UKTC Archive

Re: VETERAN TREES Re: Tree Risk Management - Taking the defect out of it

Subject: Re: VETERAN TREES Re: Tree Risk Management - Taking the defect out of it
From: AV Arboriculture
Date: Feb 06 2020 12:41:18
This debate just shows why these terms are not that useful and simply confuse 
matters.  Better to be clear and distinctive about why a tree is worth 
preserving (eg it provides good ecological habitat).  The BS5839 distinctions 
lead the surveyor to be clear about the tree's qualities (ie 
arboricultural/landscape/cultural & conservation).

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: "Tim Moya" <tim.moya@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.co.uk>
To: "uktc" <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
Sent: Thursday, 6 February, 2020 12:26:03
Subject: RE: VETERAN TREES Re: Tree Risk Management - Taking the defect out 
of it

Ancient trees are those which achieve exceptional longevity for the species. 
Veteran trees are those which display the characteristics of ancient trees.
That's 22 words
Tim Moya 


-----Original Message-----
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info <uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info> 
On Behalf Of Michael Richardson
Sent: 06 February 2020 12:05
To: UK Tree Care <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
Subject: Re: VETERAN TREES Re: Tree Risk Management - Taking the defect out 
of it

As Alex Shigo said:I believe if a person cannot define a term in 25 words or 
less, they should not use it because they probably do not understand it.

Michael Richardson B.Sc.F., BCMA
Ontario MTCU Qualified Arborist
Richardson Tree Care
Richardsontreecare.ca
613-475-2877
800-769-9183

  <http://www.richardsontreecare.ca/images/Tree_Doc_logo_email.png>



On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 6:52 AM Wayne Tyson <wt750mv@xxxxxx.com> wrote:

A limber pine could be thought of as a "runt" throughout its life. No 
need to split hairs, particularly general, semantic ones. That's why 
assessments need to be individual, and based on facts, not on vague 
labels of questionable foundation. But the quest for "accurate" terms 
is a fascinating one. Clarity in the language is sometimes elusive. 
And sometimes, mere terminology may not be up to the task. Meaningless 
terms might simply be tossed into the dustbin.

Wayne

On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 3:33 AM Ben Oates <b.oates@xxxxxxxx.co.uk> wrote:

Hi Tom,

Good to hear from you.

I mentioned in my previous email that it is all in the word which 
originates from the Latin vetus meaning old.

In my mind, it follows then, therefore, that a tree which is not 
vetus, old or reached full maturity is not a veteran in the true 
sense of the
word
unless one is anthopomorphasising the term for trees, which is what 
I disagree with, i.e. calling young trees with ecological features
veterans.

The value of veteran trees is in part to do with the irreplaceable 
habitats that form over a long time. The younger the tree, the 
easier it may be to replace the habitat because it hasn't taken 
hundreds of years
to
form.

A non-mature tree with important ecological features might be a 
'runt' or 'sickly tree' and likely to merit the BS 5837:2012 
category of C or U
(low
value). Whereas a veteran, in the true sense of the word, would 
likely be an A (high value) category because it truly has acquired 
great age and
all
those things that flow with it along the passage of time.

Young sickly, runts often have features similar to but not on a
comparable
scale with those found on the same species but of great age and 
those
young
runts might well be as important ecologically but on the balance of 
probabilities sickly trees are unlikely to achieve the great age of 
a
true
veteran.

To me, the most significant feature of trees is their ability to 
achieve great age and all that flows from it is what makes true 
veterans so precious.

The implication of naming young runts as veterans undermines the 
values
we
place on true veterans.

Based on my reasoning I do not make a distinction between veteran 
and ancient, to me the word means the same thing, old, and is 
regardless of habitat features.

I am open minded and not stuck in my ways but this is where I stand 
for the time being.

Best regards,

Ben Oates

________________________________
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info <
uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
on behalf of Tom Thompson <admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.co.uk>
Sent: 06 February 2020 00:33
To: UK Tree Care <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
Subject: Re: VETERAN TREES Re: Tree Risk Management - Taking the 
defect out of it

Ben

Are trees not classified as veterans due to their defects, sorry
features,
so they do not have to be old.

Ancient trees are old.  I thought that this was the distinction.

Sincerely Tom

I S Tom Thompson (known as Tom) BSc (Hons) Arb, MSc eFor, MArborA

Principal Arboricultural Consultant
Arbor Cultural Ltd

36 Central Avenue, West Molesey, Surrey, KT8 2QZ

T   0333 XXX XXXX
M  07899 XXXXXX
E   Admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.co.uk
W  [X] www.arbor-cultural.co.uk<http://www.arbor-cultural.co.uk>




On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 at 17:36, Ben Oates <b.oates@xxxxxxxx.co.uk> wrote:

Kevin Slezacek wrote: "I'm seeing an increasing number of cases 
where trees with simple storm damage are being classed as veterans 
and using
this
to object to planning applications."


I have also experienced an LPA classing an early mature sweet 
chestnut (less than 1m dbh) with woodpecker holes and die back, 
likely due to on-site evidence of old root damage, as a veteran 
and invoking the
NPPF.


Don't get me wrong, I love veteran trees.



I agree that a middle aged soldier or younger having seen active
service
makes them a veteran but I do not agree with anthropomorphising 
the
term
for trees, especially for the purposes of invoking the NPPF.



For a tree to be a veteran, in my mind's eye, it must have great age.



The term ‘veteran’, from the Latin vetus, means ‘old’.



So I say a veteran tree is one that has considerably outlived the
typical
life expectancy of the species found in a similar environment
regardless
of
size and habitat potential etc.


Authoritative written guidance is helpful but should be backed up 
with knowledge.

Ben Oates



________________________________
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info <
uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
on behalf of Kevin Slezacek <KevinSlezacek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.com>
Sent: 05 February 2020 16:33
To: UK Tree Care <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
Subject: RE: Tree Risk Management - Taking the defect out of it

Please lets not start introducing terms like early veteran or semi 
ancient. I'm seeing an increasing number of cases where trees with
simple
storm damage are being classed as veterans and using this to 
object to planning applications. I appreciate fully the benefit of 
"true"
veterans
and also understand how many mature trees can have certain
characteristics
that may have benefit to other organisms but I think arbs know a 
proper veteran when we see one and Id like to see some more 
distinct
recognised
terms rather than woolly definitions. When NPPF specifically 
mentions veterans (quite rightly) I don’t think it meant every 
mature tree with
a
woodpecker hole or bit of deadwood! Semi Ancient - what would 
define
that!

Kind regards,

Kevin Slezacek



--
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 
[X] 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 
[X]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/




-- 
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/