RISK MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP A balancing of misconceptions and reality - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TREE HEALTH AND TREE RISK MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP

Thursday 31 January 2019 The Earth Trust, Oxfordshire

A balancing of misconceptions and reality of the management of tree related risks

WELCOME

Robin Edwards Regional Director, CLA South East

INTRODUCTIONS

John Lockhart Chairman Nick Bolton Director Victoria Sherbourne Marketing Executive

• Established in 1998
• Fully serviced offices in Northamptonshire and

Oxfordshire

• Background of Trees, Woodlands, Forestry and

Environmental Land Management advice

• Expansion into Planning and Development areas
• Team of 35 across five key service areas
• Professional, Independent, Specialist Consultancy
• Vision focused on quality and growth

LOCKHART GARRATT LTD

Environmental Planning & Forestry Consultants “To see land used in a sustainable way making responsible use of available natural resources”

Arboriculture

Focusing on the management and maintenance of trees

Ecology

Ecological solutions to support the planning process and planning applications

Forestry & Woodland Management

Managing over 8,000 ha of woodland from creation to harvesting

Landscape & Green Infrastructure

Land management, landscape delivery and green infrastructure support

Minerals & Waste Restoration

Informed landscape, restoration and environmental management services

Lockhart Garratt Ltd

Environmental Planning & Forestry Consultants

Celebrating 20 Years

Soils Survey & Advice

Surveying soil resource to inform planning applications, and final land use for restoration design.

BACKGROUND

• Why hold these workshops?
• Intentions for the day
• Why are you here? What would you like to

get out of the day?

• What issues have you encountered?
• Good experiences?
• Bad experiences?

ROLE IN THE SECTOR

John Lockhart

• Representation of Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) on the National

Tree Safety Group (NTSG)

• 2007 to Present
• Representation of RICS and NTSG on Defra Ash Dieback Health and Safety Task

Force

• 2016 to Present

Nick Bolton

• Chairman, Consultants Working Group – Arboricultural Association
• 2014 to Present
• Vice Chairman, Professional Committee – Arboricultural Association
• 2013 to Present

PROGRAMME

Timing Session Lead

10.00 Introduction and CLA briefing CLA 10.15 Introduction to LG and Purpose and Scope of Workshop JAL 10.30 Tree Risk Management and Tree Health NB 11.00 Strategy Implementation and Management including other issues: NTSG/Ash Dieback Task Force/Contractor management/Road Closures/replanting NB/JAL 11.30 Q/A 11.50 Woodland and Forestry Update: Natural Capital/Markets/Woodland Carbon/Woodland Creation JAL 12.15 Q/A 12.30 Lunch 1.30 Site visit: input from external speaker – Chris Parker NB 2.30 Discussion ALL 2.50 Round up and take away messages JAL

TREE RISK MANAGEMENT AND TREE HEALTH

Nick Bolton

• Myth busting
• Tree Risk
• What the law requires
• What HSE expects
• Best Practice Guidance
• Managing Tree Risk
• Hazard Identification
• Common Pests & Diseases

MYTH BUSTING

• “My insurer says I have to inspect all my trees”
• “My insurer won’t pay out if I don’t undertake inspections”
• “HSE says I have to inspect my trees every year”
• “It’s my land and I can choose to do or not do whatever I want”
• “I have ash dieback so I have to fell every ash tree”
• “Trees in tenanted properties are not my concern”
• “The local council will pay for ash trees dying on the roadside”

WHAT THE LAW REQUIRES

Statute

• Occupier’s Liability Acts 1957 and 1984

Occupiers have a common duty of care to take all reasonably practicable precautions to ensure the safety of those on their land. Breaches of this duty could lead to a civil suit for damages.

• Health and Safety at Work Act 1974

Statutory duties and related regulations to do all that is reasonably practicable to ensure that people are not exposed to risks to their health and safety.

WHAT ARE COURTS CONSIDERING?

Case Law

• Bowen v The National Trust (2007)

A land owner must have in place a reasonable system for assessing and managing tree related risk.

• Micklewright v Surrey County Council (2010)

There is no law that requires a land owner to make his/her land completely safe.

WHAT ARE COURTS CONSIDERING?

Legal Requirement – Case Law

• Poll v Bartholomew (2006)

The person undertaking tree hazard inspections have the correct training and competence to do so.

• Stagecoach v Hind & Steel (2014)

A landowner has a duty to undertake regular informal inspections of trees on his/her land, but is

• nly required to act where a danger is apparent

upon inspection.

