October 2010
Monthly Archive
October 21, 2010
As we’re sure you know, Municipal Election Day — Monday, October 25 — is less than a week away. GUFF sent a questionnaire to each of the candidates, and asked them to reply by Monday, October 18.
Not all have answered, but we hope you will take a look at the responses before you cast your vote. You might also consider why a candidate might fail to respond to questions about how they value our trees. You can see samples of some of the comments below.
The names of the candidates who responded are highlighted. If you click on the name, you will see the responses of that candidate.
Candidates who responded to the questions were:
Mayor: Scott L. Nightingale
Ward 1: Bob Bell, Karolyne Pickett, Gary Walton, Linda Murphy
Ward 3: Craig Chamberlain, Mark Enchin
Ward 4: Cam Guthrie, Mike Salisbury
Ward 5: Leanne Piper
Candidates who did not answer the questions but sent in general comments were: Karen Farbridge, Ian Findlay, Karl Wettstein and David Birtwistle.
We hope candidates’ answers will help voters understand their views on funding for initiatives to maintain our urban forest and to educate the public on the many benefits of trees.
There is also excellent information for voters on issues such as growth, trees, taxes and development, etc. at:
www.voteguelph.ca
www.royalcityrag.ca
www.guelphcivicleague.ca
Sample responses:
“I will support requiring the evaluation of the ecological value of trees that developers (whether private or the municipality itself) are proposing to remove”
“How far in your pocket or in your backyard do you want your City Council?”
“New developments and infrastructure replacement should be designed and built with shade as a mandatory requirement.”
“I tend to lean more towards property rights of the individual than for government interfering with trees on that person’s property.”
“We need to add protection for trees as part of our building permit process.”
“Our public trees are assets and long term investments.”
October 19, 2010
Dear Candidate:
Guelph Urban Forest Friends is a local group that advocates for better protection of urban trees and canopy. We make delegations to City Council, hold events to raise awareness about the importance of urban trees, and distribute information about the many benefits of trees, and the threats to trees, through our web site.
We have serious concerns about the continued loss of mature trees in our City and hear frequently from upset residents about tree removals. We are submitting these questions to candidates for City Council and respectfully request your response by October 18. The responses we receive will be posted on our web site and e-mailed to our list of 500 supporters.
For further information, please check our website (www.guffguelph.ca) or contact us. Thank you for your response. GUFF
Craig Chamberlain – Ward 3 Candidate
1. Currently all tree planting, maintenance and removal activities are the responsibility of the City’s Operations Department. Will you support and advocate for establishing an Urban Forest department headed by a forester with a degree in urban forestry? Why or why not.
“Yes” to having qualified staff, “no” to an Urban Forest department: It is best that issues relating to tree care and a sustainable urban forest be integrated into operations — how we care for our parklands and public areas. It’s best that our operations aren’t divided, such that the staff caring for our parklands and other public areas think what they do around trees (mowing, trimming…) doesn’t impact on them, that it is some other department’s problem. Our public trees are assets and long term investments, and it is imperative that we don’t have departments operating at cross purposes. Further, departments require support staff, supervisory staff, vehicles, etc. While some of this could be portioned away from the existing staff and fleet, I am concerned that more resources would be directed to something that may sound good but in fact lead to negative outcomes – fewer trees actually being planted and maintained (i.e. fewer dollars available for trees because of overhead), and a reduced sense of responsibility on the part of the Operations Department in how they perform their duties around trees. Better to have it under one department and budget so that supervisory staff for Operations are motivated to ensure trees are not damaged.
As for having qualified staff to care for our trees, yes, but this may not always involve staff with degrees. It is important to not manage an operational matter.
2. Shade is important for reducing the heat island effect and for reducing the risk of skin cancer. Will you support and advocate for establishing a shade policy which would set goals for shade coverage along streets/sidewalks, in parking lots and in parks? Why or why not.
Yes, in principal, for two more reasons – water and energy conservation – but it would come down to the actual wording of the policy, which should also be species-specific. I noticed the wording, “which would set goals” – I’m not sure we need “goals”. If we do have a policy, we don’t need goals, we need “standards”, otherwise we just have a political statement to point to when we want to feel good but ends up embarrassing us when what is actually happening is examined. A policy needs to have outcomes that can be evaluated, not goals that are never met.
