ISA Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form Instructions

Page 1 Copyright ©2017 International Society of Arboriculture. All rights reserved. 163 Appendix 1 Using the ISA Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form This form is provided with the ISA Tree Risk Assessment Manual and is intended to act as a guide for collecting and recording tree risk assessment information. This form is for trees receiving a basic (Level 2) risk assessment. It is not intended for use with limited visual (Level 1) or advanced (Level 3) assessments. Space is provided to write comments and notes for various conditions that are not included elsewhere on the form or for points that need additional explanation. It is not necessary to mark every box or to fill in every line on this form. Only information relevant to the tree risk assessment should be collected. You may adapt this form for your specific needs or you may use your own method of collecting and analyzing field data. PAGE 1—DATA COLLECTION Section 1—Assignment and Tree ID Client—name of the person who hired you to perform the assessment or agency for which you are working. Date—date of the tree inspection. Time—time of the tree inspection. Address/Tree location—the physical address, GPS coordinates, or other location description of the tree and the location of the tree on the property, such as “backyard” or “between street and sidewalk on the north side of walk.” A typical entry may be “411 Pine Street, Oakville. Large tree on left near driveway.” Tree no.—if the tree has an inventory tag with a number, it should be entered here. If a group of trees without tags are assessed, they may be assigned a sequence number. Sheet—if multiple sheets are used for a tree assessment—or if a group of trees are assessed—the sheet number and total number of sheets used on the job may be entered. Tree species —include the common and/or scientific name of the tree; cultivar, if known. dbh—diameter at breast height [U.S., 4.5 feet (1.37 m); or customary diameter measure for your country; IUFRO standard is 1.3 m above ground] measured in inches or centimeters. Height—tree height either visually estimated or measured. If measured, the tool used for this measurement should be noted in T ools used. Crown spread dia. —average diameter of the drip line of the tree; measured or estimated. Assessor(s)—name of the person or people collecting the tree risk information; may also include qualifications such as “TRAQ.” T ools used—list of tools used in the assessment such as “mallet” or “binoculars.” If no tools were used, write “none” or leave blank. Time frame—period in which you are estimating the likelihood of failure, typically between one and five years. Time frame is essential when rating the likelihood of failure with all categories except imminent, which has a different time frame (very soon). This section outlines the basic information for your assessment. This will be valuable information when drafting your written report. Be sure to refer back to the time frame stated in this section when determining likelihood of failure later on this form. — Trunk — — Crown and Branches — — Roots and Root Collar — Unbalanced crown  LCR ______% Dead twigs/branches  ______% overall Max. dia. ________ Broken/Hangers Number __________ Max. dia. ________ Over-extended branches  Pruning history Crown cleaned  Reduced  Flush cuts  Thinned  Topped  Other Raised  Lion-tailed  Cracks  ________________________________ Lightning damage  Codominant  ______________________________ Included bark  Weak attachments  _________________ Cavity/Nest hole ____% circ. Previous branch failures  _____________ Similar branches present  Dead/Missing bark  Cankers/Galls/Burls  Sapwood damage/decay  Conks  Heartwood decay  ______________________ Response growth Client _______________________________________________________________ Date ___________________ Time _________________ Address/Tree location _________________________________________________________ Tree no. ____________ Sheet _____ of _____ Tree species _________________________________________ dbh_____________ Height ___________ Crown spread dia. ____________ Assessor(s) __________________________________________ Tools used______________________________ Time frame_____________ Target Assessment Target number Target description Target protection Practical to move target? Restriction practical? Target within drip line Target within 1 x Ht. Target within 1.5 x Ht. 1 2 3 4 History of failures _____________________________________________________________ Topography Flat Slope _________% Aspect _____ Site changes None  Grade change  Site clearing Changed soil hydrology Root cuts Describe _____________________________________ Soil conditions Limited volume Saturated Shallow Compacted Pavement over roots ______% Describe __________________________ Prevailing wind direction______ Common weather Strong winds  Ice  Snow Heavy rain Describe______________________________ Tree Health and Species Profile Vigor Low  Normal  High  Foliage None (seasonal)  None (dead)  Normal _____ % Chlorotic _____% Necrotic _____% Pests/Biotic_________________________________________________ Abiotic _______________________________________________________ Species failure profile Branches Trunk Roots Describe ____________________________________________________________________ Load Factors Wind exposure Protected Partial Full  Wind funneling  ________________________ Relative crown size Small  Medium  Large Crown density Sparse Normal Dense Interior branches Few Normal Dense Vines/Mistletoe/Moss  _____________________ Recent or expected change in load factors ________________________________________________________________________________________ Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure Occupancy rate 1–rare 2 – occasional 3 – frequent 4 – constant Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form Page 1 of 2 Site Factors Target zone Condition(s) of concern Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Part Size Fall Distance Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Dead/Missing bark  Abnormal bark texture/color  Codominant stems  Included bark  Cracks  Sapwood damage/decay  Cankers/Galls/Burls  Sap ooze  Lightning damage  Heartwood decay  Conks/Mushrooms  Cavity/Nest hole _____ % circ. Depth _______ Poor taper  Lean _____° Corrected? __________________________________ Response growth Condition(s) of concern Part Size Fall Distance Collar buried/Not visible  Depth________ Stem girdling  Dead  Decay  Conks/Mushrooms  Ooze  Cavity  _____% circ. Cracks  Cut/Damaged roots  Distance from trunk _______ Root plate lifting  Soil weakness  Response growth Condition(s) of concern Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Part Size Fall Distance Part Size Fall Distance Page 2 Copyright ©2017 International Society of Arboriculture. All rights reserved. 164 Section 2—T arget Assessment The Target Assessment chart is used to list target(s)—people, property, or activities that could be injured, damaged, or disrupted by a tree failure—within the striking distance (target zone) of the tree part concerned. Four lines are provided; additional targets can be listed on a separate form. Target information will correspond with the Risk Categorization chart on the back of the form. Target number—many trees have multiple targets within the target zone; the target number is provided to list individual targets and to facilitate inclusion of this number in the Risk Categori - zation chart so that the target description does not need to be rewritten. Target description —brief description such as “people near tree,” “house,” “play area,” or “high-traffic street.” Location of the target can be noted by checking one of the distance boxes under Target zone. Target protection—note any significant factors that could protect the target because this may affect the likelihood of impact and/or the consequences of failure. Target zone—identify where the targets are in relation to the tree or tree part: Within drip line—target is underneath the canopy of the tree. Within 1 × Ht—target is within striking distance if the trunk or root system of the tree fails (1 times the height of the tree). Within 1.5 × Ht—target is within striking distance if the trunk or root system of the tree fails and there are dead or brittle branches that could shatter and fly from the failed tree. Occupancy rate —an estimated amount of time the target is within the target zone. Use corresponding numbered codes (1–4): 1. Rare—the target zone is not commonly used by people or other mobile/movable targets. 2. Occasional —the target zone is occupied by people or other targets infrequently or irregularly. 3. Frequent—the target zone is occupied for a large portion of the day or week. 4. Constant —a target is present at nearly all times, 24-hours a day, 7 days a week. Practical to move target?—check box if it is practical to move the target out of the target zone if mitigation is required. Restriction practical?