All right Mega City!!!!

[rb_in_va]

And how many decisions people make about trees are informed ones based on common sense? How many more are based on fear and loathing, aided and abetted by tree "services" bent on selling removal?

Agree 100% with you on this Guy. I've seen many trees taken out because of fear that they will come down in a storm and hit their house, and it makes me sick.


Yard I was in yesterday had a maple stump. Tree once shaded his whole home. The owner told me he had it cut down because a tree "service" pointed out a bug and convinced him it was unsafe.


Sounds like the homeowner was fine with the tree till the treecudder told him it was a hazard. Guy, I agree with the principle of the law, but the execution of the law is often flawed, you know what I mean?

 

[Guy Meilleur]

Originally posted by rb_in_va
I agree with the principle of the law, but the execution of the law is often flawed, you know what I mean?

And I agree with the principle of tree owners determining their trees' fate after getting advice from professionals. But since most tree professionals know little more about trees other than removing them, the advice is bad and so is the outcome.

So the execution of the current program is worse than if govt gets involved. I can tell stories like ORclimber too, but the challenge is to educate the city staff which is easier done than educating every single tree owner.

 

[John Stewart]

They are hiring 7 New Bylaw Officers for this.
They only hire out of the university programs so most of them are well educated
And at $73 000.00 per year to be a pain in the arse you know there will be alot of people applying for the job so you will have to know some stuff!
Or someone
The only real issue I have with this is the only university program around here is a forestry degree
Any well versed Arborist will not have a chance!
The foresters around here stick together and try and control everything and only want Arborist's to do the work!
Oh Oh I feal a rant!!!!!! New post coming up
Later
John

 

[John Stewart]

Originally posted by rb_in_va
Frank,
Not exactly sure what your trying to say in your last post. All I can say is that I prefer that government stay out off my property. Be it a firearm or a tree, I will decide what to do with it. When politics come into play, common sense generally goes out da winder. JMO, later, Roger.

Not every tree has a owner that cares or understands tree issues!
So you can't compare the two and yes someone has to step in some where on tree issues and have the authority to back it up!
Later
John

 

[Gord]

in the greater vancouver area we have municipalities with little to no tree by-laws and two with strict by-laws similar to what toronto now has. in the most regulated municipality the fellows enforcing the restrictions and handing out permits are all arborists, mostly with proper experience in the field from years of hazard assessment and climbing. permits are also needed to prune trees larger than 75cm DBH. a property owner must have a good reason to remove a tree, leaves in the gutters does not work. on the whole the system works quite well and very few hacks step over the boundaries. and one thing i'm very certain of appreciate very much: the system prevents idiots from moving into a place and hiring joe hack to log of the 150' firs in his back yard so that he can have more light to suntan in.

 

[SilverBlue]

Reading up and I can see that Toronto council dropped the ball again and is going for another money grab. To. council should have followed Mississauga’s lead after council amended their bylaw after the public’s input. Tree companies should perhaps be regulated not the public.
http://www.city.toronto.on.ca/trees/bylaws_policies.htm

 

[Guy Meilleur]

Thank you Gord for that voice of experience. That helps confirm my opinion based on living there in 85 that you live in one of the most both civilized and natural places on the planet.:angel:

Can Toronto learn form that experience and hire actual tree people and not just U-trained foresters? Is there any way to break the death grip that U has on Toronto's hiring?

You and John S need to come up with a plan to try and change this, before John S blows from the pressure of frustration. It can blow your mind, I know. The U here does some good things but is an albatross on others.

 

[John Stewart]

Originally posted by SilverBlue
Reading up and I can see that Toronto council dropped the ball again and is going for another money grab. To. council should have followed Mississauga’s lead after council amended their bylaw after the public’s input. Tree companies should perhaps be regulated not the public.
http://www.city.toronto.on.ca/trees/bylaws_policies.htm

Hey Rob
What was the update in Missisauga?
Last I heard it was OK to remove anything as long as it didn't total 4 or more!
After that a permit is required.
I do agree on the cash grab thing but it is a start.
I would love to see tree companies and arborists regulated!
There would be alot of companies craping themselves including BIG GREEN
Later
John

 

[John Stewart]

Maybe I will get my Board Certified and add it to my 4 other certifactions
and apply for one of these tree cop jobs!
Then watch me blow because all those coupled with 16 years of field exp.
and a bus pass will get me down town !!!
Later
John

 

[glens]

If "they" ever try to pull any of that kind of crap around here, my place is for sale and I'm gone.  If it doesn't sell, I'm gone.  I won't put up with it.

7 × $73,000.00 (even Canadian ones) is a lot of dough.  Are the $100 permits going to pay for that colossal overhead?  It would require 5,110 permits just to cover the take-home pay.  What about the matched taxes, benefits, office expenses, supervisor's pay, etc.?

Stumper, I hope you include me in your list of names next time.

John, respectfully, you really need to take a step back and evaluate your position further.  It doesn't appear to be very well thought out.

