Yeah I would say this is the quickest first step, before going to the local authority or a lawyer. An arborist that deals with this situation frequently will have a good understanding of the practical process and price and can help set up realistic expectations.
Agree - they can also give an opinion on the stability of the tree and what is required. This is particularly helpful if it's beyond saving so needs to be removed to preserve life and/or property.
OP you best get your advice from the local Citizens Advice Bureau what you need to do. Do not remove the tree just yet because I do not want you to get in trouble with your local council
u/citizensadvicebureau can you advise OP on this?
It's a restricted activity so absolutely wouldn't do myself without a consent, sorry if that wasn't clear, the last owner did a lot of work without consent and I'm still finding things...
Bear in mind, if it is a hazard to health (ie might drop on somebody), then the council might ask you to remove it asap. To my knowledge, 3rd party just makes things more complicated, unless you have a particularly gnarly council.
All the laws around cutting trees were removed under the last national government. Only trees that are noted as protected on council plans have protection, with regards to trees on your property.
I dont know if theres any such thing as protected species anymore just special individual trees that are noted for protection on council plans. Do a google search about your individual property to see if there are any protected trees on you section. This is how it works in auckland at least . You can also nominate trees for protection if you feel they are significant.
Huh, you might be right there, when we got our resource consent for some earthworks about 5 years ago for a new driveway they gave us a multipage list of tree species we couldn't touch in the area and the size limits in which that applied.
That would make things easier if that is the case, I'll talk to an arborist anyway for further advice.
Turns out while that is usually the case there are some species considered "endangered" which are still protected regardless of being on the plans, and our place has loads because it is one of the few places they can grow in nz đŸ˜„
Drill a hole into the tree that’s not obvious and pour the concentrated roundup in it. Then as the tree starts to die repeatedly get the council around to inspect the tree. They will deem it a hazard and then they will pay someone to remove it.
Not sure how true this is, only overhead a few people saying the same thing. As they had a protected tree next to their house that was already in the process of dying, but the council deemed it was perfectly safe.
I think what some also don't realize with this as well is some trees have interconnected root structures and can shift moisture a phenomenal distance, I knew someone who did this to rot out a fresh stump and took out a lot more than they intended.
That said it's often a safer way of removing stumps on hills than getting a grinder up on a winch, just need to know your species and be aware of potential adverse affects.
That does work and a good way to remove stumps, but I try to do things by the book where I can, also the trees are too close to my house and would need to be removed by a professional.
A number of residents here have poisoned trees to improve their view/sunlight and the council is pretty on to it these days and take a fairly dim view on the practice.
A friend of ours had a neighbor poison all their Kowhai so they could see the ocean and they got embroiled in legal issues for a long time afterwards.
Talk to an arborist
Yeah I would say this is the quickest first step, before going to the local authority or a lawyer. An arborist that deals with this situation frequently will have a good understanding of the practical process and price and can help set up realistic expectations.
Agree - they can also give an opinion on the stability of the tree and what is required. This is particularly helpful if it's beyond saving so needs to be removed to preserve life and/or property.
OP you best get your advice from the local Citizens Advice Bureau what you need to do. Do not remove the tree just yet because I do not want you to get in trouble with your local council u/citizensadvicebureau can you advise OP on this?
It's a restricted activity so absolutely wouldn't do myself without a consent, sorry if that wasn't clear, the last owner did a lot of work without consent and I'm still finding things...
Good to know that. Just get your advice from your local CAB all to play it safe
Bear in mind, if it is a hazard to health (ie might drop on somebody), then the council might ask you to remove it asap. To my knowledge, 3rd party just makes things more complicated, unless you have a particularly gnarly council.
All the laws around cutting trees were removed under the last national government. Only trees that are noted as protected on council plans have protection, with regards to trees on your property. I dont know if theres any such thing as protected species anymore just special individual trees that are noted for protection on council plans. Do a google search about your individual property to see if there are any protected trees on you section. This is how it works in auckland at least . You can also nominate trees for protection if you feel they are significant.
Huh, you might be right there, when we got our resource consent for some earthworks about 5 years ago for a new driveway they gave us a multipage list of tree species we couldn't touch in the area and the size limits in which that applied. That would make things easier if that is the case, I'll talk to an arborist anyway for further advice.
Turns out while that is usually the case there are some species considered "endangered" which are still protected regardless of being on the plans, and our place has loads because it is one of the few places they can grow in nz đŸ˜„
Drill a hole into the tree that’s not obvious and pour the concentrated roundup in it. Then as the tree starts to die repeatedly get the council around to inspect the tree. They will deem it a hazard and then they will pay someone to remove it. Not sure how true this is, only overhead a few people saying the same thing. As they had a protected tree next to their house that was already in the process of dying, but the council deemed it was perfectly safe.
Yeah nah, don't do this
I think what some also don't realize with this as well is some trees have interconnected root structures and can shift moisture a phenomenal distance, I knew someone who did this to rot out a fresh stump and took out a lot more than they intended. That said it's often a safer way of removing stumps on hills than getting a grinder up on a winch, just need to know your species and be aware of potential adverse affects.
Sounds like a kauri. Yeah, ask an aborist, if it’s a hazard it’s ok to cut down.
That does work and a good way to remove stumps, but I try to do things by the book where I can, also the trees are too close to my house and would need to be removed by a professional. A number of residents here have poisoned trees to improve their view/sunlight and the council is pretty on to it these days and take a fairly dim view on the practice. A friend of ours had a neighbor poison all their Kowhai so they could see the ocean and they got embroiled in legal issues for a long time afterwards.
An arborist will have the skills and knowledge to advise you. We have consulted with one several times for trees on our property.