Trees

[grandwazo]

So, you have a Renovation Master Plan and it's beautiful.

The plan calls for "acres" of trees to be removed, with select "specimen" trees to be left throughout the golf course.  Even after removing the hundreds of trees you have targeted the course will still be considered to be tree lined and "parkland" in nature.

The "Tree Warden" for the town your golf course is located in lives on the 4th fairway of your course, and he loves trees, which is why he took the job and you've targeted that hole as one of the first holes you need to work on, especially the trees that line the left side of the hole directly in front of his house.

The town has specific regulations regulations regarding the cutting down of trees and you need a permit to take down trees that do not pose a safety risk to the community.

What do you do?

Has anyone faced this challenge or know of a course that has and what, if any, legal precedence may have been set that allows a club to pursue a course renovation that includes the wholesale removal of trees deemed in the best interest of the club by its members?

[cary lichtenstein]

Two possible solutions:

1. Hire a giant crew and find out when he goes on vacation.

2. Hire an aronist and burn his house down

[Patrick_Mucci]

Grandwazo,

I won't get into specifics, but, the answer is yes.

And, you don't start with the 4th hole, you finish with the 4th hole.

Call me and we'll discuss this.

[Craig Sweet]

The "tree warden" has jurisdiction over trees that are not on city property? Wow! That is messed up.

I can understand the TW being concerned about infested trees on private property and having some legal control there, but healthy trees on private property have a value (in the dollar and cents sense) and are yours.

[James Bennett]

Grandwazo

I am aware of a club in Melbourne who had a similar problem.  To cut a long story short, they developed detailed vegetation management plans, indicating the variety of different vegetation across the course (original vegetation), detailed tree inventories, commentary on why some introduced tree types should stay and others go, research on locally important (heritage) trees etc etc.  There were about three different reports on vegetation prepared, in addition to the Master Plan.  The Local Council gave them approval for a number of years to implement the Plan.  Without that approval, it was tedious progress, and the beauty that has been since emerged would still be hidden by non-native evergreens.

In Adelaide, our vegetation control is on trees with trunks at 1.5 metres from ground level greater than 2.5 metres in circumference (about 2 feet in diameter).  If we are doing 'the right thing' overall, we have been able to get approval to date.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Tree Ordinances, even for private property, are fairly common. Always have been, in terms of preferred trees to plant, etc.  In the last dozen years, many cities, thinking of developers who tear down trees to squeeze in more condos or more parking for a shopping center, have instituted 1:1 or more replacement plans for any tree removed.

While you can see the logic in that, restoring golf courses is a great example of why these type ordinances shouldn't be one size fits all. However, what beuarocrat would fight for a course to remove trees, knowing that he would be setting a precedent that a developer could cite for other tree removal.