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

Updates – Case Law

• Witley vs Cavangh (2018)

Estates must have an inspection regime that gives due consideration to the age and size of trees, relative to potential targets

WHAT HSE EXPECTS

Health & Safety Executive

• Reducing Risk, Protecting People – HSE’s

Decision-making Process

Tolerability of Risk Framework – Defines everyday risk into three regions – Unacceptable, Tolerable and Broadly acceptable. The risk from trees falls into the broadly acceptable region

• SIM 01-2007/05 - Management of the risk from

falling trees

Outlines the HSE guidance on the standard of risk management of trees, including risk assessment and routine checks by competent persons. It recommends that landowners should have in place a system to control risk from trees to employees, contractors and members of the public

BEST PRACTICE GUIDANCE

National Tree Safety Group

The Guidance Document is based on 5 basic principles 1. Trees provide a wide variety of benefits to society 2. Trees are living organisms and naturally lose branches or fall 3. The risk to human safety is extremely low 4. Tree owners have a legal duty of care 5. Tree owners should take a balanced and proportionate approach to tree safety management http://ntsgroup.org.uk/

BEST PRACTICE GUIDANCE

Department of Transport Code of Practice 2005

• Principally prepared to provide guidance to

regional highways authorities.

• Section 154 of the Highways Act 1980

empowers the authority to deal with trees, hedges etc that overhang the highway and recover costs.

• Recommends inspection frequency is

appropriate to the individual tree, but suggests not less that every 5 years

• General principle is the preservation of trees

where possible and appropriate

BEST PRACTICE GUIDANCE

Forestry Commission Practice Guide Hazards From Trees (2000)

INSURANCE – MISCONCEPTIONS AND MYTH

• The Purpose of Insurance (a laymans perspective)
• Public Liability
• Negligence
• Recklessness
• What does your insurer need you to do?

HAZARDS ON TREES

EXAMPLES OF HAZARD TREES

EXAMPLES OF HAZARD TREES

EXAMPLES OF HAZARD TREES

COMMON PESTS & DISEASES

Meripilus giganteus (Beech) Honey Fungus (Various broadleaf) Inonotus hispidus (Ash) Polyporus squamosus (Sycamore, willow, poplar) – Dryad’s saddle

COMMON PESTS & DISEASES

Ash Dieback

• Spread now across UK
• Defra Health & Safety

Group Taskforce

• National Tree Safety

Group

• Forestry Commission

Management Guidance

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

• Be pro-active!

COMMON PESTS & DISEASES

Other Threats

Pseudomonas Bleeding Canker (Horse Chestnut)

• Widespread across the UK and no immediate curative available

Kretzchmaria deusta (Beech)

• Increasingly common across the UK

Phytophthora ramorum (P. ramorum)

• now potentially moving into secondary species e.g. sweet chestnut

Acute Oak Decline

• some signs of recovery

Oak Processionary Moth

• Impact on human health

Xylella fastidiosa

• Multiplex now recorded in France and Germany
• Wide range of potential hosts

STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION & MANAGEMENT

John Lockhart & Nick Bolton

• First steps and approach
• Technical Expertise & Contractor

Appointment

• Felling Consent / TPO &

Conservation Areas

• Contract implementation and

Health and Safety

• Case study : Examples
• National Tree Safety Group:

guidance revision and updating

• Ash Dieback Health and Safety Task

Force

• Local Authority policy and planning

FIRST STEPS & APPROACH

• Understanding what is required to manage tree related risk
• Tree Risk Management Policies
• Tree Risk Surveys vs Tree Risk Management Policies

TREE RISK MANAGEMENT

Policy and Management Objectives 1. Prioritise work through identification of Priority Inspection Zones (PIZs) 2. Ensure an inspection regime commensurate with the PIZ

• Frequency of inspection / timings (seasons)
• Detail of inspection
• Informal
• Formal
• Detailed / advanced inspections

3. Make trees safe, following the ALARP (As Low As Reasonably Practical Principle) 4. Implement a robust Tree Risk Management System (TRMS) to combine and coordinate the first three objectives

TREE RISK

Priority Inspection Zones

TECHNICAL EXPERTISE & CONTRACTOR APPOINTMENT

• Professional Tree Inspectors
• Internal tree condition monitoring
• Where to find an assessor?
• Who to use to undertaken tree safety works?
• Arboricultural Association Approved Contractors (www.trees.org.uk)
• Forestry Contractors working in accordance with FISA guidelines
• If road closure required, use specialists to obtain highways consent

