Mapscape vs
Polished mapping-first arborist tool. Strong on the cartographic side; weaker on field-capture ergonomics and report drafting.
The honest comparison.
| Capability | Mapscape | tree·canopy |
|---|---|---|
| Voice-first capture in the field | — | |
| AI-drafted report | — | |
| Native mobile + browser | — | |
| Offline-first | ||
| Transparent public pricing | — | |
| Your local tree survey standard | ||
| Species ID built-in | — | |
| Pest & disease ID built-in | — | |
| Constraints plan overlay | ||
| GIS export (Shapefile / GeoJSON) | ||
| Self-service trial | — | |
| EU data residency |
Where Mapscape is strong — and where we fit.
Mapscape produces some of the best-looking deliverables in the category. The map output, the constraints plan, the cartographic polish — all genuinely strong. If your client expects a beautiful figure on the planning application, Mapscape has been a safe choice.
The trade-off is the workflow leading up to that figure. Capture is still form-and-stylus. There's no voice layer, no AI-drafted narrative, no self-service trial. You have to talk to sales to get a quote.
The same constraints-plan overlay your clients expect, with voice capture in front of it and an AI-drafted narrative behind it. Published pricing, self-service trial, no sales call to find out the number.
Transparent. Per seat.
One price for sole traders. Per-seat for small practices. Direct contract for Enterprise.
Solo
$35
For sole-trader consultants.
Practice
$39
For 2–25 person consultancies. Shared review, team workspace.
Enterprise
$1,199
For councils, large consultancies, and council in-house teams.
tree·canopy
Your next site should be on this.
14-day free trial. No card. Download and start on Monday.
Or — talk to us about Enterprise → hello@treecanopy.app