What Is an Arboricultural Method Statement?

​

An Arboricultural Method Statement explains how construction work should be carried out where retained trees could be affected.

It forms part of the arboricultural information prepared to support many developments under BS5837:2012 Trees in Relation to Design, Demolition and Construction. Recommendations. Depending on the project, it may accompany an Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Tree Protection Plan, describing the sequence of works, protective measures and working methods needed to safeguard retained trees throughout construction.

 

BS5837 Tree Surveys

Arboricultural Impact Assessments (AIA)

​

Every site is different, but an Arboricultural Method Statement commonly addresses matters such as protective fencing, ground protection, construction access, service installation, excavation within Root Protection Areas, changes in ground level and supervision of sensitive operations. The purpose is not simply to identify risks, but to explain how those risks will be managed before work begins.

That is the technical definition.

The practical reality is rather different.

By the time we arrive, construction has often already begun in some form. Materials have been delivered. Machinery has been moved onto site. Temporary access routes have appeared. Sometimes the retained trees have already been fenced correctly. Sometimes heavy plant has been parked directly within areas that should have remained protected. More often than not, nobody has acted carelessly. They have simply been focused on a different part of the project.

That is why we spend as much time understanding the site as we do reading the drawings.

Before we begin thinking about documents, we want to understand what is happening on the ground. How are the retained trees being treated today? Where are people naturally moving around the site? Where are the pressure points likely to develop once construction gathers pace?

Those first observations tell us far more than a plan ever can.

Only then do we begin building an Arboricultural Method Statement that reflects both the technical requirements of the project and the practical realities of delivering it.

Because the best Method Statements are not those that are simply submitted.

They are the ones that continue to protect trees long after the report has been filed away.

​

Does Your Project Actually Need an Arboricultural Method Statement?

Not every development near trees requires an Arboricultural Method Statement.

That may seem like an unusual thing for an arboricultural consultancy to say, but our role is to provide professional advice, not simply produce reports.

Sometimes we visit a site where a client has been told they need an Arboricultural Method Statement because trees are present somewhere within the development. Once we understand the proposal, the position of the retained trees and the way the site will actually operate, it becomes clear that a simpler solution is perfectly appropriate.

If construction activities remain well clear of the retained trees, there may be little benefit in producing a lengthy technical document explaining risks that simply do not exist. In those situations, straightforward guidance and sensible site management may be all that is required.

Equally, many developments are granted planning permission with a condition requiring an approved Arboricultural Method Statement before work can begin. Where that requirement exists, there is very little room for interpretation. Our responsibility is to prepare a clear, technically robust document that satisfies the planning condition and provides practical guidance for everyone working on the site. Understanding that distinction is important.

There is a difference between good arboricultural practice and planning requirements.

One is based on professional judgement. The other is a legal obligation attached to the development.

Part of our job is helping clients understand which applies to their project.

There is little value in producing unnecessary reports. Equally, there is significant value in ensuring that reports which are genuinely required are prepared properly from the outset. A well considered Method Statement can prevent delays, reduce uncertainty during construction and give everyone involved confidence that the project can move forward whilst safeguarding the retained trees.

​

Our advice is always guided by the same principle.

We recommend the minimum level of intervention necessary to protect the trees, satisfy the planning requirements and allow the development to proceed with confidence.

​

How We Approach an Arboricultural Method Statement

​

Every site has drawings. Every site has measurements. Every site has planning information, but none of those tell the whole story.

An Arboricultural Method Statement is ultimately about people. It is about understanding how people will move around a site, where pressure points will develop and how construction can continue without creating unnecessary risk to retained trees, that's why we spend time observing before we begin recommending. One of the first things we notice is how the trees are already being treated.

Sometimes protective fencing has already been installed correctly. Access routes have been carefully planned and the retained trees have clearly been considered from the beginning of the project. Those sites usually tell us that everyone involved understands the importance of tree protection and is working towards the same objective.

Other sites tell a different story.

It is not unusual to find heavy machinery parked within Root Protection Areas, building materials stored beneath retained trees or temporary access routes crossing ground that should remain undisturbed. In our experience this is rarely the result of negligence. More often, nobody has yet explained why those areas matter or how easily avoidable damage can occur. That distinction is important, because if we assume people do not care about trees, we start from the wrong position.

Most contractors care deeply about delivering a good project. They simply have a different set of priorities. Their focus is programme, safety, access, deliveries and keeping work moving. Ours is ensuring that those objectives can be achieved without compromising the long term health of the retained trees.

