Dear supporters A long-awaited draft Tree Strategy is finally available for public comment here: https://sheffield.citizenspace.com/place-planning-1/trees-and-woodlands-strategy-consultation/ The draft strategy was supposed to be ready in November 2015, but it was delayed because Sheffield City Council did not start drafting it until after 26th February 2016, despite promising on 23rd July 2015 that work would begin on it immediately. Thank you to everyone who has worked so very hard over the last 19 months to get us this far! A Tree Strategy is the only real way to get Sheffield City Council to put in place adequate steps to help ensure fulfilment of policy commitments and compliance with current good practice. It should GUIDE and INFORM ALL local authority policy and decisions that affect trees, particularly those in local authority care. Once formally adopted as policy, and as a Supplementary Planning Document (SPD), the strategy should be reviewed and revised at planned and appropriate intervals, in accordance with current good practice, as detailed in previous SORT letters. At the last SORT social, concerns were raised with regard to not understanding urban forestry terms and some assistance was requested in what to write as personal contribution to the strategy. So what is a Tree Strategy? A Tree Strategy is a planned, integrated, systematic approach to the sustainable management of the Urban Forest, of which Street Trees are a significant part. The 'Urban Forest' is defined, by the Government’s UK Forestry Standard, as the collective tree and woodland cover of the urban area. The strategy is to guide and inform policy and decisions. Think of it as a framework, detailing processes, methods, techniques, organisational structure, roles and responsibilities, policies and action plans (preferably with targets that are specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and timed: SMART). An adequate strategy - drafted in accordance with current good practice guidance and recommendations - would encourage and help ensure AN OPEN, HONEST, TRANSPARENT APPROACH, which is auditable, with greater accountability. Such a strategy would help ensure that assessments are appropriate, adequate, balanced and undertaken by competent people (using current, widely recognised and accepted methods and techniques), and that actions are proportionate, defendable and not unduly influenced by transitory or exaggerated opinions. An adequate strategy is the best and most appropriate way to fulfil existing policy commitments, duties imposed by legislation, and helps ensure compliance with current good practice. A good example of a working tree strategy is Haringey Council’s here: http://www.haringey.gov.uk/environment-and-waste/nature-and-conservation/trees/tree-strategy Refer to section 5.2 Highway Maintenance Works. Suggestions for Comment on Sheffield's Parent Tree Strategy and the Sub-Strategy for Highway Trees: The previous SORT letters will give an idea of what is required of a tree strategy. In particular, see pages 7 to 9 and pages 62 and 65 of the SORT letter dated 29th January, 2016 (This was the Nether Edge petition hand-out that was distributed to EVERY councillor in the City of Sheffield): http://bit.ly/2dGxO01 You could also ask for detail of what methods and techniques will be used to ensure risk assessment is balanced. You could ask for detail of the methods and techniques to be used for valuations, cost: benefit analyses, risk assessment, risk analyses, and various other tasks (such as hazard assessments, site preparation prior to planting, and specifications for planting, protection and aftercare). What steps exist to ensure compliance with current good practice? Who is responsible for undertaking, supervising, monitoring, auditing various tasks? At what stage? How? Where are they? How can they be contacted? What steps exist to ensure a timely response to: a) Requests for information; b) Complaints of non-compliance with good practice; c) Enquiries? The sub-strategy for Highway Trees should be cross-linked and fully integrated with the parent tree strategy, current good practice guidance and recommendations, policy commitments and legislation (local, national, European and international). These should be cited and referenced. It should include: 1. Detail of alternative Highway engineering specifications for footway, edging (kerb) and drain construction, authorised for consideration for use when undertaking works in close proximity to trees: this must not just be merely a list of ideas, materials or techniques and must include technical drawings. 2. Detail of methods to be used for valuation of the structural value of trees and for each of the range of ecosystem services that street trees provide (amenity, filtration of particulate matter, provision of oxygen, rainfall interception & reduction of flow and surface water run-off, regulation of climate [noise, heat and exposure], etc). CAVAT and i-Tree are examples of methods that could be used. 3. Detail of methods to be used for cost:benefit analysis (important for use in balanced risk assessment and responsible asset management). 4. Detail of methods and techniques used for risk assessment and risk analyses (for example, for hazards associated with trees, particularly those affecting footways, edging, carriageways and adjacent land and built structures). 5. Detail of methods and techniques used for assessment of highway canopy cover and the impact of proposals on canopy cover at street, neighbourhood and city-wide levels. 6. Detail of how canopy cover will be maintained, in each land-use category (highways, housing, schools and colleges, cemeteries, parks, etc.) as required by The UK Forestry Standard: The governments' approach to sustainable forest management. 7. Detail of the process, methods and techniques that will be used to determine whether or not a tree is worthy of retention (such as used for estimation of Safe Useful Life Expectancy: SULE), particularly during works in close proximity to trees. 8. Clear, unambiguous definitions of all arboricultural or technical words and terms. 9. Detail of strategy for community involvement: education, consultation and participation, as recommended by Trees in Towns 2: a new survey of urban trees in England and their condition and management (2008): a report commissioned by the Department for Communities and Local Government. Access extracts of the report, in PDF format, using this link:https://www.stocksbridgecommunity.org/news/published-after-wait-14-months-sheffields-first-draught-tree-strategy-available-public-comment 10. Detail of the process for registering a claim with Sheffield City Council for damage or harm caused as a result of the Council’s actions, and detail of the current process for handling such claims. 11. Detail of how to contact Sheffield City Council’s PFI Client Team directly, to report non-compliance with good practice. 12. Detail of steps to ensure timely, adequate, intervention by Sheffield City Council’s PFI Client Team in response to reports of non-compliance with good practice, so as to prevent harm/damage and avoid further harm/damage. 13. Detail of the process, methods and techniques that Sheffield City Council will use to “investigate” reported non-compliance with good practice: in particular, actions that harm trees. The above information represents just a few suggestions and is not intended to be a comprehensive list of all that could be included in a tree strategy or sub-strategy for highway trees. It is offered as inspiration to make useful, valid contributions. You have until the END OF NOVEMBER 2016 to comment on Sheffield's Tree Strategy. Please share your thoughts on the STAG website: https://www.facebook.com/groups/392913244219104/ Please comment as soon as you can! All For One, One For All SORT