P5110030

Niles
Community Unity
A secular public forum

Back to Category
General


Removal of Trees from Trail (2 replies)
 
I am not aware of the palm trees that you are speaking of, but I did notice that quite a large number(I think at least 20) large mature trees were removed from the Niles side of the Alameda Creek trail near
Shinn Pond this week. It is very sad to see...I hope that there was a
good reason for the removal and replanting is on the agenda. If
anyone has insight on this I'd love to hear about it.
Kelly
J Street
Posted – 09/09/07 10:22pm by Lynn Slater, updated or replied 09/09/07 10:23pm
 
 

 I am pasting in an email, below, dated Aug 7th, from Kim Stiles about the
trees that were removed along the Alameda Creek - there are lots more emails
on the subject, but this one is quite comprehensive... I really miss all
the poplars, but they were diseased - mostly diseased, that is.... a few of
the trunks seemed to reveal healthy trees.

Nancy Coumou
D Street

Hi all (from New York!)
As you know the trees were re-marked a week and a
half ago. I asked Inta (arborist) and Robert
(inspector) if there were any plans to plant new trees
and at this point there are not. The trees around
Shinn pond appeared to be re-marked accurately (i.e.
according to Inta's initial report to me about
diseased poplars having to go but the big Eucs
staying).
On the stretch of trail between the Bart weir and
Sequoia bridge (not Shinn pond) I became concerned
when I saw a lot of the trees on the river side were
re-marked for removal when Inta had originally told me
most of them would be saved.
After conversations with both Inta and Robert this
week, Robert went back to check the re-marking, and
much to my relief told me that he is removing marks
from trees 1331,1390, and the row of trees
1388,1387,1386,1385 (all locusts on the river side).
This is a sweet victory, because once we lose a tree
on the river side it will never be replaced (flood
control folks won't allow it). I got nowhere trying to
save some of the bigger Eucs on the opposite side of
the trail. As Robert put it, they are a "public safety
concern" and if someone gets hurt after 2 arborists
advised removing them, he would have a very hard time
justifying his decision.
I thanked both Robert and Inta for working with us,
they did promptly return my calls and overall we did
save about 30 trees which caused extra work for them
in terms of renegotiating and revising contracts at
multiple meetings with the various agencies involved.
Robert told me the cutting would begin tomorrow.
Gwen and I will be back next week, I must admit I'm a
little apprehensive about what we'll find!
See ya!
Kim
Posted – 09/09/07 10:23pm by Lynn Slater
 

tree removal not always a bad thing
 It is often a sad thing to see trees removed.
Ideally, restoration with native trees and plants
should follow a removal. But, I was actually sorry to
hear that eucalyptus trees would remain! Eucalyptus
trees are introduced species that have a dramatic
effect on local ecosystems. Here is an excerpt from
an op-ed piece published in the Palo Alto Weekly after
a controversial euc removal on the peninsula:

1) Compared to native trees, eucalyptus provides
little support for wildlife. California oaks support
at least 100 times more insects, a primary food source
of songbirds. Few native animals and birds find food
or shelter in eucalyptus trees.
2) Chemicals in eucalyptus create toxic conditions in
the soil and this plus their biomass of bark and
leaves make it difficult for native plants to grow
under their canopy.
3) Eucalyptus trees are hummingbird killers. Their
sweet-scented flowers attract hummingbirds and other
birds, such as the Ruby-crowned Kinglet, that on
occasion are smothered by a tar-like pitch as they
attempt to drink the nectar.
4) The extensive root systems of eucalyptus trees soak
up large volumes of ground water, reducing the amount
available to native plants and trees. Large stands
have been known to dry up all-year streams,
threatening local aquatic life.
(http://www.paloaltoonline.com/weekly/morgue/2004/2004_05_05.guest05tree2.shtml)

And, we all know from the Oakland Hills fire that they
are dangerous due to flammability. Here is a UC
Berkeley article about their removal around the
campus:

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2004/09/21_16695.shtml

So, I am thrilled when eucalyptus trees are removed
and hope CalTrans will take the row along the creek in
the canyon (next time you drive through the canyon,
just quickly observe if anything grows under or around
this row of trees). As we keep learning, sometimes
what looks nice to us is not always best for other
critters.

Diana
Iron Horse Lane
Posted – 09/09/07 10:23pm by Lynn Slater
 

Back to Category

You may add your own community information to this website.
Copyright 2006-2009

http://www.hotdoodle.com, HotDoodle™ Custom Web Design and Quality Affordable Website Designers for Small Businesses and Professionals
Powered by http://www.hotdoodle.com, HotDoodle™ Custom Web Design and Quality Affordable Website Designers for Small Businesses and Professionals
Professional Website Designs for Self-edit Sites Site Map NYC Bamco, Universe, Sobotec, Terreal (Terra Cotta) installation New York
East Bay Area landscape garden Patios Tree Trimming Cement Driveways
Lynn Slater enginneer and inventor
EFT for dance performance in Pittsburgh
Hair air permanents Fremont, Newark, Union City, California