[CANUFNET] Tangible Capital Asset Registry - Reporting Trees andUrban Forest Assets

Fri Mar 21 08:30:28 EDT 2008

We do indeed need collaborative advocacy among Urban Foresters in
Canada...every time we try to get that going it starts and then fades away
again...this really should be a prime initiative for Tree Canada and topic
at the CUFC. Is there any of this type of discussion planned at this years
CUFC ie Canada specific discussion towards solutions to Canadian problems.
The Canadian Forest Strategy does not seem to be doing squat for us!!

Cheers

Philip van Wassenaer
Urban Forest Innovations
Mississauga, Ontario

  _____  

From: canufnet-bounces at list.web.net [mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net]
On Behalf Of Ward, Greg
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 1:04 PM
To: Canadian Urban Forest Network
Subject: [CANUFNET] Tangible Capital Asset Registry - Reporting Trees
andUrban Forest Assets

Hi Russell,
    The City of Surrey is (or has) built their TCAR, and trees are not
included in the registry.  

    Our Parks Division rep to the initiative made such a case to include
trees, however, it was deemed that trees do not fit the accounting criteria
at this time.  See the attached for some background, or google 'capital
asset inventory trees' and there is explanation from the Municipal Finance
Officer's Association of Canada in a newsletter.

    Interestingly, in the newsletter  they do state that where trees are
planted as a barrier, to serve a similar benefit or service as a masonry
wall or fence, that they would aggregately be considered a capital asset.
The discussion in the newsletter also seems to reveal there is room for
discussion on the point of including or excluding trees.  It seems that the
decision-makers, accountants, don't fully understand the services and
benefits that individual trees provide.  

    I think that if it is important to have trees included (perhaps a
question that first needs addressing) there needs to be collaborative
advocacy from urban foresters.  Perhaps a resolution at the upcoming
Canadian Urban Forest conference would be appropriate?

Greg Ward 
Manager, Urban Forestry and Environmental Programs 
City of Surrey, B.C. 
604 501 5170 

'Nature matters, 
protect, enhance, enjoy' 

-----Original Message-----
From: canufnet-bounces at list.web.net [mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net]On
Behalf Of Friesen, Russell
Sent: March 14, 2008 3:41 PM
To: Canadian Urban Forest Network
Subject: [CANUFNET] Tangible Capital Asset Registry - Reporting Trees
andUrban Forest Assets

Tangible Capital Asset Registries are topic that has great implications for
municipal forestry operations across the country, but I am pretty sure most
CANUFNET subscribers have probably never even heard of it.  Around 2005, the
Public Sector Accounting Board (PSAB) recommended that governments including
municipalities report "Tangible Capital Assets" (TCA) on their balance
sheets. In Alberta, this recommendation became law and is now a legislative
requirement commencing Jan. 1 2009. The Province of Ontario also appears to
have similar requirements, and many municipalities in that jurisdiction are
well on their way to reporting TCA. 

Unfortunately, there does not appear to be a standard practice or consensus
on how to report trees.  The advice given by the PSAB isn't specific and
opinion from other sources is contradictory, ranging from don't report the
value of trees, to report the value of trees that were planted with a
purpose (like visual screening), to report the value trees as if they were
converted to pulp wood.

Most municipalities involved in building TCA registries have hired
consultants to aid with the developing the reporting process. In some cases
the same consultants have been hired by several municipalities, but for
ethical reasons the consultants can't share what one municipality is doing
with another municipality.  All this results in a dearth of guidance and
information about how to report trees and the urban forest in a Tangible
Capital Asset Registry.  

Therefore, I think that it is important for municipal foresters to share
with each other what they know about TCA registries, what their TCA will
report, how their reporting policy is worded and how they are going to
track, collect and manage their asset reporting in subsequent years. . 

So now for my questions. 

Which other municipalities are in the process of building their TCA?
How are you planning on reporting trees? 
Have you tried to make the case that tree appreciate in value rather than
depreciate? ... and how did that go?    
Are you using historic costs of acquisition (planting) for your starting
point and depreciating from there? 
Are you reporting individual trees or lumping trees into a general average
land improvement value?  
What is your useful lifespan for a tree? 
How are you taking into account vintages?    
And my final question, does anybody - anywhere, understand this? 

Thank You 
Russell Friesen
Urban Forestry Coordinator 
City of Calgary Parks  

NOTICE -
This communication is intended ONLY for the use of the person or entity
named above and may contain information that is confidential or legally
privileged. If you are not the intended recipient named above or a person
responsible for delivering messages or communications to the intended
recipient, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that any use, distribution, or copying of
this communication or any of the information contained in it is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify
us immediately by telephone and then destroy or delete this communication,
or return it to us by mail if requested by us. The City of Calgary thanks
you for your attention and co-operation.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20080321/124d4145/attachment.htm>