TREE RISK MANAGEMENT

Inspections v Assessments

• VTA = Visual Tree Assessment
• Lantra Basic Tree Inspection
• PTI = Professional Tree Inspection
• TRAQ = Tree Risk Assessment Qualification
• QTRA = Quantified Tree Risk Assessment
• STORM – Southampton Tree Operational Risk

Management System

• THREATS – Tree Hazard: Risk Evaluations and

Treatment System

Suitable for basic tree inspections on remote locations Appropriate for places with high frequency of use, but requires a professional to undertake

FELLING CONSENT/TPO’S AND CONSERVATION AREAS

• Forestry Act restricts felling of trees to 5cbm per calendar quarter except

under specific circumstances:

• Trees in gardens
• Trees in church graveyards
• Statutory undertakers
• Trees that are demonstrably dangerous
• Trees that are having tree surgery works (ie not felled)
• Trees that are consented with a felling licence
• Tree that are consented with planning permission

FELLING CONSENT/TPO’S AND CONSERVATION AREAS

• The Town and Country Planning Act prohibits the

felling of trees subject to a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) or trees in Conservation Areas, without consent.

• Dangerous trees are subject to the same rules,

although there is a fast track process to get dangerous trees removed.

• There is an untested argument relating to the need

for consent for abatement of a nuisance.

CASE STUDY EXAMPLES

CASE STUDY 1

CASE STUDY 2

CASE STUDY 3

CONTRACT IMPLEMENTATION AND HEALTH & SAFETY

Current issues in particular Ash Dieback make it critical to ensure that contracts are carefully set up:-

• Forestry Industry Safety Accord (FISA) –

published guidance to address the issues associated with structural integrity of diseased ash.

https://www.ukfisa.com/assets/files/alerts/Safety%20Guid ance%20Note%20-%20Felling%20dead%20ash%20- %20April%202018.pdf

NATIONAL TREE SAFETY GROUP

• Original Guidance published in
• Work underway to revise and update

the main guidance

• Timetable early 2019
• CLA representation – feedback and

input always valued

• http://ntsgroup.org.uk/

ASH DIEBACK HEALTH & SAFETY TASK FORCE

• The priority areas previously raised by the Taskforce.
• These included
• Felling Licence
• Habitat Guidance
• Tree Preservation Orders
• Unregistered Land
• Road Closures
• Training and Surveying
• Guidance

LOCAL AUTHORITY POLICY & PLANNING

• Some Local Authorities in badly impacted areas developing policy

guidance.

• Devon County Council (201X)
• https://new.devon.gov.uk/environment/ash-dieback
• 448,000 roadside ash; 95% responsibility of farmers and landowners
• Estimated cost £58million
• Leicestershire County Council (2018)
• http://politics.leics.gov.uk/documents/s138891/Ash%20Die%20Back%20Action%2

0Plan.pdf

• 128,000 ash in high risk locations; 120,000 in private ownership
• Pro-active management policy; Allocation of over £5million

THESE…

“My insurer says I have to inspect all my trees” “My insurer won’t pay out if I don’t undertake inspections” “HSE says I have to inspect my trees every year” “It’s my land and I can choose to do or not do whatever I want” “I have ash dieback so I have to fell every ash tree” “Trees in tenanted properties are not my concern” “The local council will pay for ash trees dying on the roadside”

….and any other Questions

WOODLAND & FORESTRY UPDATE

John Lockhart

• Timber prices
• Management Grant funding
• Countryside Stewardship
• ELMS
• Woodland Creation
• Woodland Carbon
• Natural Capital
• Development

Softwoods

Product High (£) Low (£) Spruce Sawlogs £85.00 £75.00 Palletwood/Bars £70.00 £60.00 Posts, Stakes, Rails £60.00 £50.00 Mixed Conifer SRW £55.00 £50.00

Source: Timber Auctions

PRICES £M3 ROADSIDE

• Product
• High (£)
• Medium (£)
• Low (£)

OAK PRICES £M3 ROADSIDE (£HFT ROADSIDE)

Product High (£) Medium (£) Low (£) Planking 277.40 (10.00) 221.92 (8.00) 194.18 (7.00) Beam/Fenc ing 249.66 (9.00) 194.18 (7.00) 138.70 (5.00) Cordwood 41.61 (1.50) 34.68 (1.25) 27.74 (1.00)

Source: Timber Auctions

PRICES £M3 ROADSIDE (£HFT ROADSIDE)

