Recipient

Forestry Commission

First report 12 Jul 2017•Latest report 2 Jan 2018

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Other public bodies · Environmental statutory body. This page brings together reports naming this recipient and response statements clearly connected to concerns raised in those reports.

Reports: 2
Published responses: 0%
Concerns addressed: 0
Stated actions: 0

Reports over time

Reports naming this recipient by issue year.

Evidence profile

Report topics

Share of this recipient’s reports compared with all other recipients.

0%published responses found

0stated actions described

Topic comparisons are not available in the current evidence snapshot.

Concerns and recipient responses

Statements from Forestry Commission linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

2 Jan2018
Manchester South
Concerns raised3
1. Lack of immediately available support for tree surgeons
2. Ineffective communication between groundsmen and tree surgeons
3. Failure to provide an aerial-work-qualified groundsman for tree surgeons
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.

No linked response statements
No action or position from this recipient is clearly linked to the concerns in this report.
AI-generated summary

Paul Anthony Daniels · Prevention of Future Deaths report

This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

Report summary

Paul Anthony Daniels died after falling approximately 50 feet from a conifer tree while working as a tree surgeon at Hazel Grove Golf Club. Concerns included the staffing ratio, the groundsman’s lack of aerial-work qualification, and difficult communication between the groundsman and tree surgeons.

Read the report on judiciary.uk
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Forestry Commission; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Lack of immediately available support for tree surgeons
Wider context from the report
“1. There were two tree surgeons climbing with one groundsman between them. The ratio of 2:1 meant that the tree surgeons did not have someone supporting them and available immediately at all times; ”
Open source report
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Forestry Commission; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Ineffective communication between groundsmen and tree surgeons
Wider context from the report
“3. Communication between the groundsman and tree surgeons was via shouting and hand signals. This was difficult given the density of the trees being cut and the height that the tree surgeons were working at. ”
Open source report
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Forestry Commission; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Failure to provide an aerial-work-qualified groundsman for tree surgeons
Wider context from the report
“2. The groundsman supporting the tree surgeons was not qualified for aerial work. This meant that should the tree surgeon have required assistance whilst in the trees the groundsman could not have gone to their help; ”
Open source report
12 Jul2017
West Yorkshire Eastern
Concerns raised3
1. Failure to distinguish Polyporus Squamosus from Phytophthora Pseudomonas or bleeding canker
2. Failure to recognise the urgency of felling trees affected by Polyporus Squamosus
3. Failure to undertake sufficiently thorough examination and testing of trees with visible defects or recognized fault or disease for Polyporus Squamosus
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.

No linked response statements
No action or position from this recipient is clearly linked to the concerns in this report.
AI-generated summary

Elaine Edith Davison · Prevention of Future Deaths report

This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

Report summary

Elaine Edith Davison was fatally injured when part of a tree fell onto the car in which she was travelling as a passenger during a storm on 11 November 2010. The principal concern was that the tree had visible defects and longstanding decay that should have led to closer inspection and urgent felling, but its condition was not identified before it fell.

Read the report on judiciary.uk
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Forestry Commission; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Failure to distinguish Polyporus Squamosus from Phytophthora Pseudomonas or bleeding canker
Wider context from the report
“(2) Post incident the tree was examined by an expert Arboriculturist who determined that the tree was severely decayed at 8.5 metres in height with insufficient sound timber at this point to support the weight of the tree. The decay was caused by a fungal infection Polyporus Squamosus. The decay was longstanding and progressive. The decay was hidden from sight, but the tree contained visible defects worthy of closer inspection, which would have led to the discovery of this condition, and a recommendation for it to be felled as a matter of urgency. (3) I am informed that your view is that the risk of people being killed by falling trees is extremely low. In fact one in ten million, but you recognise the duty of holders who are required to take reasonable steps to minimise the risk. Notwithstanding this I recommend that your organisation has a major influence nationally on tree safety, bring to the attention of those who are responsible for the upkeep and maintenance of trees, particularly in places frequented and used by the public, and for trees that are abut and overhang a highway, when such a tree or trees are recognised as having fault or disease, that such trees are automatically examined and tested for Polyporus Squamosus and if such a disease is identified then the tree should be recommended for felling. (4) It is apparent that the condition Polyporus Squamosus may well be mistaken for the more common condition Phytophthora Pseudomonas or bleeding canker, and the urgency of felling might not be considered. ”
Open source report
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Forestry Commission; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Failure to recognise the urgency of felling trees affected by Polyporus Squamosus
Wider context from the report
“(2) Post incident the tree was examined by an expert Arboriculturist who determined that the tree was severely decayed at 8.5 metres in height with insufficient sound timber at this point to support the weight of the tree. The decay was caused by a fungal infection Polyporus Squamosus. The decay was longstanding and progressive. The decay was hidden from sight, but the tree contained visible defects worthy of closer inspection, which would have led to the discovery of this condition, and a recommendation for it to be felled as a matter of urgency. (3) I am informed that your view is that the risk of people being killed by falling trees is extremely low. In fact one in ten million, but you recognise the duty of holders who are required to take reasonable steps to minimise the risk. Notwithstanding this I recommend that your organisation has a major influence nationally on tree safety, bring to the attention of those who are responsible for the upkeep and maintenance of trees, particularly in places frequented and used by the public, and for trees that are abut and overhang a highway, when such a tree or trees are recognised as having fault or disease, that such trees are automatically examined and tested for Polyporus Squamosus and if such a disease is identified then the tree should be recommended for felling. (4) It is apparent that the condition Polyporus Squamosus may well be mistaken for the more common condition Phytophthora Pseudomonas or bleeding canker, and the urgency of felling might not be considered. ”
Open source report
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Forestry Commission; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Failure to undertake sufficiently thorough examination and testing of trees with visible defects or recognized fault or disease for Polyporus Squamosus
Wider context from the report
“(2) Post incident the tree was examined by an expert Arboriculturist who determined that the tree was severely decayed at 8.5 metres in height with insufficient sound timber at this point to support the weight of the tree. The decay was caused by a fungal infection Polyporus Squamosus. The decay was longstanding and progressive. The decay was hidden from sight, but the tree contained visible defects worthy of closer inspection, which would have led to the discovery of this condition, and a recommendation for it to be felled as a matter of urgency. (3) I am informed that your view is that the risk of people being killed by falling trees is extremely low. In fact one in ten million, but you recognise the duty of holders who are required to take reasonable steps to minimise the risk. Notwithstanding this I recommend that your organisation has a major influence nationally on tree safety, bring to the attention of those who are responsible for the upkeep and maintenance of trees, particularly in places frequented and used by the public, and for trees that are abut and overhang a highway, when such a tree or trees are recognised as having fault or disease, that such trees are automatically examined and tested for Polyporus Squamosus and if such a disease is identified then the tree should be recommended for felling. (4) It is apparent that the condition Polyporus Squamosus may well be mistaken for the more common condition Phytophthora Pseudomonas or bleeding canker, and the urgency of felling might not be considered. ”
Open source report

Information checked against published PFD reports and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Data last updated 7 September 2026

Reports, concerns and published responses

Reports over time

Concerns raised3

Lack of immediately available support for tree surgeons

Ineffective communication between groundsmen and tree surgeons

Failure to provide an aerial-work-qualified groundsman for tree surgeons

Concerns raised3

Failure to distinguish Polyporus Squamosus from Phytophthora Pseudomonas or bleeding canker

Failure to recognise the urgency of felling trees affected by Polyporus Squamosus

Failure to undertake sufficiently thorough examination and testing of trees with visible defects or recognized fault or disease for Polyporus Squamosus