Tree felling restrictions?

Gosub

Hi All,
I was wondering if there is any regulation in place to restrict tree felling on a private site. There are quite a few scruffy looking large leylandii trees surrounding the site and I wanted to remove some of them. Also might need to fell a tree or two to allow for building work.

Any knowledge gratefully received.

Area is Wexford.

The Woodcock

Every tree over 10 years old is supposed to be protected under law and you need a felling licence to cut them down. If they are closer than 100ft to your house you can knock them without a licence.
However, I doubt if this law is enforced and leylandii hardly qualify as being of any significance, ecologically or otherwise. The authorities in this country should have more to be worrying about than policing tree-felling on private land.

Interesting discussion on the issue here: http://www.gardenplansireland.com/forum/about1220.html

dog tag

as Woodcock states. The 100ft rule applies except if there is a TPO order on the tree or it is in a heritage or area of special interest. Then you would have to talk to the local council. Normally TPO badges are placed on trees just over head height. The Law here is a bit vague. In the UK each council has a tree officer. Some have Hedge officers as well, to deal with large hedge disputes between neighbours. Leylandi hedges been the main problem in urban and city dwellings.
Eventually Ireland will follow the UK. The standard for tree work is BS3998.

If you have to fell a few of them to build, your architect should of stated this in the planning application.

Hope this helps.

Oldtree

read the actual regulations from the department here:

http://www.agriculture.gov.ie/forestservice/treefelling/

No tree officers here and the law is enforced, so do not put yourself into a bad position.

I think the law is going to change about the planning application issue but not as yet, still need a licence as the dwelling isnt there yet for the 100ft rule to apply.

Gosub

Oldtree wrote: »

read the actual regulations from the department here:

http://www.agriculture.gov.ie/forestservice/treefelling/

No tree officers here and the law is enforced, so do not put yourself into a bad position.

I think the law is going to change about the planning application issue but not as yet, still need a licence as the dwelling isnt there yet for the 100ft rule to apply.

Thanks for all the input guys.

@ Oldtree... Who is enforcing the law, the Gardai? Would it be on foot of a report?
There is a house, but I hope to extend it. Hence the possibility of tree removal.

peadar76

the law is not being enforced, I'd cut away

magicbastarder

i was talking to someone yesterday who had been told of leylandii being felled last summer, and destroying a BOP nest (with two chicks) in the process.
so regardless of whatever action you take, check for any nests before commencing any work.

Oldtree

Gosub, sounds like the tree is adjacent to an existing house. If it is over the 100 foot away just ring your local forestry inspector and ask for a visit to sort the issue out. Another issue is that depending on the age of the tree planning may be a problem. The nesting issue is also relevant.

peadar76 wrote: »

the law is not being enforced, I'd cut away

hmmmmmm, gambler are you? All it takes is a complaint to the forestry inspector and he is obliged to follow it up.

Western People, Wednesday, December 12, 2007

Error led to felling of 520 trees

A CONG man who illegal felled 520 trees near his home in South Mayo will have to report to the local District Court for a period of ten years.

Fergal O’Mahony, Old School, Cong, appeared at Ballinrobe District Court on charges under the Forestry Act. The court heard O’Mahony uprooted and cut down 520 trees, without a felling licence, at a site at Nymphsfield, Cong. The trees, which were at least 10 years old, were a mixture of ash, scotts pine, super spruce, oak and beech. Before cutting down the trees, O’Mahony had not served notice on the Gardaí and had later claimed the trees were on a site owned by him, where he intended to seek planning permission to build a new family home.

The court heard O’Mahony had not been aware he was committing an offence by felling the trees, as he had checked to see if the site was deemed an area of conservation and learned that it was not. The defendant pleaded guilty to the charges before the court.

Mr Seamus Hughes, State Solicitor, said the penalty in such a case was a fine of €63 per tree. However, the Department of Agriculture was currently in negotiations with Mr O’Mahony, who had expressed his sincere apologies, explaining that he really had no idea he was doing anything wrong.
The defendant had offered to re-plant a section of the site, as well as offering another portion of land to replant some more trees, to make up for the loss.

Mr Hughes noted that the Department is interested in the landowner’s proposal, but pointed out that, legally, the Minister must obtain a conviction before issuing the re-planting order. Nevertheless, the solicitor commented that the Minister had indicated that he would like to see O’Mahony go ahead with the proposed planting.

Mr Creed, solicitor, stressed his client had not acted out of malevolence and had actually contacted Dúchas to make sure the site was not located in a special area of conservation. The defendant hired a contractor to remove trees and when the matter was brought to Mr O’Mahony’s attention he immediately put his hands up.

