What a surprise!!!
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 Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 1:00 PM David Evans <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.com> wrote:
<<Although not a perfect system, the content of peer reviewed articles is
generally more trustworthy than those we regularly see referenced with no
such controls. I had two very astute peer reviewers who made some useful
and valuable suggestions, and the article is much better for it.>>
Hi Jeremy
Thanks for the share. Unfortunately, there's not much I agree with in the
article, but that's fine. All we can do is make our best pitch, debate
matters, and let everyone else make their minds up.
I've got a couple of questions of clarification. The first one is, why is
the 'likelihood of occupancy' not part of your definition of tree risk,
before the Figure 3 risk matrix? Was this omission not picked up during
the peer review? Or is there a reason for not including the likelihood of
occupancy in your definition of tree risk?
Cheers
Acer Ventura
--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info
The UKTC forum is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy and
Stockholm Tree Pits
https://www.stockholmtreepits.co.uk
--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info
The UKTC forum is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy and
Stockholm Tree Pits
https://www.stockholmtreepits.co.uk