3. There is currently no program in place to recognize or protect trees that are exceptionally large, old or have a significant history in the City. Will you support and advocate for a city program to be adopted during the next term of council aimed at designating and protecting Heritage Trees? Why or why not.
Not sure – when considering policy we have to ask how the policy could evolve in a way that was not originally intended. I imagine this would require a committee of review to implement, which could become quite politicized.
If a tree on private property is designated, is the City assuming responsibility for it? Completely? What risk does that create for the City? If the City doesn’t assume responsibility for a designated tree and the risk it can pose to property and people, I am also concerned this policy could negatively impact on property values – that prospective buyers would be concerned about the approvals required to remove a designated tree in decline. Also, Heritage cannot override safety.
4. Though the City has adopted a goal of 40% tree canopy coverage, information about tree canopy loss due to development, road construction, etc. is not being collected. Will you support and advocate for collecting publicly accessible data, funded in the next budget cycle, on the annual removal of mature trees and loss of canopy within the City? Why or why not.
Not at this time. I agree it would be helpful to know where we stand in terms of meeting our goal, but based on my door knocking, this is not a priority for the upcoming budget. I think we can work towards our goal with the tools we have, i.e. site plan requirements. We can require specific planting schemes or specific protections for trees as part of issuing a building permit.
5. The City does not have an inventory of trees in our urban forest (species, size, health, etc.), nor are trees given value as “assets” or “green infrastructure.” Will you support and advocate for an inventory of trees in the City, including the dollar value of the trees (using currently available computer programs that compute the dollar value of ecological services provided by trees)? Why or why not.
I know our “green capital” or “green infrastructure” provides measurable contributions to our economy, and I understand the value of having this contribution better understood and considered when evaluating a proposal. I don’t think this information would be weighted very highly in decision-making and so I don’t support this expense at this time.
6. City Council recently passed a tree by-law which requires permits for removing large trees on properties over half an acre in size. This tree by-law only covers a small percentage of properties within the City. Will you support and advocate for expanding the existing tree by-law to cover all properties in Guelph? Why or why not.
No. Removing a large tree is expensive and is not something most residents undertake without good reason. It’s dangerous work – a job most people cannot do safely themselves, and they readily recognize that. It’s also a job most people try to put off, preferring to wait to see how the tree improves or declines from one year to the next. They generally consult with others about the tree, and rely on third party expertise. The process of deciding what to do with a tree typically begins by asking if there is something that can be done to save it. Even if it is obvious a tree is in decline or becoming dangerous, people are generally sensitive to how their neighbours would react to it being removed and proceed cautiously.
My wife and I had to remove a declining sugar maple from our property and if we had the additional expense of a permit, I am not sure if we would have been able to do it, or what it would have meant for our household budget. The tree was also quite close to a sidewalk used by children, and close to power lines, which is to say it was in the public interest for us to remove it — and quite frankly it should have been done sooner. The experience sensitized me to the issue of publicly-dangerous trees located on private property. I am concerned that permits to remove trees will discourage property owners from removing trees that should be removed.
Many of the seniors I met in my door knocking want to live independently, in their homes as long as possible, and I don’t want to make it so that they cannot afford to maintain their properties. Similarly, we need to ensure younger home owners in our older neighbourhoods can afford to remove a tree that has become problematic – and permits represent an added expense.
In closing, I appreciate my responses may not be what you would have wanted but I hope you also see that I do understand the issues and have tried to show respect for your concerns by the thought I have put into my responses, tempered by the concerns I am clearly hearing for other priorities through my door knocking.
Craig Chamberlain
October 16, 2010
Dear Candidate:
Guelph Urban Forest Friends is a local group that advocates for better protection of urban trees and canopy. We make delegations to City Council, hold events to raise awareness about the importance of urban trees, and distribute information about the many benefits of trees, and the threats to trees, through our web site.
We have serious concerns about the continued loss of mature trees in our City and hear frequently from upset residents about tree removals. We are submitting these questions to candidates for City Council and respectfully request your response by October 18. The responses we receive will be posted on our web site and e-mailed to our list of 500 supporters.
For further information, please check our website (www.guffguelph.ca) or contact us. Thank you for your response. GUFF
Cam Guthrie – Ward 4 Candidate
1. Currently all tree planting, maintenance and removal activities are the responsibility of the City’s Operations Department. Will you support and advocate for establishing an Urban Forest department headed by a forester with a degree in urban forestry? Why or why not.
