A PDF of the slideshow can be viewed at the “Downloads” page.

See the link below for more details:

http://www.scotsman.com/edinburgh-evening-news/edinburgh/trees-trust-has-no-case-to-answer-in-road-death-1-2282746

The . . . → Continue reading: New: BS5837:2012 – Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction – Recommendations.]]> Its not just the title that’s overly long in this newly released British Standard! It could be suggested that a document that’s over forty pages long isn’t user friendly or easy to interpret. But at a quick glance it looks like not much has changed. Will update this post should anything major crop-up.

The new document can be purchased at:

http://shop.bsigroup.com/en/ProductDetail/?pid=000000000030213642

Another week, another tree disease! Surely a sign of the times/changing climate; anyway, the Forestry Commission have reported two outbreaks of Sweet Chestnut Blight in southern and central England. The Blight is caused by the fungus Cryphonectria parasitica (C. parasitica).

It has been confirmed in two young nut orchards of European sweet chestnut (Castanea sativa) . . . → Continue reading: New disease of Sweet Chestnut]]>

Another week, another tree disease! Surely a sign of the times/changing climate; anyway, the Forestry Commission have reported two outbreaks of Sweet Chestnut Blight in southern and central England. The Blight is caused by the fungus Cryphonectria parasitica (C. parasitica).

It has been confirmed in two young nut orchards of European sweet chestnut (Castanea sativa) in Warwickshire and East Sussex. It had never previously been found in Britain, although it has been present in southern continental Europe since the 1930s, and can now be found in much of the continent.

More details can be read at the link below:

http://www.forestry.gov.uk/chestnutblight

The talk covered the requirements of a tree inspector; how to meet a duty of care when commissioned to carry out a hazardous tree . . . → Continue reading: ITS Presentation to ICF – Tree Inspectors’ duty of care]]> Chris Simpson (ITS Director) was delighted to be invited to speak to a combined Insitute of Chartered Foresters (ICF) and Arboricultural Association Scottish branch (AASB) on the 14th March 2012.

The talk covered the requirements of a tree inspector; how to meet a duty of care when commissioned to carry out a hazardous tree survey. The powerpoint presentation can be viewed on our “Downloads” page.

Please refer to our “downloads” page for our recent presentation on “Roadside” trees to the IAM. The talk covers, pros & cons of roadside trees, duty of care, ownership, management and common defects to look out for.

ICF South Scotland Regional Group Evening Meeting                         14th March 2012

 Dear Colleague

 ICF South Scotland Regional Group – Tree Safety & Duty of Care –  7:15pm to 8:45pm. 

 ICF members are invited to attend a Joint meeting with the Arboricultural Association Scottish Branch to a presentation and discussion regarding tree . . . → Continue reading: ICF/AA NTSG seminar 14th March 2012]]> 31^st January 2012

ICF South Scotland Regional Group Evening Meeting                         14^th March 2012

 Dear Colleague

 ICF South Scotland Regional Group – Tree Safety & Duty of Care –  7:15pm to 8:45pm. 

 ICF members are invited to attend a Joint meeting with the Arboricultural Association Scottish Branch to a presentation and discussion regarding tree safety and inspections in the light of the new National Tree Safety Group Guidance “Common Sense Risk Management of Trees”.  The new guidance document is available to download here: http://www.forestry.gov.uk/forestry/HCOU-4VXJ5B

 As principal speaker we are delighted to have Neville Fay MICFor, Chair of the NTSG drafting panel.  

Alan Motion FICFor, Chair of ICF Examinations Board, and Chris Simpson MICFor Arboriculturist & LANTRA /NPTC instructor will also be giving their perspectives as a prelude to a plenary discussion.

 This group meeting is relevant to Foresters and Arboriculturists alike.  Topics will include:

• What do the guidelines mean for me and my clients?
• Who is competent to conduct a tree safety survey?
• How does this change my liability?

 Booking:
Please confirm attendance by e-mail to: john.lees@scottishwoodlands.co.uk

 Location: Royal Hotel
55 Henderson Street
Bridge of Allan
Stirlingshire
FK9 4HG

 The Royal hotel provides a wide range of food at the bar which is available from 4:30pm onwards (vegetarian options available) and which is a good opportunity for members to meet beforehand.

