David wrote
<<Here's the quote.
"Where trees are in very public places we suggest that non-specialist
staff with a working knowledge of trees should look out for obvious
problems as part of their everyday work. Inspection by tree experts is
likely to be appropriate only in very limited circumstances, for example
where a tree in a very public area is known to be unstable but is kept
for heritage or other reasons......... We hope that by sharing our own
guidance we have provided a useful starting point."
I just can't believe that so many Arbs, on the forum and elsewhere can
dream of going along with this.>>
At first sight it does seem a bit cavalier, but if you emphasise the
words 'obvious' and 'for example' it is slightly less so. Unfortunately,
it is an understandable reaction to the draft BS. And from the spectrum
of tree risk management from none, through reasonable to excessively
cautious, I think the RRAC may be nearer reasonable than 8516 and that
is why, if published, the BS could become a cause celebre for the
growing anti-nanny-state brigade with resultant and entirely negative
publicity for our profession. Which is a shame, because when you inspect
your 15,000 street trees you do so much more than look for holes and
weak forks.
John Hearne
Tree Officer
New Forest National Park Authority
South Efford House
Milford Road
Lymington
SO41 0JD
Direct Line: 01590 646677
Fax: 01590 646601
Web: www.newforestnpa.gov.uk
The New Forest National Park Authority's Purposes
Email disclaimer
This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet Services. The
service is powered by MessageLabs.
--
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/
