I have a tree (Ok, Lleylandi sp?) I desperately need to trim the top
off. However, there is a birds nest about half way up it (way below
where I intend to chop). Nest appears to be vacant, but I cannot be
certain. I think the birds are starlings.

Is there any time I can safely assume the nest would be vacant in order
to perform the appropriate chopping of the tree?

wrote in message
ups.com...
I have a tree (Ok, Lleylandi sp?) I desperately need to trim the top
off. However, there is a birds nest about half way up it (way below
where I intend to chop). Nest appears to be vacant, but I cannot be
certain. I think the birds are starlings.

Is there any time I can safely assume the nest would be vacant in order
to perform the appropriate chopping of the tree?

All starling chicks have flown the nest here (Leeds). All the nests in our
Leylandii are vacant now. I'd say it was a good time, bird-wise.

Mary

On 3/7/06 11:25, in article
,
" wrote:

I have a tree (Ok, Lleylandi sp?) I desperately need to trim the top
off. However, there is a birds nest about half way up it (way below
where I intend to chop). Nest appears to be vacant, but I cannot be
certain. I think the birds are starlings.

Is there any time I can safely assume the nest would be vacant in order
to perform the appropriate chopping of the tree?

Can you wait until September to be on the safe side? If it IS a starling's
nest, it may well be vacant by now but if not, well........starlings are on
the Red List.
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(email address on website)

On 3/7/06 11:48, in article ,
"Mary Fisher" wrote:


wrote in message
ups.com...
I have a tree (Ok, Lleylandi sp?) I desperately need to trim the top
off. However, there is a birds nest about half way up it (way below
where I intend to chop). Nest appears to be vacant, but I cannot be
certain. I think the birds are starlings.

Is there any time I can safely assume the nest would be vacant in order
to perform the appropriate chopping of the tree?

All starling chicks have flown the nest here (Leeds). All the nests in our
Leylandii are vacant now. I'd say it was a good time, bird-wise.

You may well be right but I have looked on the RSPB web site and can't find
any details of when different birds nest, lay eggs, hatch, and fledge.
Perhaps I'm just not putting in the right questions.
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(email address on website)

On 3/7/06 13:13, in article , "Malcolm"
wrote:


In article , Sacha
writes
On 3/7/06 11:25, in article
,
" wrote:

I have a tree (Ok, Lleylandi sp?) I desperately need to trim the top
off. However, there is a birds nest about half way up it (way below
where I intend to chop). Nest appears to be vacant, but I cannot be
certain. I think the birds are starlings.

Is there any time I can safely assume the nest would be vacant in order
to perform the appropriate chopping of the tree?

Can you wait until September to be on the safe side? If it IS a starling's
nest, it may well be vacant by now but if not, well........starlings are on
the Red List.

Their presence on the Red List doesn't affect things as it has no legal
status.
snip

But the legal status, or otherwise, isn't the point. The point is:

"The UK's birds can be split in to three categories of conservation
importance - red, amber and green.
Red is the highest conservation priority, with species needing urgent
action. Amber is the next most critical group, followed by green.*
Please refer to our PDF download*for the full list of red and amber
categorised species (see link).*
Birds in the red and amber lists will be subject to at least one of the
relevant factors listed below. Again, a full list of criteria can be found
in the PDF download (see link).
Red list criteria
€ Globally threatened
€ Historical population decline in UK during 1800-1995
€ Rapid ( or =50%) decline in UK breeding population over last 25
years
€ Rapid ( or =50%) contraction of UK breeding range over last 25
years"***
http://www.rspb.org.uk/birds/guide/status_explained.asp
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(email address on website)

Thanks to all info.

To answer Malcolm's specific comment... why the desperation... It's the
people behind me, who keep asking me to chop it, and this past weekend
they threatened me with legal action (It's less than 3metres tall)
citing that it's blocking their sunlight (I don't agree, as it's to the
North of them - if anything, it blocks my sunlight).

I'll dig the ladder out tonight and go climbing.

Thanks again,

Ian


Malcolm wrote:
In article . com,
" writes
I have a tree (Ok, Lleylandi sp?) I desperately need to trim the top
off. However, there is a birds nest about half way up it (way below
where I intend to chop). Nest appears to be vacant, but I cannot be
certain. I think the birds are starlings.

Is there any time I can safely assume the nest would be vacant in order
to perform the appropriate chopping of the tree?

They are unlikely to be starlings as that species nests in holes.
Blackbird or Song or Mistle Thrush are more probable.

If you are going to trim the top off, presumably you have a ladder so
why not climb up and have a look? You won't do any harm if it is
occupied. If it is, then with incubation and fledging periods both
around a fortnight, you won't have long to wait. If you can't do that,
then simple observation should confirm whether or not the nest is
occupied. An incubating bird usually has its bill and tail sticking out
over the edge of the nest. If young are being fed, the parents will be
coming in at frequent intervals.

