John wrote...
"I suspect that both groups would feel more comfortable if their decisions
were based on a better understanding of the problem, through independent and
effective research, and that in turn they could follow appropriate guidance
that could easily emerge from a more sophisticated look at the subject."
In theory yes, but in reality thats just not going to happen because there
are tooo many factors involved. The more I look at it the more I realise that
the "problem" is tooo complicated. I did like Davids idea of using a risk
threshold for trees that needed to be managed, however thats only going to go
so far because it will bring up problems of its own, like how are you then
going to manage the trees in higher risk areas, how high or low should the
risk threshold be, how to decide the actual level of risk on the ground, how
often does the risk needs to be assessed, one Judges decisions, etc,etc.
The solution? We need to learn as we go. Not just about tree risk management
but urban tree management as a whole. I mean what is it that we are doing?
What is the ultimate goal? How many trees of what age do we need? Are we
employing the best methods to achieve these goals? How can we measure our
success or failure? In my mind its no good saying well we've always grown
trees like this so lets carry on and plant some more. Before such questions
are answered I think it would be daft to set a standard that determines what
we should do. I will make things even more complicated and not less so.
And all that before breakfast.
Regards,
Simon Valente
========================================
Message Received: Jul 16 2008, 08:19 PM
From: "John Flannigan" <john@xxxxxxxxxxxx.freeserve.co.uk>
To: "UK Tree Care" <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
Cc:
Subject: RE: Risk and Regulation Advisory Council & BS 8516
Acer wrote <<Whether that risk has been reduced significantly or not is a
different matter, and whether they have done so at an unnecessary cost to
the environment, and financial cost to the tree owner, by removing, or
heavily pruning too many trees too early is an interesting aside.>>
I'm not so sure that this is an interesting aside for all landowners but a
key part of the debate. Community leaders such as district or county
Councillors, for example, would have to be persuaded that an increase in
tree related deaths (no matter how small in overall terms that may be) was
worth re-allocating resources. That's a tricky decision for a politician.
Professionals, particularly those faced with the possibility of corporate
manslaughter charges, will also be wary of making decisions that increase
tree related deaths no matter whether such numbers were 'tolerable' or not.
I suspect that both groups would feel more comfortable if their decisions
were based on a better understanding of the problem, through independent and
effective research, and that in turn they could follow appropriate guidance
that could easily emerge from a more sophisticated look at the subject.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: David Evans [mailto:david.evans@xxxxxxxxxxxx.co.uk]
Sent: 16 July 2008 16:46
To: UK Tree Care
Subject: RE: Risk and Regulation Advisory Council & BS 8516
<<Trees do pose a low level of risk - the important question that needs
answering is that is this because of, or despite of, Arboricultural
management?>>
Hi John
I don't doubt the role of arboriculturists has reduced the risk from trees.
One of the things that strikes me, as I drive around, are the tens of
thousands of trees that I have passed that most certainly aren't subject to
any regular tree inspection regime at all.
If arboriculturists are reducing the risk of death significantly to as low
as 1 in 10 million, then it could be argued resources are not be
appropriately apportioned because the risk of trees could be much higher
than this and still be acceptable (and that's without considering there
numerous benefits). Put simply, the money would be better spent elsewhere,
or on other arboricultural budgets, such as formative pruning - which would
reduce risk further in the long term - or establishment.
Cheers
Acer ventura
--
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/
--
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/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Trees are for life, not just for christmas.
--
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/
