[CANUFNET] Boundary Trees

[Bohdan Kowalyk]

>From my reading of the case, the court seemed to be siding with a common
sense approach rather than promoting a single way of treating all leaning
trees if that is what the problem is.

Bohdan Kowalyk


<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
Virus-free.www.avg.com
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 10:19 AM Julian Dunster via CANUFNET <
canufnet at list.web.net> wrote:

> Hartley was an unfortunate decision as it clarified nothing of use and
> created a mess. The rest of Canada has largely ignored it in bylaws and
> case law. The rest of the world typically works with the base of the tree
> and the boundary line.
>
> The messiness of Hartley and the silliness that results from it, is
> illustrated in Trees and The Law in Canada.
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
> On Behalf of Dunster and Associates Environmental Consultants Ltd.
>
>
>
>
>
> Dr. Julian A Dunster R.P.F., R.P.P.., M.C.I.P., ISA Certified Arborist,
> ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist # 378,
> ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified
> Honourary Life Member ISA + PNWISA
> www.dunster.ca		www.treelaw.info		North American distributor for Rinntech www.rinntech.info
>
> On Wed/2/21/2024 12:52 PM, Alison Bond via CANUFNET wrote:
>
> Hello Canufnet:
>
>
>
> We’ve provided advice to our clients in the past about what would
> constitute a boundary tree in Ontario, based on the Hartley vs. Cunningham
> case (2013.)  It seems that most municipalities use this interpretation
> (i.e., if any portion of the trunk up to the first branch crosses a
> vertical projection of the property boundary, then it is a boundary tree.)
>
>
>
> As it has been more than 10 years since that case, I am wondering whether
> this has been successfully challenged or whether this is still the accepted
> definition?  I am asking mainly to ensure that we are giving our clients
> correct information.
>
>
>
> Thank you.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Alison
>
>
>
> Alison Bond *BSc MSc BLA OALA CSLA*
>
> *Landscape Architect and Certified Arborist*
>
>
>
> *ENVISION-TATHAM Inc.*
>
> 115 Sandford Fleming Drive, Suite 200, Collingwood, ON  L9Y 5A6
>
> abond at envision-tatham.com I Tel: 705.445.0422 <7054450422> I Fax:
> 705.444.2327 <7054442327> I Cell: 705.994.2059 <7059942059> I
> www.envision-tatham.com
>
> This email may contain confidential and/or privileged information for the
> sole use of the intended recipient. Any review or distribution by others is
> strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please
> contact the sender and delete all copies.
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20240223/e9fe5e08/attachment.htm>