The two are not in conflict nearly as often as people imagine.

 

Before we begin writing, we ask ourselves a series of practical questions.

How are the retained trees being managed today?

How close will construction activities actually come to them?

Where will vehicles naturally want to travel?

Where will materials be stored?

Which operations present the greatest risk?

Are there straightforward changes that could remove those risks before they become a problem?

These questions rarely appear within the finished report.

They shape every recommendation inside it.

Tree species also influence our thinking. Different species respond differently to disturbance, soil compaction and changes to their rooting environment. The age, condition and expected longevity of the trees all contribute to our assessment, as do the nature of the proposed works and the constraints of the site itself.

No two Method Statements should be identical because no two sites are identical, our aim is never to produce the longest report, our aim is to produce the report that best fits the site in front of us.

That sometimes means recommending robust protective measures where the risks demand them.

Sometimes it means recognising that a straightforward solution is all that is required.

Professional judgement is knowing the difference.

​

Good Arboriculture Depends Upon Good Communication

One lesson has been reinforced repeatedly throughout our work on development sites. Protecting trees is rarely the difficult part. Helping everyone involved understand how that protection fits into a live construction project is often the greater challenge.

An Arboricultural Method Statement should never exist in isolation. It sits alongside architects' drawings, engineers' designs, construction programmes and the countless practical decisions that have to be made every day on a working site. If those disciplines are not communicating with one another, conflict becomes almost inevitable.

We have seen that happen more than once.

On one project in Cuxton, a Root Protection Area established around a retained tree significantly altered the route that heavy machinery would have to take through the site. From the contractor's perspective, it was understandable why questions were asked. The revised route was longer, less convenient and would inevitably affect the efficiency of the work.

Those conversations are an important part of the process.

There is little value in dismissing genuine operational concerns, just as there is little value in ignoring the requirements that exist to safeguard retained trees. Our responsibility is to listen, explain the reasoning behind our recommendations and help everyone understand what flexibility exists and, just as importantly, what flexibility does not.

In this instance, the Root Protection Area had been derived in accordance with the recommendations of BS5837:2012. Although Root Protection Areas can sometimes be modified where there is sound arboricultural justification and site specific evidence to support it, they cannot simply be reduced because they create inconvenience during construction. If we were prepared to alter fundamental protection measures without technical justification, we would not be protecting the tree or serving our client particularly well.

That does not mean every conversation ends with a simple "no".

Quite the opposite.

Once the principles of tree protection are established, there is often considerable scope to discuss how construction can still proceed efficiently. Changing the sequence of works, altering storage locations, adjusting access routes or reconsidering the timing of certain operations can often resolve practical difficulties without compromising the retained trees.

Those conversations are rarely described in the finished report, but they are an important part of good arboricultural consultancy.

Ultimately, our objective is not to write reports that prevent development. It is to help development proceed responsibly. We have always believed that tree protection works best when it is understood rather than imposed. A contractor who understands why a protective measure exists is far more likely to respect it than one who sees it as another arbitrary restriction.

That is why we see communication as one of the most valuable tools available to an arboricultural consultant. Long before machinery arrives on site or protective fencing is erected, a clear conversation can often prevent the problems that no report can solve afterwards.

​

A Method Statement Is Only Successful If People Follow It

​

One of the most important lessons we have learnt is that technical accuracy alone does not protect trees.

An Arboricultural Method Statement can be impeccably researched, fully compliant with BS5837 and supported by excellent drawings, but if the recommendations are impractical or difficult to apply on a busy construction site, the document has failed in its most important purpose.

Tree protection does not happen on paper.

It happens on site.

That is why we spend as much time thinking about the people who will be using the Method Statement as we do the document itself.

A site manager has different pressures from a groundworker. An excavator operator experiences the site differently from a planning officer reading the report in an office. Each person will interact with the recommendations in a different way, yet every one of them contributes to the eventual outcome for the retained trees.

We believe a good Arboricultural Method Statement should recognise those realities rather than ignore them.

Wherever possible, we look for solutions that protect the trees whilst fitting naturally within the way a project is already intended to operate. Sometimes that means adjusting the sequence of construction. Sometimes it means identifying a more appropriate location for temporary storage. Occasionally it is simply a matter of explaining why a particular restriction exists before it becomes a source of frustration.

These are often small conversations, but they can have a lasting impact.

