CONSERVATION AND ECOLOGY
Surveying your trees
A common sense approach
In the present climate of litigation, many clubs are now afraid of the words health and safety. However, with a common sense approach to surveying your trees, an efficient and cost effective strategy can be put in place which should cover your legal requirements
I
t should be noted that relatively few accidents per annum arise from trees; most of these occur where adjoining highways when vehicles are moving at speed. For instance, in the past decade an average of four deaths a year have occurred as a result of roadside trees falling on vehicles or from collision’s with fallen trees. The risk of being injured or killed by a falling tree is therefore low.
A new approach to tree surveys has recently come to the fore, which involves identifying areas of high and low risk. This allows the land owner to concentrate his efforts on key areas.
A tree survey plan should be put in place
incorporating zones of high and low risk and the amenity importance of any notable trees.
Zoning
A landowner or manager can define areas of use, prioritising the most used areas or those which have a definite target, such as an adjoining property. This is a cost effective approach to tree surveys and can focus resources on appropriate areas. It contributes to sensible risk assessment and a defendable position in the event of an accident.
There would typically be two zones - high
risk and low risk - high risk being an area which has a target (a house or building) or is used by many people every day. On a golf course, this could be a tee or green or, in general terms, could be a public footpath, road, children’s playground or railway line.
Who can assess in the first instant?
An assessment should take into account all trees on the property, looking at the location of trees in relation to levels of use. A basic
assessment of risk can then be made. This initial assessment is best done by the landowner or manager of the site as local knowledge is essential. A specialist should not be required at this stage. Once the preliminary assessment is undertaken and areas of high and low risk are identified then a plan of monitoring can take place, taking into account the former.
Trees in low risk areas
Trees in areas of low public use, or without a target, may only require irregular inspection by a visual survey; these areas need to be recorded as part of the zoning plan. An annual visual inspection should suffice.
Trees in high risk areas require monitoring
An owner/manager should decide a policy appropriate to their site, which is influenced by levels of use and the importance of the trees. Trees with structural faults which are valued for their amenity value will, of course, require greater monitoring and possibly specialist advice. It is reasonable to inspect trees within
falling distance of well used areas, such as roads, footpaths or on golf course greens and tees. Zoning allows resources to be allocated to areas of high risk. An inspection may take the form of
informal observation, formal or detailed inspection. Following zoning, it is necessary to
identify the type of inspection required. Initially, this can be carried out by walking the site. Trees that require further inspection can be identified depending on their location in relation to risk, their size and condition. If there are any doubts at this stage, then specialist advice should be
There is no substitute for experience, as the drill
provides evidence of only the area where it is used. The arborist’s experience will tell him where the greatest likelihood of failure is liable to be
PC February/March 2019 117
“
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148
