.gov.uk> Subject: RE: Beech + Meripilus = fell ?It is an interesting discussion and I have no quarrel with theassertionsyou make about the pathology and complexity of the tree and itsfungus. Butresources are not infinite and those of us that have to work withinbudgetrecognise that.
Edmund Hi
I have only had time to dip in and and out of this thread, but to
sound my own hobby horse,
I guess one of the conclusions is that CTLA should inform QTRA and
vice versa.
Not all trees are of equal amenity value and some will justify more
expense than others.
Equally not all trees impinge upon targets and need much expense.
A better understanding of the resource's value and the value of its
key components will help inform budget allocation.
Regards Adam -- The UK Tree Care mailing list To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info The UKTC is supported by The Arbor Centre http://www.arborcentre.co.uk/
Current thread
- Re: uktc Digest Wed, 07 Dec 2005
Dec 08 2005 19:14:26- Re: uktc Digest Wed, 07 Dec 2005
Dec 09 2005 01:31:29
- Re: uktc Digest Wed, 07 Dec 2005