People are far more likely to respect recommendations when they understand the purpose behind them. A contractor who knows that repeated vehicle movements will compact the soil above a tree's rooting environment is no longer following an arbitrary instruction. They are making an informed decision to help protect a living organism that may have stood on the site for decades before construction began.

That is the difference between enforcement and cooperation.

The best projects rarely succeed because everyone agrees from the outset. They succeed because people with different objectives find a way to work towards a shared outcome. In our experience, that is where an arboricultural consultant can add the greatest value. We are not simply interpreting British Standards or preparing reports. We are helping architects, developers, contractors and planning authorities move towards a solution that protects both the project and the landscape that surrounds it.

Ultimately, that is what an Arboricultural Method Statement should achieve. Not another layer of bureaucracy, but a practical framework that gives everyone the confidence to move forward.

​

Trees Do Not Fail Overnight

​

One of the more difficult aspects of arboricultural consultancy is that the consequences of poor decisions are rarely immediate.

If a branch is removed incorrectly, the effects may be visible within a relatively short period of time. Construction is different. Damage to a tree's rooting environment often occurs quietly, beneath the surface and without any obvious indication that anything is wrong. A site can appear tidy, organised and well managed whilst irreversible harm is taking place below ground.

That is one of the reasons Arboricultural Method Statements exist in the first place.

Much of a tree's absorbing root system occupies the upper layers of the soil. Those roots depend upon a delicate balance of oxygen, moisture and soil structure to remain healthy. Repeated vehicle movements, the storage of heavy materials, excavation, changes in ground level or poorly planned access routes can all alter that environment, sometimes permanently.

The difficulty is that mature trees are remarkably resilient.

A tree may tolerate that disturbance for months or even years before the symptoms become apparent. By the time crown dieback, reduced vigour or structural decline begin to develop, the activities that caused the damage have often long since finished. It is therefore easy to assume that the construction had little effect, when in reality the decline began the moment the rooting environment was compromised.

That delayed response is one of the reasons we encourage clients and contractors to think beyond the construction programme itself.

Our responsibility is not simply to help a development reach practical completion. It is to help ensure that the trees intended to be retained are still healthy many years after the last contractor has left the site.

This is also why some recommendations can appear cautious at first glance. Protective fencing, ground protection systems and carefully planned access routes are not intended to make construction more complicated. They exist because preventing damage is almost always easier than attempting to manage the consequences afterwards.

Once significant root damage has occurred, there is often very little an arboriculturist can do to reverse it.

For that reason, we believe prevention is not only the most responsible approach, but also the most economical. Protecting a mature tree during construction is almost always less costly than dealing with its decline, removal and replacement in the years that follow.

Perhaps more importantly, some losses cannot truly be replaced at all.

A newly planted tree has enormous value and we strongly support good planting as part of long term landscape management. Even so, it may take decades before it begins to offer the same visual presence, habitat value and contribution to the wider landscape as the mature tree it replaces.

That perspective influences every recommendation we make.

Our objective is not simply to preserve a tree because it appears on a drawing. It is to preserve the contribution that tree already makes to the character, ecology and longevity of the landscape.

​

When Tree Protection Becomes an Afterthought

​

Most problems we encounter on development sites are not caused by bad intentions.

They arise because construction moves quickly.

A delivery arrives earlier than expected and materials are placed in the nearest convenient location. A machine takes the shortest route across the site because it seems the obvious thing to do. Temporary access becomes permanent through repeated use. Small decisions are made throughout the day, each of them perfectly understandable in isolation, yet together they gradually place increasing pressure on the retained trees.

That is why successful tree protection depends upon thinking ahead rather than reacting afterwards.

By the time an arboricultural consultant is called to investigate visible damage, the opportunity to prevent it has often passed. The soil has already been compacted, roots have already been severed or protective fencing has already been moved to accommodate the demands of the project. At that stage, our role changes from prevention to assessment, and prevention is always the better outcome.

This is where a well prepared Arboricultural Method Statement adds value that is not immediately obvious.

It encourages everyone involved to pause before work begins and consider how the site will function over the coming weeks and months. Where will deliveries arrive? Where will welfare facilities be positioned? How will machinery move from one part of the site to another? Where is the most appropriate place to store materials without creating unnecessary pressure on retained trees?

These are practical questions rather than complicated ones, yet answering them early can remove many of the situations that lead to accidental damage later.

