[CANUFNET] Woodland compensation/replacement

[Jeremy Gye]

With natural areas becoming more highly valued amongst urban residents in
our community (City of Victoria Master Plan Parks Survey), this is a timely
and intriguing discussion thread.  I think it is useful to make two
distinctions to further the discussion.
 
Firstly, are we discussing cases in which loss or damage has occurred under
permit or illegitimately (without a permit)?  With respect to tree loss,
often a replacement ratio is built into permit conditions, but less often
into claims for damage.
 
Secondly, Let's distinguish issues of compensation from issues of
restoration standards or prescriptions, even though these subjects are
closely related (as Julian notes).
 
Assuming we are discussing loss or damage from trespass or without permit,
and regardless of whether we are discussing loss of woodland or some other
type of natural area, we have at least one fairly straightforward method
available to us at for appraising compensation value.  This is the "Cost of
Cure" methodology set out in the 9th edition of the Guide for Plant
Appraisal.  This method essentially calculates the costs associated with
restoring the lost or damaged area to as close to its former condition as is
practically and reasonably possible.  If the claim for damages are brought
forward in a civil suit, the presiding judge may also elect to award
punitive damages and costs against the defendant, if the trespass is
particularly aggregious.  (Dunster, Julian A., and Susan Murray,
Arboriculture and the Law in Canada).
 
This still leaves the question of what a "reasonable and practical" standard
for restoration condition should consist of.  This is a technical question
requiring the input of a qualified professional and will vary from site to
site and depend upon the natural features, functions and use-values at stake
in the natural area affected.
 
One of the implications of this discussion is that its difficult to come up
with simple, repeatable formulas for compensation when dealing with natural
areas, particularly as we become more aware of the full range of values and
considerations at play.  From this perspective, the classification scheme
used in Chris' jurisdiction is intriguing as a means of simplifiying and
standardizing the evaluation of natural area value and condition, but
deserves scrutiny.
 
Respectfully,
 
Jeremy Gye
 
Gye and Associates - Urban Forestry Consultants Ltd
Victoria, BC
Tel: (250) 544-1700
Cell: (250) 883-4533
Fax: (250) 544-2059
 

  _____  

From: canufnet-bounces at list.web.net [mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net]
On Behalf Of Geri Poisson
Sent: March-11-09 1:31 PM
To: canufnet at list.web.net
Subject: [CANUFNET] Woodland compensation/replacement



I am working on developing policy for replacement/compensation of lost or
impacted natural areas.  

Does anyone have any experience or references on compensation ratios for
wooded areas.  I know it is a complicated and not very well developed field,
but I am trying to boil it down to something somewhat simplified, credible
and defensible to be implemented at a municipal level.

Thanks

Geri Poisson 
(705) 645-1050

 

Geri Poisson, B.A. Hon.

Terrestrial Ecologist

Beacon Environmental

29 Manitoba St., Suite 2

Bracebridge, ON

P1L 1S4

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20090313/04b323c1/attachment.htm>