—check box if it is practical to restrict access to the target zone. — Trunk — — Crown and Branches — — Roots and Root Collar — Unbalanced crown  LCR ______% Dead twigs/branches  ______% overall Max. dia. ________ Broken/Hangers Number __________ Max. dia. ________ Over-extended branches  Pruning history Crown cleaned  Reduced  Flush cuts  Thinned  Topped  Other Raised  Lion-tailed  Cracks  ________________________________ Lightning damage  Codominant  ______________________________ Included bark  Weak attachments  _________________ Cavity/Nest hole ____% circ. Previous branch failures  _____________ Similar branches present  Dead/Missing bark  Cankers/Galls/Burls  Sapwood damage/decay  Conks  Heartwood decay  ______________________ Response growth Client _______________________________________________________________ Date ___________________ Time _________________ Address/Tree location _________________________________________________________ Tree no. ____________ Sheet _____ of _____ Tree species _________________________________________ dbh_____________ Height ___________ Crown spread dia. ____________ Assessor(s) __________________________________________ Tools used______________________________ Time frame_____________ Target Assessment Target number Target description Target protection Practical to move target? Restriction practical? Target within drip line Target within 1 x Ht. Target within 1.5 x Ht. 1 2 3 4 History of failures _____________________________________________________________ Topography Flat Slope _________% Aspect _____ Site changes None  Grade change  Site clearing Changed soil hydrology Root cuts Describe _____________________________________ Soil conditions Limited volume Saturated Shallow Compacted Pavement over roots ______% Describe __________________________ Prevailing wind direction______ Common weather Strong winds  Ice  Snow Heavy rain Describe______________________________ Tree Health and Species Profile Vigor Low  Normal  High  Foliage None (seasonal)  None (dead)  Normal _____ % Chlorotic _____% Necrotic _____% Pests/Biotic_________________________________________________ Abiotic _______________________________________________________ Species failure profile Branches Trunk Roots Describe ____________________________________________________________________ Load Factors Wind exposure Protected Partial Full  Wind funneling  ________________________ Relative crown size Small  Medium  Large Crown density Sparse Normal Dense Interior branches Few Normal Dense Vines/Mistletoe/Moss  _____________________ Recent or expected change in load factors ________________________________________________________________________________________ Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure Occupancy rate 1–rare 2 – occasional 3 – frequent 4 – constant Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form Page 1 of 2 Site Factors Target zone Condition(s) of concern Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Part Size Fall Distance Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Dead/Missing bark  Abnormal bark texture/color  Codominant stems  Included bark  Cracks  Sapwood damage/decay  Cankers/Galls/Burls  Sap ooze  Lightning damage  Heartwood decay  Conks/Mushrooms  Cavity/Nest hole _____ % circ. Depth _______ Poor taper  Lean _____° Corrected? __________________________________ Response growth Condition(s) of concern Part Size Fall Distance Collar buried/Not visible  Depth________ Stem girdling  Dead  Decay  Conks/Mushrooms  Ooze  Cavity  _____% circ. Cracks  Cut/Damaged roots  Distance from trunk _______ Root plate lifting  Soil weakness  Response growth Condition(s) of concern Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Part Size Fall Distance Part Size Fall Distance Page 3 Copyright ©2017 International Society of Arboriculture. All rights reserved. 165 Section 3—Site Factors Site factors may influence the likelihood of tree failure. This section provides a list of common site factors that should be considered. There may be other site factors that are critical on a given site or that you should note even if they are not on this form. Any of these factors can be further described in the space provided or on additional paper. Other site factors affecting wind load should be noted. These may include the site elevation, surface roughness, and hilltop locations. History of failures —note and describe evidence of previous whole-tree failures on the site, and estimate the time frame for how recently they occurred. Previous branch failures should be noted in the Crown and Branches box (located in the T ree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure section of the form). T opography—check boxes for flat or sloping topography; an estimate of the slope percentage may be included. Aspect—the compass direction that the slope is facing. Site changes—factors affecting the root system of the tree or the change in exposure of the tree to wind. Check all that apply: None—no evidence of recent site changes. Grade change—soil was added or removed from the site. Site clearing —adjacent trees, which may have blocked the wind, have been removed or significantly reduced. Changed soil hydrology—changes have been made that affect water flow in or out of the site. Root cuts —the root system has been cut or otherwise significantly damaged. Additional information on root cuts will be included in the Roots and Root Collar box. Describe—note applicable details or further descriptions of site changes. Soil conditions—factors that can affect the ability of the root system to mechanically support the tree, as well as the general health and vitality of the tree. Check all that apply: Limited volume—soil volume limited by rocks, water table, building foundations, size of a container, or other factors. Saturated—soil saturated due to poor drainage, high water table, excess irrigation, or location in a low area. May be saturated now or have a history of inundation. Shallow—rooting depth limited by one or more factors including high water table, rock ledges, compacted layers, or underground structures such as parking decks. Compacted—soil is severely compacted, limiting the depth, spread, and distribution of the root system. Pavement over roots—concrete, asphalt, pavers, or other materials restricting root growth or water movement into the root zone. If present, enter the percentage of the area within the drip line that is paved. Describe—note applicable details or further descriptions of site conditions. Prevailing wind direction—a typical, consistent, moderate-to- strong wind, usually from a single direction, that has affected tree crown and root system development. Common weather—trees will adapt to a number of climatic conditions if they occur regularly. Check all that apply (strong winds, ice, snow, or heavy rain). Describe—note any further descriptions regarding common weather. — Trunk — — Crown and Branches — — Roots and Root Collar — Unbalanced crown  LCR ______% Dead twigs/branches  ______% overall Max. dia. ________ Broken/Hangers Number __________ Max. dia. ________ Over-extended branches  Pruning history Crown cleaned  Reduced  Flush cuts  Thinned  Topped  Other Raised  Lion-tailed  Cracks  ________________________________ Lightning damage  Codominant  ______________________________ Included bark  Weak attachments  _________________ Cavity/Nest hole ____% circ. Previous branch failures  _____________ Similar branches present  Dead/Missing bark  Cankers/Galls/Burls  Sapwood damage/decay  Conks  Heartwood decay  ______________________ Response growth Client _______________________________________________________________ Date ___________________ Time _________________ Address/Tree location _________________________________________________________ Tree no. ____________ Sheet _____ of _____ Tree species _________________________________________ dbh_____________ Height ___________ Crown spread dia. ____________ Assessor(s) __________________________________________ Tools used______________________________ Time frame_____________ Target Assessment Target number Target description Target protection Practical to move target? Restriction practical? Target within drip line Target within 1 x Ht. Target within 1.5 x Ht. 1 2 3 4 History of failures _____________________________________________________________ Topography Flat Slope _________% Aspect _____ Site changes None  Grade change  Site clearing Changed soil hydrology Root cuts Describe _____________________________________ Soil conditions Limited volume Saturated Shallow Compacted Pavement over roots ______% Describe __________________________ Prevailing wind direction______ Common weather Strong winds  Ice  Snow Heavy rain Describe______________________________ Tree Health and Species Profile Vigor Low  Normal  High  Foliage None (seasonal)  None (dead)  Normal _____ % Chlorotic _____% Necrotic _____% Pests/Biotic_________________________________________________ Abiotic _______________________________________________________ Species failure profile Branches Trunk Roots Describe ____________________________________________________________________ Load Factors Wind exposure Protected Partial Full  Wind funneling  ________________________ Relative crown size Small  Medium  Large Crown density Sparse Normal Dense Interior branches Few Normal Dense Vines/Mistletoe/Moss  _____________________ Recent or expected change in load factors ________________________________________________________________________________________ Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure Occupancy rate 1–rare 2 – occasional 3 – frequent 4 – constant Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form Page 1 of 2 Site Factors Target zone Condition(s) of concern Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Part Size Fall Distance Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Dead/Missing bark  Abnormal bark texture/color  Codominant stems  Included bark  Cracks  Sapwood damage/decay  Cankers/Galls/Burls  Sap ooze  Lightning damage  Heartwood decay  Conks/Mushrooms  Cavity/Nest hole _____ % circ. Depth _______ Poor taper  Lean _____° Corrected? __________________________________ Response growth Condition(s) of concern Part Size Fall Distance Collar buried/Not visible  Depth________ Stem girdling  Dead  Decay  Conks/Mushrooms  Ooze  Cavity  _____% circ. Cracks  Cut/Damaged roots  Distance from trunk _______ Root plate lifting  Soil weakness  Response growth Condition(s) of concern Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Part Size Fall Distance Part Size Fall Distance Page 4 Copyright ©2017 International Society of Arboriculture. All rights reserved. 166 Section 4—Tree Health and Species Profile Vigor—an assessment of overall tree health. Classify as low, normal, or high: Low—tree is weak, growing slowly, and/or under stress. Normal—tree has average vigor for its species and the site conditions. High—tree is growing well and appears to be free of signifi - cant health stress factors. Foliage—size and color are indications of tree health; compare with a healthy specimen of the same species in the area: None (seasonal) — a deciduous tree that has dropped its leaves for the winter. None (dead)—a tree that has dropped its leaves because it is dead. Normal—percentage of foliage size and color that is normal for the species in the area. Chlorotic—percentage of foliage that is yellowish green to yellow. Necrotic—percentage of dead foliage in the crown. Pests/Biotic— insects and diseases that may significantly affect tree health or stability. Abiotic— abiotic problems that may significantly affect tree health or stability. Species failure profile—any known failure problems with the species in the branches, trunk, or roots. Describe—note any further species failure details. — Trunk — — Crown and Branches — — Roots and Root Collar — Unbalanced crown  LCR ______% Dead twigs/branches  ______% overall Max. dia. ________ Broken/Hangers Number __________ Max. dia. ________ Over-extended branches  Pruning history Crown cleaned  Reduced  Flush cuts  Thinned  Topped  Other Raised  Lion-tailed  Cracks  ________________________________ Lightning damage  Codominant  ______________________________ Included bark  Weak attachments  _________________ Cavity/Nest hole ____% circ. Previous branch failures  _____________ Similar branches present  Dead/Missing bark  Cankers/Galls/Burls  Sapwood damage/decay  Conks  Heartwood decay  ______________________ Response growth Client _______________________________________________________________ Date ___________________ Time _________________ Address/Tree location _________________________________________________________ Tree no. ____________ Sheet _____ of _____ Tree species _________________________________________ dbh_____________ Height ___________ Crown spread dia. ____________ Assessor(s) __________________________________________ Tools used______________________________ Time frame_____________ Target Assessment Target number Target description Target protection Practical to move target? Restriction practical? Target within drip line Target within 1 x Ht. Target within 1.5 x Ht. 1 2 3 4 History of failures _____________________________________________________________ Topography Flat Slope _________% Aspect _____ Site changes None  Grade change  Site clearing Changed soil hydrology Root cuts Describe _____________________________________ Soil conditions Limited volume Saturated Shallow Compacted Pavement over roots ______% Describe __________________________ Prevailing wind direction______ Common weather Strong winds  Ice  Snow Heavy rain Describe______________________________ Tree Health and Species Profile Vigor Low  Normal  High  Foliage None (seasonal)  None (dead)  Normal _____ % Chlorotic _____% Necrotic _____% Pests/Biotic_________________________________________________ Abiotic _______________________________________________________ Species failure profile Branches Trunk Roots Describe ____________________________________________________________________ Load Factors Wind exposure Protected Partial Full  Wind funneling  ________________________ Relative crown size Small  Medium  Large Crown density Sparse Normal Dense Interior branches Few Normal Dense Vines/Mistletoe/Moss  _____________________ Recent or expected change in load factors ________________________________________________________________________________________ Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure Occupancy rate 1–rare 2 – occasional 3 – frequent 4 – constant Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form Page 1 of 2 Site Factors Target zone Condition(s) of concern Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Part Size Fall Distance Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Dead/Missing bark  Abnormal bark texture/color  Codominant stems  Included bark  Cracks  Sapwood damage/decay  Cankers/Galls/Burls  Sap ooze  Lightning damage  Heartwood decay  Conks/Mushrooms  Cavity/Nest hole _____ % circ. Depth _______ Poor taper  Lean _____° Corrected? __________________________________ Response growth Condition(s) of concern Part Size Fall Distance Collar buried/Not visible  Depth________ Stem girdling  Dead  Decay  Conks/Mushrooms  Ooze  Cavity  _____% circ. Cracks  Cut/Damaged roots  Distance from trunk _______ Root plate lifting  Soil weakness  Response growth Condition(s) of concern Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Part Size Fall Distance Part Size Fall Distance This section provides the opportunity to note any species-specific failure patterns that you suspect may influence likelihood of failure. Any species information you feel is important should be noted in this section. Any of these factors can be further described in the spaces provided or on additional paper. Page 5 Copyright ©2017 International Society of Arboriculture. All rights reserved. 167 Section 5—Load Factors Wind exposure —factors that affect wind load on the tree. Check all that apply: Protected—trees or structures in the area significantly reduce wind velocity or the tree’s exposure to wind. Partial—other trees, or buildings near the tree, moderately reduce the impact of wind on the tree. Full—tree is fully exposed to wind. Wind funneling—wind may be “funneled” or “tunneled” (by buildings, canyons, large stands of trees) toward the tree so that wind velocity experienced by the tree is increased. Relative crown size—comparison of the tree’s crown size to the trunk diameter. Classify as small, medium, or large. Crown density—the relative wind transparency of the crown: Sparse—crown allows a large degree of wind and light penetration; varies with species. Normal—indicates moderate wind and light penetration. Dense—crown does not allow much light or wind penetration. Interior branches —increase wind resistance but dampen branch/tree movement: Few—little wind resistance and damping. Normal—moderate wind resistance and damping. Dense—significant wind resistance and damping. Vines/Mistletoe/Moss—check box if present at moderate to high levels that increase weight or wind resistance. Moss refers to Spanish or ball moss (epiphytes). Recent or expected change in load factors—record any factors, recent or planned, that may significantly affect the load on any defects. Generally, two types of loads need to be considered when evaluating tree risk. Dynamic load is from wind as it impacts the tree, and static load is from gravity acting on the tree. These two loads can interact. — Trunk — — Crown and Branches — — Roots and Root Collar — Unbalanced crown  LCR ______% Dead twigs/branches  ______% overall Max. dia. ________ Broken/Hangers Number __________ Max. dia. ________ Over-extended branches  Pruning history Crown cleaned  Reduced  Flush cuts  Thinned  Topped  Other Raised  Lion-tailed  Cracks  ________________________________ Lightning damage  Codominant  ______________________________ Included