I would rely heavily on staff to recommend and lay out the pros and cons to this type of department being created. I’d be happy to hear why your organization also would like this department created.
2. Shade is important for reducing the heat island effect and for reducing the risk of skin cancer. Will you support and advocate for establishing a shade policy which would set goals for shade coverage along streets/sidewalks, in parking lots and in parks? Why or why not.
Yes, I actually would look at supporting something like this. Especially in large open area parking lots.
3. There is currently no program in place to recognize or protect trees that are exceptionally large, old or have a significant history in the City. Will you support and advocate for a city program to be adopted during the next term of council aimed at designating and protecting Heritage Trees? Why or why not.
Again, I’d look at protecting trees that fall into this those categories. They are a part of our heritage here in Guelph just as a building could be.
4. Though the City has adopted a goal of 40% tree canopy coverage, information about tree canopy loss due to development, road construction, etc. is not being collected. Will you support and advocate for collecting publicly accessible data, funded in the next budget cycle, on the annual removal of mature trees and loss of canopy within the City? Why or why not.
Collecting this data makes sense to me as well. I’d have to look into the cost as I don’t have those numbers but I can see an initiative like this not being difficult to perform for our city and would give us the hard data required to move forward with our tree canopy coverage.
5. The City does not have an inventory of trees in our urban forest (species, size, health, etc.), nor are trees given value as “assets” or “green infrastructure.” Will you support and advocate for an inventory of trees in the City, including the dollar value of the trees (using currently available computer programs that compute the dollar value of ecological services provided by trees)? Why or why not.
I can see the results from such a “census” being a positive thing. So yes I think this would be a good idea. Again, it gives us a base line where we can go from and with those stats we can compare year to year as we move forward.
6. City Council recently passed a tree by-law which requires permits for removing large trees on properties over half an acre in size. This tree by-law only covers a small percentage of properties within the City. Will you support and advocate for expanding the existing tree by-law to cover all properties in Guelph? Why or why not.
No. I tend to lean more towards property rights of the individual than for government interfering with trees on that person’s property.
Cam Guthrie
October 16, 2010
Dear Candidate:
Guelph Urban Forest Friends is a local group that advocates for better protection of urban trees and canopy. We make delegations to City Council, hold events to raise awareness about the importance of urban trees, and distribute information about the many benefits of trees, and the threats to trees, through our web site.
We have serious concerns about the continued loss of mature trees in our City and hear frequently from upset residents about tree removals. We are submitting these questions to candidates for City Council and respectfully request your response by October 18. The responses we receive will be posted on our web site and e-mailed to our list of 500 supporters.
For further information, please check our website (www.guffguelph.ca) or contact us. Thank you for your response. GUFF
1. Currently all tree planting, maintenance and removal activities are the responsibility of the City’s Operations Department. Will you support and advocate for establishing an Urban Forest department headed by a forester with a degree in urban forestry? Why or why not.
2. Shade is important for reducing the heat island effect and for reducing the risk of skin cancer. Will you support and advocate for establishing a shade policy which would set goals for shade coverage along streets/sidewalks, in parking lots and in parks? Why or why not.
3. There is currently no program in place to recognize or protect trees that are exceptionally large, old or have a significant history in the City. Will you support and advocate for a city program to be adopted during the next term of council aimed at designating and protecting Heritage Trees? Why or why not.
4. Though the City has adopted a goal of 40% tree canopy coverage, information about tree canopy loss due to development, road construction, etc. is not being collected. Will you support and advocate for collecting publicly accessible data, funded in the next budget cycle, on the annual removal of mature trees and loss of canopy within the City? Why or why not.
5. The City does not have an inventory of trees in our urban forest (species, size, health, etc.), nor are trees given value as “assets” or “green infrastructure.” Will you support and advocate for an inventory of trees in the City, including the dollar value of the trees (using currently available computer programs that compute the dollar value of ecological services provided by trees)? Why or why not.
6. City Council recently passed a tree by-law which requires permits for removing large trees on properties over half an acre in size. This tree by-law only covers a small percentage of properties within the City. Will you support and advocate for expanding the existing tree by-law to cover all properties in Guelph? Why or why not.
Ian Findlay – Ward 2 Candidate
While not responding to GUFF’s specific questions, Ian Findlay did provide the following statement:
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to your survey.
