Trees are dynamic, living organisms which are exposed to the elements. For this reason, no tree can be truly deemed as ‘safe’, even after reasonably practicable steps have been taken to monitor and manage the risk trees pose.
Due to the phenomena of negative reporting, trees are often perceived as a much greater threat than they actually are.
Tree risk & target management
A study commissioned by the National Tree Safety Group (NTSG) concluded
‘’The chance of being killed by a falling tree or branch is 1 in 10 million, with a risk of injury serious to warrant a visit to hospital being less than 1 in 1 million’’.
Everyday activities such as driving a car, which we carry out without a thought present a much higher risk than being killed or seriously injured by a tree.
There have been several cases in the past where trees have harmed both people and property, often due to sudden and unexpected failure, which has driven people to prosecute in court, seeking compensation for their devastating losses. The precedents set by these cases such as the Poll v Bartholomew (2006) case. often leave the Arboricultural industry at fault, when in reality little could have been done to prevent the outcome of tree failure.
In the case of Parker v The National Trust and those involved in this judgement (Expert Witness Mike Ellison, and His Honour Judge Bird), a sensible verdict was reached and one which perhaps marks an evolution for common-sense risk management. One of the pivotal points that comes out of the judgment is the acceptance of a perceived and indeed factual approach to risk posed by trees.
In August 2016, whilst visiting Lyme Park, Cheshire (managed by the National Trust) the claimant Mrs Parker suffered life-changing injuries when she was struck by a substantial branch, which had fallen from a horse chestnut tree. This was a tragic and life-changing event for the claimant, and as arboriculture professionals, an event which lasts in our memory for a long time. Furthermore, it proves to be an influential lesson for our tree risk decision making and future tree risk inspection processes.
It is important to stress that the National Trust had a reasonable and properly implemented policy of tree safety management. Crucially, this policy was adhered to, as a policy only works if it’s still relevant and upheld by the duty holder. An effective policy of tree safety management should set out the duty holders’ position on trees, their benefits, and the associated risks.
The implementation of a reasonable and proportionate tree risk management policy, along with sensible evidence provided by Expert Witness Mike Ellison, were the key factors leading to the dismissal of the claim against the National Trust. It was found the defendants had properly discharged their ‘duty of care’ under the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957 & 1984, and the claimants’ injuries were the result of a disastrous accident and not the negligence of the National Trust. Read the Case Here and Commentary.
Wharton Natural Infrastructure Consultants regularly undertake tree risk inspections and assess a diverse population of trees all over the UK, as part of our Tree Benefit and Risk Management surveys. As a team of experienced and qualified arboriculturists, we are often commissioned to undertake more detailed risk assessments of trees whereby we provide our clients with appropriate and proportionate recommendations to manage the perceived risk, whilst also retaining the valuable benefits these natural assets provide.
Our Arboricultural Team recently attended the VALID training course and are now official Validators. This enables us to provide VALID risk-benefit assessments for our clients.
VALID describes itself as "an elegantly simple solution to a complex problem" and is the only tree risk system that's 'been built with a Professor in risk and the natural environment' with a methodology and strategy now adopted worldwide by a range of public and private companies and institutions across a number of sectors.
What we really like about VALID is the Strategy and its Policy - a position statement that lays out the 'why' and 'what' of the Strategy.
The Policy says;
• Trees give us many benefits that we need
• The overall risk from trees and branches falling is extremely low
• We can't entirely remove the risk, and trees are living structures that sometimes shed branches or fall over; usually because of severe weather
• We have a duty of care to be reasonable, proportionate, and reasonably practicable when managing the risk
• We’re going to manage the risk to an Acceptable or Tolerable level
If you’d like to discuss all things trees and tree risk-benefit management, or need a qualified and experienced arboriculturist, we’d love to help.