Glen

 

[SilverBlue]

I could just see some underhanded scoundrels getting the job and living quite well off under the table "advances" Hey would it be the first time? Anyone who has delt with a city building inspector knows the score.

John when you coming out this way?

http://www.mississauga.ca/ecity/dow...ataName=data&mimeTypeName=mimeType&id=4200204

 

[John Stewart]

Hey Rob

Ya that is what I heard about Missisauga's By-Law!
Pretty easy to get around a no permit scenario just wait 2-3 years, 4 here 4 there and Badabing Bob's your uncle job's done!
I'll call you next week and maybe we can hook up for a brew!
Are you going to the tree climbing championship on Sept 18 in Bellville?
Later
John

 

[John Stewart]

Originally posted by glens
If "they" ever try to pull any of that kind of crap around here, my place is for sale and I'm gone.  If it doesn't sell, I'm gone.  I won't put up with it.

7 × $73,000.00 (even Canadian ones) is a lot of dough.  Are the $100 permits going to pay for that colossal overhead?  It would require 5,110 permits just to cover the take-home pay.  What about the matched taxes, benefits, office expenses, supervisor's pay, etc.?

Stumper, I hope you include me in your list of names next time.

John, respectfully, you really need to take a step back and evaluate your position further.  It doesn't appear to be very well thought out.

Glen

What do you mean Glen $73000 sounds pretty good to me and workin 5 days a week and home by 4!
SWEET!
Later
John

 

[glens]

Originally posted by John Stewart
What do you mean Glen $73000 sounds pretty good to me and workin 5 days a week and home by 4!
SWEET!

I'm not saying it wouldn't be sweet to <i>earn</i> the money with those hours.&nbsp; My point was about you thinking it's a good idea to have this bureaucratic overhead/interference/invasion.&nbsp; How is it going to be funded?&nbsp; Did you see how many $100 permits would be required?&nbsp; Say these 7 people each can inspect and issue permits for 4 trees a day.&nbsp; That's $2,800 &times; 5 &times; 50 weeks (no holidays) = $700,000.&nbsp; There's $511,000 required <i>just for the salaries</i> of these folks.&nbsp; That leaves $189,000 for all the other overhead, which I can just about guarantee won't even touch it (are all these officials driving their own vehicles with their own registration/insurance/upkeep for instance?)!

That's <b>7,000</b> permitted tree removals per year!&nbsp; Now I understand that fines are going to be imposed here and there, but still...

It might seem like a good idea for a few select people for a short while, but in the long run it will be an expensive burden on the citizenry, such as are typically quite difficult to remove once emplaced.

Glen

 

[Stumper]

Glen, Delighted to include you among the enlightened. (To all of my slightly Pink friends here. You are still my friends but I have to keep reminding you that what is yours IS yours and mine IS mine.-I wouldn't dream of letting anyone take your stuff without your permission. If you think that it is okay for someone to mess with my stuff you ARE dreaming.)

 

[Crofter]

So what is the alternative to having an inspection and permit system. I hear a lot of complaining about ill advised and unprofessional treecare. What will work in a city the size of Greater Toronto.

Perhaps a parallell situation with which I have experience is the licensing and inspection of all levels of workers and facilities in the auto repair industry in Canada. There is still backyard abuse and the system costs money to run but the public seems to generally get the protection and quality they need.

I have no question that there should also be some method of ensuring training and quality control of the tree care industry. I have also heard a lot of complaining about being controlled by regulations and losing your freedom to do what you want. Do you really think you can have it both ways?

 

[Stumper]

The free market.


How many of us here are facing decisions about expanding our businesses or raising our prices or limiting our customer base in some other way because our reputations have grown to the point we are busier than we want to be? That doesn't happen overnight but after a few years of quality work it happens.
Yes, I know that the average tree owner doesn't know what good tree care is. Yes I am aware that the average tree whacker won't give them good advice. The answer is not to enslave, rather imform the public. :angel:

 

[Guy Meilleur]

Originally posted by Stumper
The free market. The answer is not to enslave, rather imform the public. :angel:

I agree with this idea, but the free markets of ideas and of arboriculture have not transmitted much information. An adequately informed govt, like Gord talks about in Vancouver, can do a good job and make regulation work well.

The scenario of University forestry grads coming in and making arboricultural decisions for homeowners I agree is scary. If they have a closedminded knowitall attitude they can do harm. We had a city urban forester like that in our area and the effects on the urban forest were not good.

John S what are the requirements called for? Can you post the listing for these positions?

 

[Treeman14]

For those who want no one to interfere with their "right" to do as they please on their own property, Are you familiar with "The Tragedy of the Commons?"

 

[ORclimber]

The town of Lake Oswego is a small town and not really comparable to a big city in Canada. But... They used to require $7 tree removal permits, and a city forester looked at the trees. As of a year ago, they required a report filled out by a certified arborist. It was a 2 sided full page that rated the hazard of the tree, explained why it should be removed, and had to be signed by a CA. Imagine that would free them up to issue permits without having to look at every tree.