I have demonstrated a deep and strong commitment to the urban tree canopy and the environment in my own life.
On my Downtown property, I have planted approximately 600 trees, all native species. I have had to harvest some very old trees due to their unsafe condition. I was able to mill up two of the trees to trim out the interior of my heritage home as well as build a deck. The wood that was unusable for milling is being used to heat my home. Approximately 60% of the energy required to heat my home, has come from my property.
I have used alternate forms of transportation to meet all my commitments as a Councillor for the past four years. Whether it be walking, my bike, car pooling or public transit, I have been able to avoid the use of my car.
The questions you have asked are very specific and I will need to evaluate all perspectives before I am able to provide a more comprehensive response.
I believe that I have demonstrated the values that GUFF feels is important for a healthy and sustainable community.
Ian Findlay
October 14, 2010
Dear Candidate:
Guelph Urban Forest Friends is a local group that advocates for better protection of urban trees and canopy. We make delegations to City Council, hold events to raise awareness about the importance of urban trees, and distribute information about the many benefits of trees, and the threats to trees, through our web site.
We have serious concerns about the continued loss of mature trees in our City and hear frequently from upset residents about tree removals. We are submitting these questions to candidates for City Council and respectfully request your response by October 18. The responses we receive will be posted on our web site and e-mailed to our list of 500 supporters.
For further information, please check our website (www.guffguelph.ca) or contact us. Thank you for your response. GUFF
Bob Bell – Ward 1 Candidate
1. Currently all tree planting, maintenance and removal activities are the responsibility of the City’s Operations Department. Will you support and advocate for establishing an Urban Forest department headed by a forester with a degree in urban forestry? Why or why not.
I am not sure how to best advance the reforesting of Guelph. I believe we need competent people on the end of shovels planting trees that will survive. I think we need to have a lot more trees planted and less paperwork.
2. Shade is important for reducing the heat island effect and for reducing the risk of skin cancer. Will you support and advocate for establishing a shade policy which would set goals for shade coverage along streets/sidewalks, in parking lots and in parks? Why or why not.
New developments and infrastructure replacement should be designed and built with shade as a mandatory requirement. The same way that we regulate the number of parking spaces we should be regulating a shade design condition. We could allow exceptions in some cases but as a general policy it would be beneficial.
3. There is currently no program in place to recognize or protect trees that are exceptionally large, old or have a significant history in the City. Will you support and advocate for a city program to be adopted during the next term of council aimed at designating and protecting Heritage Trees? Why or why not.
I would support specific designation if was limited to a specific number of trees and funded to assist the property owner so that they are not burdened with the maintenance of these community assets.
4. Though the City has adopted a goal of 40% tree canopy coverage, information about tree canopy loss due to development, road construction, etc. is not being collected. Will you support and advocate for collecting publicly accessible data, funded in the next budget cycle, on the annual removal of mature trees and loss of canopy within the City? Why or why not.
I think basic analysis of canopy on a year by year basis is a good idea. A modest budget would be appropriate to monitor program success.
5. The City does not have an inventory of trees in our urban forest (species, size, health, etc.), nor are trees given value as “assets” or “green infrastructure.” Will you support and advocate for an inventory of trees in the City, including the dollar value of the trees (using currently available computer programs that compute the dollar value of ecological services provided by trees)? Why or why not.
No, money would be better spent on planting and nurturing.
6. City Council recently passed a tree by-law which requires permits for removing large trees on properties over half an acre in size. This tree by-law only covers a small percentage of properties within the City. Will you support and advocate for expanding the existing tree by-law to cover all properties in Guelph? Why or why not.
In the short time that we have had the bylaw I have already encountered a couple of shortcomings. We should be amending the bylaw every couple of years until its usefulness is optimized. All properties (trees) need protection from third parties.
October 14, 2010
Dear Candidate:
Guelph Urban Forest Friends is a local group that advocates for better protection of urban trees and canopy. We make delegations to City Council, hold events to raise awareness about the importance of urban trees, and distribute information about the many benefits of trees, and the threats to trees, through our web site.
We have serious concerns about the continued loss of mature trees in our City and hear frequently from upset residents about tree removals. We are submitting these questions to candidates for City Council and respectfully request your response by October 18. The responses we receive will be posted on our web site and e-mailed to our list of 500 supporters.
