UKTC Archive

Re: Tree Root related subsidence and Woodland TPO's

Subject: Re: Tree Root related subsidence and Woodland TPO's
From: Andersonarb
Date: Jun 06 2006 08:40:00
In a message dated 05/06/2006 10:53:18 GMT Standard Time, writes:

The case in question is alleging that two trees in particular out of the
entire woodland that the property backs onto are causing the problem. Quite
how they have deduced this is beyond me, and why they think that the removal
of these two will do anything to abate it, I have no idea.

Do these two trees happen to be the largest ones in the wood casting most 
shade on the garden Gordon?

I've defended a ludicrous suggestion of a woodland causing subsidence  by a 
similar method; "how do you know it's these trees and not any of the others?" 
But I then had to acknowledge that the woodland had been TPOd and then not 
touched for 20 years. We can't really get away from the fact that shade 
are going to develop over that sort of time and the problem needs to be 
addressed. The "you shouldn't have built the house" argument just won't wash.

As far as I can see the removal of a couple of trees out of hundreds just 
isn't going to make any difference. (Thank you Adam for the eloquence of 
annual increment and leaf area per unit area"). If it was reasonable I'd fell 
the trees if it makes the resident's life a bit easier but if they do come 
wanting more doing cos it hasn't worked, well you've got the "it didn't work 
last time, why should it work this time" argument to throw back at em.

I am concerned that TPOs of whatever hue do not enforce the routine 
management of woodlands or trees and how this situation will affect the long 
term tree 
population of our cities I do not know. Too many tree/ woodland owners 
(individual and LA) fall back on the "it's protected you can't do anything" 
which is ultimately counter-productive.


The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send

The UKTC is supported by The Arbor Centre