Brighton tree lopper faces $132,000 fine

Apocalypsse · 7th January 2011, 03:59 PM

Quote:

January 7, 2011
A BRIGHTON resident is facing prosecution and fines of up to $132,000 for allegedly taking a chainsaw to a street tree that blocked views of Port Phillip.

Neighbours in Martin Street, Brighton, took photos of two men allegedly hacking into a tree on the nature strip at midday on Boxing Day and loading the branches into a station wagon.

It is believed the mature coastal banksia tree obscured views of the bay from an upstairs window.

A resident took this photo of the vandal loading branches into a car.

The photos were given to Bayside Council last week as evidence of alleged tree vandalism and also published on notices posted on lamp-posts around the million-dollar neighbourhood.

''Tree vandals caught in the act,'' the anonymous notices read. ''Not cool! Please protect our trees. Peace.''

Bayside Council said it had received complaints from several residents about damage to the tree and had launched an investigation.

''Council is preparing to prosecute the matter in the Magistrates Court,'' a spokeswoman said.

The council letter-boxed the area calling for witnesses, offering a reward of up to $20,000 for anyone with evidence that leads to a successful prosecution.

The investigation is expected to take at least a month because some of the witnesses have gone overseas on holiday.

The maximum penalty for tree vandalism under state legislation is $132,000.

The spokeswoman said council was not considering prosecution against the Brighton resident who distributed notices about the alleged vandalism.

The latest incident comes after tree vandals sawed and poisoned more than 20 trees along the foreshore of another Bayside suburb, Beaumaris, on Melbourne Cup Weekend.

I hope he gets hit up for doing that, there are so many better options to deal with the tree. Epic lolz @ the picture of him stuffing branches into the back of his 300C wagon.

Eric Frei · 7th January 2011, 05:44 PM

Interesting to follow what happens.

Dave Again · 10th January 2011, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apocalypsse

Brighton tree lopper faces $132,000 fine

I hope he gets hit up for doing that, there are so many better options to deal with the tree. Epic lolz @ the picture of him stuffing branches into the back of his 300C wagon.

This guy has been a pain in the neighbourhood for years, spreading false rumours about people. Hope he gets his comeuppance

This guy has been a pain to many in the neighbourhood for years, spreading false rumours about people. Hope he meets his come uppance.

Eric Frei · 10th January 2011, 05:27 PM

I looked at Google Street view and the pic showed that house as sort of being constructed ... is it only a few years old etc?

I doubt the trees were big enough to obscure any view.

Dave Again · 11th January 2011, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric Frei

I looked at Google Street view and the pic showed that house as sort of being constructed ... is it only a few years old etc?

I doubt the trees were big enough to obscure any view.

The house in question is 70-80 years old but has had major renovations. The trees are a very slow growing species of banksia. He would have cut off about five metres of the canopy. The gentleman charged lives in Bonleigh Avenue off Martin Street and the tree would have obscured an angelled view of the sea from his house. He felt he was entitled to this view, which clearly he was not. If you want sea views, you have to pay beachfront prices.

Drouin Tree Service · 11th January 2011, 07:26 PM

Hope he gets book thrown at him far to many people getting water views from cutting and poisoning in that area,think they are above the law.

Rockstock · 20th January 2011, 04:11 PM

No way I feel for the guy and think he is in the right. I understand the tree is not on his property, but on the property of the government. I understand that the law restricts anyone from cutting the trees. My argument is simply this: Laws are not perfect, they are made by a few individuals that are supposed to represent the ideals of the majority. And 99% of the time the law that keeps people from cutting down trees is best for everyone. However, not in every instance. In this example that one tree affected this man more than anyone else. It was on the border of his property and blocking his view. He didn't vandalize it, he simply trimmed it. And you people that are quick to pass judgment didn't notice the power lines directly above the tree. Do you think the city will move the power lines once the tree starts to grow into them. Absolutely not. They will do a quick hack job and make a mess of the tree and leave an eye sore like this.

[/IMG]
I get so tired of people sticking there nose in others business. You never really understand a situation completely until you see it from other peoples eyes.