For further information, please check our website (www.guffguelph.ca) or contact us. Thank you for your response. GUFF
Leanne Piper – Ward 5 Candidate
1. Currently all tree planting, maintenance and removal activities are the responsibility of the City’s Operations Department. Will you support and advocate for establishing an Urban Forest department headed by a forester with a degree in urban forestry? Why or why not.
We have re-aligned some of our departments recently, and created a revised portfolio and responsibilities for a General Manager, Parks Maintenance and Development. Under this position there is a Forestry Department.
2. Shade is important for reducing the heat island effect and for reducing the risk of skin cancer. Will you support and advocate for establishing a shade policy which would set goals for shade coverage along streets/sidewalks, in parking lots and in parks? Why or why not.
Yes. Parking lots are my personnel pet peeve, especially large ones such as those in plazas and grocery stores.
3. There is currently no program in place to recognize or protect trees that are exceptionally large, old or have a significant history in the City. Will you support and advocate for a city program to be adopted during the next term of council aimed at designating and protecting Heritage Trees? Why or why not.
We have policies now, under the Ontario Heritage Act, trees can be included in designations if they have cultural value. Designating a tree simply because it is old is not possible under the current laws. We can also protect trees that are part of a designated cultural landscape, such as trees at Exhibition Park or Woodlawn Memorial Park.
4. Though the City has adopted a goal of 40% tree canopy coverage, information about tree canopy loss due to development, road construction, etc. is not being collected. Will you support and advocate for collecting publicly accessible data, funded in the next budget cycle, on the annual removal of mature trees and loss of canopy within the City? Why or why not.
Yes, in principle. However, I need to know the resources required and estimated cost before I will commit to supporting such a recommendation. We currently have a GIS system mapping tree canopy, so some of this work is being done now.
5. The City does not have an inventory of trees in our urban forest (species, size, health, etc.), nor are trees given value as “assets” or “green infrastructure.” Will you support and advocate for an inventory of trees in the City, including the dollar value of the trees (using currently available computer programs that compute the dollar value of ecological services provided by trees)? Why or why not.
This is being done for public trees now.
6. City Council recently passed a tree by-law which requires permits for removing large trees on properties over half an acre in size. This tree by-law only covers a small percentage of properties within the City. Will you support and advocate for expanding the existing tree by-law to cover all properties in Guelph? Why or why not.
In principle, yes. Again, I want to see and read the proposed by-law first. The previous by-law that came before Council was not clear enough on exceptions, enforcement and alternatives. I expect we will likely see alternatives when the Urban Forest Management Plan comes back to Council.
While I advocate for the preservation of existing trees, we must also invest in increased planting and improved maintenance (species selection, watering, pruning, etc.) practices if we are going to prepare for the next generation.
We also need to add protection for trees as part of our building permit process, i.e. requiring fencing around drip lines to prevent construction damage and heavy equipment stress.
Leanne Piper
October 13, 2010
Dear Candidate:
Guelph Urban Forest Friends is a local group that advocates for better protection of urban trees and canopy. We make delegations to City Council, hold events to raise awareness about the importance of urban trees, and distribute information about the many benefits of trees, and the threats to trees, through our web site.
We have serious concerns about the continued loss of mature trees in our City and hear frequently from upset residents about tree removals. We are submitting these questions to candidates for City Council and respectfully request your response by October 18. The responses we receive will be posted on our web site and e-mailed to our list of 500 supporters.
For further information, please check our website (www.guffguelph.ca) or contact us. Thank you for your response. GUFF
Scott Nightingale – Mayoral Candidate
1. Currently all tree planting, maintenance and removal activities are the responsibility of the City’s Operations Department. Will you support and advocate for establishing an Urban Forest department headed by a forester with a degree in urban forestry? Why or why not.
Hey Friends. Great to have you in the city. I would like to see a team developed to assess the state of, and assemble a mapping of, the trees of Guelph. It is my belief that trees are an undeniable asset to many urban issues, heat regulation, air quality, water; so many things… trees are a partner to this city.
2. Shade is important for reducing the heat island effect and for reducing the risk of skin cancer. Will you support and advocate for establishing a shade policy which would set goals for shade coverage along streets/sidewalks, in parking lots and in parks? Why or why not.
