[CANUFNET] CANUFNET Digest, Vol 61, Issue 16
BGeerts at brantford.ca
BGeerts at brantford.ca
Thu Jan 28 10:48:05 EST 2010
The previous point about inspecting trees prior to installation is very
important. It also gives you a chance to look at root quality.
Our planting contract documents reference the Canadian Standards for
Nursery Stock; the trees must conform to all stated requirements for the
type of plant material. This document considers species & natural form,
as well as health, vigour, appropriate physical proportions that trees to
which supplied trees should conform. It has some shortcomings, but the
latest edition has fairly reasonable requirements.
For those unfamiliar with the document, you can get it here:
http://www.canadanursery.com/Page.asp?PageID=924&ContentID=841
________________________
Brian Geerts
ISA Certified Arborist
Urban Forestry Technician
City of Brantford
Parks & Recreation Department
1 Sherwood Drive
Brantford, ON N3T 1N3
519.756.1500 x5511
Fax 519.756.4893
bgeerts at brantford.ca
canufnet-request at list.web.net
Sent by: canufnet-bounces at list.web.net
01/28/2010 10:33 AM
Please respond to
canufnet at list.web.net
To
canufnet at list.web.net
cc
Subject
CANUFNET Digest, Vol 61, Issue 16
Send CANUFNET mailing list submissions to
canufnet at list.web.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://list.web.net/lists/listinfo/canufnet
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
canufnet-request at list.web.net
You can reach the person managing the list at
canufnet-owner at list.web.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of CANUFNET digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Healthy tree definition (Ian Wilson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 07:05:43 -0800
From: "Ian Wilson" <IWilson at kelowna.ca>
Subject: Re: [CANUFNET] Healthy tree definition
To: "Canadian Urban Forest Network" <canufnet at list.web.net>
Message-ID:
<63C8F69A3250564AAAEE162EF144217F1E471FE4 at kelexchange.city.kelowna.bc.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi all,
I suggest that instead of focusing on the tree health at final
inspection, that you change your contracts to state that all trees must
be inspected and approved by city staff prior to planting. Ideally you
could go to the nursery with your contractor and pick out the trees you
want. It can be difficult to get the contractor to make any changes at
final inspection.
Another approach is to pick out and buy the trees yourself; you supply
the trees to the landscaping contractor to ensure quality. Having a
good quality tree to start with doesn't guarantee that it will still be
healthy by the time you have final inspection, but it should help.
Ian Wilson
City of Kelowna
From: canufnet-bounces at list.web.net
[mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net] On Behalf Of For Trees
Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 9:46 PM
To: 'Canadian Urban Forest Network'
Subject: Re: [CANUFNET] Healthy tree definition
With regard to Travis' comments, it seems to me that this wording leaves
it completely open to whatever subjective interpretation your
inspectors may have on any particular day, with no recourse whatsoever
for the contractors or nurseries that have their trees rejected. You
are basically saying that a tree must conform to your standards,
whatever they may be, right or wrong.
In point of fact, trees are not normally high headed, and must be pruned
that way in the nursery. Such pruning is clearly detrimental to the
health of the tree, and in most cases, stunts the growth, reduces taper
and trunk strength, and invites disease and poor compartmentalization,
which can lead to trunk cracks, sunscald and several other defects that
I can think of. This is all well researched and documented in Alex
Shigo's book 'A New Tree Biology" 1989 and in "Modern Arboriculture."
1990. Other researchers such as Gilman have since written excellent
books on the topic of pruning and pruning trees for urban areas in the
nursery, which have been universally accepted by most of the rest of
North America and the world.
And what of trees that do not normally have a central leader in the
Edmonton area? Trees like Green Ash, Mayday, Schubert, Amur Cherry and
Ornamental Crabapples very rarely possess a "single dominant, well
developed leader." I can only imagine that very few otherwise healthy
trees of these varieties survive your inspection process!
