ethicsvstrees

[arboralliance]

Weeeell...

Under your rule all sting rays should now be murdered is this right or only the ugly ones or the ones we cant manage risk around because we are to concerened about having days off?


FYI: i fish saltwater all the time.. only have caught a few rays.. cow nosed ray up here, and southern ray,, down at my folks in south carolina...i get a ray, cut the line.. catch tons of skates,, same family as rays, look similar, no spikes.. take the hook out, and throw them back...

still don't know what stingrays have to do with this thread!!!!!!!

dog fish, now thats a different story.........

My point was just because one tree (or one branch) kills one person does this mean all trees need to be removed if they look dangerous...

One of our Australian living icons Steve Irwin died from a sting ray defending itself so i posed the question relating to this as an example...

 

[juststumps]

Your post had a lot fo right in it, but this is Wrong again. Arborist judges, owner decides. Tree care is not a "rip off". Mongering arborphobia takes away peoples' trees and a lot more of their money than arboriculture does.

After the risk of tree failure and the risk of that failure to people and property are assessed, ways of managing the risk must be discussed. The arborist describes for the owner all the reasonable ways of lowering that risk to a level that the owner is willing to accept. The answer may be as simple as removing a dead branch or reducing a sprawling limb. It is essential to consider the long-range effects of the complete removal of living limbs and trees. Pruning, cabling and other arboricultural treatments are not perfect or zero-maintenance solutions, but neither is removal.

Without the support provided by the missing tree or limb, adjacent trees and limbs will be on the “edge”, newly exposed to the forces of nature. Some of these forces are as subtle as sunshine, which can kill bark by scalding. The balance of the tree or grove will be altered, and they will react to stresses in new and possibly unanticipated ways. Removing large limbs also can result in the decay and failure of the parent branch or stem. Arborists sometimes automatically recommend removal in the hopes of protecting themselves from liability, but in fact, removal of trees and limbs can lead to an unanticipated increase in risk and liability.

tree, this was already all done before... 5 trees, all with clam shells growing up the trunk.. all have been dead wooded,,topped...they are messed up dying trees..customer didn't want to take them down...one failed, landed on the roof...i don't mind doing storm work,, but it really frosts my shorts,, when it could have been prevented...now the guy has a hole in his roof,,(that tree is cut down now) and four more screwed up trees next to his house...i'll bet you dollars to doughnuts,, when the insurance adjuster comes out to look at the damage... the other four trees come down,, or the policy will be revoked...

 

[arboralliance]

And...

tree, this was already all done before... 5 trees, all with clam shells growing up the trunk.. all have been dead wooded,,topped...they are messed up dying trees..customer didn't want to take them down...one failed, landed on the roof...i don't mind doing storm work,, but it really frosts my shorts,, when it could have been prevented...now the guy has a hole in his roof,,(that tree is cut down now) and four more screwed up trees next to his house...i'll bet you dollars to doughnuts,, when the insurance adjuster comes out to look at the damage... the other four trees come down,, or the policy will be revoked...

My clients have had relatives burried under some of their trees among other significant personal reasons to not want to remove the trees some have even built houses through and around the trees because of these same issues...

It's not all about time and money surely you guys know this?

 

[juststumps]

My point was just because one tree (or one branch) kills one person does this mean all trees need to be removed if they look dangerous...

One of our Australian living icons Steve Irwin died from a sting ray defending itself so i posed the question relating to this as an example...

1: who said anything about cutting all the trees down???

2: if i recall, you atacked me for not being to happy to go to work, on my day off!!!

3: this problem could have been avoided!!!!

4: i still don't get what the death of Steve Irwin, and stingrays , has to do with anything??????

5: you probably should refrain from using dead people,, to make your arguements... thats pretty low class... if you have a problem with me,,bring it on....leave the people , who are no longer with us alone... i'm sure they wouldn't like you using them in promoting your views!!!!

 

[woodchux]

I love doing storm damage cleanups.

 

[arboralliance]

1: who said anything about cutting all the trees down???

2: if i recall, you atacked me for not being to happy to go to work, on my day off!!!

3: this problem could have been avoided!!!!

4: i still don't get what the death of Steve Irwin, and stingrays , has to do with anything??????

5: you probably should refrain from using dead people,, to make your arguements... thats pretty low class... if you have a problem with me,,bring it on....leave the people , who are no longer with us alone... i'm sure they wouldn't like you using them in promoting your views!!!!

No-one said anything about cutting all the trees down the argument was made based on our having more importance over trees which is so wrong and phallic it ain’t funny from any friggin angle...

I simply and colourfully suggested you didn’t have to go to work on your day off, if you're feeling attacked its possibly common sense taping you on the shoulder, don’t run brother just turn and listen to it...Your mate then suggested I am completely stupid which is a personal attack...

