Tree World - View Single Post - Controversial pruning on protected trees Durack Primary School

Ekka · 28th August 2007, 12:12 AM

Copy of email sent to Minister of Public Works office. They responded to previous case so have tacked this to it as all falls into the same bucket. Was also CC'd to Lord Mayors office.

Quote:

----- Original Message -----
From: We are all about trees
To: pwhict at ministerial.qld.gov.au
Cc: lordmayor at brisbane.qld.gov.au
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 4:59 PM
Subject: ref DPW01832/07 Open Public email (BCC ref 23450466)

Attention ********** re: Your letter dated 02 August 2007

*******,

You responded to a letter I sent to BCC Lord Mayor.

You seemed to have missed a key point in that letter and I was amused to see the contractor for the works they done at 660 Kessels road received a warning.

See, the error lays in Q-Build not asking for quotes on specified work. Was the request so vague that it was something like, "get some quotes to prune that tree, the janitor said it needs doing"? There's perhaps no actual detail, and most likely no-one suitably qualified in Q-Build writing the quotation specification ... which also then raises the concern of why prune anyway?

The contractor to a certain degree is at fault too for not performing work to Australian Standards 4373, however does each contractor quote on what they think/guess/wonder is OK? What if the Q-Build requested a quote for exactly what they delivered, a topped/stubbed hazard tree?

You mentioned in the letter that contractors are ....
aware of QBuild's requirements in relation to performance, conduct and compliance with relevant legislation and Qbuild standards, policies, systems and business requirements
Now I don't know if Australian Standards are legislation or not however it may be wise for you to include in your wording that contractors abide by Australian Standards in addition to QBuild's as it appears QBuild isn't aware of any standards when it comes to trees, assessing them or working on them.

Here's another recent case at a school.

You can see for yourself the details on www.treeworld.info forum, rather than duplicate just follow the link below.

Controversial pruning on protected trees Durack Primary School - QBuild

In this case the entire school premises had a BCC Vegetation Protection Order (VPO) on it, a significant native vegetation order (SNV) but hey, who cares it's QBuild and they can do what they like apparently, well that's the message we see as professionals.

Now we have another abomination on our skyline advertising topping and lopping, worse still, in a school where young minds are being conditioned to the 2007 QBuild model of tree care.

I'd like to see you address and respond to this, and also a copy of this was forwarded to the Lord Mayors office.

Regards
Eric Frei
PS: It would be appropriate that suitably qualified arborists capable of assessing trees and writing reports submitted work specifications to be performed and were present when they were performed, or substituting that a BCC officer suitably qualified and capable do the same. Then get a tree company that isn't "TREE LOPPERS", ironic isn't it, tree lopping is a malpractice form of pruning so why use the term let alone name your business after it?