As far as establishing policy. No one person alone makes policy and this question would be more appropriately answered within the chorus of the councillors. I, however, would give serious time and consideration to the issue of shade and trees in general. I say these things because I believe the business of legislation can be shady at best and often times leaves room for error and consequently constant amendment and revision. That’s politics for ya, and shade is in the interest of the people of Guelph but policy must be deliberated with care and concern for the future of the city.
3. There is currently no program in place to recognize or protect trees that are exceptionally large, old or have a significant history in the City. Will you support and advocate for a city program to be adopted during the next term of council aimed at designating and protecting Heritage Trees? Why or why not.
The word program I admit makes me nervous. Because programs often mean money and money means motive and few remain satisfied because everyone has a different motive. A program for designating heritage trees is important, of this there is no doubt. But how important to how many people, and how much are they willing to pay for certain services. This is my question. I would suggest a program which tries to fund raise and approach the city with a big donation box. But a fully funded program I do not necessarily see.
4. Though the City has adopted a goal of 40% tree canopy coverage, information about tree canopy loss due to development, road construction, etc. is not being collected. Will you support and advocate for collecting publicly accessible data, funded in the next budget cycle, on the annual removal of mature trees and loss of canopy within the City? Why or why not.
I would like to see such information collected. I am personally unaware of how to tabulate the effects of construction towards the health of trees; I am aware however, that there is an effect. Communication of information is a priority in my candidacy. I am investigating the ways of getting the great wealth of issues communicated most effectively. Many people in the city of Guelph feel affinity with the trees of their neighbourhood. And, the community should have access to the things they care about.
5. The City does not have an inventory of trees in our urban forest (species, size, health, etc.), nor are trees given value as “assets” or “green infrastructure.” Will you support and advocate for an inventory of trees in the City, including the dollar value of the trees (using currently available computer programs that compute the dollar value of ecological services provided by trees)? Why or why not.
Yes, let’s inventory the trees. What is your bid? This is where the question is harder. As I have said before, fiscal responsibility is in the interest of every politician. One can easily fund everything that is important and find themselves with a hefty debt. As long as we’re talking about computer programs that speculate on dollar values of trees, what do we NEED to know and how costly is the process? I’d have to get my hands on the budget before I promised money for anything. I would not want to do it wrong, but tree inventory is a large and costly task.
6. City Council recently passed a tree by-law which requires permits for removing large trees on properties over half an acre in size. This tree by-law only covers a small percentage of properties within the City. Will you support and advocate for expanding the existing tree by-law to cover all properties in Guelph? Why or why not.
My first reaction is yes until I realize… permits? This has the potential to become a headache and a hurdle. I would like to discuss further this question with the person in charge of the permits and assess the situation. I am in favor of all tree removal being “permitted” but does the city have final say on land rights? If we can say which things you can and can’t do with your property then what rights do you have? How far do we want that to go? How far in your pocket or in your backyard do you want your city council?
Scott Nightingale
October 11, 2010
Dear Candidate:
Guelph Urban Forest Friends is a local group that advocates for better protection of urban trees and canopy. We make delegations to City Council, hold events to raise awareness about the importance of urban trees, and distribute information about the many benefits of trees, and the threats to trees, through our web site.
We have serious concerns about the continued loss of mature trees in our City and hear frequently from upset residents about tree removals. We are submitting these questions to candidates for City Council and respectfully request your response by October 18. The responses we receive will be posted on our web site and e-mailed to our list of 500 supporters.
For further information, please check our website (www.guffguelph.ca) or contact us. Thank you for your response. GUFF
Karolyne Pickett – Ward 1 Candidate
1. Currently all tree planting, maintenance and removal activities are the responsibility of the City’s Operations Department. Will you support and advocate for establishing an Urban Forest department headed by a forester with a degree in urban forestry? Why or why not.
I agree that decisions with respect to protecting our existing trees and planting new trees should be based on recommendations made by city foresters qualified in the field of urban forestry. Furthermore, those decisions are of an urban design and planning nature, not an operational one. If elected I will work with city staff to determine where in the organization it would make most sense to house city foresters, with the Planning Division being one option.
2. Shade is important for reducing the heat island effect and for reducing the risk of skin cancer. Will you support and advocate for establishing a shade policy which would set goals for shade coverage along streets/sidewalks, in parking lots and in parks? Why or why not.
