Anecdotal evidence.doesnt change the statistics
Would these tall trees beside my house concern you?
- Thread starter CanadaTreeRoger
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
I've had more than that
watched one fall last week during a microburst/tornado thing we had at work, easy money job right across from the job I was doing, doesn't change the fact that basically theres a zero % chance of a tree falling on your house, not zero but near zero
One of my favorite classes in college was statistics. One of the problems involved a traffic study. I recreated it as an example.
I'm living off of one of the most notorious intersections in Denver CO right now, Parker rd. and Quincy Ave. Anecdotally, I hear sirens 3-4 times a day. At 2-3 cars on average per accident, that's call it on average 10 cars a day involved in an accident PER DAY, some involving injuries, and yes, some even fatal. Best avoid that death trap, wouldn't you say?
And yet, I just looked up the numbers, and on average 100,000 cars pass through that intersection per day. So 99,990 passed through without incident, 99.99% of them. Now, if my brother in law had been in 2 accidents there, anecdotally and emotionally I would definitely be less inclined to pass through that intersection... but based on statistics it would be ridiculous to close the intersection based on the numbers.
From a statistics standpoint, we have to include risk factors. Of the 10 cars involved in the accidents, we can make a reasonable extrapolation that 5 of them were at fault in some way. Those we can call the at risk drivers. Now, looking at the volume of traffic, we can suppose that, being generous, there were another 90 close calls that didn't result in a crash, for a total of 100 incidents per day, just to make the math easy. So 99,900 cars made it through the intersection without incident, or 99.9 percent.
If we carry out this analogy to trees, and honestly after cleaning up several hurricanes and countless storms and wind events I think the numbers aren't far off, 99% or so of trees will be just fine, and the 1% are generally high risk trees, whether through age, disease, isolation, or some other mitigating risk factor. The proximity to a structure shouldn't be the only factor considered. Anecdotally it sucks when it happens, but statistically it shouldn't be the only factor during risk assessment. Using that logic, statistically Houston should be a prairie, and yet, probably one of the most heavily wooded metro areas in the nation.
I'm living off of one of the most notorious intersections in Denver CO right now, Parker rd. and Quincy Ave. Anecdotally, I hear sirens 3-4 times a day. At 2-3 cars on average per accident, that's call it on average 10 cars a day involved in an accident PER DAY, some involving injuries, and yes, some even fatal. Best avoid that death trap, wouldn't you say?
And yet, I just looked up the numbers, and on average 100,000 cars pass through that intersection per day. So 99,990 passed through without incident, 99.99% of them. Now, if my brother in law had been in 2 accidents there, anecdotally and emotionally I would definitely be less inclined to pass through that intersection... but based on statistics it would be ridiculous to close the intersection based on the numbers.
From a statistics standpoint, we have to include risk factors. Of the 10 cars involved in the accidents, we can make a reasonable extrapolation that 5 of them were at fault in some way. Those we can call the at risk drivers. Now, looking at the volume of traffic, we can suppose that, being generous, there were another 90 close calls that didn't result in a crash, for a total of 100 incidents per day, just to make the math easy. So 99,900 cars made it through the intersection without incident, or 99.9 percent.
If we carry out this analogy to trees, and honestly after cleaning up several hurricanes and countless storms and wind events I think the numbers aren't far off, 99% or so of trees will be just fine, and the 1% are generally high risk trees, whether through age, disease, isolation, or some other mitigating risk factor. The proximity to a structure shouldn't be the only factor considered. Anecdotally it sucks when it happens, but statistically it shouldn't be the only factor during risk assessment. Using that logic, statistically Houston should be a prairie, and yet, probably one of the most heavily wooded metro areas in the nation.
I haver really tall maples and popular close to the house and the maples overhang the house but I never worry about them falling. If they did, I carry homeowners insurance to cover any damage up to and including total replacement.
about 67% of the drivers were impaired, i.e. the tree had some obviously visible defect or weakness.
And All of this bantering doesn't matter. IF the OP is uncomfortable about those trees, take them down. If you have to replant, go with a species that has a habit that is less likely to tower over your house in your intended lifespan.
I swear, we would bicker over what color our keyboards should be!
Mine are both black...
If you cut all the trees near a house down because they might fall under some set of circumstances, how is one supposed to have their house shaded by trees?
The idea of creating or pre-determining liability by sending someone a letter stating that if something happens then they are responsible is asinine. It just doesn’t work that way, as much as clever laypeople would like to think it does. And I say that with the benefit of nineteen years of being an attorney.
The idea of creating or pre-determining liability by sending someone a letter stating that if something happens then they are responsible is asinine. It just doesn’t work that way, as much as clever laypeople would like to think it does. And I say that with the benefit of nineteen years of being an attorney.
So is mine, but I was trained on off white, and this is just wrong, I don't like it, and i want to go back to the way it was 40 years ago!
So There!
You are right, of course, unless you take that to a very large amount of decimal places. Some trees have never fallen yet.
I guess I'm just a keyboard revolutionary. Mine is black until I turn on the computer. Then it comes to life!
I have a multi-color backlit keyboard. All those bright keys of many colors help keep me typing in the right area without looking at it too much. When I need to track down a function button or figure out where my fingers drifted off to, having all the keys sorted by color zones speeds me up.
I even set it to prevent the cap-lock from locking. I'm a bit sloppy with that left little finger.
Yeah, it took a little bit of time getting the keys configured that way, too.
Oh for Pete's sake.
It takes all kinds I guess.
My son bought a Pinkway chain saw from Amazon.... I'm so .... Proud. Yeah, that's the word I was looking for.
It takes all kinds I guess.
My son bought a Pinkway chain saw from Amazon.... I'm so .... Proud. Yeah, that's the word I was looking for.
This one?
I have a mechanical keyboard, which allows me to remove the keycaps and switches without even turning off my PC
I yanked out my capslock, dis-assembled the switch, and swapped the spring for a ballpoint pen clicker spring, now instead of a normal button press its effectively like clicking 25+ keys at once, when I bump it, its basically like my pinky finger slamming into a wall, no capslock for me unless I REALLY mean to!
Naw, looks similar to this one, but the number on the side indicates 63cc. He said it will bother him less to leave it in the bed of his truck and have it stolen than if he leaves his MS261 in the cab and they bust a window out and steal that...
Attachments
Pudsy
ArboristSite Member
On topic: Not arguing for or against removing any trees based on the current risk, but as opposed to removing these, did you ever consider planting more trees "in front" of this row (in the direction the prevailing winds blow), so as to use the new trees as a "windscreen" for the existing trees. That would take away a lot of the wind pressure (and hence the risk) away from the discussed trees, while doing something extra for nature/ecology as opposed to destroying things....