We have found that the most successful projects are rarely those with the most restrictive Method Statements. They are the projects where tree protection has been considered from the outset and quietly incorporated into the way the site operates. Once good habits become part of the daily routine, they stop feeling like restrictions altogether.

There is another benefit to this approach.

Construction projects inevitably change as they progress. Unexpected ground conditions are discovered, programmes evolve and practical challenges emerge that could never have been anticipated fully during the design stage. A clear Method Statement provides a framework for making sensible decisions when those changes occur. Rather than asking whether the trees can simply be worked around, everyone involved already understands the principles that are being protected and can adapt their approach without losing sight of the wider objective.

In many respects, that is what good arboricultural consultancy is about, it's not producing a report that predicts every eventuality, that would be impossible, it's helping people make sound decisions when circumstances inevitably change.

​

Common Misconceptions About Arboricultural Method Statements

​

One of the more interesting aspects of arboricultural consultancy is that almost everybody arrives with a slightly different understanding of what an Arboricultural Method Statement is intended to achieve.

For some, it is simply another planning document. For others, it is viewed as a collection of restrictions that will inevitably make construction slower, more expensive or more complicated. Occasionally, clients assume it is little more than an administrative exercise, produced because the planning authority requires another report before work can begin.

The reality is rather more nuanced.

An Arboricultural Method Statement is not intended to prevent development. If it has been prepared properly, it should help development proceed with greater confidence. It identifies potential conflicts before they arise and provides practical ways of avoiding them, allowing retained trees and construction activities to coexist rather than compete.

Another common misunderstanding is that every recommendation is open to negotiation.

Professional judgement is involved throughout the preparation of an Arboricultural Method Statement, but professional judgement operates within established technical guidance and, where relevant, planning conditions. There are occasions when different approaches may achieve the same outcome and discussing those options with contractors can be an important part of the process. Equally, there are recommendations that exist because the evidence supporting them is well established or because they form part of an approved planning strategy. In those situations, convenience alone is not a sufficient reason to depart from them.

Perhaps the greatest misconception, however, is that tree protection and construction are somehow opposing objectives.

That has not been our experience.

The overwhelming majority of developers, contractors and site managers we have worked alongside want to deliver a successful project. They take pride in their work and understand the importance of meeting their legal responsibilities. Where difficulties arise, they are usually practical rather than philosophical. A delivery needs to be accommodated. Access is tighter than anticipated. Ground conditions have changed. The programme has shifted. These are the everyday realities of construction rather than examples of people choosing to ignore the trees.

Recognising that changes the conversation completely.

Instead of asking, "How do we stop the builders damaging the trees?", we begin asking, "How can the project continue whilst making it as straightforward as possible to protect them?"

That is a much more productive question.

It encourages collaboration rather than confrontation and acknowledges that everyone involved is working towards a successful outcome, even if they approach the project from different perspectives.

There is one final misconception that we occasionally encounter, and it is perhaps the easiest to understand.

Some people assume that if no damage is immediately visible, then the retained trees must have escaped construction unharmed.

Trees do not always respond in that way.

The effects of soil compaction, root severance or changes to the rooting environment may take years to become apparent. By the time symptoms begin to develop, the development has often been completed, the contractors have left the site and the connection between cause and effect has become much less obvious. Good tree protection is therefore based upon preventing problems before they occur, not waiting for visible signs that something has already gone wrong.

In many respects, that is what an Arboricultural Method Statement is designed to do. It is not simply a record of what should happen on site. It is an opportunity to identify avoidable problems before they become irreversible ones.

​

Professional Judgement Cannot Be Standardised

​

Modern arboriculture is supported by an excellent body of research, established British Standards and an increasingly sophisticated understanding of the relationship between trees and development. Those documents provide consistency, they establish good practice and they ensure that consultants across the profession are working from a common technical foundation. They are indispensable. Yet they cannot tell us exactly how to approach every site, because no two sites are ever quite the same.

That is where professional judgement begins.

Two developments may appear almost identical on paper. They may contain similar trees, involve comparable construction methods and be subject to the same planning framework. Yet once you stand on the site itself, entirely different challenges begin to emerge. Access routes may be more constrained than the drawings suggest. Existing site operations may already be placing pressure on retained trees. Contractors may have identified practical difficulties that were never apparent during the design stage. Equally, opportunities often become obvious that allow the project to move forward more efficiently without increasing the risk to the trees.

No British Standard can make those decisions for you.