Product High (£) Medium (£) Low (£) Ash/Beech/ Sycamore Sawlogs (2nd grade) 82.00 (3.00) 69.00 (2.50) 59.00 (2.00) Export Sycamore 221.00 (8.00) 126.50 (4.50) 113.00 (4.00)

Source: Timber Auctions

Source: Timber Auctions

FIREWOOD PRICES £/TONNE

Product High (£) Medium (£) Low (£) Firewood (Ash, Beech, Birch, Sycamore) 60.00 50.00 40.00

Source: Timber Auctions

Source: Timber Auctions

COUNTRYSIDE STEWARDSHIP SCHEME

Management Plan

• £20/ha for the first 100ha
• £10/ha thereafter
• Minimum grant £1,000
• No application window

Plant Health

• Up to £1,680/ha to remove diseased immature

trees

• Up to £4400/ha to remove rhododendron as a

host species of disease

• Up to £2.88/tree to plant and protect
• No application window

Multi-annual

• Pays £100/ha per year for 5 years
• Delivers against agreed criteria e.g. deer

management or squirrel control, as detailed in the management plan

• Applications close 5th May
• Pre-requisite of a Forestry Commission

approved WMP Woodland Creation

• Pays up to £2.88/tree (max. £6,800/ha)
• £200/ha per year for maintenance
• Min. 3ha (min 0.5ha/block or 20m width) or 1ha

(min 0.1ha/block or 14m width) depending on whether it is for biodiversity or flood risk

• No application window* as of Sept 2018

ENVIRONMENTAL LAND MANAGEMENT SCHEME (ELMS)

Public Payments for Public Goods

Assets and Services providing benefits for which there is no clear free market mechanism (a public good)

As yet finally undefined, but envisaged to be:-

• Environmental Management of land and water
• Public access and environmental education
• Maintenance of cultural and natural heritage
• Reducing or protecting from environmental

hazards

• Improving health and welfare of animals and

plants

Woodland Ecosystem services:

• pportunities
• Carbon storage
• Carbon sequestration
• Air purification
• Noise regulation
• Water flow
• Water quality
• Biodiversity
• Pollination
• Shelter and Climate Modification
• Timber production
• Accessible nature

ENVIRONMENTAL LAND MANAGEMENT SCHEME (ELMS)

WOODLAND CREATION UK 25 YEAR ENVIRONMENT PLAN

Planting Targets

• 11 million trees this parliament

(England 4,300ha)

• Increase woodland cover in England

from 10% to 12% by 2060 – 5000ha per annum

“So the imperative to husband, indeed wherever possible,

enhance our natural capital - safeguarding our

• ceans, cleaning our rivers, keeping our soils fertile, protecting

biodiversity - has to be at the heart of any plan for

• ur country and our world.”

Michael Gove, Oxford Farming Conference 2018

WOODLAND CREATION GRANT FUNDING

• Forestry Commission Funding could be

available in several phases:-

Woodland Creation Planning Grant:

• Funding for preparation of a woodland creation

design plan

• Staged payment; Stage 1 £1,000 and Stage

2 £150/ha less Stage 1 payment

• Additional funding can be available for any

required studies, landscape etc. subject to site’s deemed sensitivity.

• NO OBLIGATION to take forward to planting

N.B. Grant funding will only be available if the planting is not conditioned through planning

WOODLAND CREATION GRANT FUNDING

Woodland Creation Grant (WCG); Countryside Stewardship (min 3ha)

• Application at any time to Forestry Commission
• Funding available for planting and associated establishment costs: -

Capped grant of up to £6,800/ha payable on completion of planting.

• Maintenance funding:- £200/ha per annum for ten
• years. Infrastructure; if required can also be funded at 40% of cost

Woodland Carbon Fund (min 10ha)

• Application at any time to Forestry Commission
• Funding available for planting and associated establishment costs: -

Capped grant of up to £8,500/ha (including public access in priority area) payable on completion of planting.

• Maintenance funding:- £200/ha per annum for five years.
• Infrastructure; if required can also be funded at up to 100% of cost
• Simpler application process than WCG

WOODLAND CARBON

• UK Woodland not eligible for Kyoto-compliant credits
• New woodland planting can generate income

through the voluntary market

• The Forestry Commission has developed the

Woodland Carbon Code to give credibility to UK carbon sequestration projects and reassurance to investors

• Registration now through external body ‘Markit’ –

gives international credibility’

• Validation by independent assessors
• New Woodland 330 tonnes C02/ha by year 30.

Value circa £2,600/ha, but likely to rise.