bark  Weak attachments  _________________ Cavity/Nest hole ____% circ. Previous branch failures  _____________ Similar branches present  Dead/Missing bark  Cankers/Galls/Burls  Sapwood damage/decay  Conks  Heartwood decay  ______________________ Response growth Client _______________________________________________________________ Date ___________________ Time _________________ Address/Tree location _________________________________________________________ Tree no. ____________ Sheet _____ of _____ Tree species _________________________________________ dbh_____________ Height ___________ Crown spread dia. ____________ Assessor(s) __________________________________________ Tools used______________________________ Time frame_____________ Target Assessment Target number Target description Target protection Practical to move target? Restriction practical? Target within drip line Target within 1 x Ht. Target within 1.5 x Ht. 1 2 3 4 History of failures _____________________________________________________________ Topography Flat Slope _________% Aspect _____ Site changes None  Grade change  Site clearing Changed soil hydrology Root cuts Describe _____________________________________ Soil conditions Limited volume Saturated Shallow Compacted Pavement over roots ______% Describe __________________________ Prevailing wind direction______ Common weather Strong winds  Ice  Snow Heavy rain Describe______________________________ Tree Health and Species Profile Vigor Low  Normal  High  Foliage None (seasonal)  None (dead)  Normal _____ % Chlorotic _____% Necrotic _____% Pests/Biotic_________________________________________________ Abiotic _______________________________________________________ Species failure profile Branches Trunk Roots Describe ____________________________________________________________________ Load Factors Wind exposure Protected Partial Full  Wind funneling  ________________________ Relative crown size Small  Medium  Large Crown density Sparse Normal Dense Interior branches Few Normal Dense Vines/Mistletoe/Moss  _____________________ Recent or expected change in load factors ________________________________________________________________________________________ Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure Occupancy rate 1–rare 2 – occasional 3 – frequent 4 – constant Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form Page 1 of 2 Site Factors Target zone Condition(s) of concern Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Part Size Fall Distance Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Dead/Missing bark  Abnormal bark texture/color  Codominant stems  Included bark  Cracks  Sapwood damage/decay  Cankers/Galls/Burls  Sap ooze  Lightning damage  Heartwood decay  Conks/Mushrooms  Cavity/Nest hole _____ % circ. Depth _______ Poor taper  Lean _____° Corrected? __________________________________ Response growth Condition(s) of concern Part Size Fall Distance Collar buried/Not visible  Depth________ Stem girdling  Dead  Decay  Conks/Mushrooms  Ooze  Cavity  _____% circ. Cracks  Cut/Damaged roots  Distance from trunk _______ Root plate lifting  Soil weakness  Response growth Condition(s) of concern Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Part Size Fall Distance Part Size Fall Distance Page 6 Copyright ©2017 International Society of Arboriculture. All rights reserved. 168 Section 6—Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure Unbalanced crown —check box if foliage is not uniformly distributed. Live crown ratio (LCR )—the ratio of the height of the live crown to the height of the entire tree [LCR = (crown height/tree height) × 100]. Dead twigs/branches—small-diameter, dead branches. Check box if present and indicate percentage and size (maximum diameter). Broken/Hangers—broken or cut branches remaining in the crown. Record the number and size (maximum diameter). Over-extended branches—check box if there are branches that extend beyond the tree’s canopy or that are excessively long with poor taper. Pruning history—check appropriate boxes if pruning is known and relevant: Crown cleaned —pruning of dead, dying, diseased, and broken branches from the tree crown. Thinned—selective removal of live branches to reduce crown density. Other pruning types include, but are not limited to, structural, pollarding, espalier, and vista, and may be included in your notes. Raised—removal of lower branches to provide clearance. Reduced—pruning to decrease tree height or spread by cutting to lateral branches. T opped—inappropriate pruning technique used to reduce tree size; characterized by internodal cuts. Lion-tailed—inappropriate pruning practice removing an excessive number of inner and/or lower lateral branches. Flush cuts —pruning cuts through (or removal of) the branch collar, causing unnecessary injury to the trunk or parent branch. Other—note any other pruning history that may affect the likelihood of failure. Cracks—separation in the wood in either a longitudinal (radial, in the plane of ray cells) or transverse (across the stem) direction. Check box if present and describe briefly. Lightning damage —often evidenced by a centrally located line of sapwood damage and bark removal on either side in a spiral pattern on the trunk or branch. Check box if present. Codominant—branches of nearly equal diameter arising from a common junction and lacking a normal branch union. Check box if present and describe. Included bark —bark that becomes embedded in a union between branch and trunk, or between codominant stems, causing a weak structure. Check box if present. Weak attachments —branches that are codominant or that have included bark or splits at or below the junctions. Check box if present and describe. Crown and Branches — Trunk — — Crown and Branches — — Roots and Root Collar — Unbalanced crown  LCR ______% Dead twigs/branches  ______% overall Max. dia. ________ Broken/Hangers Number __________ Max. dia. ________ Over-extended branches  Pruning history Crown cleaned  Reduced  Flush cuts  Thinned  Topped  Other Raised  Lion-tailed  Cracks  ________________________________ Lightning damage  Codominant  ______________________________ Included bark  Weak attachments  _________________ Cavity/Nest hole ____% circ. Previous branch failures  _____________ Similar branches present  Dead/Missing bark  Cankers/Galls/Burls  Sapwood damage/decay  Conks  Heartwood decay  ______________________ Response growth Client _______________________________________________________________ Date ___________________ Time _________________ Address/Tree location _________________________________________________________ Tree no. ____________ Sheet _____ of _____ Tree species _________________________________________ dbh_____________ Height ___________ Crown spread dia. ____________ Assessor(s) __________________________________________ Tools used______________________________ Time frame_____________ Target Assessment Target number Target description Target protection Practical to move target? Restriction practical? Target within drip line Target within 1 x Ht. Target within 1.5 x Ht. 1 2 3 4 History of failures _____________________________________________________________ Topography Flat Slope _________% Aspect _____ Site changes None  Grade change  Site clearing Changed soil hydrology Root cuts Describe _____________________________________ Soil conditions Limited volume Saturated Shallow Compacted Pavement over roots ______% Describe __________________________ Prevailing wind direction______ Common weather Strong winds  Ice  Snow Heavy rain Describe______________________________ Tree Health and Species Profile Vigor Low  Normal  High  Foliage None (seasonal)  None (dead)  Normal _____ % Chlorotic _____% Necrotic _____% Pests/Biotic_________________________________________________ Abiotic _______________________________________________________ Species failure profile Branches Trunk Roots Describe ____________________________________________________________________ Load Factors Wind exposure Protected Partial Full  Wind funneling  ________________________ Relative crown size Small  Medium  Large Crown density Sparse Normal Dense Interior branches Few Normal Dense Vines/Mistletoe/Moss  _____________________ Recent or expected change in load factors ________________________________________________________________________________________ Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure Occupancy rate 1–rare 2 – occasional 3 – frequent 4 – constant Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form Page 1 of 2 Site Factors Target zone Condition(s) of concern Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Part Size Fall Distance Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Dead/Missing bark  Abnormal bark texture/color  Codominant stems  Included bark  Cracks  Sapwood damage/decay  Cankers/Galls/Burls  Sap ooze  Lightning damage  Heartwood decay  Conks/Mushrooms  Cavity/Nest hole _____ % circ. Depth _______ Poor taper  Lean _____° Corrected? __________________________________ Response growth Condition(s) of concern Part Size Fall Distance Collar buried/Not visible  Depth________ Stem girdling  Dead  Decay  Conks/Mushrooms  Ooze  Cavity  _____% circ. Cracks  Cut/Damaged roots  Distance from trunk _______ Root plate lifting  Soil weakness  Response growth Condition(s) of concern Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Part Size Fall Distance Part Size Fall Distance This section provides a systematic checklist for assessing the tree, dividing it into Crown and Branches, T runk, and Roots and Root Collar. Check only factors that apply to the assessed tree. These factors may or may not contribute to Condition(s) of concern, Load on defect, or Likelihood of failure. Page 7 Copyright ©2017 International Society of Arboriculture. All rights reserved. 