Ok So I have recently joined this forum and have seen alot of different sides and opinions. Had a share of arguments as well
It's all good. So I thought I would throw this one out there as a free for all on a report that I recently wrote that adds another perspective. I will give some photos and an excerpt of my conclusion which was unorthodox report writing due in part because of the circumstances. These are significant wildlife trees and have rare fauna that reside within them. Certain models borrowed from colleagues place their estimated value at $150 000 each. I have only supplied pics of one as the other is the same.
The question is would you retain them??
If you feel you need more info ask.
Conclusion
These two trees fail any assessment for a hazardous tree evaluation. As such the best recommendation would be for removal. There is a need however to consider the overall value that these trees have on the surrounds in terms of wildlife. No other trees within a great distance have the same requirements for habitat. There are measures that could be taken to preserve these trees however the cost would be significant and a great area would be needed to make an exclusion zone because of potential hazard.
A turn around area is proposed at the base of these trees only adding to soil compaction and potential targets from limb failure. Limb failure devices could possibly be placed within these trees but that is an admission of the trees susceptibility to fail.
With the information given it is left to decide, is the cost of retention greater than the inherent value of the trees and at what cost might a target being struck by a failed limb or tree be.
These points are brought up simply because it is obvious the significant nature of the trees however it is beyond my field to say more than they are extremely dangerous however could be retained for an exorbitant sum.