[CANUFNET] Fate of elm tree on Parliament is decided

[Debra Huron]

Replying to both Michael and Heather,

Thank you for your comments and insights, Michael. It has occurred to those of us pressing for the tree's existence that the reason PSPC commissioned 3 reports in September was so it could get the conclusion it wanted, namely that the tree was too unhealthy to keep. I think it's called cherry-picking. The final report, by a dendrologist from Natural Resources Canada -- requested by PSPC on 24 hours notice and consisting of a short email to the official who requested the opinion -- was the most damning. The chair of the committee read that report at the start of the committee meeting. Its conclusion was the tree was unhealthy and “may not survive into the spring of 2019.” 

Regarding Heather's query about modifying or moving the staging area...you underlined your question, which points to your desire for an answer. Because I'm familiar with the site, I am willing to hazard a guess at the answer. The staging area PSPC has identified is elevated above the front lawn of parliament, on the east side of Centre Block. I understand that the deep excavation required for the Phase 2 Visitor Welcome Centre is to occur in front of Centre Block. To the north of the enclave where the elm is growing and that had various other trees (until March 26) is parking. This is sacrosanct. Never would anyone consider reducing parking on the hill. In fact, part of the discussion during hour 2 of the committee meeting on Tuesday focused on the fact that PSPC wishes to build major underground parking or a stacked parking garage somewhere on the precinct. I don't think officials at PSPC envision a future with fewer cars--only one with more and more cars.

My intention is to stop taking up so much space on this forum--from now on, I will reply personally to those who offer comments.

Before I do, I wish to share a final view, on the final point in Heather's missive. I'm referring to the statement must share my view that "... if this country does a good job of planning and building sustainably, other more recalcitrant parts of the world will take the cue." Given the scourge that exists with continued tar sands development (supported by this government), given its purchase of a pipeline that Kinder Morgan dared it to buy, and given that Canada's environment commissioner (part of the Office of the Auditor-General of Canada) has just issued an independent assessment  <https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/environment-commissioner-julie-gelfand-disturbing-climate-change-1.5081027>of the government's progress on climate action that offers it no passing grade, I'd say we are pretty much the most recalcitrant part of the world when it comes to acting decisively in a time of climate crisis. Nobody should take a cue from us. 


*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
*Debra Isabel Huron*
*Here I am...*
*living on unceded*
*Algonquin territory *
*living with the reality*
*of climate crisis*
*living with rivers & trees*
*& sun & lakes & birds*
*Phone: 613 859-8049 *
*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*


**

-------------------
> I think this tree is typical of so much that happens in the tree
> inspection world. Four reports from a 6 month period with differing
> observations and conclusion; not one seems to be able to identify the
> "sudden" decline.
> 
> There is no standard for tree inspections in Ontario so that might be
> blamed but surely those that are doing inspections need to understand when
> something more than visual is needed. DED and phloem necrosis could have
> been identified with some samples while soil tests would definitely have
> identified de-icing salt in the soil. Extent of the root system could
> have been identified with a number of methodologies. If you only use your
> eyes you can miss a lot of important information and you cannot assess the
> roots or soils.
> 
> Advanced assessment (meaning more than a limited visual assessment) of
> important trees is often needed and arborists need to start doing more
> than looking, identifying defects and making unrealistic and unfounded
> conclusions and recommendations.
> 
> Michael
> 
> 
> The Greenspace Alliance had
> > access to 4 tree reports on the elm conducted between May 2018 and end of
> > September 2018. We commented on those reports in a document sent to the
> > committee members
> > <http://greenspace-alliance.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Elm-condition-summary-v2.pdf>
> > on March 18. At the meeting on April 2, PSPC pulled 2 more reports out of
> > the hat. One of them was from 1995 and said the tree had 20 years to live.
> > That was 24 years ago, and the elm's continued existence seemed to make it
> > less credible. We were asking the committee to support a professional
> > assessment of the tree after leaf out in a month or two. We thought this
> > would be worth doing because we truly questioned the quality and value of
> > the 3 assessments done last September.
> >
> > *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
> > *Debra Isabel Huron*
> 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20190404/935614d4/attachment.html>