Jeff Darby · 20th January 2011, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockstock

No way I feel for the guy and think he is in the right. I understand the tree is not on his property, but on the property of the government. I understand that the law restricts anyone from cutting the trees. My argument is simply this: Laws are not perfect, they are made by a few individuals that are supposed to represent the ideals of the majority. And 99% of the time the law that keeps people from cutting down trees is best for everyone. However, not in every instance. In this example that one tree affected this man more than anyone else. It was on the border of his property and blocking his view. He didn't vandalize it, he simply trimmed it. And you people that are quick to pass judgment didn't notice the power lines directly above the tree. Do you think the city will move the power lines once the tree starts to grow into them. Absolutely not. They will do a quick hack job and make a mess of the tree and leave an eye sore like this.

[/IMG]
I get so tired of people sticking there nose in others business. You never really understand a situation completely until you see it from other peoples eyes.

Firstly Welcome to Treeworld, this man broke one of the rules we all live by regarding trees and does not give him the right to cut off branches just because he does not want to lose his view of the sea judging by the photograph! He has allegedly vandalized public property.

This is the way I see it..You speed and get caught you get fined theres no differance really here he allegedly topped this tree and now he faces the possibility of a fine. If you cant afford the time dont commit the crime..

Apocalypsse · 20th January 2011, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockstock

No way I feel for the guy and think he is in the right. I understand the tree is not on his property, but on the property of the government. I understand that the law restricts anyone from cutting the trees. My argument is simply this: Laws are not perfect, they are made by a few individuals that are supposed to represent the ideals of the majority. And 99% of the time the law that keeps people from cutting down trees is best for everyone. However, not in every instance. In this example that one tree affected this man more than anyone else. It was on the border of his property and blocking his view. He didn't vandalize it, he simply trimmed it. And you people that are quick to pass judgment didn't notice the power lines directly above the tree. Do you think the city will move the power lines once the tree starts to grow into them. Absolutely not. They will do a quick hack job and make a mess of the tree and leave an eye sore like this.

[/IMG]
I get so tired of people sticking there nose in others business. You never really understand a situation completely until you see it from other peoples eyes.

You have to upload images to the site to post them. So there it is above. That tree has not been hacked, it actually looks like its been done properly, not by people without pruning experience.

This is simple basic law, tree isn't his property, it belongs to local council, he can put in a request to have it pruned if he wanted to but no, he decided to vandalize the tree. This man came along and butchered the tree, because he butchered it the way he did its only going to make the problem worse when the tree shoots out epicormics. Going on your theory I would be well within my right to go into your property and "trim" a tree that I didn't like because it blocked my view. As for the power line, its merely a service wire for the street light, clearance of only 1ft is required.

Rockstock · 21st January 2011, 02:04 AM

Well nice attempt at turning my theory back on me, but you are not fooling anyone. You having the right to go on my lawn and trim trees is the exact opposite of my reasoning and you know it. Of course he could try and negotiate the appropriate channels with the local city. It may be simple or it may be a gross process I don't know. If he was successful and they did come and trim it would they be professional? Or would that do a much worse job than him? I don't know and neither does anyone else here. Again, I'm tired of people acting like witch hunters and trying to make life difficult for everyone they cross.

Eric Frei · 21st January 2011, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockstock

You having the right to go on my lawn and trim trees is the exact opposite of my reasoning and you know it.

Lawn out the front of your property is council footpath, you do not own it.

Energy companies also are responsible for the wire to the first point of contact to the house/property etc so they have right.

Telco's here also have the right of entry to any property to prune or remove any tree that is interfering with telecommunications. All they have to do is provide 10 business days notice.

Here's the law.

TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT 1997 - SCHEDULE 3 Carriers' powers and immunities

Know the law, get the facts rather than rave on like some nutter.

Bowani Siam · 21st January 2011, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockstock

In this example that one tree affected this man more than anyone else. It was on the border of his property and blocking his view.