Absolutely. In fact, I think our City shade policy should go beyond establishing goals for streets, parking lots and parks, and include minimum requirements for tree cover of new residential, commercial and institutional subdivisions, consistent with the City’s tree coverage goal. Hedgerows with mature trees are consistently deemed expendable and removed in the course of development, yet they provide shade, contribute to canopy cover, and most importantly provide essential linkages between habitats.
3. There is currently no program in place to recognize or protect trees that are exceptionally large, old or have a significant history in the City. Will you support and advocate for a city program to be adopted during the next term of council aimed at designating and protecting Heritage Trees? Why or why not.
Although Guelph’s Mission Statement includes preservation of our natural and cultural heritage, it does appear that heritage planning in Guelph is focused on cultural heritage. Therefore I support the idea of protecting heritage trees explicitly. It has been done in other cities so there are models that we can learn from to develop our own. If elected I will propose expanding the city’s heritage planning mandate to specifically include heritage trees, and work with city staff on how to best integrate natural heritage planning with that of cultural heritage.
4. Though the City has adopted a goal of 40% tree canopy coverage, information about tree canopy loss due to development, road construction, etc. is not being collected. Will you support and advocate for collecting publicly accessible data, funded in the next budget cycle, on the annual removal of mature trees and loss of canopy within the City? Why or why not.
Without baseline data we will not be able to measure progress towards our tree canopy coverage goal, so yes, I support the development of a municipal database that will record and track canopy loss due to tree removal. I want this data collection to be required of any proponent of an activity that will result in the removal of trees.
5. The City does not have an inventory of trees in our urban forest (species, size, health, etc.), nor are trees given value as “assets” or “green infrastructure.” Will you support and advocate for an inventory of trees in the City, including the dollar value of the trees (using currently available computer programs that compute the dollar value of ecological services provided by trees)? Why or why not.
The first point relates to the previous question, in that measuring progress towards our canopy cover goal begins with an assessment of our current canopy cover. This data should be recorded in the municipal database mentioned above. At this point I do not support taxpayers funding a dollar value computation of our trees: as a conservation biologist, I am aware of the recent economic research related to attaching a dollar value to ecological goods and services, but I don’t believe it has reached a point where those assessments do justice to the value of plant and animal life. That being said, given that on-the-ground experience will help advance this emerging field of economics, I will support requiring the evaluation of the ecological value of trees that developers (whether private or the municipality itself) are proposing to remove. It is clear that currently, environmental costs of development are not being fully measured.
6. City Council recently passed a tree by-law which requires permits for removing large trees on properties over half an acre in size. This tree by-law only covers a small percentage of properties within the City. Will you support and advocate for expanding the existing tree by-law to cover all properties in Guelph? Why or why not.
Increasing the size of the properties to which the by-law applies was not the appropriate way to address the concerns raised by residents, nor does the revised by-law have much value given the small percentage of properties it now applies to. Residents’ concerns largely revolved around the onerous process and cost associated with having trees assessed, and I think Council should have addressed those issues directly, rather than attempting to deal with complaints by limiting the number of residents the by-law would apply to. I will support addressing the problematic process-related aspects of the original by-law proposal. The by-law is a good first step, and I’ll support revisiting it in one or two years’ time, so that we can improve it based on lessons learned during its early implementation stage.
Karolyne Pickett
October 11, 2010
Dear Candidate:
Guelph Urban Forest Friends is a local group that advocates for better protection of urban trees and canopy. We make delegations to City Council, hold events to raise awareness about the importance of urban trees, and distribute information about the many benefits of trees, and the threats to trees, through our web site.
We have serious concerns about the continued loss of mature trees in our City and hear frequently from upset residents about tree removals. We are submitting these questions to candidates for City Council and respectfully request your response by October 18. The responses we receive will be posted on our web site and e-mailed to our list of 500 supporters.
For further information, please check our website (www.guffguelph.ca) or contact us. Thank you for your response. GUFF
Linda Murphy – Ward 1 Candidate
1. Currently all tree planting, maintenance and removal activities are the responsibility of the City’s Operations Department. Will you support and advocate for establishing an Urban Forest department headed by a forester with a degree in urban forestry? Why or why not.
I would support and advocate for establishing an Urban Forest department if the budget permits.
