[CANUFNET] recent boundary tree decision

Wed Jun 5 09:51:38 EDT 2013

For Iola and anyone else,

It seems the attachments can't be accessed through the list messages, but if you google: "Hartley vs Cunningham et al. Ruling 2013" the first few links will give you everything you need.

Caroline

-----Original Message-----
From: CANUFNET [mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net] On Behalf Of canufnet-request at list.web.net
Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 9:34 AM
To: canufnet at list.web.net
Subject: CANUFNET Digest, Vol 101, Issue 3

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: CANUFNET Digest, Vol 101,     Issue 1 recent tree decision
      (Iola Price)
   2. Re: recent boundary tree decision in Ontario      Superior        Court
      (John Grindon)
   3. Re: recent boundary tree decision in Ontario      Superior        Court
      (Shields, Peter)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 12:27:44 -0400
From: "Iola Price" <iolaprice at comnet.ca>
To: <canufnet at list.web.net>
Subject: Re: [CANUFNET] CANUFNET Digest, Vol 101,       Issue 1 recent tree
        decision
Message-ID: <00d601ce6140$7160e5e0$5422b1a0$@ca>
Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"

Could we have a link or more information on how to read this decision and the documents mentioned in Lorraine Johnson's email Thanks  Iola Price

-----Original Message-----
From: CANUFNET [mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net] On Behalf Of canufnet-request at list.web.net
Sent: June 3, 2013 10:10 PM
To: canufnet at list.web.net
Subject: CANUFNET Digest, Vol 101, Issue 1

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. recent boundary tree decision in Ontario Superior Court
      (Lorraine Johnson)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2013 16:52:58 -0400
From: "Lorraine Johnson" <ljohnson at interlog.com>
To: <canufnet at list.web.net>
Subject: [CANUFNET] recent boundary tree decision in Ontario Superior
        Court
Message-ID: <000901ce609c$54b44cb0$fe1ce610$@interlog.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hi,

You might be interested in this recent Ontario Superior Court decision regarding a boundary tree in Toronto. Also attached is a press release from two of the people involved in the case.

I plan to write an article about this for Ground: Landscape Architect Quarterly and would very much like to hear from anyone with comments on the decision. Please feel free to get in touch with me off-list.

Cheers,

Lorraine Johnson

Writer, and editor of Ground

ljohnson at interlog.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20130603/46711037/attach
ment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Hartley vs Cunningham et al. Ruling 2013.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 254141 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20130603/46711037/attach
ment.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Land Mark Tree Ruling Final Press Release 05- 21-13.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 50842 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20130603/46711037/attach
ment-0001.pdf>

End of CANUFNET Digest, Vol 101, Issue 1
****************************************

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 11:42:10 -0700
From: John Grindon <John_Grindon at brinkman.ca>
To: Canadian Urban Forest Network <canufnet at list.web.net>
Subject: Re: [CANUFNET] recent boundary tree decision in Ontario
        Superior        Court
Message-ID: <1442BFE8ACFD834AA1705C2AC2ACE88E7A3185AA6B at sirius>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"

Huge win for lovers of oxygen in urban environments. What we need now is protection below the ground as well!

John Grindon
Urban Restoration Manager
Brinkman & Associates Reforestation Ltd
778-229-3599
www.brinkmanforest.com

________________________________
From: CANUFNET [canufnet-bounces at list.web.net] On Behalf Of Lr.rainville.consulting [lr.rainville.consulting at gmail.com]
Sent: June-03-13 7:28 PM
To: Canadian Urban Forest Network
Cc: <canufnet at list.web.net>
Subject: Re: [CANUFNET] recent boundary tree decision in Ontario Superior Court

Thanks for sharing this...this is a great win for the protection of our urban forest!

Luc Rainville
L&R Rainville Consulting
ISA Certified Arborist AUM
1629 11th Avenue SW, unit #B
Calgary, Alberta T3C 0N3
403-702-6648

Sent from my iPhone / Envoy? de mon iPhone

It's Ok to print this email. Paper comes from a biodegradable, recyclable, renewable resource - trees. Making forest products from sustainably managed forests results in jobs for thousands of people, clean air, clean water, wildlife habitat and carbon storage.