169 Cavity/Nest hole—openings from the outside into the heartwood area of the tree. Record the percentage of the branch circumference that has missing wood. Previous branch failures —check box if there is evidence of previous branch failures and describe briefly. Check “similar branches present” if relevant. Dead/Missing bark—check box if branches are dead or if areas of dead cambium are present where new wood will not be produced. Cankers/Galls/Burls —check box if relevant and circle which one(s) are of concern: Canker—localized diseased areas on the branch; often sunken or discolored. Gall—abnormal swellings of tissue caused by pests; may or may not be a defect. Burl—outgrowth on the trunk, branch, or roots; not usually considered a defect. Sapwood damage/decay —check box if there is mechanical or fungal damage in the sapwood that may weaken the branch, or decay of dead or dying branches. If checked, you may circle “damage” or “decay” to indicate which one is present. Conks (mushrooms, brackets)—fungal fruiting structures; common, definite indicators of decay. Check box if present and describe under Condition(s) of concern. Heartwood decay —check box if present and describe. Response growth —reaction wood or additional wood grown to increase the structural strength of the branch. Note location and extent. Condition(s) of concern —conditions in the crown and branches that may affect likelihood of failure. Note the main concern(s); if there are no concerns, write “none.” Part Size—a characterization of the part of the tree that may fail toward the target. Usually this is the diameter of the branch that can fall or the dbh of the tree. It may be appropriate to indicate the size of the part that could impact the target. Include units of measurement. Fall Distance—if applicable, record the distance that the tree or tree part will fall before hitting a target; this may be relevant to the consequences of failure. Load on defect —a consideration of how much loading is expected on the tree part of concern. Record as N/A (not applicable), minor, moderate, or significant, and/or note the cause of loading. Likelihood of failure —the rating ( improbable, possible, probable, or imminent) for the crown and branches of greatest concern. If there is a main concern, this information should be transferred to the Risk Categorization chart. Page 8 Copyright ©2017 International Society of Arboriculture. All rights reserved. 170 Trunk Dead/Missing bark—check box if a stem or codominant stem is dead or if areas of dead cambium are present where new wood will not be produced. Abnormal bark texture/color —may indicate a fungal or structural problem with the trunk. Check box, if present, and add notes if it is a concern. Codominant stems —stems of nearly equal diameter arising from a common junction and lacking a normal branch union. Note the size, location, and number, if relevant, under Condition(s) of concern. Included bark —bark that becomes embedded in a union between branch and trunk, or between codominant stems, causing a weak structure. Check box if present. Cracks—separation in the wood in either a longitudinal (radial, in the plane of ray cells) or transverse (across the stem) direction. Check box if present and describe under Condition(s) of concern. Sapwood damage/decay—check box if there is mechanical or fungal damage in the sapwood that may weaken the trunk. If checked, you may circle “damage” or “decay” to indicate which one is present. Cankers/Galls/Burls—may or may not affect the structural strength of the tree. Check box if present and circle which one(s): Canker—localized diseased area on the branch; often sunken or discolored. Gall—abnormal swelling of tissue caused by pests; may or may not be a defect. Burl—outgrowth on the trunk, branch, or roots; not usually considered a defect. Sap ooze —oozing of liquid that may result from infections or infestations under the bark. May or may not affect structure or stability. Check box if present. Lightning damage—often evidenced by a centrally located line of sapwood damage and bark removal on either side in a spiral pattern on the trunk or branch. Check box if present. Heartwood decay—check box if present and identify/describe under Condition(s) of concern. Conks/Mushrooms—fungal fruiting structures; common, definite indicators of decay when on the trunk. Check box if present and identify/describe under Condition(s) of concern. Cavity/Nest hole—openings from the outside into the heartwood area of the tree. Record the percentage of the trunk circumference that has missing wood, and the depth of the cavity. Poor taper—change in diameter over the length of the trunk, important for even distribution of mechanical stress. Check box if trunk has poor taper. Lean—angle of the trunk measured from vertical. Record the degree of lean. Corrected?—the tree may have been able to correct the lean with new growth in the younger portions of the tree. Note con- ditions related to lean in the space provided. Response growth—reaction wood or additional wood grown to increase the structural strength of the trunk. Note location and extent. Condition(s) of concern —conditions in the trunk that may affect likelihood of failure. Note the main concern(s); if there are no concerns, write “none.” Part Size—a characterization of the part of the tree that may fail toward the target. Usually this is the diameter of the branch that can fall or the dbh of the tree. It may be appropriate to indicate the size of the part that could impact the target. Include units of measurement. Fall Distance—if applicable, record the distance that the tree or tree part will fall before hitting a target; this may be relevant to the consequences of failure. Load on defect—a consideration of how much loading is expected on the tree part of concern. Record as N/A (not applicable), minor, moderate, or significant, and/or note the cause of loading. Likelihood of failure—the rating ( improbable, possible, probable, or imminent) for the trunk. If there is a main concern, this information should be transferred to the Risk Categorization chart. — Trunk — — Crown and Branches — — Roots and Root Collar — Unbalanced crown  LCR ______% Dead twigs/branches  ______% overall Max. dia. ________ Broken/Hangers Number __________ Max. dia. ________ Over-extended branches  Pruning history Crown cleaned  Reduced  Flush cuts  Thinned  Topped  Other Raised  Lion-tailed  Cracks  ________________________________ Lightning damage  Codominant  ______________________________ Included bark  Weak attachments  _________________ Cavity/Nest hole ____% circ. Previous branch failures  _____________ Similar branches present  Dead/Missing bark  Cankers/Galls/Burls  Sapwood damage/decay  Conks  Heartwood decay  ______________________ Response growth Client _______________________________________________________________ Date ___________________ Time _________________ Address/Tree location _________________________________________________________ Tree no. ____________ Sheet _____ of _____ Tree species _________________________________________ dbh_____________ Height ___________ Crown spread dia. ____________ Assessor(s) __________________________________________ Tools used______________________________ Time frame_____________ Target Assessment Target number Target description Target protection Practical to move target? Restriction practical? Target within drip line Target within 1 x Ht. Target within 1.5 x Ht. 1 2 3 4 History of failures _____________________________________________________________ Topography Flat Slope _________% Aspect _____ Site changes None  Grade change  Site clearing Changed soil hydrology Root cuts Describe _____________________________________ Soil conditions Limited volume Saturated Shallow Compacted Pavement over roots ______% Describe __________________________ Prevailing wind direction______ Common weather Strong winds  Ice  Snow Heavy rain Describe______________________________ Tree Health and Species Profile Vigor Low  Normal  High  Foliage None (seasonal)  None (dead)  Normal _____ % Chlorotic _____% Necrotic _____% Pests/Biotic_________________________________________________ Abiotic _______________________________________________________ Species failure profile Branches Trunk Roots Describe ____________________________________________________________________ Load Factors Wind exposure Protected Partial Full  Wind funneling  ________________________ Relative crown size Small  Medium  Large Crown density Sparse Normal Dense Interior branches Few Normal Dense Vines/Mistletoe/Moss  _____________________ Recent or expected change in load factors ________________________________________________________________________________________ Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure Occupancy rate 1–rare 2 – occasional 3 – frequent 4 – constant Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form Page 1 of 2 Site Factors Target zone Condition(s) of concern Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Part Size Fall Distance Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Dead/Missing bark  Abnormal bark texture/color  Codominant stems  Included bark  Cracks  Sapwood damage/decay  Cankers/Galls/Burls  Sap ooze  Lightning damage  Heartwood decay  Conks/Mushrooms  Cavity/Nest hole _____ % circ. Depth _______ Poor taper  Lean _____° Corrected? __________________________________ Response growth Condition(s) of concern Part Size Fall Distance Collar buried/Not visible  Depth________ Stem girdling  Dead  Decay  Conks/Mushrooms  Ooze  Cavity  _____% circ. Cracks  Cut/Damaged roots  Distance from trunk _______ Root plate lifting  Soil weakness  Response growth Condition(s) of concern Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Part Size Fall Distance Part Size Fall Distance Page 9 Copyright ©2017 International Society of Arboriculture. All rights reserved. 171 Roots and Root Collar Collar buried/Not visible—check box if the root collar is not visible. If possible, determine and note the depth belowground. Stem girdling—restriction or destruction of the trunk or buttress roots. Check box if it is a failure concern. Dead—check box if one or more structural support roots are dead. Decay—check box if present and identify/describe under Condition(s) of concern. Conks/Mushrooms—fungal fruiting structures; common, definite indicators of decay. Fungal fruiting structures away from the trunk in the turf or mulch may be due to the presence of a mycorrhizal fungus and, if so, do not pose a threat to the tree. Check box if present and identify/describe under Condition(s) of concern. Ooze—seeping or exudation that can result from pest infestations or infections under the bark. Check box if present and describe. Cavity—definite indicators of heartwood decay. Measure the size of the opening and record the percentage of the tree’s circumference affected. Cracks—separation in the wood in either a longitudinal (radial, in the plane of ray cells) or transverse (across the stem) direction. Check box if present and describe. Cut/Damaged roots—check box if present. Measure and record the distance from the trunk to the cut. Root plate lifting—soil cracking or lifting indicates the tree has been rocking, usually in high winds. Check box if present, and note under Condition(s) of concern. Soil weakness—check box if there is a soil condition affecting the anchorage of the tree’s root system. Note under Condition(s) of concern if significant. Response growth—reaction wood or additional wood grown to increase the structural strength of the roots or root collar. Note location and extent. Condition(s) of concern —conditions in the trunk that may affect likelihood of failure. Note the main concern(s); if there are no concerns, write “none.” Part Size—a characterization of the part of the tree that may fail toward the target. Usually this is the diameter of the branch that can fall or the dbh of the tree. It may be appropriate to indicate the size of the part that could impact the target. Include units of measurement. Fall Distance—if applicable, record the distance that the tree or tree part will fall before hitting a target; this may be relevant to the consequences of failure. Load on defect—a consideration of how much loading is expected on the tree part of concern. Record as N/A (not applicable), minor, moderate, or significant, and/or note the cause of loading. Likelihood of failure —the rating ( improbable, possible, probable, or imminent) for the roots or root collar. If there is a main concern, this information should be transferred to the Risk Categorization chart. — Trunk — — Crown and Branches — — Roots and Root Collar — Unbalanced crown  LCR ______% Dead twigs/branches  ______% overall Max. dia. ________ Broken/Hangers Number __________ Max. dia. ________ Over-extended branches  Pruning history Crown cleaned  Reduced  Flush cuts  Thinned  Topped  Other Raised  Lion-tailed  Cracks  ________________________________ Lightning damage  Codominant  ______________________________ Included bark  Weak attachments  _________________ Cavity/Nest hole ____% circ. Previous branch failures  _____________ Similar branches present  Dead/Missing bark  Cankers/Galls/Burls  Sapwood damage/decay  Conks  Heartwood decay  ______________________ Response growth Client _______________________________________________________________ Date ___________________ Time _________________ Address/Tree location _________________________________________________________ Tree no. ____________ Sheet _____ of _____ Tree species _________________________________________ dbh_____________ Height ___________ Crown spread dia. ____________ Assessor(s) __________________________________________ Tools used______________________________ Time frame_____________ Target Assessment Target number Target description Target protection Practical to move target? Restriction practical? Target within drip line Target within 1 x Ht. Target within 1.5 x Ht. 1 2 3 4 History of failures _____________________________________________________________ Topography Flat Slope _________% Aspect _____ Site changes None  Grade change  Site clearing Changed soil hydrology Root cuts Describe _____________________________________ Soil conditions Limited volume Saturated Shallow Compacted Pavement over roots ______% Describe __________________________ Prevailing wind direction______ Common weather Strong winds  Ice  Snow Heavy rain Describe______________________________ Tree Health and Species Profile Vigor Low  Normal  High  Foliage None (seasonal)  None (dead)  Normal _____ % Chlorotic _____% Necrotic _____% Pests/Biotic_________________________________________________ Abiotic _______________________________________________________ Species failure profile Branches Trunk Roots Describe ____________________________________________________________________ Load Factors Wind exposure Protected Partial Full  Wind funneling  ________________________ Relative crown size Small  Medium  Large Crown density Sparse Normal Dense Interior branches Few Normal Dense Vines/Mistletoe/Moss  _____________________ Recent or expected change in load factors ________________________________________________________________________________________ Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure Occupancy rate 1–rare 2 – occasional 3 – frequent 4 – constant Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form Page 1 of 2 Site Factors Target zone Condition(s) of concern Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Part Size Fall Distance Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Dead/Missing bark  Abnormal bark texture/color  Codominant stems  Included bark  Cracks  Sapwood damage/decay  Cankers/Galls/Burls  Sap ooze  Lightning damage  Heartwood decay  Conks/Mushrooms  Cavity/Nest hole _____ % circ. Depth _______ Poor taper  Lean _____° Corrected? __________________________________ Response growth Condition(s) of concern Part Size Fall Distance Collar buried/Not visible  Depth________ Stem girdling  Dead  Decay  Conks/Mushrooms  Ooze  Cavity  _____% circ. Cracks  Cut/Damaged roots  Distance from trunk _______ Root plate lifting  Soil weakness  Response growth Condition(s) of concern Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Part Size Fall Distance Part Size Fall Distance Page 10 Copyright ©2017 International Society of Arboriculture. All rights reserved. 