2. Shade is important for reducing the heat island effect and for reducing the risk of skin cancer. Will you support and advocate for establishing a shade policy which would set goals for shade coverage along streets/sidewalks, in parking lots and in parks? Why or why not.
I would support a shade policy it is actually disheartening to see all those empty parking lots.
3. There is currently no program in place to recognize or protect trees that are exceptionally large, old or have a significant history in the City. Will you support and advocate for a city program to be adopted during the next term of council aimed at designating and protecting Heritage Trees? Why or why not.
I agree to designation and protecting Heritage Trees but once again the budget would have to permit this.
4. Though the City has adopted a goal of 40% tree canopy coverage, information about tree canopy loss due to development, road construction, etc. is not being collected. Will you support and advocate for collecting publicly accessible data, funded in the next budget cycle, on the annual removal of mature trees and loss of canopy within the City? Why or why not.
I feel that we need to be made aware of the destruction of trees, it takes a long time to replace them.
5. The City does not have an inventory of trees in our urban forest (species, size, health, etc.), nor are trees given value as “assets” or “green infrastructure.” Will you support and advocate for an inventory of trees in the City, including the dollar value of the trees (using currently available computer programs that compute the dollar value of ecological services provided by trees)? Why or why not.
I would support an inventory of trees but once again I don’t believe our budget could support this.
6. City Council recently passed a tree by-law which requires permits for removing large trees on properties over half an acre in size. This tree by-law only covers a small percentage of properties within the City. Will you support and advocate for expanding the existing tree by-law to cover all properties in Guelph? Why or why not. Linda Murphy
I am still undecided on this, more info would be needed.
Linda Murphy
October 11, 2010
Dear Candidate:
Guelph Urban Forest Friends is a local group that advocates for better protection of urban trees and canopy. We make delegations to City Council, hold events to raise awareness about the importance of urban trees, and distribute information about the many benefits of trees, and the threats to trees, through our web site.
We have serious concerns about the continued loss of mature trees in our City and hear frequently from upset residents about tree removals. We are submitting these questions to candidates for City Council and respectfully request your response by October 18. The responses we receive will be posted on our web site and e-mailed to our list of 500 supporters.
For further information, please check our website (www.guffguelph.ca) or contact us. Thank you for your response. GUFF
1. Currently all tree planting, maintenance and removal activities are the responsibility of the City’s Operations Department. Will you support and advocate for establishing an Urban Forest department headed by a forester with a degree in urban forestry? Why or why not.
2. Shade is important for reducing the heat island effect and for reducing the risk of skin cancer. Will you support and advocate for establishing a shade policy which would set goals for shade coverage along streets/sidewalks, in parking lots and in parks? Why or why not.
3. There is currently no program in place to recognize or protect trees that are exceptionally large, old or have a significant history in the City. Will you support and advocate for a city program to be adopted during the next term of council aimed at designating and protecting Heritage Trees? Why or why not.
4. Though the City has adopted a goal of 40% tree canopy coverage, information about tree canopy loss due to development, road construction, etc. is not being collected. Will you support and advocate for collecting publicly accessible data, funded in the next budget cycle, on the annual removal of mature trees and loss of canopy within the City? Why or why not.
5. The City does not have an inventory of trees in our urban forest (species, size, health, etc.), nor are trees given value as “assets” or “green infrastructure.” Will you support and advocate for an inventory of trees in the City, including the dollar value of the trees (using currently available computer programs that compute the dollar value of ecological services provided by trees)? Why or why not.
6. City Council recently passed a tree by-law which requires permits for removing large trees on properties over half an acre in size. This tree by-law only covers a small percentage of properties within the City. Will you support and advocate for expanding the existing tree by-law to cover all properties in Guelph? Why or why not.
Karl Wettstein – Ward 6 Candidate
While not responding to GUFF’s specific questions, Karl Wettstein did provide the following statement:
Thank you for your interest and ongoing participation in overseeing the preservation and enhancement of our tree canopy. The tree by-law is a part of this process and though it does not meet everyone’s needs it is a balanced start. Guelphites have always been good stewards of our trees and I believe we will continue to do so. As a Rotarian I encouraged by what we have been able to do over the years to demonstrate this.
Karl Wettstein
Next Page »
As we’re sure you know, Municipal Election Day — Monday, October 25 — is less than a week away. GUFF sent a questionnaire to each of the candidates, and asked them to reply by Monday, October 18.