 Parking:
Space is available at the hotel and nearby on street.

 Registration on 14^th March:
Please aim to arrive at 7.00pm at the latest to register.

 Fee:  A small charge for tea and coffee £2.95 each at registration.

 I very much hope that you can join us for what will be a very interesting and informative evening.

 Yours faithfully

 John

 John Lees MICFor, Secretary

Temporary Horticulturist (Dawyck)

Salary £15,680, pro-rata

The Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh is looking to recruit a full time Temporary Horticulturist for a period of 3 months to be based at Dawyck Botanic Garden. . . . → Continue reading: Botanic Gardens job available Feb 2012]]> An opportunity to “get a foot in the door” with the Royal Botanic Gardens is available. Their flyer reads:

Temporary Horticulturist (Dawyck)

Salary £15,680, pro-rata

The Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh is looking to recruit a full time Temporary Horticulturist for a period of 3 months to be based at Dawyck Botanic Garden. DBG is located near to Stobo, on the B712 (8 miles south-west of Peebles).

Applicants should have a recognised horticultural qualification, good practical horticultural skills, knowledge of plants, horticultural machinery and their uses and the requirements of health and safety legislation. You should have good communication and problem solving skills and have the ability to work well on your own as well as part of a team. Any one of the following would be a distinct advantage: PA1 and PA6 spraying certificates, chainsaw qualifications (CS30/CS31), current driving licence, first aid at work qualification.

An application form and a full job description and person specification which outlines all the essential and desirable criteria for this post can be downloaded from this page.

Completed application forms and an equal opportunities questionnaire should be sent to Nicole McGregor in our HR team at The Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh, 20a Inverleith Row, Edinburgh, EH3 5LR or n.mcgregor@rbge.org.uk by Friday, 10 February 2012.

The National Tree Safety Group (NTSG), as I am sure you are aware, are a self appointed group that  have produced, arguably, the most important guidance to . . . → Continue reading: National Tree Safety Group Guidance – a response]]>

No-one was hurt, but the road was closed for a day and the bridge damaged. So unlikely to make it onto the data used by NTSG.

The National Tree Safety Group (NTSG), as I am sure you are aware, are a self appointed group that  have produced, arguably, the most important guidance to affect Arboriculture in some years. Reading through the meatier (of the three documents) “Common sense risk management of trees – Guidance on trees and public safety in the UK for owners, managers and advisers“, I slowly became concerned about the objectivity of the text and the general tone. The NTSG continually confirm that the risk of fatalities or physical harm, due to tree failure, are very low. I agree they are. But why doesn’t the NTSG mention damage to property (homes, out-buildings, cars), the inconvenience caused when roads are blocked, near accidents, cost and inconvenience of clearing up after tree failure?

The NSTG compare the 55 reported A&E cases due to tree failure per year against the vastly higher 262,000 cases caused by playing football. They choose not to mention that no family members have ever had watch their off-spring or parent be crushed to death in front of them when playing football. To quantify the outcomes of tree failure purely in numbers and ignore the severity of physical and physiological affects is to be non-objective.

This document is very important; it declares that “This document may be presented to a court for consideration as supporting documentation in any case involving death or personal injury caused by a falling tree or branch… This guidance can,… inform the court in the making of that decision”. It will be a far more useful document for the defence than the pursuer because it aims to stress the low risk throughout.

Now I don’t lightly criticize anyone’s work, but if the documents provide guidance they need to be objective throughout. I honestly don’t feel I read a balanced objective document. For example (and I realise the whole document needs to be read in context) the word “benefit(s)(ing)” is mentioned 117 times. Fatality is mentioned twice. Diseases, twice. Pathogen, not mentioned at all. Damage is mentioned 27 times, but mainly in the context of damage occurring to the tree. 

The NTSG have stressed the benefits of the tree greatly throughout. They also aim to educate the reader on just how decayed a tree can be and still be healthy. And yes we understand the loss of static mass can be of no concern to the vigour of the tree, but veteran trees can surely only develop safely in open areas, in populated areas it will be difficult to manage the decline of the tree safely.