Would you like this dead silkyoak infront of your house?

Eric Frei

Family moved in 1 year ago and the tree was there already dead.

The tree is on the footpath.

The tree has no hollows and only offers a roost for birds like the butcherbird, crows, ibis and magpies.

The Redland City Council refuse to cut it down.

I have added more information at post 67 on 13th April 2011, 06:55 AM and post 90 on 13th April 2011, 08:36 PM

Attached Thumbnails

     

__________________

Jeff Darby

I would not like it out front of my place, it has no purpose, no hollows, so it's not being retained for habitat. May be the previous resident poisoned the tree and council has dug its heals in and not approved removal as a lesson ? You poisoned it you can keep it....??

Even if this is the case it's not real fair on the occupants who reside there now !.

__________________

Member: Australian Tree Association

Join the Australian Tree Association...Have your voice heard !

Arboriculture, A life long study for some, a passing phase for others

© Jeffrey J Darby 2011

Eric Frei

It is Council's tree so approval is not an issue.

__________________

Jeff Darby

I will clarify my meaning, may be council suspected previous residents or near by residents of poisoning the tree so they are refusing to cut it down. I dont really know how it died, naturally or other wise, I was just putting forward an idea why its still standing.

__________________

Member: Australian Tree Association

Join the Australian Tree Association...Have your voice heard !

Arboriculture, A life long study for some, a passing phase for others

© Jeffrey J Darby 2011

Eric Frei

I will write to the council to try and get the facts but regardless of how it died would you like it in front of your house? That is the question, I doubt anyone would.

__________________

TrevMcRev

I vote NO!

I have seen councils do the same as JayD was inferring down here with either previously poisoned or vandalised (unauthorized pruning/topping) leaving the eyesore tree stand as long as possible to serve them a lesson.

redmower

I would have to say yes, I would like it in front of my home.

I would then be asked by my good father to cut it down for the poor council. He would then have it milled so he could work wonders in his workshop.

He has just sold his (my old) family home and wants to go back there in a few months and offer the new owners to remove a 'bad' tree in the back yard for nix. (no guesses which son will be doing the removing one fine weekend). I have little if any carpentry skill and can only wonder at the pleasure he gets from working with silky oak. Dad did his carpentry apprenticeship in the Railway wagon building workshops and now likes to return to those techniques he was taught 60 odd years ago.

So yes, i would be happy with this dead tree, initially.

stihlman441

Climb up the tree one night put a rope around it and connect to a 4 x 4 and pul it over.

Sam Beazley

i voted no. that tree should have been removed along time ago.

stihlman441

Climb up the tree one night put a rope around it and connect to a 4 x 4 and pull it over.

TREE-SURFER

I too vote NO!

The Council should not punnish or otherwise disturb the quiet living of the new residents of the property that this tree is in front of. The potential for failure is evident and causes concern for Life or Property should this tree fail.
The tree is in an unsafe condition and therefore should be removed.
It provides no amenity value to asthetics or for wildlife conservation.

REMOVE!

__________________

The Aerial Arborist

Isle of Man Tree Surgeon| All Aspects of Tree Work

What experts say about TOPPING

Itsposs

I would nt mind grabing it to put threw a mill provided there s no piping in it and to remove it I d go the 4x4 route save money on stump grinding

ken koala

If it was my place - as I have a combustion stove = one fortnights supply of firewood -lol:

olyman

and do you suppose,,any of those council people,,could use a lesson in their perfect lives??? seen the same sort of trash happen with the so called council in this town...theyd be the LAST i would council with,,but they sure have most of the people in this town fooled-- ALSO,as jay said,,NO purpose whatsoever!!

Benb

No thanks - it would have to go!
There are plenty of hungry white ants in Redlands - so it will go eventually - and possibly take someone with it.

Joshua Rugg

nope take it down. in fact that thing is soo ugly you can fly me out from hawaii and i will do it for ya.

__________________
Stihl
MS192T 14"
MS200T 16"
MS261 16"
MS440 25"

Husqvarna 359 20"
394XP 32"

Poulan P3314 14" ( new hire/groundy saw)

Mike17112

As a bird watcher I would say keep it, as a pedestrian that it might fall on I would say remove it. Self-preservation wins. Remove it before it kills someone.

banner

The tree looks to be an accident waiting to happen.....No. These politically correct environmentalist really are on the fringe of lunacy in IMO.

mattwalker

No from me - rip it down!

jmcg.insight.gardens

that birds enjoying himself, heh, bestview ever.

But

Lesson would be learned by now, only a matter of time til it falls.

No.

Tintin

No. Cut it down and plant two more.

archibald tuttle

I don't know if I would want it in front of my house but I'm with the gang for citizen action. Yank it or cut it down. One thing if its highly complicated set up but this one looks pretty clearcut . . . sorry.

Waiting for the government is never a good idea.

jmcg.insight.gardens

good answer TinTin,

two more suitable species, maybe three. Give them more privacy.

Safety_Pays

Hey all

The council would appear to be as dead as the tree, mentally I am referring. It was years ago working in Oz for an international tree company I had the privelage of meeting some clowns there.

When it falls on the house or somebody I hope whole heartedly they hire a great solicitor who will personally sue the pants off the council and the tweedy little tree man wannabe who rubber stamps the refusalsIt is really hard to deal with 'stupid' isn't it?

Safety Guy: soapbox::

johnnytrees

defo ,no,no. remove before it fails & injures some one

bill24

Could be a story or two about the hard trim of the tree ???

Regardless of who did what and when, the current situation is that the pieces of bark pictured present a current and real danger to pedestrians as they fall to ground, and thats not to far in the future !

Its got to go !!

Local paper, letter to editor, or several residents contact council and ask for a site inspection/meeting with a rep.

(Check no underground services that could be a problem.)

Top idea to put to council - replace with another more suitable species.

swanray

I voted no, but on second thought I wish I had it in front of my house so I could chop it up and have a warm house in winter!

Phil Baker

No - it seems to serve no purpose and will only become dangerous

faller

Definitely no, with the present wet weather the root plate would already have started to decay and the tree just sitting there waiting! Pity Qld doesn't have a VCAT (Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal) like Victoria. $35.00 to register don't need lawyers and the tribunal can order the council to remove it. although the council will have lawyers.

kingr

Redland Council seems to have a solution for this type of tree, put a man made birds nest at the top. Noticed while down at wellington point there were at least two very large pines that had no branches or foliage but a man made nesting box stuck to the very top.