unnecessary removal soap box

Jomoco, the bottom of that page reads 'urban legends reference pages,' which I believe the MPA may be. Lots of chatter on the web about it lately, not sure what the real truth is.

Tom
 
In the last decade or so the use of imidicloprid has exponentially increased. It is the #1 recommended chemical for Hemlock Wooly Adelgid. Eastern hemlock has a rather large range and imidicloprid is being dumped in the ground through out it. Imidicloprid is also the ONLY over the counter option for homeowners to treat EAB. It is being dumped in the ground throughout the eastern seaboard and midwest. Plus all the lawn companies using it for grub control plus all of the agricultural applications.

And on the thread topic, I have taken part in some unnecessary removals and it has pained me in doing so. Eventually the feelings of remorse and guilt fade. It is nice to be able to not bend from what you know to be right and not be driven by the easy sale and profit (hopefully). I feel so much better when I can say "there is nothing wrong with this tree and I am not interested in killing it, I'm sure another company will have no problem".
 
[ QUOTE ]
I feel so much better when I can say "there is nothing wrong with this tree and I am not interested in killing it, I'm sure another company will have no problem".

[/ QUOTE ]

Treegazer, do you mind if I use that quote next time?
 
Perhaps defining what constitutes unnecessary tree removal?

Does it apply to commercial/state/federal removals the same as it does to private residential removals?

I'm not on this particular soapbox because I'm guilty as hell of slaughtering trees by the thousands in both categories.

Mostly federal naval housing removal and state road widening contracts etc. But plenty of private removal contracts involving hundreds of removals on one very large property, HOAs etc.

I see myself as a professional tree killer who respects the decisions of private property owners whether I agree with them or not. The same with state and federal authorities who make the decision to remove trees.

There was one Ocean Beach condominium complex that had a fair sized leaning lemon euc scheduled for removal in it. But three of the residents there were horrified about the tree's imminent demise that day to the point they chained themselves to its base that morning.

So I called the owner of the company I was subbing for, apprised him of the situation, and suggested a rather devious plan with him by phone to overcome the stand off once he arrived there in person.

I assured the two ladies and one man chained to the tree that we took there concern for the tree very seriously, and that the tree company owner along with the owner of the property and property manager would be arriving shortly to discuss their concerns about removing the tree, and what could be done to save it. But that the meeting could not take place in the open commons area, and would have to take place in the property manager's office if they wanted to save the tree rather than getting the cops involved and facing possible arrest.

I informed my 5 man crew of the plan in detail. So when the bosses arrived they unchained themselves, I made the introductions, and followed the group halfway to the manager's office before doubling back, cuing my ground crew to block all approaches to the common area, fired up my 365 Special, and dropped that lemon euc in short order.

I'm a paid tree assassin who completes each contract as long as the law allows me to.

On the other end though, there have been two occasions when scheduled removal contracts I'd been subbed to complete were stopped cold. Once by a very savvy lawyer in a luxury Mercedes working on behalf of a very wealthy client who lived on the hilltop above the worksite who did not care if the city of Bonita wanted to widen their road or not. And once by the news crews who acted on behalf of local residents who'd signed a petition to stop Scripps Hospital from removing a very old Torrey pine on their property. Both succeeded in stopping me from doing my job quite effectively, and to my knowledge all those trees are still living today.

I respect both the law and private property rights of folks.

jomoco
 
[ QUOTE ]
I assured the two ladies and one man chained to the tree that we took there concern for the tree very seriously, and that the tree company owner along with the owner of the property and property manager would be arriving shortly to discuss their concerns about removing the tree, and what could be done to save it. But that the meeting could not take place in the open commons area, and would have to take place in the property manager's office if they wanted to save the tree rather than getting the cops involved and facing possible arrest.