It is tempting to think of arboricultural consultancy as a process of applying rules, but our experience has been rather different. Standards provide the framework within which we work, but they do not replace careful observation, practical experience or thoughtful communication. The value of a consultant lies not in knowing that guidance exists, but in understanding how to apply it proportionately to the circumstances in front of them.

That inevitably means accepting that every recommendation should have a reason. Occasionally that reason will lead us to recommend more extensive protective measures because the level of risk justifies them. On other occasions it leads us to conclude that a simpler approach is entirely appropriate. We have never believed that good consultancy means producing the longest report or imposing the greatest number of restrictions. Quite the opposite. We believe our responsibility is to recommend the minimum intervention necessary to protect the trees, satisfy the planning requirements and allow the project to proceed with confidence.

Perhaps that is why we see our role rather differently from many people outside the profession.

We are not simply interpreting British Standards, nor are we acting solely on behalf of one particular interest. Every project brings together homeowners, developers, contractors, architects, planning officers and the trees themselves, each with their own priorities, responsibilities and objectives. Rarely are those priorities completely aligned. Our role is to understand each perspective, communicate clearly with everyone involved and find practical solutions that respect the needs of the project without losing sight of the long term health of the landscape.

In many respects, that is what an arboricultural consultant is really appointed to do.

The reports we prepare are important, but they are only the visible outcome of a much larger process. Behind every recommendation is a series of conversations, observations and decisions that seek to balance competing priorities with fairness, honesty and technical integrity. By the time an Arboricultural Method Statement reaches a client, it should represent far more than compliance with a planning condition. It should represent a considered piece of professional judgement that helps everyone involved move forward with confidence.

​

Frequently Asked Questions About Arboricultural Method Statements

​

What is an Arboricultural Method Statement?

​

An Arboricultural Method Statement explains how construction work should be carried out where retained trees could be affected. It sets out the working methods, protective measures and sequence of operations that will allow development to proceed whilst reducing the risk of avoidable damage to trees that are to remain.

On many developments, the Method Statement forms part of the wider arboricultural information prepared in accordance with BS5837:2012 and works alongside documents such as an Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Tree Protection Plan.

More importantly, it provides practical guidance for the people delivering the project. A Method Statement should not simply explain what must happen. It should explain how those measures can be incorporated into the day to day operation of a construction site.

 

When is an Arboricultural Method Statement required?

There is no single answer because every project is different.

Many Arboricultural Method Statements are prepared to discharge a planning condition where a local planning authority has approved development subject to retained trees being protected during construction. Others are commissioned voluntarily by developers, contractors or project teams who recognise the value of having a clear framework before work begins.

If you are uncertain whether your project requires an Arboricultural Method Statement, we are happy to review the planning documentation and explain what is required before recommending any work.

 

Who prepares an Arboricultural Method Statement?

An Arboricultural Method Statement should be prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced arboricultural consultant with a sound understanding of tree biology, construction practices and the recommendations contained within BS5837:2012.

Producing the document is only one part of the role.

A good consultant also understands how developments operate in practice and can prepare recommendations that are both technically robust and realistic to implement on site.

 

What is the difference between an Arboricultural Method Statement and a Tree Protection Plan?

The two documents perform different functions but are closely related.

A Tree Protection Plan illustrates the physical protection measures on a plan. It identifies features such as protective fencing, ground protection and Root Protection Areas.

An Arboricultural Method Statement explains how construction activities should take place around those protection measures. It provides the practical detail that supports the drawings, describing how particular operations will be undertaken whilst safeguarding retained trees.

On many developments the two documents are prepared together because each supports the other.

​

Can work begin before an Arboricultural Method Statement has been approved?

That depends upon the planning permission and the conditions attached to it.

Where an approved Arboricultural Method Statement is required to discharge a planning condition before development commences, work should not proceed until that condition has been satisfied. Beginning work prematurely can create unnecessary planning complications as well as increasing the risk of damage to retained trees.

If no such condition exists, the position may be different. We always recommend reviewing the planning decision notice and any associated conditions before work begins.

 

Can an Arboricultural Method Statement be changed once construction has started?

Construction projects evolve and unexpected circumstances do arise.

Minor amendments may sometimes be appropriate where they remain consistent with the objectives of tree protection and, where necessary, receive agreement from the relevant parties. However, changes should never be made simply for convenience if they would reduce the level of protection afforded to retained trees.