172 PAGE 2—RISK CATEGORIZATION AND MITIGATION Target (Target number or description) —specify target number or a brief description from the first page of this form. Tree part—specify the branch, trunk, or root of concern. For example, Condition Number 1 may be the broken branch over the house, and Condition Number 2 may be a branch over the driveway. The entries in the T ree part column would both be “branch.” Other options for this column include “trunk” and “roots.” Condition(s) of concern—identify the concern(s) with the tree part listed. An example would be “large, dead branch over the house.” Section 7—Risk Categorization The second page of the form focuses on categorizing the risk the tree poses and describing how the risk should be mitigated. It also provides space for additional notes or comments regarding any section from the first page. Use a separate sheet of paper if more space is needed. This form uses the risk categorization methodologies presented in ISA’s Best Management Practices: Tree Risk Assessment. The chart provided on the form is a tool to tie the data collected on the front of the form to the risk categorization process. You can rate the risk for up to four different conditions that may be found in the tree being assessed. Additional ratings may be made on an additional form. If there is only one condition of concern, only one line needs to be completed. Target (Target number or description) Tree part Condition(s) of concern Risk rating (from Matrix 2) Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix. Likelihood of Failure Likelihood of Impact Very low Low Medium High Imminent Unlikely Somewhat likely Likely Very likely Probable Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat likely Likely Possible Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat likely Improbable Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Failure Impact Failure & Impact (from Matrix 1) Likelihood Improbable Imminent Possible Very low Unlikely Negligible Medium Likely Significant Probable Low Somewhat Minor High Very likely Severe Consequences Likelihood of Failure & Impact Consequences of Failure N e g l i g i b l e Minor Significant Severe Very likely Low Moderate High Extreme Likely Low Moderate High High Somewhat likely Low Low Moderate Moderate Unlikely Low Low Low Low Data Final  Preliminary Advanced assessment needed No Yes-Type/Reason ________________________________________________ Inspection limitations None Visibility Access Vines Root collar buried Describe ___________________________________________ Notes, explanations, descriptions 1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ 2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ 3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ 4.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ Overall tree risk rating Low  Moderate  High  Extreme  Overall residual risk None  Low  Moderate  High  Extreme  Recommended inspection interval__________________ This datasheet was produced by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) — 2017 North Page 2 of 2 Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix. Risk Categorization Mitigation options Target (Target number or description) Tree part Condition(s) of concern Risk rating (from Matrix 2) Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix. Likelihood of Failure Likelihood of Impact Very low Low Medium High Imminent Unlikely Somewhat likely Likely Very likely Probable Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat likely Likely Possible Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat likely Improbable Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Failure Impact Failure & Impact (from Matrix 1) Likelihood Improbable Imminent Possible Very low Unlikely Negligible Medium Likely Significant Probable Low Somewhat Minor High Very likely Severe Consequences Likelihood of Failure & Impact Consequences of Failure N e g l i g i b l e Minor Significant Severe Very likely Low Moderate High Extreme Likely Low Moderate High High Somewhat likely Low Low Moderate Moderate Unlikely Low Low Low Low Data Final  Preliminary Advanced assessment needed No Yes-Type/Reason ________________________________________________ Inspection limitations None Visibility Access Vines Root collar buried Describe ___________________________________________ Notes, explanations, descriptions 1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ 2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ 3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ 4.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ Overall tree risk rating Low  Moderate  High  Extreme  Overall residual risk None  Low  Moderate  High  Extreme  Recommended inspection interval__________________ This datasheet was produced by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) — 2017 North Page 2 of 2 Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix. Risk Categorization Mitigation options Target (Target number or description) Tree part Condition(s) of concern Risk rating (from Matrix 2) Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix. Likelihood of Failure Likelihood of Impact Very low Low Medium High Imminent Unlikely Somewhat likely Likely Very likely Probable Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat likely Likely Possible Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat likely Improbable Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Failure Impact Failure & Impact (from Matrix 1) Likelihood Improbable Imminent Possible Very low Unlikely Negligible Medium Likely Significant Probable Low Somewhat Minor High Very likely Severe Consequences Likelihood of Failure & Impact Consequences of Failure N e g l i g i b l e Minor Significant Severe Very likely Low Moderate High Extreme Likely Low Moderate High High Somewhat likely Low Low Moderate Moderate Unlikely Low Low Low Low Data Final  Preliminary Advanced assessment needed No Yes-Type/Reason ________________________________________________ Inspection limitations None Visibility Access Vines Root collar buried Describe ___________________________________________ Notes, explanations, descriptions 1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ 2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ 3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ 4.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ Overall tree risk rating Low  Moderate  High  Extreme  Overall residual risk None  Low  Moderate  High  Extreme  Recommended inspection interval__________________ This datasheet was produced by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) — 2017 North Page 2 of 2 Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix. Risk Categorization Mitigation options Page 11 Copyright ©2017 International Society of Arboriculture. All rights reserved. 173 T ree risk has two components: (1) the likelihood of a tree failure striking a target, which is divided into the likelihood of failure and the likelihood of impact, and (2) the consequences of failure. Use your best judgment and the data available to assess the likeli- hood of failure (improbable, possible, probable, imminent) and the likelihood of impact ( very low, low, medium, high). After these two decisions are made, use Matrix 1 (likelihood matrix) to determine the likelihood of failure and impact category (unlikely, somewhat likely, likely, very likely) based on your assessment. The likelihood of failure can be categorized using the following guidelines: Improbable—the tree or tree part is not likely to fail during normal weather conditions and may not fail in extreme weather conditions within the specified time frame. Possible—failure may be expected in extreme weather conditions, but it is unlikely during normal weather conditions within the specified time frame. Probable—failure may be expected under normal weather conditions within the specified time frame. Imminent—failure has started or is most likely to occur in the near future, even if there is no significant wind or increased load. This is an infrequent occurrence for a risk assessor to encounter, and it may require immediate action to protect people from harm. The imminent category over- rides the stated time frame. Since these categories are time dependent, the time frame must be considered. The time frame is recorded on the first page. The likelihood of impacting a target can be categorized using the following guidelines: Very low—the chance of the failed tree or tree part impacting the specified target is remote. Likelihood of impact could be very low if the target is outside the anticipated target zone or if occupancy rates are rare. Another example of very low likelihood of impact is people in an occasionally used area with protection against being struck by the tree failure due to the presence of other trees or structures between the tree being assessed and the targets. Low—there is a slight chance that the failed tree or tree part will impact the target. This is the case for people in an occasionally used area with no protection factors and no predictable direction of fall, a frequently used area that is partially protected, or a constant target that is well protected from the assessed tree. Examples are vehicles on an occasion- ally used service road next to the assessed tree, or a frequently used street that has a large tree providing protection between vehicles on the street and the assessed tree. Medium—the failed tree or tree part could impact the target, but is not expected to do so. This is the case for people in a frequently used area when the direction of fall may or may not be toward the target. An example of a medium likelihood of impacting people could be passengers in a car