UKTC Archive

RE: Definition of public.

Subject: RE: Definition of public.
From: Andrew Jones
Date: Jul 26 2021 09:13:42
<<I don't know that "public" amenity can ever be determined with any sort of 
number and visibility is key>>

Key as it is, visibility is just one factor, and I think that our usage of 
TPOs will always reflect the public consciousness and what is 'valued' at any 
given point in time.  (Original government guidance and subsequent County / 
LPA focus saw a lot of focus on protection of woodlands prior to the forestry 
act protection etc.)

Without wishing to go down the route of looking to increase the involvement 
of 'public' bodies in the care of trees in 'private' ownership I do think 
that we will need to begin to give greater consideration to the 'other 
factors, such as importance to nature conservation or response to climate 
change' mentioned in the NPPG.

In light of the way planning looks set to be moving towards 'forward 
planning' and the increasing 'value' being given to 'nature recovery 
networks' there could well be an argument for protecting trees that 
contribute to strategic green infrastructure whether it is 'publicly' visible 
or not.

Always food for thought - what about a veteran tree (NPPF irreplaceable 
habit) that should generally trump any development unless there are wholly 
exceptional circumstances - but without any public visibility? Should we 
refuse development that put it at risk but not make a TPO because it's not 

As someone once said - justification and making the case is the key ;)
For more information go to<>

This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Claranet. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:

The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send

The UKTC forum is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy and
Stockholm Tree Pits