120 Randrup: Development of a Danish Model for Plant Appraisal Watson (2002) showed that CTLA Trunk Formula method derived lower values than four other international valuation models. Watson concluded that all the tested methods were widely adapted in each country of origin. The reason for some methods yielding high values and others giving low values was not evident. Under Danish conditions, the values derived by the use of this new model should be regarded as high (valuations are approximately ten times higher under the new model). However, the model may not be creating a price high enough to discourage builders, entrepreneurs, and others from felling trees. In such cases, the felling act may be regarded as a felony, and it will be up to the court to decide a penalty. The assessed value of the tree may be used as a basis for setting a fine. In Table 5, the value of three trees were assessed using Figure 4. Sorbus intermedia located just outside central Copenhagen. Value according to VAT03 is US$1,100 (photo credit: Lars E.A. Poulsen). The value of three individual trees would increase 1.9 to 3.6 times using trunk area instead of circumference, and 4.2 to 9.3 times if the largest available tree was used instead of a fixed size of 18 to 20 (7.2 to 8 in.) cm circumference at 100 cm (40 in.) above ground. The prices shown for large trees in Table 4 could be even higher if trees were imported from Germany or The Netherlands. In the VAT03 model, the species rating system in the CTLA method (2000) is not used. Instead, the tree species is evaluated indirectly by the Condition and Location factors. Also, the tree species is reflected in the nursery price, because certain trees are easier to produce than others. If a tree unexpectedly is doing well in a certain area, that will then be regarded as an asset. Table 4. Tree value (US$) by use of VAT03. The values are related to the effects in price if trunk area and largest available trees (CTLA 2000) were used. The value of these three individual trees would increase 1.9 to 3.6 times using trunk area instead of circumference, and 4.2 to 9.3 times if the largest available tree was used instead of a fixed size of 18 20 cm (7.2 to 8 in.) circumference at 100 cm (40 in.) above ground. Largest Species Tilia cordata Aesculus hippocastanum Sorbus intermedia VAT03 trunk area 7,600 8,900 1,100 27,300 31,600 2,200 ©2005 International Society of Arboriculture (Adjusted) Difference (times) 3.6 3.6 1.9 available Difference tree* 31,700 83,000 8,800 (times) 4.2 9.3 7.7 *Circumference is measured 100 cm above ground level, in accordance to Danish nursery practice. both VAT03 and the CTLA (2000) Trunk Formula methods. While this is not a statistical test of the two models, the difference among the three trees indicates some of the major differences between the two models. The Tilia and the Aesculus are both mature trees, located in prestigious settings, and judged to be in good condition. Both species were given the same species rating (0.80). The fact that the Aesculus is larger than the Tilia gives it a value more than three times higher than the Tilia. Both trees were valued lower under the VAT03 model than under the CTLA (2000) model. The Tilia does not have a reduction in value due to age, but the Aesculus has a 29% reduction because it is assumed that the tree has only 25 years left to live. However, the difference in tree size does not make a major impact on the overall VAT03 values. The two trees are assessed to have an almost equal value, despite the difference in ages. The Sorbus is valued very low using the VAT03 model, primarily due to its advanced age and its poor condition rating. The CTLA (2000) Trunk Formula method also values this tree relatively low, but, presumably because of its size, this tree is still valued higher than the younger, healthier, and better-located Tilia. This is not the case using the VAT03, where an old and structurally unsound tree always will be valued low. Actually, this tree will generate a value that is only slightly higher than the costs of a new tree. CTLA (2000) describes a variation of different tree appraisal approaches. Therefore, it is possible that a CTLA appraisal of the Sorbus should be done using another method than the Trunk Formula used in the example, (e.g., Cost of Cure). Using such a method could result in a negative value due to the hazardous nature of the tree.
May 2005
| Title Name |
Pages |
Delete |
Url |
| Empty |
Ai generated response may be inaccurate.
Search Text Block
Page #page_num
#doc_title
Hi $receivername|$receiveremail,
$sendername|$senderemail wrote these comments for you:
$message
$sendername|$senderemail would like for you to view the following digital edition.
Please click on the page below to be directed to the digital edition:
$thumbnail$pagenum
$link$pagenum
Your form submission was a success.
Downloading PDF
Generating your PDF, please wait...
This process might take longer please wait