But why the desperation to lop the tree? Wait until September and you
will be past the breeding season of all three species. Blackbirds and
Mistle Thrushes rarely have young in the nest after early July, Song
Thrushes sometimes continue into August.

--
Malcolm

"Sacha" wrote in message
...
On 3/7/06 11:48, in article
,
"Mary Fisher" wrote:


wrote in message
ups.com...
I have a tree (Ok, Lleylandi sp?) I desperately need to trim the top
off. However, there is a birds nest about half way up it (way below
where I intend to chop). Nest appears to be vacant, but I cannot be
certain. I think the birds are starlings.

Is there any time I can safely assume the nest would be vacant in order
to perform the appropriate chopping of the tree?

All starling chicks have flown the nest here (Leeds). All the nests in
our
Leylandii are vacant now. I'd say it was a good time, bird-wise.

You may well be right but I have looked on the RSPB web site and can't
find
any details of when different birds nest, lay eggs, hatch, and fledge.
Perhaps I'm just not putting in the right questions.

It's just from observation of bird activity (a lot) in our very tall
Leylandi.

I wondered about the starling identification too because of the location,
our starlings nest in holes in the eaves. Perhaps it's a blackbird's nest -
they do sometimes have two (rarely here) or even (very rarely here) three
hatches.

It would certainly be a good idea to leave it until early autumn to be
sure - cooler too :-)

Mary

wrote in message
oups.com...
Thanks to all info.

To answer Malcolm's specific comment... why the desperation... It's the
people behind me, who keep asking me to chop it, and this past weekend
they threatened me with legal action (It's less than 3metres tall)
citing that it's blocking their sunlight (I don't agree, as it's to the
North of them - if anything, it blocks my sunlight).

Don't be intimidated by them. Three metres isn't high and if it's to their
north, as you say it's not blocking light.

Nieghbours too often 'threaten' legal action to bully others to get what
they want. Once they've done it successfully they're going to win every
time. Stand against them.

If necessary play the conservation card to give you time to get professional
advice.

Mary

On 3/7/06 15:47, in article ,
"Mary Fisher" wrote:


wrote in message
oups.com...
Thanks to all info.

To answer Malcolm's specific comment... why the desperation... It's the
people behind me, who keep asking me to chop it, and this past weekend
they threatened me with legal action (It's less than 3metres tall)
citing that it's blocking their sunlight (I don't agree, as it's to the
North of them - if anything, it blocks my sunlight).

Don't be intimidated by them. Three metres isn't high and if it's to their
north, as you say it's not blocking light.

Nieghbours too often 'threaten' legal action to bully others to get what
they want. Once they've done it successfully they're going to win every
time. Stand against them.

If necessary play the conservation card to give you time to get professional
advice.


A batty neighbour of mine once tried reporting me for chopping down a row of
horrible leylandii trees, complaining it was detrimental to the area, or
some such nonsense. The council official she spoke to nearly died laughing!
Not only is trying to preserve the potential safety of birds a hands down
winner, 9' of leylandii is not anti-social and it will cost the OP's
neighbour a lot of money to make a trivial complaint which will be ignored.
Three metres is quite high enough, IMO and should provide all the privacy
needed, so in his shoes, I'd keep it there and tell the neighbour that's
what is going to happen. My guess is that the neighbour is starting to
panic as he sees these trees leaping for the sky but it wasn't a good
neighbourly move to bring in the heavy brigade at this stage!
Of course, in due course, the OP may like to consider the problems he faces
with planting things beneath his hedge and indeed, the blocking of sunlight
already starting!
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(email address on website)

In article ,
Malcolm writes:
|
| Whether or not the species is judged to be globally threatened, in
| decline or experiencing a rapid contraction of its UK range is
| immaterial to whether or not he can legally destroy the nest.

I believe that you can be prosecuted for destroying a ruddy duck's
nest, on which the Men From The Ministry have just shot the duck.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Sacha wrote:
On 3/7/06 15:47, in article ,
"Mary Fisher" wrote:

wrote in message
oups.com...
Thanks to all info.

To answer Malcolm's specific comment... why the desperation... It's the
people behind me, who keep asking me to chop it, and this past weekend
they threatened me with legal action (It's less than 3metres tall)
citing that it's blocking their sunlight (I don't agree, as it's to the
North of them - if anything, it blocks my sunlight).
Don't be intimidated by them. Three metres isn't high and if it's to their
north, as you say it's not blocking light.

Nieghbours too often 'threaten' legal action to bully others to get what
they want. Once they've done it successfully they're going to win every
time. Stand against them.

If necessary play the conservation card to give you time to get professional
advice.


