imagineero
Addicted to ArboristSite
The saleability of consulting services also depends a lot on the tree laws in your local area. In Aus, each local council has its own regulations regarding tree work, each with their own conditions on what can be removed without permits, what can be pruned etc. The requirements in terms of certification for doing work have been going up in recent years, more on pruning than on removals.
Most councils won't let you remove a tree outright without a valid reason. Leaves, potential for property damage, and even cracked driveways aren't considered to be valid reasons. Some councils aren't even allowing removal of trees that are damaging pipes. Some councils are a bit more liberal and have exemption clauses for certain species within X feet of a structure or underground pipes. Most allow removal of dead trees without a permit, and removal of dying trees, but to prove a tree is dying you need an arborist report. Council isn't willing to make the judgement. The level of qualification for writing that report varies by area, and in some places you need a degree. Some councils also require pruning reports and risk asessments for any pruning work on heritage listed trees.
Local councils also call in expert consultants to do reports on city trees - expected life, whether weight reduction is needed, management plans for individual trees etc. The city removes and replaces trees before they fail to reduce their liability, and somebody has to make that call.
If you have the qualifications, then you can make some quite big $$$ writing these reports. Some councils have gone as far as to say that the person writing the report must not be the person doing the trim/removal, or work for the same company. Of course, HO's arent going to pay you for writing a report that says a tree is healthy, in most cases people want a reason to trim/remove. They aren't interested in improving the trees health.
As the laws get stricter, I'm seeing a lot more poisoning of trees. Dead trees are exempted in most places, so the HO gets what they want in the end. Some councils require replacement of all trees though, especially if it looks poisoned. Its all getting kind of silly really.
Shaun
Most councils won't let you remove a tree outright without a valid reason. Leaves, potential for property damage, and even cracked driveways aren't considered to be valid reasons. Some councils aren't even allowing removal of trees that are damaging pipes. Some councils are a bit more liberal and have exemption clauses for certain species within X feet of a structure or underground pipes. Most allow removal of dead trees without a permit, and removal of dying trees, but to prove a tree is dying you need an arborist report. Council isn't willing to make the judgement. The level of qualification for writing that report varies by area, and in some places you need a degree. Some councils also require pruning reports and risk asessments for any pruning work on heritage listed trees.
Local councils also call in expert consultants to do reports on city trees - expected life, whether weight reduction is needed, management plans for individual trees etc. The city removes and replaces trees before they fail to reduce their liability, and somebody has to make that call.
If you have the qualifications, then you can make some quite big $$$ writing these reports. Some councils have gone as far as to say that the person writing the report must not be the person doing the trim/removal, or work for the same company. Of course, HO's arent going to pay you for writing a report that says a tree is healthy, in most cases people want a reason to trim/remove. They aren't interested in improving the trees health.
As the laws get stricter, I'm seeing a lot more poisoning of trees. Dead trees are exempted in most places, so the HO gets what they want in the end. Some councils require replacement of all trees though, especially if it looks poisoned. Its all getting kind of silly really.
Shaun