The solicitor said his client had entered into immediate discussions with the Department of Agriculture. Mr O’Mahony valued his good name, was involved in many community organisations and was embarrassed by what had occurred. Mr Creed said his client ran a thriving business which involved travel to the United States. A conviction against him might prevent him from travelling to the US in the future and he implored Judge Devins not to impose a conviction.

“My client is in open correspondence with the Department and has hired a horticulturist and a tree expert to re-plant the trees. This is a case of human error. He did not wilfully set out to break the law and he is prepared to pay any costs to the State. In the circumstances, I would ask the court to please consider some method of dealing with this case without imposing a conviction,” said Mr Creed.

Judge Mary Devins said she accepted the evidence given by the defence but the Department of Agriculture would need reassurance that if the trees were replanted they would not be cut down some time later.

In this regard, Judge Devins suggested that the matter be adjourned for a lengthy period and brought back before the court on an annual basis. She ordered that Mr O’Mahony contribute to the State’s legal costs and said that she would reassess the case on a year-to-year basis so that negotiations could be entered into and that the re-planting could be carried out. Concluding, she adjourned the case to December 2, 2008, for mention.

Coll1e

The law in this regard is being enforced by the Gardai, the NPWS and the city and County Councils.

I've seen people prosecuted for cutting vegetation during the bird nesting season and I also seen planning applications being refused because trees were cleared on the site prior to applying for planning permission on the site.

?Cee?view

It depends on where the site is.

"The requirement for a felling licence for the uprooting or cutting down of trees does not apply where:

a) The tree in question is a hazel, apple, plum, damson, pear, or cherry tree grown for the value of its fruit or any ozier;
b) The tree in question is less than 100 feet from a dwelling other than a wall or temporary structure;
c) The tree in question is standing in a County or other Borough or an urban district (that is, within the boundaries of a town council, or city council area)."

paddy147

Check for any nesting birds in the trees before doing anything.

Afterall,thats their house/home.



How would you like it if someone with a crane/digger came along,took the roof of your own house,and then pulled you and your family out of said house.

So in effect,thats what you are doing to any birds who are nesting in the trees.



Have a think about that,before doing anything.

paddy147

I wonder if DCC got away with the mass tree felling operation on Lennox Street in Dublin City??



URL]http://www.herald.ie/news/councils-bright-idea-to-save-these-trees-from-damage-28849572.html[/URL]

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=81149201

?Cee?view

The requirement for a felling licence for the uprooting or cutting down of trees does not apply where the tree in question is standing within the boundaries of a town council, or city council area

Gosub

paddy147 wrote: »

Check for any nesting birds in the trees before doing anything.

Afterall,thats their house/home.



How would you like it if someone with a crane/digger came along,took the roof of your own house,and then pulled you and your family out of said house.

So in effect,thats what you are doing to any birds who are nesting in the trees.



Have a think about that,before doing anything.

I wouldn't be doing anything until the autumn. I am a bird lover and wouldn't do anything to harm them. They are one of the reasons I am moving back to Ireland. I miss our birdsong.

Gosub

churchview wrote: »

The requirement for a felling licence for the uprooting or cutting down of trees does not apply where the tree in question is standing within the boundaries of a town council, or city council area

Thanks Churchview, that doesn't apply in my case.

peadar76

Oldtree wrote: »

Gosub, sounds like the tree is adjacent to an existing house. If it is over the 100 foot away just ring your local forestry inspector and ask for a visit to sort the issue out. Another issue is that depending on the age of the tree planning may be a problem. The nesting issue is also relevant.



hmmmmmm, gambler are you? All it takes is a complaint to the forestry inspector and he is obliged to follow it up.

There's a big difference between cutting down a couple of trees in the vicinity of your house and cutting down 500 hundred trees.

Oldtree

churchview wrote: »

The requirement for a felling licence for the uprooting or cutting down of trees does not apply where the tree in question is standing within the boundaries of a town council, or city council area

except TPO's, etc.....

Oldtree

peadar76 wrote: »

There's a big difference between cutting down a couple of trees in the vicinity of your house and cutting down 500 hundred trees.

there is no difference in the eyes of the law. This was a case to show you that the law is implemented, unfortunatly single illegal fellings dont make it into the newspapers but are prosecuted nonetheless.

peadar76

Oldtree wrote: »

there is no difference in the eyes of the law. This was a case to show you that the law is implemented, unfortunatly single illegal fellings dont make it into the newspapers but are prosecuted nonetheless.

Well I've never heard of anyone being prosecuted for felling a tree or two and I know plenty of people that have done it. Myself included

Oldtree

peadar76 wrote: »

Well I've never heard of anyone being prosecuted for felling a tree or two and I know plenty of people that have done it. Myself included

Well why dont you go report yourself to the forestry inspector and see what happens then.

