UKTC Archive

RE: [EXTERNAL] Tree failure potential assessment study WAS Civil cases for nuisance or damage to property

Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Tree failure potential assessment study WAS Civil cases for nuisance or damage to property
From: oldoaktree@xxxxxxxxx.net
Date: Jan 14 2020 22:14:19
Nicely shot from the hip there Wayne, but you rub a lot of peoples noses in 
the dirt there. 

Talk like "show me an expert and I'll show you a fool" doesn't really gell 
very well with any of us who might have some expertise in certain areas.

If you want to make a criticism, then please make it clear, specific and 
recognisable. Scattergun approaches do not help your position.

Ta

Dave

-----Original Message-----
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info <uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info> 
On Behalf Of Wayne Tyson
Sent: 14 January 2020 20:30
To: UK Tree Care <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Tree failure potential assessment study WAS Civil 
cases for nuisance or damage to property

Then "arbs" have a long way to go. "They" haven't scratched the surface of 
science, and if by "judgment" you mean "experience," they are settling for 
far too little. There are WAGs and SWAGs, but show me some DATA! That is, 
*discipline*! Where are the actual studies that can back up "judgment?" I 
can't find 'em. The tree professions *can* get better and better, if the 
individuals in it want to. Show me an "expert" and I'll show you a fool. At 
the very least, the profession can move from "imminent" to recognizing 
unstoppable trends.

On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 11:42 AM Jim Quaife <jq@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.co.uk>
wrote:

Nice idea Wayne, but no chance of enactment. By and large root systems 
are over-designed in nature, and root severance is a matter of 
judgement and not law.  BS5837 advocates the removal of perhaps 
two-thirds of a tree's root system. There are any number of instances 
where roots have been severed to an extent that raises eyebrows and 
yet the tree doesn't miss a beat.
Of course there are converse examples, but I have been in situations 
where a single root is deemed to be important and when one looks at 
what else is sustaining the tree, that notion is frankly ridiculous.
Like everything else to do with trees, root severance is a matter of 
judgement and justification.  This is an arb's stock in trade!
Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info [mailto:
uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info] On Behalf Of Wayne Tyson
Sent: 14 January 2020 18:38
To: UK Tree Care
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Tree failure potential assessment study WAS 
Civil cases for nuisance or damage to property

The main "practical" point is that there should be a law prohibiting 
the severance of tree roots. Of course, we all know that's not going 
to happen, but it should be done with full knowledge of the 
consequences, and under permit that requires real data on the 
potential consequences (including
liability) derived from sound scientific procedures (e.g., tritium 
tracing or approved equal [For the record, I have not performed this 
procedure, only read about it.]). What is not well understood is the 
complex nature of the radial root system development in all directions 
from the stem/trunk in relation to tree health and structural 
stability. What really provides resistance to toppling/uprooting is 
the fine-root matrix that extends to and beyond the "drip-line" of the 
tree and whether or not meristematic tissue is present to facilitate 
"recovery" of the severed roots, which is limited to fine roots. 
Anchoring roots tend, in many if not most species, to lack such 
tissue, and their severance kills the attached finer roots that 
actually provide the resistance. Big roots lacking the capacity to recover 
do not, by themselves, provide much resistance--root "pruners,"
listen up! Loss of resistance is essentially permanent, and the load 
continues to increase as the tree grows. At the very least, such a 
practice does not increase resistance (root-system "strength").

Here is a link of relevance I recently discovered by one of our (US) 
best arborists. It should be noted that while it may be an absurdly 
extreme case, tree failure potential can be significantly induced by far 
less.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFqU2kBlxkI

WT

On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 4:33 AM Harrison, Sean < 
Sean.Harrison@xxxxxxxxxxx.gov.uk> wrote:

Nice one Wayne;
I shall use that next time an insurance company wants a 200 year old 
tree removed because roots are damaging the foundations of a 70 year 
old
house.
Sean



-----Original Message-----
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info <
uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
On Behalf Of Wayne Tyson
Sent: 11 January 2020 22:40
To: UK Tree Care <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Tree failure potential assessment study WAS 
Civil cases for nuisance or damage to property

Warning: email from outside of MVDC - if in any doubt do not open 
links
or
attachments, or carry out requested actions
________________________________


 Mike Charkow,

Somewhat tongue-in-cheek but (contrarily and seriously), I might 
suggest that the construction of the fence and slab might have 
caused damage and
to
the root system and compromised its integrity, possibly compromising 
the tree's well-being and shortening the tree's life, not to mention
weakening
the tree's ability to support itself constitutionally and 
physically, as well as the slab depriving the root system of air and 
water, thus causing the root system to favor the part of the soil 
profile nearest the
surface,
i.e., the slab as well as possible or probable damage to the root 
system
by
the digging of fencepost pits, not to mention the installation of 
underground facilities such as foundations, utility facilities, etc.

On the other hand, the planting of a large-growing tree in a 
location close to a property line by someone who knew or should have 
known that it would encroach upon an adjacent property might also be 
questioned. If the tree was natural, both owner and neighbor might 
be guilty (as if there
were
any justice for Nature's voiceless) of  compromising the tree's 
rights to the quiet enjoyment of its home and sustenance, as well as 
expectations
of
freedom from injury.

I'll be interested to know (and get links to) any cases and 
judgments. Do tree's have standing?

Wayne



--
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/ This MVDC email is only intended for 
the individual or organisation to whom or which it is addressed and 
may contain, either in the body of the email or attachment/s, 
information that is personal, confidential and/or subject to 
copyright. If you are not the intended recipient, please note that 
copying or distributing this message, attachment/s or other files 
associated within this email, is strictly prohibited. If you have
received
this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and then 
delete it.



--
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/



--
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/




-- 
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/