City Trees and Customer Complaints

[CLMB HIGH]

I have been in the business for around three years now and since then I look up where ever I go. I notice the amount of deadwood in trees throughout the city in city trees and get a little irritated when I see tree equipment just sitting in the city lot for weeks on end.

I notice my customer's all want work done on their city trees and yet whenever we try to assist them in pruning the trees back from their homes or doing PHC work on them we always run into the same problem.

The city warden or one of the cities representatives come out and try and stop our work. We have even been reported to the pesticide board for "improper Mauget technique" because we injected an ill city tree. After the board we were cleared of any whrong doing and yet we still have politics following our company. I guess when you live in a city like Boston there are bound to be politics.

To my question for discussion.

Do we in the tree industry feel it should be the customer's right to have city trees cared for by professional tree companies if they see fit?

At what point should our cities sub-contract out the work and/or do your cities do this?

What avenues would you suggest to get the right person to hear these complaints? What departments?

 

[OTG BOSTON]

There are many different ways trees are cared for in the City of Boston. I could go on for days about the nuances. I will more directly address the situation you bring up because I would guess that is really what is going on here.

All public trees in Massachusetts are protected by Ch. 87 of the Mass. General Laws. As tree warden it is my job to enforce the regulations under Ch. 87. Basically if a tree in the city is to be pruned or removed it must be reviewed by myself or a member of my staff. If a homeowner would like to have a city tree pruned or injected or whatever by a private contractor they must contact my office (most legit tree companies and certified arborists are aware of the laws and comply)

Your company was contacted by the pesticide board after the THIRD city tree I saw that had been injected by your company. I think a three strike policy is more than fair. Furthermore it was impossible to get a hold of anyone in a position of authority at your company, all I got in response was excuses from a secretary. If leaving mauget caps in a public tree for weeks at a time is proper practice, I will eat my mauget manual.

I am not the tree police, I don't go looking for trouble, and take no pleasure in reporting tree companies to the pesticide bureau. I like to resolve conflict like a gentleman and always conduct myself as such. If you have any further questions please feel free to contact the Parks department.

Hope this helps.

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

If leaving mauget caps in a public tree for weeks at a time is proper practice, I will eat my mauget manual.

In WI there would be a fine if it were pesticide, being that they are in a place where chidren and pets can get at them. With WDNR rules, it can be interpreted that one cannot leave mauget caps unattended.

In Milwaukee I will prune trees for paying customers if they ask, it is not a big deal. The only problem I've had is with union proud workers complaining I'm taking their work. Mostly I will just be doing clearance work, because the city responds quickly to hazard complaints.

A number of years ago they did smoke tests on the sewers by a family friends house (Little Old Lady) and the smoke went up through the trunk of the very large sugar maple by here drive and out a hole in the main branch union.

She expressed concern to the city workers who said it was ok. I thumped it, shined a light down the huge cavity and had her call forestry to say that an arborist said it has rootrot, a large column of decay and is a hazard tree.

It was down the next week.

 

[OTG BOSTON]

In WI there would be a fine if it were pesticide, being that they are in a place where chidren and pets can get at them. With WDNR rules, it can be interpreted that one cannot leave mauget caps unattended.

In Milwaukee I will prune trees for paying customers if they ask, it is not a big deal. The only problem I've had is with union proud workers complaining I'm taking their work. Mostly I will just be doing clearance work, because the city responds quickly to hazard complaints.

A number of years ago they did smoke tests on the sewers by a family friends house (Little Old Lady) and the smoke went up through the trunk of the very large sugar maple by here drive and out a hole in the main branch union.

She expressed concern to the city workers who said it was ok. I thumped it, shined a light down the huge cavity and had her call forestry to say that an arborist said it has rootrot, a large column of decay and is a hazard tree.

It was down the next week.

It sounds like you live in a place with a good forestry program. I've spent the last five years getting mine to a high level of response, and still have to deal with BS from companies trying to make the fast buck.

I could have fined them, but its not really my style. I just document offenses and report to the proper authorities. In five years I have handed out a grand total of two fines, maybe I need to follow the letter of the law more closely.

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

I could have fined them, but its not really my style. I just document offenses and report to the proper authorities. In five years I have handed out a grand total of two fines, maybe I need to follow the letter of the law more closely.

The fine would have come from the state, who regulate comercial pesticide use.

For city work, Milwaukee is one of the best. There are still practices that I shake my heard at.

You can regularly see people from MKE DoF in the Journal of Arboriculture. (What did they change the neame to?)

 

[OTG BOSTON]

They may have been fined by the state. I could also have imposed fines from the city.

As far as strange practices go, I bet all cities have their share. Sometimes a butt log will be left standing for a while after a storm event or whatever. It is amazing to me how many people will call and request that we "prune" their tree like the butt log!!!

 

[BostonBull]

I dont see what all the arguing is about. Would we be having this same conversation if a child or someones dog came by and got some chemicals on them, then licked them off or touched their mouths with that part of their body, and died?

 

[moss]

I have been in the business for around three years now and since then I look up where ever I go. I notice the amount of deadwood in trees throughout the city in city trees and get a little irritated when I see tree equipment just sitting in the city lot for weeks on end.

Hmmm... So I wonder how many trees there are on city property in Boston? I can't imagine it would be possible for city arborists to stay on top of the situation in the same way that a private company can for their customer's trees. It's a no contest.

Also, thank God that every dead branch isn't trimmed out of every tree on public land in Boston. I love the Arnold Arboretum but their diligent staff has cleaned up the trees and grounds there so well that they've unintentionally suppressed nesting and feeding habitat and cover for wildlife.
-moss

 

[M.D. Vaden]

The problems that city workers involved with tree care face, include the problem that governments are not in a position to bend rules or make any mistakes.

Businesses are granted that freedom to operate into the area of "gentlemens handshake" and succeed if they are wise about it.

I've worked for the City of Portland, OR, park bureau, the State of Oregon as horticulturist at the Oregon Health Sciences University, and two terms as board member for the Oregon Landscape Contractors Board.

Every time I was in a goverment job or position, the limitations of governing were amazingly mollasses-like. Due process is slowed to a snail crawl by structure and the amount of paperwork.

That doesn't mean that the city work is bad (although I've seen huge problems with safety or crews working just three and a half hours a day via long breaks and lunches). It's just innefficient, because final decisions and responsibility are transferred to people or boards, that lack a real understanding of tree care, and who are primarily immune from consequences for their decisions.

Competent Arborists and contractors get spanked early, therefore perform quite well, remembering the lesson and avoiding consequences and back-lash.

Boards, and some city administration, are not in a position for the same kind of spanking and backlash when their decisions cause problems at-large in the city.

By the way, on the subject of fines, if every legitimate business is not allowed by a city to evade it's business license fee, should a city allow violaters to evade fines; a source of income and getting attention?

 

[moss]

Do we in the tree industry feel it should be the customer's right to have city trees cared for by professional tree companies if they see fit?

Sounds like a recipe for disaster. If all of your customers wanted you to perform fine pruning and do what it takes to keep a city tree healthy then the city might welcome that.

My impression from living in my Boston neighborhood for 20 years is that most city residents want trees worked on for the following reasons (I'm not talking about tree failure jobs):

1. The tree is dropping too many leaves and sticks on my car and in my yard (the "trees are dirty" theory).

2. Squirrels are jumping off the tree to my roof, please cut it down. Don't you know? Squirrels are evil incarnate, they chew wires and steal babies in the middle of the night.

3. Radically prune or cut the tree down I'm having trouble getting the perfect lawn.

As far as I can tell the only reason that 90% of the trees on private land in Boston haven't been cut down is because:
a. people can't do it themselves (they try)
b. people won't spend the money to have a professional do it, innate cheapness has saved many, many trees from being cut down

Sounds like your company needs to sit down with the city arborist staff and discuss a more cooperative scenario. Right?
-moss

 

[Dadatwins]

To my question for discussion.

Do we in the tree industry feel it should be the customer's right to have city trees cared for by professional tree companies if they see fit?

I believe if the tree in the city right of way, then it is the cities responsibility to maintain the tree since they probably planted it. If a city tree falls on a car or pedestrian the city will have to foot the bill. Of course this opens pages of discussion about pruning cycles and proper maintenance and what is a dead tree and so on, but for this discussion and answer to this quote the answer is no, the customer has no rights to the cities trees in my opinion with regard to pruning or removing. If the city has a permit process in place and grants a permit to a licensed and qualified company to do work AFTER it has been inspected by the city and approved that is fine. It would be Chaos if homeowners could just call tree companies and request tree work.

 

[lync]

NYC Trees

In NYC we have to get a permit and pay a fee to work on city trees. Pruning and fertilization are the only care we are allowed to provide. On rare occasion we will do a removal on a two years dead tree, if the client can get someone from the parks department to verify that it is really dead. All permit costs are the responsibility of the client, who is usually the homeowner/businessman where the tree is located. Some "block associations" will foot the bill for all the trees on a particular block.
There are so many trees throuout the city that the parks department could not possibly manage them all, and they know it. Getting a permit is really no problem.

Corey

 

[M.D. Vaden]

I will immediately paypal you $15, if you post his company's name here. What a maroon.

Mike, your comment brought a thought to mind that bypassed me earlier.

If that was the third tree, were there two notices beforehand, or was nothing said about the previous two trees?

If notification or fines were issued - if it was a violation - then that would be action.

If two tree related pesticide matters were tossed by the way-side, that brings a couple of more questions to mind.

 

[SRT-Tech]

the city shuts people down quickly becasue the unions freak out that their jobs are being taken away....

case in point: last fall a bunch of fallen leaves plugged the storm drain and my patio flooded (ground floor). I went outside with a shovel and moved the leaves. City Crew dorve by, slammed on the brakes and the big burly boys yelled at me.....demanding to know who authorized me to do leave clearing work.....:deadhorse:

its the same with trees.....

 

[Canyon Angler]

City Crew dorve by, slammed on the brakes and the big burly boys yelled at me.....demanding to know who authorized me to do leave clearing work...

Thank GOD for the bureaucrats and politicians who save all us Little People from Unauthorized Leaf Clearing!

Not to get into a debate over the merits of leaving mauget caps unattended in trees, but Jeezis H. Keeripes I think you'd have more trouble setting up a bucket truck in Boston or some of these other Bureaucracy Cities than you would on Dzerzhinsky Square!

Sheesh. "Tree Warden." Where are the "Bureaucrat Wardens"? Where's my .308?

 

[treeseer]

Canyon I don't know why you are confusing leaf workers who yell (you should have gotten their names) with tree wardens. Trees are essential infrastructure in cities, and valuable city property, so it only makes sense to manage their maintenance, just like lights and roads. YOu should stick your .308 where the sun does not shine. no, I really mean perhaps you could rethink that statement. :angel:

MD I agree that OTG was too nice a guy, letting the first two cases slide. But it must be a tough job to balance. Maybe next time error on the side of the trees rather than slacking off on contractor slack.

In Raleigh you are supposed to get a permit to prune any city tree, but that is not strongly enforced. I'm fine with doing that; it is not hard, the city foresters are reasonable professionals, and it opens up a channel of communication with them. Clmbhigh, if you want city work, that would be the route to follow--first prove yourself as a professional.

JPS, how hollow was that sugar maple? Did you as a consultant just foment crazy panic?:hmm3grin2orange:

Good thread. moss's observation on cleaning trees = stealing habitat deserves a thread of its own.

 

[jonseredbred]

where did the author of this thread go? why no response to his own thread?

 

[jbw]

down here in chas. i have pruned city trees but only after getting permission from the city tree warden. he is a fellow certified arborist who is aware of which company performs proper tree care. maintaining contact with him through networking and at area seminars allows him to know that your company is current and conscientious. now a phone call, an address and documentation on the treatment for his records is the procedure.

i have reported to dhec and dnr concerning mauget capsules left in trees. both the imicide and fert. company was fined. some of the trees were in protected wet lands as well as street side.

-in between evolution-

 

[diltree]

the city shuts people down quickly because the unions freak out that their jobs are being taken away....

case in point: last fall a bunch of fallen leaves plugged the storm drain and my patio flooded (ground floor). I went outside with a shovel and moved the leaves. City Crew dorve by, slammed on the brakes and the big burly boys yelled at me.....demanding to know who authorized me to do leave clearing work.....:deadhorse:

its the same with trees.....

This is true in the city of Worcester MA, where the forestry department no longer contracts any of the work load out to bid mainly because of the union......but is not the case in Boston MA, where they have a full time forestry department, yet a large portion of the tree maintenance and removal is put out to bid every couple years.


www.dillontree.com

 

[jmack]

I have been in the business for around three years now and since then I look up where ever I go. I notice the amount of deadwood in trees throughout the city in city trees and get a little irritated when I see tree equipment just sitting in the city lot for weeks on end.

I notice my cusotmer's all want work done on their city trees and yet whenever we try to assist them in pruning the trees back from their homes or doing PHC work on them we always run into the same problem.

The city warden or one of the cities representatives come out and try and stop our work. We have even been reported to the pesticide board for "improper Mauget technique" because we injected an ill city tree. After the board we were cleared of any whrong doing and yet we still have politics following our company. I guess when you live in a city like Boston there are bound to be politics.

To my question for discussion.

Do we in the tree industry feel it should be the customer's right to have city trees cared for by professional tree companies if they see fit?

At what point should our cities sub-contract out the work and/or do your cities do this?

What avenues would you suggest to get the right person to hear these complaints? What departments?

you have been lucky ya might get served