UKTC Archive

Re: How does one inspect big hairy common limes, allowed to grow a secondary forest of basal sprouts?

Subject: Re: How does one inspect big hairy common limes, allowed to grow a secondary forest of basal sprouts?
From: AV Arboriculture
Date: Oct 29 2019 11:59:52
David,

It is fair that you have pointed out the lack of clarity in some of my 
language, and your clarifications are in line with my intended meanings. 

I do not concur with your approach that the tree has to have an obvious 
defect such as dieback in order to have a closer look at the lower stem and 
base of the tree.  I'm sure most people on here will concur that a tree can 
have a serious structural defect and show no physiological symptoms.  
Similarly, a tree can have an infection of Ganoderma sp. or Kretzschmaria 
deusta and still show no physiological symptoms in the crown.

I'm sure you know this; I can't understand why you wouldn't want to make sure 
that a tree has no defects that would make it an intolerable risk?  Could you 
honestly declare a stand of Limes with epicormics growth to be of tolerable 
risk, just going by a visual inspection above epicormic level?  Could you 
then defend yourself in court when one of these trees fails and kills 
someone, due to the presence of a critical defect that would have been 
spotted had the epicormics been removed? 

Regards, 

Mike Charkow 
Principal Arboriculturist 
______________________ 
Arbor Vitae Arboriculture Ltd 

Planning surveys, Tree inspections, Bats in trees inspections, Arboricultural 
consultancy, Soil de-compaction, Root Investigation, Woodland Management. 

[ mailto:info@xxxxxxx.co.uk | info@xxxxxxx.co.uk ] 
[ https://avtree.co.uk/ | www.avtree.co.uk ] 
07917XXXXXX 
Company Registration Number: SC413171

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Evans" 
To: "uktc" <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
Sent: Tuesday, 29 October, 2019 10:12:24
Subject: RE: How does one inspect big hairy common limes, allowed to grow a 
secondary forest of basal sprouts?

Hi Mike

<epicormics, ivy or whatever).>>

I'd strongly suggest never using the S word no matter how thoroughly a tree 
is inspected.  Safe, to most people, means the complete absence of risk.  You 
can't make a tree safe.  What a duty holder should be looking to do is manage 
the risk to a tolerable or acceptable level.  Not minimise or reduce the 
risk.  If a tree fails and kills someone clearly it wasn't safe.  It could be 
a tolerable or acceptable risk though.

<>

What's inspected properly?

I'm guessing you're okay with inspecting trees and assessing the level of 
risk without climbing each one and checking the upper side of all the 
branches you can't see?  Or not entering every garden that's necessary to see 
a tree from all angles.  Or without carrying out sonic tomography and running 
it through some software like TreeCalc on each tree to see whether there's 
significant strength loss from decay?  Or without carrying out a Static Load 
test on each tree in case the roots are decayed?  The same principle applies 
to ivy, climbers, bramble, rhododendron, epicormics, very steep slopes etc.

If you look at the issue through the spectrum of risk, because we know the 
overall level of risk is extremely low (our base rate, on which 
proportionality is founded), you should only be looking closer if there was 
an obvious defect, like dieback, to trigger the extra effort and cost.  As an 
assessor, you simply note the limitations of the assessment.

Cheers

Acer Ventura


--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com




-- 
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

The UKTC is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy
http://www.boskytrees.co.uk/




-- 
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

The UKTC is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy
http://www.boskytrees.co.uk/