Speeding is illegal and many do it, but you pay for it when you are caught. Ignorance is no defence in law, neither is the "he did it so i thought it was ok" defence. :rolleyes:

There have been no changes to this specific issue in the new forestry bill going through parliment at the moment.

peadar76

But it's not comparable to speeding. If there's a tree on my property annoying me then I should be allowed kill it. Now obviously the same thing doesn't apply to the wife when she's annoying me, so common sense has to be applied.

Oldtree

peadar76 wrote: »

But it's not comparable to speeding. If there's a tree on my property annoying me then I should be allowed kill it.

And you can if it is within 100 foot of the dwelling. as to further than 100 foot then the only route open to you in a Democracy is to vote in someone who shares your views and get them to change the existing law.

peadar76 wrote: »

Now obviously the same thing doesn't apply to the wife when she's annoying me, so common sense has to be applied.

lololol

magicbastarder

peadar76 wrote: »

If there's a tree on my property annoying me then I should be allowed kill it.

if it's a 300 year old oak, which was there long before you bought the property, and would be there long after you were gone (if left unmolested), it has a value which outweighs your annoyance by a very large factor.

Oldtree

an oak can have a long lifespan and the older it gets the more stuff lives on it.
300 years to grow, 300 years to mature and then 300 years to die. Its not a low priced comodity, it deserves respect, even a 100 year old tree started its journey before our state started its journey.

looksee

Story about an oak tree. We bought a site in the country, specifically because it had one of the very few remaining oak trees from what was apparently an oak forest years ago. Our planning permission required that we cut down the oak!! We didn't, it was sound, well off the road and no problem to anyone. Eventually, ten years later we sold the house and six months later got a bill from the new purchasers for removing the oak, in keeping with the planning. Appealed, but the planning authority said, no, the oak had to go. So we had to pay up.

Story about a hedge. We moved to another house and a few years ago a new estate was built backing onto ours. There was an old, large hedgerow, the original town boundary, which was preserved in their planning permissions. Bit by bit the hedge (which was at the bottom of their gardens, bordering a green area on our side) was removed, always early on a Saturday morning when there was no-one at the planning office. Nothing was done, despite repeated complaints from me at least, possibly other people, I don't know, apart from eventually a letter was sent out telling them not to cut any more hedge, but of course by that time several hundred years of hedgerow was gone.

periodictable

The Woodcock wrote: »

...leylandii hardly qualify as being of any significance, ecologically or otherwise.

Leylandii actually is an approved species for planting under the Forest Service afforestation schemes....

Oldtree

periodictable wrote: »

Leylandii actually is an approved species for planting under the Forest Service afforestation schemes....

Where did you find that nugget? It's not mentioned here:

http://www.agriculture.gov.ie/forestservice/publications/

periodictable

It's in the list of approves species and here's a couple of Wiki pages:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leyland_Cypress

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?title=Leylandii_Wood
It's worth noting that some older trees are still putting on height

I have great time for leylandii, in the right place of course

Jimmy Garlic

periodictable wrote: »

I have great time for leylandii, in the right place of course

I have no time for them, dirty and full of midges. I cleared 20+ of them and planted willow in their place.

magicbastarder

periodictable wrote: »

It's in the list of approves species

do you have a link for that?

periodictable

Table 7. Acceptable Tree Species for Grant aid
Conifers
Botanic name
Abbreviation
Lawson cypress
Chamaecyparis lawsoniana
LC
Leyland cypress
Cupressocyparis leylandii
LeyC
Monterey cypress
Cupressus macrocarpa
CM
Western Hemlock
Tsuga heterophylla
WH
European Larch
Larix decidua
EL
Douglas Fir
Pseudotsuga menziesii
DF
Grand Fir
Abies grandis
GF
Austrian pine
Pinus nigra (var. nigra)
AP
Corsican pine
Pinus nigra (var. maritima)
CP
Lodgepole pine
Pinus contorta
LP
Monterey pine
Pinus radiata
MP
Scots pine
Pinus sylvestris
SP
Norway spruce
Picea abies
NS
Serbian spruce
Picea omorika
Serb S
Sitka spruce
Picea sitchensis
SS
Western Red Cedar
Thuja plicata
WRC
Coast Redwood
Sequoia sempervirons
CR
Broadleaves
Common alder
Alnus glutinosa
Ald
Ash
Fraxinus excelsior
Ash
Beech
Fagus sylvatica
Be
Southern beech
Nothofagus procera / N. obliqua
SBe
Cherry
Prunus avium
Ch
Spanish (Sweet) chestnut
Castanea sativa
SC
Lime
Tilea cordata / T.platyphllos
Lime
Norway maple
Acer platanoides
NM
Sycamore
Acer pseudoplatanus
Syc
Pedunculate oak
Quercus robur
PO
Sessile oak
Quercus petraea
SO
Red oak
Quercus rubra
RO
Additional Broadleaves
-
Adb
Other
p35 Forestry Schemes Manual