Fire his aspirations for a fat pension!

guymayor

Branched out member
Location
East US, Earth
Please consider tweeting or fbing on this

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/news/l...3603#cmComments

right re intent, no doubt fueled by the communication with the risk manager. He overreacted to target rating and neglected to do a reasonable level of inspection for condition. re species, ficus in Hong Kong are about 70% of the urban canopy because they are extremely durable and adaptable. Mitigation options were evidently not considered, nor were the contributions of the tree.

That's 5 Omissions, unless they show otherwise. Ignoring the BMP on 5 major points does not sound like due diligence, but IANAL.

It's a breakdown in communications, if the risk manager answers to the county manager. If it was intentional, maybe the appraised value could come out of their checks. Why should taxpayers foot the replacement bill?

Coppicing could be considered here. And we need to remember that "obvious defects" with any kind of adaptive growth are very poor indicators of strength and risk--that is the consensus among researchers.
 
Did you know the tree? With conflicting risk analysis who's right, the boss, who may or may not be a tree expert or the horticultualist who again may be capable of mistakes and bad judgement. Two senior people said leaf it alone and two middle managers decided to remove it. Is that correct? Seems straight forward. Who's in charge and is everybody doing their job correctly?

Either the boss didn't communicate, the hort didn't check his memos or attend the meeting or someone misjudged the risk. Or someone went to the wrong address.
 
Since there appears to be nobody with tree risk assessment involved I think that the city did what is appropiate for their level of training.

I am sure Guy would bring out his wooden mallet and do better than anybody, but, the city did what was normal for it.
 
It's just a tree..... Until someone cuts it down or at least threatens to cut it down. When will municipalities learn to properly inventory and categorize there urban forest to insure proper assessment is done and the options considered. Obviously if it were a tree in a corner of a park then it would be of lesser importance to work up a full assessment with a range of options to mitigate any risk. In this case though, from its location it would stand to reason that this is a significant tree that would justify such an assessment.

It would appear from the article the supervisor of grounds maintenance made the decision to go forward without advising the commissioner or city manager. Without having seen the tree it's hard to know if the hazard perceived by the horticulturist was sufficient to warrant immediate removal.
 
Do we really expect that a CITY manager is going to make decisions about trees?

As for properly trained city arborists, never meet one in my life.
 
It's murder I tell yu!

Howz bout we tweet n chirp twixt ourselves till high capacity sawz arrr banished, banished, banished!

Next on the list, axes in uncertified hands!

Are you certified?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9UKB05EgpM

jomoco
grin.gif
 
Click on the article picture and it zooms in good. There appears to be decay across the middle. A close up of the stump could be enough to end the discussion. You never know maybe the person that made the call was in love with the tree and had to pull the plug after seeing the damage done installing the tree protection ring.

Too bad the skateboarders will trash the cement anyway.
 
boreality, do you have much ficus growing in the boreeal forest? different than spruce or manitoba maple. You're right about construction damage but still there were many ways to deal with the decay.

That site was made for propping; posts installed inside the ring. ficus can be trained to self-prop with aerial roots. Etc...Oh yeah and pruning. the hort boys probably could not even climb.

Left alone, how big do you subtropical folks reckon the sprouts would be in 1 year? 5?
 

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom