what is longest lasting wooden fence?

[matz]

we need 60 feet of fencing for a boundray but it has to be

1. very sturdy
2. longlasting

40 feet at 4ft high
20 feet at 6 ft high

I'm thinking 4" wooden posts with 3 horizontal rails and vertical close boarding fixed on as its built but am mindful of rotting posts.

Maybe concrete posts with mortices and as above?

concrete posts or wooden posts with ready made panels seem alot weaker to me

any advice on a really solid wooden fencing system that wont cost more than a block wall?

 

[scbk]

You need good quality timber, like larch heartwood for the posts, and atleast 4" thick.

Some folks would say use concrete but I think timber is much better looking.

I would soak the bottom of the posts in proper creosote beforehand too

 

[ImayKnow]

How long lasting your fence will be is determined by your maintenance regime. Any fence will deteriorate if you don't have a good maintenance programme.

 

[ntb]

Make sure the timber is pressure treated rather than dipped. Most seems to be these days but make sure - it makes a big difference.

5*3 posts would be a better bet with rails. Open boards will save money and give much better resistance to wind and look nicer too imo.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I would soak the bottom of the posts in proper creosote beforehand too

Revocation of approvals for amateur creosote/coal tar creosote wood preservatives under the Control of Pesticides Regulations (COPR)

In 2003, action was taken to remove the approvals given under the Control of Pesticides Regulations 1986 (as amended) for the use of creosote and coal tar creosote wood preservatives by the general public.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) acted on behalf of the former Department of Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) (now Department for Innovation & Skills) to implement, in part, European Commission Directive 2001/90/EC.

In summary:

• Since 30 April 2003 retailers can no longer sell creosote and coal tar creosote wood preservatives to the general public in Great Britain
• Since 30 June 2003 general public can no longer use creosote and coal tar creosote wood preservatives in Great Britain

 

[scbk]

Maybe the OP could employ a contractor to treat the posts for them


Or maybe they could just go out and buy a drum of creosote and do it themselves, but of course, that would be against the law

 

[ntb]

It's only EuroBS. Treat it with the contempt it deserves.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

So you think that if there were no regulations of European origin which restricted the sale and use of hazardous, carcinogenic chemicals we wouldn't have any?

Don't be daft.

 

[ntb]

Don't put words in my mouth.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Come on then, explain how, if we did not have health & safety & environmental protection regulations which originated in Europe we wouldn't have any at all.

Feel free to be logical and intelligent.

 

[ntb]

The 'Directive' to ban Creosote from use by the public is EuroBS. I said nothing about about health and safety or environmental regulations in general. Stop putting words in my mouth.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

OK - so do you think that if we didn't have that particular ban, of European origin, we would not have introduced a home-grown one, and we would be allowing the uncontrolled amateur use of a carcinogenic and environmentally damaging chemical?

 

[ntb]

I'd estimate a less than 50% chance that it would have been banned from public use by now. The EU has a whole additional army of bureaucrats dedicated to telling us what we can and can't do. The UK government has less resources so the rate at which it can expand the nanny state is somewhat less by comparison.

Uncontrolled amateurs have access to far more deadly stuff than creosote but since you feel it is such a risk, perhaps you can point out a few people that have been killed by creosote?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I'd estimate a less than 50% chance that it would have been banned from public use by now.

On what basis?

Is that a reasonable estimate, or a complete guess?

The EU has a whole additional army of bureaucrats dedicated to telling us what we can and can't do. The UK government has less resources so the rate at which it can expand the nanny state is somewhat less by comparison.

What is it you really object to?

The ban itself, or where it originated?

If it had been entirely homegrown, would your comment above have been "It's only Health & Safety Executive BS. Treat it with the contempt it deserves"?

Uncontrolled amateurs have access to far more deadly stuff than creosote but since you feel it is such a risk, perhaps you can point out a few people that have been killed by creosote?

No I can't, but then that's not the field I work in, and I'm not the sort of person whose reaction to a ban on the uncontrolled use of an environmentally persistent probable carcinogen is that it's just nanny state BS and it should be treated with contempt because I don't know of anybody who's been killed by it.

 

[ntb]

On what basis?

I explained my reasoning.

What is it you really object to?

The ban itself, or where it originated?

The ban itself.

If it had been entirely homegrown, would your comment above have been "It's only Health & Safety Executive BS. Treat it with the contempt it deserves"?

Yes.

No I can't,

Neither can anyone else it seems. The great 20th century creosote disaster seems to have gone unnoticed despite literally millions of people being unaffected.

I'm not the sort of person whose reaction to a ban on the uncontrolled use of an environmentally persistent probable carcinogen is that it's just nanny state BS and it should be treated with contempt because I don't know of anybody who's been killed by it.

I'm not the sort of person that unquestioningly accepts a reduction in my liberty without a compelling reason. There is no compelling reason in this case, nor in countless others.