All right Mega City!!!!

[John Stewart]

Well we got some good news today!
A few years back Toronto emalgimated all the cities in it's area.
It is called the GTA or Mega City now.
It was going to improve infastructure and lower taxes and all that jazz!
Instead it improved it's own revenue and that is about all!
As you can tell I for one don't like it and not to many people that I talk to do.
But today I support it because as of May 1/05 we will have a tree bylaw across the GTA
Old Toronto had a 6" and over no removal bylaw without permit!
This includes front and backyards, private or commercial.
It is the best thing we have in this area
Well now it is every where in the GTA
Nothing can be removed without the permit.
All species are involved no excemptions.
Hazard trees will be excempt once the city deems them as such!
This is going to stop alot of hacks in the area because no permit no job
I am very happy about this step forward!
It is not perfect but it is a start
It will make quoting a lot easier because there is no explaining why I wont remove a tree and then they go find some one who will.
Some of the local MPP are pissed and say it is an invasion of privacy and we should not be able to tell home owners what they can do with their own trees and property!
Well, cry me a river

Later
John

 

[John Stewart]

Oh ya it will cost $100.00 for the permit if it is granted!
More revenue and they say it is about are greenscape or lack of it!
I don't really care what their reasoning is!!!!!

Later
John

 

[MasterBlaster]

We need that around here!

 

[John Stewart]

I thought you southern boy's were light years ahead of us when it came to tree bylaws?
Or is that more in regards to being certified arborist/tree worker?
Later
John

 

[MasterBlaster]

Originally posted by John Stewart
I thought you southern boy's were light years ahead of us when it came to tree bylaws?
Or is that more in regards to being certified arborist/tree worker?
Later
John

If anything, it's just the opposite.

 

[rb_in_va]

Originally posted by RockyJSquirrel
I'm sure they will do just as good of a job as they've done with health care and gun control.

Do you mean to say that gun control doesn't reduce crime? And it just creates problems for law abiding citizens who want to protect their families? Hmm...

 

[John Stewart]

Ya thanks for trying to bring me down Rocky!
But not today it is a start and we have been needing this start for along time!
Up hill for sure, impossible maybe but you got to start some where!
And dam your pretty well read for a good ol boy on our nothern policies
Later
John

 

[John Stewart]

Originally posted by rb_in_va
Do you mean to say that gun control doesn't reduce crime? And it just creates problems for law abiding citizens who want to protect their families? Hmm...

OH OH Bleeding Heart 12 o clock !

 

[OutOnaLimb]

We arnt that bad here in Colorado Springs and Denver, but you have to be liscensed to remove anything over 25 ft. And if the city forester sees a dead tree on your property you have to remove it or be fined. Which is cool because the city guy give the home owner a list of all the liscensed tree guys.

Kenn

 

[John Stewart]

Originally posted by OutOnaLimb
We arnt that bad here in Colorado Springs and Denver, but you have to be liscensed to remove anything over 25 ft. And if the city forester sees a dead tree on your property you have to remove it or be fined. Which is cool because the city guy give the home owner a list of all the liscensed tree guys.

Kenn

Now that's a sweet gig!

 

[NeTree]

Rocky, I agree.

Rb, I agree.

I'd like to see an insurance company step forward with an incentive to the homeowner to remove hazard trees. After all, the attitude around here is "F-it, when it goes I'll let the insurance pay for it." So, instead of a simple $800 removal say, it's an $800 removal and $4000 in damages to the house.

Know what I mean?

Furthering that, why not some assistance with keeping trees from becoming hazards?

 

[NeTree]

I hear ya Mike, but they're spending sh!tloads of money now on preventable claims anyways... seems like it would be in their interest to pre-empt at least SOME of them.

 

[NeTree]

Or...

A discount to people who have their trees regularly inspected/maintained?

Kinda like the 5% we get on our auto policies for having an anti-theft system...

 

[Guy Meilleur]

THanks for the news about toronto area; sounds like a great start. It is too bad tree issues are so bad that govt had to step in. You're way ahead of my allegedly civilized capital/college area.

Most of rocky's points have validity; still, tree regulation has made for net improvement in most places it's been done.

A discount to people who have their trees regularly inspected/maintained is a great idea that would save money and lives. More communication with the insurance and inspection field may make that work.

 

[Stumper]

Have you ever noticed that telling people what to do with their own property for their own and the community's good seems 'reasonable' until it is you and your property that some bureaucrat is stopping from a utilization which you KNOW is noone else's business but yours?
Rocky, r_b and Erik get it. The good intentions don't matter. The good results (if and when they actually occur) don't matter either. Tyranny stinks. We can't have freedom without responsibility. If people make bad decisions they will suffer the consequences. I may also get hit with fallout from those decisions. So be it. I accept that because I WILL NOT relinquish my right to decide for myself.:blob5:

 

[Crofter]

restrictive laws

Stumper;
Because people obviously will so decide what they choose is apropriate, we search their pockets before the get on the airplane with other people.
When we lived far enough apart, total self determination was OK: We have now propogated ouselves to the point where we can no longer enjoy that freedom. We have "one size fits all" laws because it is too cumbersome and costly to review every case by itself. It will only get worse as we continue to join the dots on the map. What is the alternative; have the neighbors get their guns out to settle tree cutting / trimming disputes on a grand scale? Probably the bureaucratic answer to that will be " take away their guns too". No, I think the kind of freedom there used to be is gone! All we can do is lament. If you try to regain the old freedom, they will lock you up! Lol!

 

[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.

 

[Guy Meilleur]

Originally posted by rb_in_va
When politics come into play, common sense generally goes out da winder.

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?

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.

Where was the common sense in that operation?

 

[Crofter]

Just pointing out that if you go very far in the way of making your own decisions (flaunting the law) you will get jugged! It sucks, but society sanctioned restrictions to personal liberty are growing. Barring wishful thinking, is their any alternative as our population growth around most urban areas packs us tighter and tighter together. Don't get me wrong, I dearly love my self determination too. That is why I choose to live far from the city.
The more people you crowd onto the life raft, the less allowable is any self determination.

 

[ORclimber]

I'm all for protecting trees that are an assett to the community if they are on public right of way. Have seen some questionable trees protected by overzealous city arborists and it's frustrating. Going to take 2 dead limbs out of declining 30" white oak next week that was recently buried under 4' of fill and pavement. Someone thought a treewell leaving a foot around the trunk was a good idea on an already declining tree. What a waste of $. Have to wait until it dies to knock it down, probably next summer. Have a client with a scrubby 12" tree that drops limbs every winter over a sidewalk. It's on city right of way and the city arborist told her she couldn't remove it. Even though she is more than willing to replant another tree. Her husband is some sort of urban planner, they are tree huggers. Blanket rules protecting trees are silly, because every urban tree should be evaluated individually.

Hope it works better in there, than it does here.