TP-OH NO YOU DON'T!

Originally posted May 2023.

Many of you (industry based or otherwise) will be familiar with the notion of "TPO" and "Conservation". Along with these terms come a set of rules for how to manage any intentions to work on trees that are subject to them; processes must be followed and applications must be submitted to receive permission (or not). Any work carried out without approval may be subject to a fine if discovered, with said fine applying to both the resident and the tree surgeon involved.

There are of course circumstances where approval can be fast-tracked and steps can skipped with emergency notice due to the poor or dangerous condition of a tree (such as the one pictured), though this would only apply to a minimal amount of cases.

The "Higher Powers" responsible for granting the aforementioned permission are the Tree Officers employed by the Council reigning over each relevant area. To the best of our understanding, their role is to consider the details of the work applied for and what impact it would have on the welfare of the tree(s) in question plus the surrounding area. Their position is certainly not an envious one as it is impossible to please everyone or reason over what they believe is in the best interest of the tree(s), especially as there will certainly be occasions where two professional opinions (that of a tree officer and of an arborist) may differ - yet their say is final.

So it raises the question - how difficult can it be for trees subject to TPO/Conservation to be worked on and is this reasonable?

First of all, we firmly agree with the importance for such strategies to exist; it is important to preserve trees that otherwise may be removed or at the very least ruined. We can all agree trees serve a great purpose for a multitude of reasons; their aesthetic value alone is undeniable and many of us would not wish to imagine living in a concrete wasteland where they were freely disposed of. That is, however, the most extreme perspective of what could occur without these limitations in place; the majority within society are not so unreasonable they would pursue such severe action. In our experience, the main component of TPOs and Conservation that antagonises people is the notion that what happens to trees they technically own is somewhat out of their own control; on paper, the logistics of this are easy to question. It is interesting to consider exactly what people would do with the trees on their property if they were granted total freedom to do so - what would you do?

There often seems to be an ill-conceived idea that trees guarded by TPO or Conservation are "immune" to requiring work; as if the restrictions act as a literal "armour" to protect them from developing any defects or need for maintenance. Many places have self-elected groups within the community who embody these ideologies and champion themselves as pillars of justice against change to the aesthetics of their area. While it is inevitable that often their concerns over the legitimacy of work they witness can sometime be warranted, these people will regularly act as judge and jury from the pavement with minimal courtesy when raising their queries to the professional in question. Every tree surgeon has likely experienced a member of the public, armed with their phone camera, playing the role of paparazzi (TreeMZ if you will) - hoping to capture an incriminating snapshot they can report back to the relevant authority with. Many will remain peeping from the bushes, while some will be verbal with their accusations; either way, very few approach the scenario with reason as they have already drawn their own conclusions. After all, it is surely impossible anyone would allow these trees to be worked on - they're "protected".

The application process to garner permission is not the simplest; it requires the provision of applicant/site details, a detailed specification of the intended work using relevant terminology and a sketch plan marking the location of the trees. As long all sections are presented with the satisfactory information, the local Council will mark your proposal as valid and then pursue their own investigation to determine their decision - including a site visit to consider the accuracy of any claims made. Even if completed with absolute precision, there is still no guarantee your request will be granted - or at least not in a timely manner.

Here at Deadwood Arborists, we regularly submit applications on behalf of our customers upon confirmation that our quotation has been accepted. The theory behind us acting as agents to do this is that it reduces the margin for any error and ensures the correct terms are used in hopes of accomplishing the best result possible. Based off our own enagements with the Tree Officers of the different Councils we have dealings with; Wirral, Chester and Cheshire West, Liverpool and Knowsley, there is usually an effort for mutual respect and understanding in order to reach a satisfatory solution for all parties - well at least with 3/4 of them. Regardless, it is not uncommon for people to try their luck in bypassing the process to avoid disappointment, long wait times or the actual time and energy required to apply.

Based on an anonymous sample of data sourced from a selection of our peers:

• 50% of them have experienced prolonged wait times or unreasonable opposition from the Council in regards to work on trees subject to TPO or Conservation.

• Of the 92% that claim they will submit an application on their customers' behalf, 25% will only do it for a price and another 25% base their willingness to do so on the value of the job itself.

• 50% admit to working on trees without being granted permission to do so.

• While 31% will only even check for TPO/Conservation depending on the area the tree resides in.

All of these choices are down to the individual, yet these factors do make you wonder if improvements could or should be made in the management of protected trees and the systems around working on them to make ensure consistency and efficiency for all involved. At the very least, if tree work is being carried out without permission and there is no knowledge of any repercussions, what does this suggest to those who do follow the correct process?