Arboricultural Report Trees on Rocks Green Development Site, Ludlow, Shropshire Pickstock Homes March 2021 1. Instructions and scope of report My instructions are: 1) To assess the health and condition of several Ash trees on site 2) To consider their appropriateness to the site and its future use This survey follows up on the BS 5837 survey carried out by Sylvan Resources Ltd in October 2017. The plan in Appendix 1 indicates the locations of the trees identified in the initial survey. The relevant trees are numbers; 2, 3 and 13. 2. Instructions received from Pickstock Homes, 17 Mile Oak, Maesbury Road, Oswestry, Shropshire SY10 8GA 3. Background to Ash dieback and the current situation at Rocks Green Ash dieback, Hymenoscyphus pseudoalbidus or Chalara, is a damaging disease affecting Ash trees by causing leaf loss and crown dieback. Early sightings of the disease were discovered around 2012 – 2013 in South-East England. Since then it has spread across the UK and was first detected in Ludlow, Shropshire in 2016. Guidance indicates that it is better to retain Ash wherever possible because of the contribution they make to ecosystems. However, where public safety is concerned, complications resulting from the disease present increased risks. These arise from weakened crowns, deadwood, reduced stability and the increased likelihood of further infection in neighbouring trees. Ash dieback has been observed in the Ludlow area and there is a high likelihood that Ash trees on this site will become infected if they have not already. 4. Tree 2 The previous report considered Tree 2 to be healthy, although it had some root damage and a crack on the north side of its stem (Appendix 2). A second inspection by a tree surgeon has confirmed that this tree is unsafe. Ash dieback could not be confirmed in this tree. However, some large branches in the canopy are dead and others have fallen to the ground. This indicates some element of dieback. A large proportion of the crown appeared to have grown in the last few years and was unaffected. As shown in Appendices 3 and 4, Tree 2 is located near to plots 6 and 7. 5. Tree 3 The 2017 report concluded that the condition of Tree 3 was fair. Some basal decay and fungal bodies were observed (Appendix 2). The basal decay is shown in Appendices 5 and 6, and the fungal bodies in Appendix 7 (photographed March 2021). Since 2017 the tree has declined. Basal decay now threatens the stability and health of the tree. A second inspection by a tree surgeon has confirmed that it this tree is unsafe. Ash dieback could not be fully confirmed. A large branch had cracked in the canopy (Appendix 8 and 9), in addition to this, other dead branches both in the canopy and on the floor were observed. A good proportion of the tree appeared healthy. As shown in Appendix 10, Tree 3 is located near to plots 26,27, 28, 32 and 33. 6. Tree 13 is a poorly formed tree showing progressive decline. Its removal is now recommended. 7. Recommendations Given the proximity of these three trees to buildings and the growing likelihood of people being near them, they present an increased risk to the public and/or property. In my opinion, these trees are should be removed in order to ensure the safety of those close to them trees, workers, future occupiers and the public. My opinion is supported by that expressed by a tree surgeon who has since inspected the trees. Appendix 1 2017 Tree survey plan Appendix 2 2017 Tree survey findings Appendix 3 House plots in relation to Tree 2 Appendix 4 Tree 2 in relation to plots 6 and 7 (7 in the foreground) Appendix 5 Basal decay Tree 3 (1) Appendix 6 Basal decay Tree 3 Appendix 7 Fungal bodies Tree 3 Appendix 8 Cracked limb in Tree 3 (1) Appendix 9 Cracked limb in Tree 3 (2) Appendix 10 House plots in relation to Tree 3 .