I am talking about sting rays not dead people, the reference to R.I.P. Mr. Irwin was ONLY included for your clarification based on a significant recent event relating to the destruction of a defenseless being based on gross generalisations and fear run riot and the removal of something because it is ugly or old or possibly not sound or not safe...

My intent was not to bring a dead person into this it was to bring an analogy into this, but, as I should have guessed, because you guys have nothing to base your arguments on you are scratching at straws to attempt to discredit my argument...

Whether a stingray or a tree killed or hurt someone is not justification to cut it down or kill it, is the roof of the house hurtin' so bad the poor blokes trees all need to be cut down?

We had the same problem with sharks years ago here when some do gooder cruised around hunting sharks to near extinction because a couple of people had been hurt by them, the relationship between them and trees is obvious in my eyes i.e. someone gets hurt and some seeming do gooder proposes we cut down dangerous and ugly trees as a result of one tree hurting someone or someone’s poor wittle roof...

If you choose to take the mention of a dead person in attempting clarify your ignorance of highly publicized international events as me trying to make my arguments and being low class then you may (as I seem to be constantly reiterating) have to re-read and even have someone read it for you and explain what is actually being meant in my posts...

I don’t have a problem with any of you, I am simply saying that the language being used here is of gross generalisation and could be taken to mean you guys are only interested in removing trees and replanting more not on creating old character and significant trees that command respect and dignity as they gracefully and (in their own eyes and a meek few others) successfully, out live our stupidity... Hopefully this thread won’t turn into yet another case of, as Peter Ustinov put it so eloquently, there being no defense against stupidity…

 

[arboralliance]

Great!

I love doing storm damage cleanups.

Perahaps you could get together with juststumps and do some meditations with that line as your mantra?

 

[woodchux]

Don't take me wrong, I'm all for preservation...
I was just stating that I get a very satisfying feeling from getting a fallen tree off of a roof, Trimming out broken limbs etc...

 

[arboralliance]

No, I am agreeing...

Don't take me wrong, I'm all for preservation...
I was just stating that I get a very satisfying feeling from getting a fallen tree off of a roof, Trimming out broken limbs etc...

I understand I was just suggesting you might be able to help juststumps overcome his fear of that type of work...:hmm3grin2orange:

 

[Ekka]

Hey Jarrah, wow .... you must have had an huge stump to grind today. lolopcorn:

Any more takers?

I cut down a lot of palms ..... and love it. :hmm3grin2orange:

 

[Climb020]

Arbor trust me I love large, magestic tree. They are just amazing to see as well as being a part of caring for them. That is not what I am saying at all. I think this must be a little bit of a miss understanding. I worked with stumps and the customers pissed money away all the time. I am talking multi- millionaires with more money then they know what to do. My main working area is Princeton and if you don't know the area think of Princeton University. It is the most expensive college as well as one of the most prestigues ivy league school. So the area around it reflects it.

I think what would clear this up is pictures of tree that I myself and stumps are talking about.

Also arbor I did not mean to insult your intelligence but just wanted you to not read to much into it. Like I said a picture would clear this up very fast I am sure. As well I don't appreciate you way of refering to the knowledge that I have and have learned. I take great pride in my work. Tree work is not my job, it is my career with I try very hard to excel in which would be why I go to site like this. But I have seen you have have made the same mistake that many have before you that I am just some 22 year old punk that thinks he knows it all. Cause if I knew it all why would I be on some site like this waisting my time or interested in finding new books to improve myself as well as the trees that I care for. But I can do tree work better and know more about the care of trees then most average tree guys cause they just wanted there pay check and to hell with the tree or the property. And as in averge I don't mean anyone on this site because anyone who would take addition time out of there day to try to better themselves is better then average in most cases.

 

[juststumps]

My point was just because one tree (or one branch) kills one person does this mean all trees need to be removed if they look dangerous...

One of our Australian living icons Steve Irwin died from a sting ray defending itself so i posed the question relating to this as an example...

your post!!!!

 

[juststumps]

No-one said anything about cutting all the trees down the argument was made based on our having more importance over trees which is so wrong and phallic it ain’t funny from any friggin angle...

I simply and colourfully suggested you didn’t have to go to work on your day off, if you're feeling attacked its possibly common sense taping you on the shoulder, don’t run brother just turn and listen to it...Your mate then suggested I am completely stupid which is a personal attack...

I am talking about sting rays not dead people, the reference to R.I.P. Mr. Irwin was ONLY included for your clarification based on a significant recent event relating to the destruction of a defenseless being based on gross generalisations and fear run riot and the removal of something because it is ugly or old or possibly not sound or not safe...