Gah! This tree is not 'affecting' just this one resident. It is on public property, for the benefit of the public and therefore 'affects' everybody. The guy already has a pretty bloody expansive view, so why is it not good enough to have 90% coast visibility? What is the problem with having an attractive SMALL tree as part of the vista? Now he's got a view of a f*** ugly tree instead of a nice neat one.

At the end of the day it is not his property and he has no right to touch it.

RANT!

Dave Again · 24th January 2011, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockstock

Well nice attempt at turning my theory back on me, but you are not fooling anyone. You having the right to go on my lawn and trim trees is the exact opposite of my reasoning and you know it. Of course he could try and negotiate the appropriate channels with the local city. It may be simple or it may be a gross process I don't know. If he was successful and they did come and trim it would they be professional? Or would that do a much worse job than him? I don't know and neither does anyone else here. Again, I'm tired of people acting like witch hunters and trying to make life difficult for everyone they cross.

This is not a witch hunt. Firstly, the tree is not on the border of his property. He lives around the corner in an adjacent street. He has been behaving like this for years and finally the Bayside Council have concrete evidence on him. He even used his own station wagon to remove the loppings. It is parked in clear view on his property. Secondly, the tree was a Coastal Banksia, very slow growing. Even at it's original height, it probably would have been another thirty years before it came close to the overhead wires, in which case, gentle trimming would have sufficed.

Eric Frei · 24th January 2011, 04:22 PM

Rockstock's from Idaho USA, they aint got an ocean coz they're landlocked and I doubt he'd even have seen a banksia.

friendofcarlotta · 4th February 2011, 07:57 PM

Laws are not perfect, they are made by a few individuals that are supposed to represent the ideals of the majority. And 99% of the time the law that keeps people from cutting down trees is best for everyone.

It was on the border of his property and blocking his view. He didn't vandalize it, he simply trimmed it.

Laws are not perfect, your right, but trees don't have a defense against Golden Mile like this guy

Derp Herpquan · 5th February 2011, 04:52 AM

I think that fine is a little on the hefty side. He is stupid not to get a permit though, I know when we remove trees we have to get all kinds of permits from local government. We removed this massive Oak from some land in Baton Rouge last year to put in a parking garage and we had to get tons of stuff from the govt'. What a dumb guy.

Apocalypsse · 5th February 2011, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derp Herpquan

I think that fine is a little on the hefty side. He is stupid not to get a permit though, I know when we remove trees we have to get all kinds of permits from local government. We removed this massive Oak from some land in Baton Rouge last year to put in a parking garage and we had to get tons of stuff from the govt'. What a dumb guy.

The difference here though is the tree he cut was a local council tree, you can't get a permit to cut it yourself because it doesn't even belong to you. If he wanted to cut a tree on his property he would need a permit though.

Eric Frei · 5th February 2011, 09:43 AM

We have to wait for the court case to see what he gets.

becmate · 8th February 2011, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockstock

If he was successful and they did come and trim it would they be professional? Or would that do a much worse job than him? I don't know and neither does anyone else here

Hi Rockstock. I know, and we are qualified Arborists. Don't underestimate our professionalism just because we are employed by the council. It doesn't make us uneducated blue-collar workers, although we may be a little crazy!

Drouin Tree Service · 8th February 2011, 04:14 PM

I think a community based order like cleaning the local train station platform of cigarette butts and toilets would be more fitting,And the big fine if he doesnt comply.

Eric Frei · 9th March 2012, 07:44 AM

$20,816 all up.

High price for lopping Brighton tree - Local News - News - Moorabbin Leader

Quote:

High price for lopping Brighton tree

Local News

8 Mar 12 @ 06:00am by Jon Andrews

A BRIGHTON tree-lopper has been ordered to pay more than $20,000 for illegally improving his view of Port Philip Bay.

John Langton-Bunker, 65, appeared at Moorabbin Magistrates’ Court on Friday to hear judicial registrar Richard O’Keefe give him a fine of $8000, order costs of $12,000 and make him pay $816 for a new tree to be planted.