A batty neighbour of mine once tried reporting me for chopping down a row of
horrible leylandii trees, complaining it was detrimental to the area, or
some such nonsense. The council official she spoke to nearly died laughing!
Not only is trying to preserve the potential safety of birds a hands down
winner, 9' of leylandii is not anti-social and it will cost the OP's
neighbour a lot of money to make a trivial complaint which will be ignored.
Three metres is quite high enough, IMO and should provide all the privacy
needed, so in his shoes, I'd keep it there and tell the neighbour that's
what is going to happen. My guess is that the neighbour is starting to
panic as he sees these trees leaping for the sky but it wasn't a good
neighbourly move to bring in the heavy brigade at this stage!
Of course, in due course, the OP may like to consider the problems he faces
with planting things beneath his hedge and indeed, the blocking of sunlight
already starting!
I assume the same as a hedge, it is not recommended to prune before August.

"Sacha" wrote in message
...
On 3/7/06 15:47, in article
,
"Mary Fisher" wrote:


wrote in message
oups.com...
Thanks to all info.

To answer Malcolm's specific comment... why the desperation... It's the
people behind me, who keep asking me to chop it, and this past weekend
they threatened me with legal action (It's less than 3metres tall)
citing that it's blocking their sunlight (I don't agree, as it's to the
North of them - if anything, it blocks my sunlight).

Don't be intimidated by them. Three metres isn't high and if it's to
their
north, as you say it's not blocking light.

Nieghbours too often 'threaten' legal action to bully others to get what
they want. Once they've done it successfully they're going to win every
time. Stand against them.

If necessary play the conservation card to give you time to get
professional
advice.


A batty neighbour of mine once tried reporting me for chopping down a row
of
horrible leylandii trees, complaining it was detrimental to the area, or
some such nonsense. The council official she spoke to nearly died
laughing!
Not only is trying to preserve the potential safety of birds a hands down
winner, 9' of leylandii is not anti-social and it will cost the OP's
neighbour a lot of money to make a trivial complaint which will be
ignored.
Three metres is quite high enough, IMO and should provide all the privacy
needed, so in his shoes, I'd keep it there and tell the neighbour that's
what is going to happen. My guess is that the neighbour is starting to
panic as he sees these trees leaping for the sky but it wasn't a good
neighbourly move to bring in the heavy brigade at this stage!
Of course, in due course, the OP may like to consider the problems he
faces
with planting things beneath his hedge and indeed, the blocking of
sunlight
already starting!

Indeed.

We have a VERY high Leylandii which is almost the only tree in the
neighbourhood which is home to nesting birds. Nobody has complained about it
and it does keep the underlying ground (only in our garden) very dry but
that's advantatgeous to our hens, who like to dig to Australia there and
have shelter when it rains. The only sunlight blocked is in our garden and
although the roots must be draining the surrounding ground of nutrients I am
growing (with reasonable sucess) runner beans and tomatoes in the ground
below. Last year I grew potatoes. I hope, gradually, to improve the quality
of the soil while keeping the tree (for the sake of the birds) but I do have
to water a lot. The hens do their bit towards fertilising it ...

Mary
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(email address on website)

"Janet Baraclough" wrote in message
...
The message
from "Mary Fisher" contains these words:


Don't be intimidated by them. Three metres isn't high and if it's to
their
north, as you say it's not blocking light.

How can you tell, without seeing it? It's perfectly possible for a
tree, (or wall, or shed) to block light from a nearby groundfloor
window, making rooms dark. North-facing rooms and windows are more, not
less, vulnerable to light loss.

The poster said that it the neighbour said it was blocking SUNlight.

Mary

In article ,
Malcolm writes:
|
| I believe that you can be prosecuted for destroying a ruddy duck's
| nest, on which the Men From The Ministry have just shot the duck.
|
| Your belief is wrong.

Well, that's not what the government says on its Web pages. I should
have to go to the UL to read the Act to see if it is telling porkies or
you are. See paragraph 5 (legislative background) of :

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/em2004/uksiem_20041487_en.pdf


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

In article ,
Malcolm writes:
|
| http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/em2004/uksiem_20041487_en.pdf
|
| I've read para 5, and the rest of the document, but haven't found
| anything relevant to whether to not a ruddy duck's nest can legally be
| destroyed. What part do you think is relevant?

What is it about "Section 1 of the Act makes it an offence to ... take,
damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird" that you don't understand?

| Your belief that it is illegal to do so is still wrong

As I said, possibly. But, when you have made such claims, and I have
checked them up, 2/3 of the time it is I that have been correct and
you that have been wrong. I am disinclined to read the 1981 Act and
subsequent legislation just to prove this yet again.

If you can provide any clear evidence for your statement, don't let
me stop you.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.