Comments on: Lewis Ginter’s new blog tackles urban tree issues

By: North Richmond News » It takes a village to save a tree - Richmond, Virginia

Tue, 25 Nov 2008 00:10:53 +0000

[...] the fate of the stately willow oak in North Side tagged by the city for removal remains murky, two local residents have swung into action with [...]

By: john roberts

john roberts — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 22:59:10 +0000

I do not think this tree should go.

It looks healthy, It is providing shade, summer cooooling, and acorns for wildlife, and branches for birds and squirrels.

It is also beautiful, and well over 75 years old.

I have become very discouraged about our urban forestry div. Last year when I contacted them about the volcano mulching on Brook, they denied knowning anyting about it even though Brook is only a few streets away from their offices.

To date, nothing has been done about the volcano mulching.

Enough is enough! We citizens must stand up for our trees!

John Roberts

By: tvnewsbadge

tvnewsbadge — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 23:10:18 +0000

” The City or its contractors are responsible for inspecting roads and utilities, and there is staff in place to measure trees.”
Actually, that’s mis-leading. The city tree people themselves have told me that they lack the staff to do the job assigned them.
I asked for a city tree in my front yard ( branches of which are almost over the roof of my house ) to be looked at back in 2006… they told me not to expect any action until 2008.

Now they tell me that they don’t WHEN they can get to it.

I don’t have dog in this hunt, but please, let’s tell it like it really IS.

TvNB

By: Guy Meilleur

Guy Meilleur — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 13:50:07 +0000

Thank you Frank for your thoughtful and compelling words on trees and risk. I agree that the City needs to integrate tree management into its overall tree risk management policy.

The City does not tear out street lights when the bulbs burn out.

The City does not close roads when potholes form.

The City does not shut off water, gas and other utilities because leakage is a potential risk.

The City manages all these risks without denying citizens the benefits of all this gray infrastructure. Other cities manage their trees, their green infrastructure, in a proactive manner. They preserve their life-enhancing tree canopy. Richmond can too.

“Basically, if a tree is compromised – in this case by maturity, a full canopy and the weight of an abundant acorn crop – it becomes a hazard. And, even if treated, should it fall and do property damage or kill someone, the City clearly has a problem. The tree needed to go because of risk management.”

I don’t know where this information came from, but there are inaccuracies:

1. A “hazard” tree is one that is identified as needing management to reduce risk, just as streetlights, roads and utilities need management to reduce risk. Sometimes removal is the best solution, often other options–pruning, cabling, etc.– are more reasonable.

2. The City or its contractors are responsible for inspecting roads and utilities, and there is staff in place to measure trees.

3. The tree on Seminary is not gone yet. It will be assessed by an independent professional tree risk manager from outside the area tomorrow, Tuesday, at 9 a.m. If anyone is curious about how tree risk is systematically assessed, they are welcome to attend.

The assessment will also be reviewed during the Tree Stewards class at 6:30 p.m., held at the roundhouse in Byrd Park that evening.