Even if any particular Urban Forestry department actually knew what a
"healthy tree" was and could specify this in a way that was "not open to
interpretation", there is no guarantee that picking a tree simply on the
basis of "good" form will guarantee future good health, especially in a
place where trees are notoriously difficult to grow, such as the Western
Prairies. Planting methods are the single biggest factor influencing the
success of a tree. And while you are perfectly right not to accept a
tree with obvious signs of abuse such as scrapes and broken branches, we
continue to plant the healthiest of trees in the worst of places and
blame the tree when it dies. Trees need room to grow both above and
below the ground to sustain themselves, and usually have neither in most
Urban Areas in the world today.
Fixating on a tree's form, especially when the form is entirely
unnatural to the species or variety, certainly should never be
considered the only attribute of potential good health!
We obviously need to rethink the whole notion of "tree health" when
Urban Areas are still in the design process. I believe it is possible
to shape cities to conform to nature, but nature cannot be retrofitted
to fit our cities, if our cities are to be sustainable.
Food for thought.
Gerard Fournier
Board Certified Master Arborist #PR-0130BT
Tree Canada Community Advisor-Southern Alberta
President
For Trees Company Ltd.
1-877-390-TREE (Alberta toll-free)
http://www.fortrees.ca <http://www.fortrees.ca/>
From: canufnet-bounces at list.web.net
[mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net] On Behalf Of Travis Kennedy
Sent: January-27-10 4:17 PM
To: 'Canadian Urban Forest Network'
Subject: Re: [CANUFNET] Healthy tree definition
Our Design and Construction standards touch briefly on "healthy" but add
a number of other quality measurements to reinforce our intent:
Refer to section 02930 2.2 and 2.3 in Volume 5
<http://www.edmonton.ca/city_government/documents/PermitsLicences/D_and_
C_landscapsng.pdf> : City of Edmonton Design and Construction
Standards.
A design review comment that we like to make on submitted drawings from
developers usually contains some or all of the wording below (this
particular case is in reference to deciduous blvd. material):
"All trees to be high headed and exhibit a full and uniform crown, with
a single dominant, well developed leader. Trees with broken or damaged
or missing leaders will not be accepted. All plant material must conform
to the City of Edmonton Design and Construction Standards."
This comment in combination with the standard helps prevent confusion
about what is and isn't acceptable during our CCC / FAC inspection
process.
Regards,
Travis Kennedy, BSc, AIT
River Valley, Forestry and Environmental Services
12304 - 107 Street
Edmonton, Alberta
T5J 2R7
p 780 496 4954
-----Original Message-----
From: canufnet-bounces at list.web.net
[mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net] On Behalf Of Kowalyk, Bohdan
(MNR)
Sent: Monday, January 25, 2010 7:05 PM
To: Canadian Urban Forest Network
Subject: Re: [CANUFNET] Healthy tree definition
There are various tree classification systems depending
on
intent. For some purposes, it may be appropriate to require
confirmation by a qualified person, subject to an authority's approval,
that a healthy tree is not likely to degrade in health and functional
attributes for at least the next 15 years.
Bohdan
________________________________
From: canufnet-bounces at list.web.net
[mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net] On Behalf Of
SVescio at thunderbay.ca
Sent: Monday, January 25, 2010 1:02 PM
To: canufnet at list.web.net
Subject: [CANUFNET] (no subject)
Hello out there,
Is there an accepted or standard definition for the term
"healthy tree"? We would like to revise the wording for acceptable
condition of trees at final inspection and do not want the health of a
tree open to general interpretation. Thanks.
Shelley Vescio RPF
City of Thunder Bay
(807) 625-2473
(807) 625-3258 (fax)
The information transmitted by electronic communication
is
intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may
contain confidential and/or privileged material. The sender does not
waive any related rights or obligations. Any review, re-transmission,
dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon
this information, by persons or entities other than the intended
recipient, is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact
the sender and delete the material from any computer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://list.web.net/archives/canufnet/attachments/20100128/0dd48d4a/attachment.htm
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 9489 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <
http://list.web.net/archives/canufnet/attachments/20100128/0dd48d4a/attachment.jpeg
>
End of CANUFNET Digest, Vol 61, Issue 16
****************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20100128/465bca3f/attachment.htm>
More information about the CANUFNET
mailing list