Where significant alterations become necessary, it is often sensible to seek further arboricultural advice before proceeding.

​

What happens if trees are damaged during construction?

The answer depends on the nature of the damage and the legal status of the trees.

In some cases the effects are relatively limited and can be managed through appropriate arboricultural recommendations. In others, damage to roots or the rooting environment may have long term consequences for the health, stability or safe useful life expectancy of the tree.

If the tree is protected by a Tree Preservation Order or lies within a Conservation Area, there may also be legal implications depending upon the circumstances.

Perhaps the most important point is that many forms of construction damage are preventable. That is precisely why careful planning before work begins is so valuable.

​

Why is protecting roots so important?

Most people naturally focus on the visible parts of a tree, but the rooting environment is every bit as important as the crown above ground.

The majority of a tree's absorbing roots occupy the upper layers of the soil, where they rely upon adequate oxygen, moisture and healthy soil structure. Heavy machinery, repeated trafficking, excavation and changes in ground level can all affect that environment, sometimes without any visible signs at the time.

Protecting roots is therefore not simply about preserving the tree during construction. It is about preserving its long term health once the development has been completed.

​

How long does it take to prepare an Arboricultural Method Statement?

The timescale depends upon the complexity of the project, the information already available and whether additional site work is required.

Straightforward developments can often be completed relatively quickly, whilst larger or more technically challenging projects may require coordination with architects, planning consultants and other members of the design team.

Where timescales are important, we are always happy to discuss programme requirements at the outset so expectations are clear from the beginning.

​

Do you carry out site visits before preparing an Arboricultural Method Statement?

Wherever possible, yes.

Plans and drawings provide essential information, but they rarely tell the whole story. Visiting the site allows us to understand how it currently operates, assess the retained trees within their surroundings and identify practical considerations that may not be apparent from drawings alone.

That understanding often results in better recommendations and a Method Statement that is more useful once construction begins.

​

Do I need an Arboricultural Method Statement for every development?

No. Whilst Arboricultural Method Statements are common on developments where retained trees could be affected by construction, they are by no means required for every project. Much depends upon the nature of the proposals, the proximity of retained trees and the requirements imposed by the local planning authority.

There are occasions where an Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Tree Protection Plan provide sufficient information without the need for a separate Method Statement. Equally, there are projects where the complexity of the proposed works makes a detailed Method Statement essential. Every site should be assessed on its own merits rather than assuming the same documentation is appropriate for every development.

​

What information do you need before preparing an Arboricultural Method Statement?

The more information available at the outset, the more effectively we can tailor our recommendations to the project.

Typically, we will require the approved site layout, any relevant planning conditions, architectural or engineering drawings where available and previous arboricultural documents such as a Tree Survey, Arboricultural Impact Assessment or Tree Protection Plan. Visiting the site is also extremely valuable, as it allows us to understand how the development is likely to operate in practice rather than relying solely on drawings.

If some of this information has not yet been prepared, we can advise on the most appropriate sequence of reports before work begins.

​

Can you prepare an Arboricultural Method Statement if another consultant completed the Tree Survey?

Yes.

There is no requirement for the same consultant to prepare every arboricultural document associated with a project. We are frequently instructed to prepare Arboricultural Method Statements using Tree Surveys, Impact Assessments or planning documents produced by other consultants.

Where this is the case, we will review the existing information carefully before preparing our recommendations. If we identify any issues that require clarification, we will discuss them with you before proceeding to ensure the Method Statement reflects the realities of the site.

​

What happens if construction work changes after the Method Statement has been written?

Construction projects are dynamic by nature and it is not unusual for aspects of a development to evolve as work progresses. Minor changes can often be accommodated without affecting the overall strategy for tree protection, whilst more significant alterations may require the Method Statement to be reviewed or updated.

The important point is that changes should be considered before they take place rather than afterwards. A brief discussion at the right time can often prevent unnecessary delays, avoid damage to retained trees and provide confidence that the revised approach remains appropriate.

​

Will an Arboricultural Method Statement delay my project?

In our experience, a well prepared Arboricultural Method Statement is far more likely to prevent delays than cause them.

Many of the problems encountered on construction sites arise because practical questions have not been considered until work is already underway. Access routes become restricted, materials need to be stored somewhere unexpected or machinery arrives without clear guidance on where it can safely operate.

By identifying these issues in advance, the Method Statement provides a practical framework that allows construction to continue with fewer surprises. Taking the time to plan before work begins is almost always quicker and less expensive than resolving avoidable problems once they have developed.