traveling on an arterial street (frequent occupancy) next to the assessed tree with a large, dead branch over the street. High—the failed tree or tree part is likely to impact the target. This is the case when there is a constant target with no protection factors, and the direction of fall is toward the target. The consequences of failure can be categorized using the following guidelines: Negligible—no personal injury, low-value property damage, or disruptions that can be replaced or repaired. Minor—minor personal injury, low-to-moderate value property damage, or small disruption of activities. Significant—substantial personal injury, moderate- to high-value property damage, or considerable disruption of activities. Severe—serious personal injury or death, high-value property damage, or major disruption of important activities. Risk rating—the risk rating of the individual part for a specified target. The risk rating is categorized using Matrix 2. Risk rating terms are low, moderate, high, and extreme. Matrix 1 (likelihood matrix) is used to determine the combined likelihood of failure and impact in a given time frame. The resulting terms ( unlikely, somewhat likely, likely, very likely ) are defined by their use within the matrix and are used to represent this combination of occurrences in Matrix 2 (risk rating matrix). In the Consequences section, one category should be selected ( negligible, minor, significant, severe). Consequences of failure are estimated based on the amount of harm or damage that will be done to a target. The consequences depend on the part size, fall characteristics, fall distance, and any factors that may protect the risk target from harm. The significance of target values—both monetary and otherwise—are subjective and relative to the client. Page 12 Copyright ©2017 International Society of Arboriculture. All rights reserved. 174 Notes, explanations, descriptions—describe any conditions or factors that are not well described elsewhere on the form. Include notes on anything you need to take into consideration for making ratings or recommendations. The grid, stem, and circle templates are provided for sketching any applicable details related to the tree or site. Mitigation options —list options for mitigating each risk described. List your preferred recommendation on the first line. Residual risk—the residual risk is for the risk remaining after the mitigation you are recommending. Residual risk can be low, moderate, high, or extreme. Overall tree risk rating—the highest risk determined for the tree and target of concern. If there is more than one part or target rating, the tree risk rating is the highest of the group. Overall residual risk—risk remaining if the highest-risk tree part is mitigated. Recommended inspection interval —recommended time for reinspection or inspection frequency. Data—use these boxes to indicate whether this assessment is final or preliminary. Advanced assessment needed —note the reason for any advanced assessment recommended. Inspection limitations —factors that limited your ability to inspect the tree. Check all that apply and describe briefly. Target (Target number or description) Tree part Condition(s) of concern Risk rating (from Matrix 2) Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix. Likelihood of Failure Likelihood of Impact Very low Low Medium High Imminent Unlikely Somewhat likely Likely Very likely Probable Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat likely Likely Possible Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat likely Improbable Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Failure Impact Failure & Impact (from Matrix 1) Likelihood Improbable Imminent Possible Very low Unlikely Negligible Medium Likely Significant Probable Low Somewhat Minor High Very likely Severe Consequences Likelihood of Failure & Impact Consequences of Failure N e g l i g i b l e Minor Significant Severe Very likely Low Moderate High Extreme Likely Low Moderate High High Somewhat likely Low Low Moderate Moderate Unlikely Low Low Low Low Data Final  Preliminary Advanced assessment needed No Yes-Type/Reason ________________________________________________ Inspection limitations None Visibility Access Vines Root collar buried Describe ___________________________________________ Notes, explanations, descriptions 1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ 2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ 3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ 4.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ Overall tree risk rating Low  Moderate  High  Extreme  Overall residual risk None  Low  Moderate  High  Extreme  Recommended inspection interval__________________ This datasheet was produced by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) — 2017 North Page 2 of 2 Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix. Risk Categorization Mitigation options Target (Target number or description) Tree part Condition(s) of concern Risk rating (from Matrix 2) Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix. Likelihood of Failure Likelihood of Impact Very low Low Medium High Imminent Unlikely Somewhat likely Likely Very likely Probable Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat likely Likely Possible Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat likely Improbable Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Failure Impact Failure & Impact (from Matrix 1) Likelihood Improbable Imminent Possible Very low Unlikely Negligible Medium Likely Significant Probable Low Somewhat Minor High Very likely Severe Consequences Likelihood of Failure & Impact Consequences of Failure N e g l i g i b l e Minor Significant Severe Very likely Low Moderate High Extreme Likely Low Moderate High High Somewhat likely Low Low Moderate Moderate Unlikely Low Low Low Low Data Final  Preliminary Advanced assessment needed No Yes-Type/Reason ________________________________________________ Inspection limitations None Visibility Access Vines Root collar buried Describe ___________________________________________ Notes, explanations, descriptions 1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ 2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ 3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ 4.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ Overall tree risk rating Low  Moderate  High  Extreme  Overall residual risk None  Low  Moderate  High  Extreme  Recommended inspection interval__________________ This datasheet was produced by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) — 2017 North Page 2 of 2 Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix. Risk Categorization Mitigation options Target (Target number or description) Tree part Condition(s) of concern Risk rating (from Matrix 2) Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix. Likelihood of Failure Likelihood of Impact Very low Low Medium High Imminent Unlikely Somewhat likely Likely Very likely Probable Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat likely Likely Possible Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat likely Improbable Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Failure Impact Failure & Impact (from Matrix 1) Likelihood Improbable Imminent Possible Very low Unlikely Negligible Medium Likely Significant Probable Low Somewhat Minor High Very likely Severe Consequences Likelihood of Failure & Impact Consequences of Failure N e g l i g i b l e Minor Significant Severe Very likely Low Moderate High Extreme Likely Low Moderate High High Somewhat likely Low Low Moderate Moderate Unlikely Low Low Low Low Data Final  Preliminary Advanced assessment needed No Yes-Type/Reason ________________________________________________ Inspection limitations None Visibility Access Vines Root collar buried Describe ___________________________________________ Notes, explanations, descriptions 1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ 2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ 3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ 4.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ Overall tree risk rating Low  Moderate  High  Extreme  Overall residual risk None  Low  Moderate  High  Extreme  Recommended inspection interval__________________ This datasheet was produced by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) — 2017 North Page 2 of 2 Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix. Risk Categorization Mitigation options The shaded rows in the Risk Categorization chart may be used to assess residual risk after proposed mitigation. For each mitigation action, rate the expected risk remaining after treatment using the same methodology for categorizing risk as before. Section 8—Notes, Mitigation, and Limitations Upon completion of the assessment, use this section to illustrate potential areas of concern and to offer mitigation options. Any further recommendations or notes should be included in this section.