"If wildness can stop being (just) out there and start being (also) in here, if it can start being as humane as it is natural, then perhaps we can get on with the unending task of struggling to live rightly in the world?not just in the garden, not just in the wilderness, but in the home that encompasses them both." (Cronon, 1995)

?Introduced plants, animals, and pathogens often pose an initially hidden but eventually monumental problem...Their harmful effects are often subtle and surreptitious, but the eventual impacts on the economy or natural environment are no less real, and [are] often disastrous and even irreversible.? (Daniel Simberloff, 1996)

Le 2013-06-03 ? 14:52, "Lorraine Johnson" <ljohnson at interlog.com<mailto:ljohnson at interlog.com>> a ?crit :

Hi,

You might be interested in this recent Ontario Superior Court decision regarding a boundary tree in Toronto. Also attached is a press release from two of the people involved in the case.

I plan to write an article about this for Ground: Landscape Architect Quarterly and would very much like to hear from anyone with comments on the decision. Please feel free to get in touch with me off-list.

Cheers,
Lorraine Johnson
Writer, and editor of Ground
ljohnson at interlog.com<mailto:ljohnson at interlog.com>
<Hartley vs Cunningham et al. Ruling 2013.pdf> <Land Mark Tree Ruling Final Press Release 05- 21-13.pdf>

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 12:37:01 -0400
From: "Shields, Peter" <Peter.Shields at davey.com>
To: Canadian Urban Forest Network <canufnet at list.web.net>
Subject: Re: [CANUFNET] recent boundary tree decision in Ontario
        Superior        Court
Message-ID:
        <5791F76A0B4BD04D80CF23DE72E7CAD51F052C9B13 at KEX2K7MBX.ad.davey-tree.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"

Great call Oliver!
It seems that sometimes the requirements set upon the consultants and arborists are not consistent throughout the City and obviously with other municipalities; and may lead to more legal dilemmas, especially coming to reasonable preservation and compensation.  This one points to Norway maple, and some arborist and stakeholders view of the species.  It is a tree and has no place near a natural ravine, but despite that, it is a heck of a good city tree (in the right place of course) and the varieties are also vast and great.
I am glad of the ruling, I have defending a long list of clients where construction is impacting their trees (completely on their property) and without a reasonable or proper plan, and their projects are pushed through.  Then a simple little tree issue with perhaps some minimal injury, and the list of demands put forth are just out of this world. (some lists are good but some are not) I agree, Toronto needs to tighten up with a few definitions and become a little more consistent across the board.
Cheers,

Peter Shields
Senior Consulting Arborist
ISA Board Certified Master Arborist ON-0570B, ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified OMNR Butternut Health Assessor #252, Forest Technician, ASCA member O - (905) 274-8300  C - (647) 465-4901 www.davey.com/services/davey-resource-group/<http://www.davey.com/services/davey-resource-group/>
http://www.davey.com/services/urban-forestry/tree-preservation/arborist-reports-and-tree-preservation-plans-in-canada.aspx
Trees Were Just the Beginning <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnAennw1JUs>
[cid:image001.jpg at 01CE611F.B6B97150]

From: CANUFNET [mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net] On Behalf Of Oliver Reichl
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2013 10:56 AM
To: Canadian Urban Forest Network
Subject: Re: [CANUFNET] recent boundary tree decision in Ontario Superior Court

Thanks for posting this.
Toronto needs to tighten up its definition of "arborist" in the private tree by-law. Most municipalities require specific credentials and don't accept reports from just any "person with other similar qualifications". It seems to me that Hartley should never have gotten her removal permit in the first place, regardless of the whole property line issue.

Oliver K. Reichl, B.E.S.(Hons)
Consulting Arborist-Ecologist
ISA Certified Arborist #ON-1178A
Tel: 613-923-8833
Web: www.oliverkilian.com/treecare<http://www.oliverkilian.com/treecare>

On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Lorraine Johnson <ljohnson at interlog.com<mailto:ljohnson at interlog.com>> wrote:
Hi,
You might be interested in this recent Ontario Superior Court decision regarding a boundary tree in Toronto. Also attached is a press release from two of the people involved in the case.
I plan to write an article about this for Ground: Landscape Architect Quarterly and would very much like to hear from anyone with comments on the decision. Please feel free to get in touch with me off-list.
Cheers,
Lorraine Johnson
Writer, and editor of Ground
ljohnson at interlog.com<mailto:ljohnson at interlog.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20130604/8b959864/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 9065 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20130604/8b959864/attachment.jpg>

End of CANUFNET Digest, Vol 101, Issue 3
****************************************

________________________________

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the County of Dufferin. Finally, the recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses. The County of Dufferin accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.

The Corporation of the County of Dufferin, 55 Zina Street, Orangeville, Ontario.

www.dufferincounty.ca