| [College of ACES] | [University of Illinois] | [Illinois CES] |
I am not familiar with the concept of a "tree butcher".
A tree butcher is someone on the other end of the scale from a tree surgeon. Butchers usually work on dead things while surgeons work on living things. If a tree is already dead, being a tree butcher should be a respectable craft, cutting the tree up; taking it down and grinding up it just like hamburger.
If the tree is alive however, some of us feel there should be much more care involved--like having the expectation of helping the client tree live longer or in better health. This is usually why we call in a surgeon for one of us, and that same intention ought to apply for trees as well.
If someone claiming to be a surgeon, makes one of us dead by incompetence, this society often calls him a butcher, a name that is then more accurate. If this happens too many times, the butcher eventually looses access to patients. And that makes particular sense, especially since we might be one of the future clients. This corrective mechanism for surgeons turned butchers ought to apply on behalf of trees as well.
I am not arguing with your concerns. Obviously I am not familiar with the regulations you are speaking of.
ANSI is a series of standards and instructions intended to provide continuity, consistency, safety, and a measure of value received for all the parties. The tree part of the standards is meant to protect workers and trees, often from each other, and establish the competencies of tree work.
ANSI has no enforcement arm. Its standards are usually examined in some detail in a court (a kind of enforcer), but most often thats after the fact and applies only to an individual case. In this litigational world, tree butchers do escape--many times they can declare bankruptcy and just reappear under a different business name. Most of the time they never get called to task. Theyll do the same work until theyre hauled into court again and since court cases are expensive and infrequent, butchers coast along answerable only to their consciences and their ignorance. Thats wrong and thats some of the background muttering by the writers of these letters.
I like trees. Me too.
I hate concrete civilian arenas. Me too.
However, I do not know to whom you are speaking of, nor what you say they are doing.
Really?
You mention hacking off tree tops because "they are too tall". Without sounding rude. So what?
Well, asking the question, So what?, is usually fundamentally rude and you cant wiggle out of that by preceding it with some exception. That kind of question implies arrogance, condescension, a previous and superior knowledge and it is often associated with adolescence. Even if you are a delayed adolescent, as suggested by the school address, may I suggest that your proper choice of words from now on would include a simple Why? Ill respond to that:
Since butchers by definition only deal with dead things, living things usually dont fit well in any concept of their work. Since there are more live trees than dead trees, getting enough work means including living trees in a butchers work pool.
Since customers often dont know better and rely on the recommendations of these self-acclaimed experts, declarations that topping trees should be done because theyre too tall are all-too-common snow jobs that treat trees as if they were dead to make some extra money. The sad truth is that for trees and butchers, this is often a self-fulfilling prophecy. If the trees werent dead before, they certainly will be.
Do you see that your use of the so what question style already excuses the butchers. Asking a real question, Why?, holds them to explain their reasons and be accountable.
For example, I have 2 wonderful old maples in my front yard. one is approx. 300 ERs. old and one is quite possibly 500 ERs. old. (Yes they are HUGE). I have never made effort to care for them as I assumed they are/were self-sustaining. Now, after years of "squirrel damage" I can see there is a danger of their huge limbs falling on my neighbor's roof (aaack!). Would you, then, call me a tree butcher if I decide to "hack" off these limbs, or even to say good-bye to the whole trees altogether and cut them down? Just wondering, and please respond non-violently :>)
There are quite a number of things I could call you, but you asked to be treated gently. So, let me instead give you a counter-situation:
For example: You have a piece of furniture thats between 300 and 500 years old; lets say, its a 16th century cabinet done by a master craftsman that took three years of his life to complete and it was willed to you by some aunt who you really dont remember. The finish had some minor damage, but is still in good shape. Its also a bit top-heavy, and your wifes always afraid that its going to fall over and crush the cat.
One morning you wake up, and your thinking is a little fuzzy because you misplaced your Prozac bottle last week, and so you suddenly decide to fix the cabinet and end your wifes incessant crankings. Being a man of simple and direct action, you wander into the garage and bring back the chainsaw.
Aaaaarrrrrreescreeeeeecheeeeiiiiigggggggh! There. Its fixed--its also half the size and no longer any threat to the cat. A few months later however, the remaining piece gets consigned to the dumpster because the Cheezits bowl kept sliding off, making noise during the Dating Game, and your wife got irritated again, so the rest of the cabinet is now in some landfill.
What do you think--would I then call you a butcher?
Oh, no, you say, its my property and I can do with it anyway I want! You cant call me names. Its none of your business. If I wanted to do it, so what?
Well Dave, heres an important point. A 400 year old thing of beauty winked out of existence because its time-line was intercepted by a bozo with a chainsaw. And a whole lot of people would be staggered by that act. There were so many other things that could have been done instead: the cabinet could have been sold; given to a museum; passed on to another relative--instead it got snuffed.
When Mr. T. clear cut his property of dozens of mature, stately, innocent trees, their time-line too was interrupted by a gold-bedecked bozo who could hire chainsaws with bodies attached. Along our lakefront, people are always cutting down trees that interfere with their view, even if the trees are on someone elses property. Would you call them butchers?
There was a thoughtful article recently in Arborists News about the ethics of arborists. The author lost an old account because he tried to find alternatives to the wholesale removal of trees as instructed by the architects. It quickly became a public issue and the plan was finally changed to an admittedly better one, but the clients didnt want an arborist who put trees ahead of their wishes. So, no more work for him with them.....
What should he have done? I think he did the right thing, but it cost him financially. How long can he sustain that kind of ethical independence? Maybe not too long, especially if there are others around to say so what, nod, and chop away.
I think the people writing on this thread of ANSI Police are fundamentally repelled by this ever-present, witless destruction of trees--quick deaths and slow deaths--and the people who will take a saw to anything, in any fashion, to make a buck. The writers are asking for standards and good practices, enforcement, education, and shared pride in their work. I hope thats a little more clear.
Did I respond non-violently? Good luck.
Bob Wulkowicz
For me, trees are my clients, not just the guy with the checkbook.