I informed my 5 man crew of the plan in detail. So when the bosses arrived they unchained themselves, I made the introductions, and followed the group halfway to the manager's office before doubling back, cuing my ground crew to block all approaches to the common area, fired up my 365 Special, and dropped that lemon euc in short order.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whether or not you actually lied to these people, which is semantics, this comes off to me like a douche move. Disingenuous at the very least. Seems like you're proud of it. "Paid tree assassin" sounds kind of pompous too. Just because it's not illegal doesn't make it the right thing to do. I think you know the difference.

-Tom
 
Nah, my tact would involve simply respecting someone else's desires when it comes to killing something potentially historical; something that can't be undone. Even if they seem radical. At the very least go through the process, THEN kill the tree, rather than sneaking back and doing it.

-Tom
 
Time is money in this biz Tom, and condo renters have no rights about Australian weeds plugging up the septic lines to the entire bldg being saved once the owner of that property makes the decision to remove it.

jomoco
 
Time is money - I agree

Condos are owned, last time I checked.

Invasive tree, definitely to be considered... The Norway Maple is actually in the Audubon guide to North American trees, as it is now considered 'naturalized.' Invasive is not a prime reason for removal.

Sewer lines were not mentioned, and even if they were, again, it is not a prime reason for removal, but certainly a factor to be considered, even though the sewer lines need to leak BEFORE the tree roots invade them.

In many communities, the property owner does not get to decide, because trees are actually an asset to the entire community, and one idiot's decision can f up more than his or her yard in many cases, as I'm sure you understand. Tree ordinances are generally a good thing in this unregulated industry of ours.

Again, consider all of these factors. Talk to the community, even if they are hysterical. Make an informed decision. Then kill the tree. That's how I roll.

-Tom
 
The owner of the property didn't make the decision to remove the admittedly beautiful euc just to be a douche. He was sick and tired of reeming that septic line out every year and listening to the complaints of the residents of that bldg when their toilets backed up. The folks chained to that tree lived in another bldg of course.

There were lots of condo renters in the 90's prior to the apt/condo conversion to ownership sea change that occurred in the early part of the 21st century.

Working for condo complexes, apt complexes and HOAs has always been a huge pain in the azz for as long as I've been in this biz.

I've no doubt you're far better and more adept at dealing with the goofy residents of those complexes than I am if it's any consolation to yu Tom.

I'm a paid tree killer, not a soap box drama public relations super star.

jomoco
 
You just have zero negotiation skills and like to take people's money, and you find myriad ways of justifying it, and your defense shield is disingenuous, back-handed compliments. Rock on, bro.
 
I've also wondered what the effects of systemic fungicides are on the soil environment. Trees are such an integral part of the soil ecosystem. A tree soaked in Alamo would seem to endanger a lot of life outside of the tree itself.

So often we introduce things into the environment with no idea what side effects we see down the road. The collapse of the vulture population in india caused be anti inflamatory medicine given to livestock (and humans). The case of DDT which drove species to extinction Ina matter of a few years. We pay the price eventually.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I've also wondered what the effects of systemic fungicides are on the soil environment. Trees are such an integral part of the soil ecosystem. A tree soaked in Alamo would seem to endanger a lot of life outside of the tree itself.


[/ QUOTE ]

Another good point, Kevin. Really it comes down to educating the client and deciding whether or not the information I provide them insulates me from the moral catch 22s. Does it?
 
Our "regulatory" agencies give these products a pass based on the research that the company developing the product has done. No independent verification is required. Studies are done on only the acute affects of the chemicals, not the chronic. The best science available lays the blame for CCD on systemic insecticides. The anecdotal evidence is that in European countries like France or Spain where these systemics have been banned, their bee populations have rebounded. Taxpayers are already taking the financial burden for these chemical companies blunders as our government has spent billions importing bees from other countries. We often forget how important bees are in our food supply, mostly we just think of the honey they give to us. We forget that without bees, agriculture mostly doesn't happen.
Just because we can develop something doesn't mean we should. Widespread use of chemicals and manipulation of plant and animal genetic code is a Pandora's box that we cannot begin to fathom the consequences of.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom