Ecolog:
I know I won't convince "Me" that while public safety concerns about falling
trees (and dropping branches) might sometimes be exaggerated, the truth is
that trees do fall and break and people die from it, and it is only prudent
to get the dangerous ones down before they fall down. "Me's" point is also
irrational, on this basis, and using straw-man arguments does not advance
the issue, it only adds an emotional component. He knows damned well I did
not imply that every tree that falls is going to kill someone; thankfully,
even in heavily-used areas such deaths are somewhat rare, but that does not
mean that dangerous trees should not be removed. Talk to the families of the
victims and tell them you stopped the tree that killed their loved one from
being removed. In my area, a public protest prevented a severely leaning
large tree that showed clear signs of root failure opposite the direction of
the lean from being removed. Those people should have to face the families
of the victims, but "God" will be blamed, as usual. What poppycock!
WT
PS: I have lost one friend to a falling tree, almost another, and several
people have been killed over the years in my community by falling trees and
branches. While running a tree survey strip when I was in the Forest
Service, I was narrowly missed by a big widowmaker, and I saw a logger's
body being carried out with his flattened hard hat where his head used to
be. A widowmaker. That's how frequently falling branches kill people in the
forest--there's even been a name for them for years.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Me" <[email protected]>
To: "Wayne Tyson" <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2013 8:20 PM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Tree stump removal in sensitive area
Omg. The moment it falls, someone is in the perfect position to be fatally
injured. That's the reason there is a war on trees in the Washington DC
area. There is this unreasonable perception that something that looms over
us is out to kill us. Parks here have trees near paths cut for the same
irrational fear. Yet you can go to other states like NY or ME and find that
there is no such rampant tree culling. There is a distorted perception of
risk to me versus averaged risk to populations.
Geoff Patton
Wheaton, MD
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 19, 2013, at 12:23 PM, Wayne Tyson <[email protected]> wrote:
Good idea in the wild, but in a place where there are lots of people, one
has to think of what it hits when it falls after the roots rot
enough--it's just fine until that instant when the last bit of rot or
burrowing rodent or whatever cuts the last bit of dead tissue--and BAM!
Somebody's dead. Drawing birds and other creatures into the urban context
is wonderful, but I worry about the populations of predators like domestic
and feral cats and the lack of understory for laddering fledglings up off
the ground when they make their first hard landing. Context is everything.
WT
----- Original Message ----- From: "eann" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2013 7:02 AM
Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Tree stump removal in sensitive area
Rather than worry about stump removal, why not cut the tree off higher up
and leave it for cavity birds?
Ann
~*~ ~*~ ~*~ ~*~ ~*~ ~*~ ~*~
E. Ann Poole, NH-CWS
Poole Ecological Consultancy
PO Box 890, 741 Beard Rd
Hillsborough, NH 03244
(603)478-1178
[email protected]
www.eannpoole.com
~*~ ~*~ ~*~ ~*~ ~*~ ~*~ ~*~
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1430 / Virus Database: 2639/5543 - Release Date: 01/19/13
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1430 / Virus Database: 2639/5543 - Release Date: 01/19/13