• Woodland Carbon Guarantee: £50million

THE PRICE OF CARBON

1Ha = 450t of carbon in 100 yrs

£100/t = £45,000/ha £200/t = £90,000/ha £300/t = £135,000/ha

ANCIENT WOODLAND RESTORATION PROJECT

• Project Aims
• Identify, assess & map remnant features
• Improve resilience
• Encourage positive management
• ASNW/PAWS site surveyed free of charge as

part of the restoration project

• Support for ongoing management

NATURAL CAPITAL & ECOSYSTEM SERVICES

Natural Capital is the stock of natural assets, for example, habitats, soils, water and biodiversity. The benefits that people derive from the natural environment (from Natural Capital) are known as Ecosystem Services. Cultural

Non-material benefits people

• btain from ecosystems

WHY IS IT IMPORTANT?

State of Natural Capital Report 2017 Natural Capital Committee

• England’s Natural Capital - in long

term decline

• Costly to our wellbeing and the

economy Safeguarding of Natural Capital essential to maintain Economic Growth

A GREEN FUTURE:

OUR 25 YEAR PLAN TO IMPROVE THE ENVIRONMENT

Chapter 1: Using and Managing Land Sustainably

• 1. Environmental Nett Gain
• 2. Improving management of land and incentives
• New environmental land management system
• New farming rules for water
• Working with farmers to use fertilisers efficiently
• Reducing environmental impacts of pesticides
• 3. Improving Soils Health and Peatlands
• Better information on soil health
• Protection of peatlands
• 4. Focus on Woodlands
• New Northern Forest
• Large scale woodland creation
• National Tree Champion
• 5. Reducing Risks from Flooding and Coastal Erosion
• Expand use of Natural flood management solutions
• SUDs
• Property resilience

Chapter 2: Recovering Nature and Enhancing the Beauty of Landscapes Chapter 3: Connecting People with the Environment to Improve Health and Wellbeing

EXISTING & EMERGING OPPORTUNITIES

Public Payment for Public Goods

Countryside Stewardship

• Complexity/Uncertainty
• Changes for 2019

New Environmental Land Management Schemes

• Collaboration
• Capital Grants – polluter pays – regulator receives
• User Friendly design – simple and un-bureaucratic
• Innovative mechanisms – reverse auctions

Other Initiatives

• HS2 Woodland Funding
• Woodland Carbon Guarantee £50Million
• National Forest
• Great Northern Forest
• Catchment Sensitive Farming
• Upstream thinking

DEVELOPMENT: CASE STUDY: TRESHAM GARDEN VILLAGE

Advance Woodland Creation

• Woodland Creation Planning Grant
• Woodland Creation Grant
• Woodland Carbon Code Registration

Ecosystem Services Mapping

• Site evaluation
• Masterplan Development and Benchmarking

Open Space Management

• Agricultural and land management opportunities
• Energy / water

DEVELOPMENT CASE STUDY BARDON 2: NATIONAL FOREST

Offsite Woodland Mitigation

• National Forest Engagement
• Guided by Ecological Network

Mapping

• Third party engagement

SUMMARY

Timber Prices

• Real opportunity to generate revenue and enhance capital values

Grant Funding

• Opportunities; Management Planning essential first step, ancient woodland opportunities

Woodland Creation

• Some very attractive opportunities for planning and implementing significant land use change

Woodland Carbon

• Ensure opportunity and embedded values not lost

Natural Capital

• Unique Opportunity to Innovate and Deliver Real Value from Woodland

Development

• Role for woodland in securing Environmental Nett Gain

Q&A

Timing Session Lead

12.30 Lunch 1.30 Site visit: input from external speaker – Chris Parker NB 2.30 Discussion ALL 2.50 Round up and take away messages JAL

AFTERNOON SESSION

FUTURE EVENTS

7th February 2019 – The Kent Debate – The Future of Farming “Where will we be in 2030?” 27th February 2019 – Keeping it in the Family, Buckinghamshire 21st March 2019 – Post-Season Clay Shoot, Berkshire 25th April 2019 – The Buckinghamshire Debate – Land Value Capture “What’s it Worth?” 30th April 2019 – How to Run a Successful Equestrian Business, Oxfordshire 8th May 2019 – CLA Buckinghamshire & Oxfordshire Branch AGM, Oxfordshire Please visit www.cla.org.uk or call 01264 313 434 for further information.

THANK YOU

CLA South East Andover Hampshire T: 01264 313434 E:robin.edwards@cla.org.uk www.cla.org.uk