​

Can contractors work inside a Root Protection Area?

Not all work within a Root Protection Area is automatically prohibited, but it should never be undertaken without careful consideration.

Some activities can be carried out using specialist construction techniques or under carefully controlled conditions that minimise the risk to retained trees. Others may require modifications to the design or construction methodology before they can proceed safely.

The purpose of the Root Protection Area is not to prevent development. It is to identify where additional care is required so that unnecessary damage to the rooting environment can be avoided.

​

How much does an Arboricultural Method Statement cost?

The cost varies according to the complexity of the development, the amount of existing information available and the level of coordination required with other members of the design team.

A straightforward residential project requiring limited recommendations will naturally differ from a large commercial development involving multiple retained trees and phased construction.

Rather than offering standardised pricing, we prefer to understand the scope of the project first so we can provide a quotation that accurately reflects the work involved.

​

Do you provide Arboricultural Method Statements throughout Kent?

Yes.

We prepare Arboricultural Method Statements for developments throughout Kent, working with homeowners, developers, architects, planning consultants and contractors across the county. We also undertake projects further afield where required.

Because much of our work involves site visits, we believe local knowledge is valuable. Understanding the planning context, the character of the landscape and the practical realities of working within the region helps us provide advice that is both technically sound and relevant to the project.

​

Can you help after the Arboricultural Method Statement has been approved?

Absolutely.

Preparing the report is often only one stage of the consultancy process. Questions frequently arise as construction progresses, unexpected situations develop or contractors require clarification regarding particular recommendations.

We are always happy to provide ongoing arboricultural advice throughout the construction phase where required. In many cases, a brief conversation or additional site visit is all that is needed to resolve an issue before it becomes a more significant problem.

​

How do I arrange an Arboricultural Method Statement?

The first step is simply to get in touch.

We will discuss your project, review any existing planning or arboricultural information and advise whether an Arboricultural Method Statement is likely to be required. If it is, we will explain the process, provide a clear quotation and outline the information we need before work begins.

Every project starts with a conversation. Our aim is to provide clear, practical advice from the outset, helping you understand not only what is required but why it is required and how it fits into the wider development process.

​

A Final Thought

​

Every successful development is built upon hundreds of individual decisions.

Some concern budgets. Others relate to programme, design or engineering. A small number concern the trees that will continue to shape the site long after construction has finished. Those decisions may seem relatively insignificant at the time, but they often determine whether mature trees remain healthy for decades or begin a gradual decline that only becomes apparent years later.

That is why we have always believed arboricultural consultancy is about far more than producing reports.

A well prepared Arboricultural Method Statement is the product of careful observation, technical knowledge and practical experience, but perhaps more importantly, it is an exercise in communication. It provides a common understanding between the people designing a project, the people constructing it and the people responsible for protecting the landscape that will remain once the work is complete.

When those conversations happen early, and when every recommendation has a clear purpose, development and tree protection cease to be competing objectives. They become part of the same process.

That has always been our approach.

If your project requires an Arboricultural Method Statement, or if you would simply like to discuss whether one is necessary, we would be pleased to hear from you.

​

​

​

​

 

About the Author

​

Jackson Moran is an arboricultural consultant and the founder of Arb & Environmental, providing professional arboricultural consultancy across Kent and the South East.

His background combines practical tree work with professional consultancy, allowing him to approach development sites from both perspectives. Before moving into consultancy, Jackson spent years working within the arboricultural industry, developing an appreciation not only for tree biology and management, but also for the practical realities faced by contractors, landowners and clients. That experience continues to shape the advice he provides today.

His work focuses on helping homeowners, developers, architects, planning consultants and local authorities make well informed decisions where trees and development intersect. Particular areas of interest include BS5837 surveys, Arboricultural Impact Assessments, Arboricultural Method Statements, Tree Protection Plans, tree risk management and the long term stewardship of the built and natural environment.

Away from individual commissions, Jackson is passionate about improving public understanding of arboriculture and ecology. Through Arb & Environmental's articles and Field Dispatches, he explores the relationship between trees, landscapes and the people who live and work amongst them, with the aim of making professional arboriculture more accessible without sacrificing technical accuracy.

He believes the role of an arboricultural consultant is not simply to identify problems, but to communicate clearly, exercise sound professional judgement and help people make decisions that will stand the test of time.

​