My intent was not to bring a dead person into this it was to bring an analogy into this, but, as I should have guessed, because you guys have nothing to base your arguments on you are scratching at straws to attempt to discredit my argument...

Whether a stingray or a tree killed or hurt someone is not justification to cut it down or kill it, is the roof of the house hurtin' so bad the poor blokes trees all need to be cut down?

We had the same problem with sharks years ago here when some do gooder cruised around hunting sharks to near extinction because a couple of people had been hurt by them, the relationship between them and trees is obvious in my eyes i.e. someone gets hurt and some seeming do gooder proposes we cut down dangerous and ugly trees as a result of one tree hurting someone or someone’s poor wittle roof...

If you choose to take the mention of a dead person in attempting clarify your ignorance of highly publicized international events as me trying to make my arguments and being low class then you may (as I seem to be constantly reiterating) have to re-read and even have someone read it for you and explain what is actually being meant in my posts...

I don’t have a problem with any of you, I am simply saying that the language being used here is of gross generalisation and could be taken to mean you guys are only interested in removing trees and replanting more not on creating old character and significant trees that command respect and dignity as they gracefully and (in their own eyes and a meek few others) successfully, out live our stupidity... Hopefully this thread won’t turn into yet another case of, as Peter Ustinov put it so eloquently, there being no defense against stupidity…

your post again

 

[juststumps]

Originally Posted by arboralliance
My point was just because one tree (or one branch) kills one person does this mean all trees need to be removed if they look dangerous...


Originally Posted by arboralliance
No-one said anything about cutting all the trees down the argument was made based on our having more importance over trees which is so wrong and phallic it ain’t funny from any friggin angle...

My clients have had relatives burried under some of their trees among other significant personal reasons to not want to remove the trees some have even built houses through and around the trees because of these same issues...

It's not all about time and money surely you guys know this?

arbor read your posts...



arbor, nothing personal,,, but i think i trump trees right now.. i kinda feel i'm a little more important than a tree.. as far as cutting trees that are a hazzard,, i'm all for it....as per your posts, i guess you cherish trees over human life....

i guess great grand dad,, wouldn't mind his great grand son planted next to him, because,, you were to worried about the tree, that was over the family plot,, and someone got killed.. thank god the tree is still there... junior is dead, but the tree made it!!!!

and arbor, it is about time and money,, unless your independantly wealthy,, unlike the majority of us... this is how i make my living...

and i still don't get the Steve Irwin and stingray thing...

 

[treeseer]

The tree owner defines what is a hazard, and decides what to do with the tree. not the guy with the saw, or the guy with the pen.

 

[Ekka]

The tree owner defines what is a hazard, and decides what to do with the tree. not the guy with the saw, or the guy with the pen.

Guy, I think I know what you mean so I'll help you out, you must have had a gin or three ....


I think the arborist is best skilled for identifying the hazard and deciding what to do with the tree .... optioned obviously. Then the customer accepts what type of risk they can live with and what options to take suiting their level of tolerance to risk..

In some instances people have zero tolerance of risk and will cut down the healthiest and most stable trees. But if there's no VPO there's little that you can do, some-one will cut the tree down.

I wouldn't be the first person to hear "but if it fell it would hit the house" whilst that is possible it very well may not be probable. Hence lots of trees cut down regardless of what you say.

Then you have a bunch of meticulous people who dont want leaves and debri.

Then you have people who have to spend $20,000 on underpinning their house because they're on clay base and some tree has sucked the living daylights out of the ground like a vampire bat on Britney Spears neck.

Then you have the drainage, mains, underground utilities and sewer blocker trees that need to be sorted. In fact just a few weeks ago across the road we had a burst watermain directly under an African Tulip Tree. To do the works and repair the geyser the tree was cut down and the stump excavated... by the way, the home-owner planted these undesirable trees but the council had to foot the bill for the busted pipe and tree removal.

Then you have the unacceptable failing risk where the tree must go .... but in cases like that sometimes the customer forgoes their right to choose as they may be treehuggers till death do us part, or Mr Scrooge and not willing to pay ... in cases like this the council may issue a notice of enforcement.

And then you have the weed species that need eradication.

These are just some examples and I'm sure there's plenty of others.

 

[jefflovstrom]

Sounds like it may be time to go into business for yourself. From there you can educate your clients on the proper way to trim/prune/height reduction, etc.

You may as well suck the $$$ out of a clients pocket because it you don't, someone else will. It also may as well be someone who educates the client in the process.

You embaress me!
Jeff Lovstrom

 

[jefflovstrom]

I will wait a day or two to reply again, but that attitude is wrong! What kinda person you must be! Hopefully someone will come along and TEACH THEM!- why not you? You embaress me!
Jeff Lovstrom
ISA#WE7624A
ISA Cert. Treeworker#wc449