Langton-Bunker (pictured) had removed branches from the coastal banksia in Martin St, Brighton, on Boxing Day 2010 so he could get a better view of the bay from his nearby home.

In September last year, Langton-Bunker admitted to two charges of interfering with a tree and failing to comply with the planning scheme.

He was seen, photographed and video-taped by neighbours removing branches from the coastal banksia.

Prosecutor Sam Bird, acting for Bayside Council, said the community viewed tree vandalism seriously.

“There was a flagrancy about this particular breach occurring on a nature strip on Boxing Day at 1pm in the afternoon,” Mr Bird said.

“Trees are property that belongs to everyone.”

He said the community now viewed illegal tree-chopping the same as drink-driving, which was not as frowned upon 20 or 30 years ago.

Langton-Bunker said others were also responsible for pruning the tree.

“I admit I undertook the pruning,” Langton-Bunker said.

“(But) that level of damage was not undertaken by me.

“The tree had been lopped at least twice before.”

Langton-Bunker had also faced court last Wednesday, but the case was adjourned because he was suffering anxiety due to losing his job.

Mr O’Keefe said there had to be a general deterrent element placed on the size of the fine.

“The penalty reflects the seriousness of the crime,” Mr O’Keefe said.

“The pruning was not helpful to the life of the tree.”

The court heard the tree had been assessed by several arborists who agreed it might not have a long-term future.

Langton-Bunker was also convicted.

The maximum fine for each of the two offences is nearly $150,000.

Langton-Bunker

Brent Ferris · 15th March 2012, 01:41 AM

$20800 should give him pause before he trims another tree without permission.

7th January 2011, 05:44 PM	#2
Eric Frei Admin - Owner Palm & Tree Services in Brisbane Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Brisbane Posts: 12,994	Re: Brighton tree lopper faces $132,000 fine Interesting to follow what happens. __________________ Protect your rights to work - Join Australian Tree Association My businesses:- Qualified Brisbane Palm and Tree Lopping \| Stump Grinding Brisbane \| Brisbane - Gold Coast Consulting Arborist

10th January 2011, 05:27 PM	#4
Eric Frei Admin - Owner Palm & Tree Services in Brisbane Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Brisbane Posts: 12,994	Re: Brighton tree lopper faces $132,000 fine I looked at Google Street view and the pic showed that house as sort of being constructed ... is it only a few years old etc? I doubt the trees were big enough to obscure any view. __________________ Protect your rights to work - Join Australian Tree Association My businesses:- Qualified Brisbane Palm and Tree Lopping \| Stump Grinding Brisbane \| Brisbane - Gold Coast Consulting Arborist

11th January 2011, 07:26 PM	#6
Drouin Tree Service Veteran Heritage Status Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Australia Posts: 1,727	Re: Brighton tree lopper faces $132,000 fine Hope he gets book thrown at him far to many people getting water views from cutting and poisoning in that area,think they are above the law. __________________ Drouin Tree Services \| Excavator Hire - Drouin and SE Gippsland \| Landclearing Melbourne

20th January 2011, 04:11 PM	#7
Rockstock I'm new here so be nice Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Idaho Posts: 4	Re: Brighton tree lopper faces $132,000 fine No way I feel for the guy and think he is in the right. I understand the tree is not on his property, but on the property of the government. I understand that the law restricts anyone from cutting the trees. My argument is simply this: Laws are not perfect, they are made by a few individuals that are supposed to represent the ideals of the majority. And 99% of the time the law that keeps people from cutting down trees is best for everyone. However, not in every instance. In this example that one tree affected this man more than anyone else. It was on the border of his property and blocking his view. He didn't vandalize it, he simply trimmed it. And you people that are quick to pass judgment didn't notice the power lines directly above the tree. Do you think the city will move the power lines once the tree starts to grow into them. Absolutely not. They will do a quick hack job and make a mess of the tree and leave an eye sore like this.[/IMG] I get so tired of people sticking there nose in others business. You never really understand a situation completely until you see it from other peoples eyes.

21st January 2011, 02:04 AM	#10
Rockstock I'm new here so be nice Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Idaho Posts: 4	Re: Brighton tree lopper faces $132,000 fine Well nice attempt at turning my theory back on me, but you are not fooling anyone. You having the right to go on my lawn and trim trees is the exact opposite of my reasoning and you know it. Of course he could try and negotiate the appropriate channels with the local city. It may be simple or it may be a gross process I don't know. If he was successful and they did come and trim it would they be professional? Or would that do a much worse job than him? I don't know and neither does anyone else here. Again, I'm tired of people acting like witch hunters and trying to make life difficult for everyone they cross.

24th January 2011, 04:22 PM	#14
Eric Frei Admin - Owner Palm & Tree Services in Brisbane Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Brisbane Posts: 12,994	Re: Brighton tree lopper faces $132,000 fine Rockstock's from Idaho USA, they aint got an ocean coz they're landlocked and I doubt he'd even have seen a banksia. __________________ Protect your rights to work - Join Australian Tree Association My businesses:- Qualified Brisbane Palm and Tree Lopping \| Stump Grinding Brisbane \| Brisbane - Gold Coast Consulting Arborist

4th February 2011, 07:57 PM	#15
friendofcarlotta I'm new here so be nice Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Melbourne, Aust Posts: 3	Re: Brighton tree lopper faces $132,000 fine Laws are not perfect, they are made by a few individuals that are supposed to represent the ideals of the majority. And 99% of the time the law that keeps people from cutting down trees is best for everyone. It was on the border of his property and blocking his view. He didn't vandalize it, he simply trimmed it. Laws are not perfect, your right, but trees don't have a defense against Golden Mile like this guy Last edited by Jeff Darby; 4th February 2011 at 08:02 PM. Reason: removed profanity

5th February 2011, 04:52 AM	#16
Derp Herpquan I'm new here so be nice Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Knollwood, AE Posts: 3	Re: Brighton tree lopper faces $132,000 fine I think that fine is a little on the hefty side. He is stupid not to get a permit though, I know when we remove trees we have to get all kinds of permits from local government. We removed this massive Oak from some land in Baton Rouge last year to put in a parking garage and we had to get tons of stuff from the govt'. What a dumb guy.

5th February 2011, 09:43 AM	#18
Eric Frei Admin - Owner Palm & Tree Services in Brisbane Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Brisbane Posts: 12,994	Re: Brighton tree lopper faces $132,000 fine We have to wait for the court case to see what he gets. __________________ Protect your rights to work - Join Australian Tree Association My businesses:- Qualified Brisbane Palm and Tree Lopping \| Stump Grinding Brisbane \| Brisbane - Gold Coast Consulting Arborist

8th February 2011, 04:14 PM	#20
Drouin Tree Service Veteran Heritage Status Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Australia Posts: 1,727	Re: Brighton tree lopper faces $132,000 fine I think a community based order like cleaning the local train station platform of cigarette butts and toilets would be more fitting,And the big fine if he doesnt comply. __________________ Drouin Tree Services \| Excavator Hire - Drouin and SE Gippsland \| Landclearing Melbourne

15th March 2012, 01:41 AM	#22
Brent Ferris Veteran Heritage Status Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,557	Re: Brighton tree lopper faces $132,000 fine $20800 should give him pause before he trims another tree without permission. __________________ My business: Tree Pruning and Removals -- Strump Removals -- Advice -- Consulting -- Arborist Reports Consulting Forester If you want an honest opinion, call Brent Ferris...because, Trees want to Live Too ! We do great jobs, even in small yards. Free Estimates Oakville to Oshawa - North to Bradford (Will travel further if cost of travelling covered) Email -- treeshaveneeds@3web.com Cell 416-460-5704

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
How much is fine for tree removal	GR1971	General Tree Chat	57	13th April 2012 09:21 PM
Kingston OH Tree Death $12500 Fine \| Buzzell Tree Service	Eric Frei	ANNOUNCEMENTS	3	14th February 2010 03:22 PM
Rocky Lamattina and Sons $220,000 fine for tree clearing in South Australia	Eric Frei	ANNOUNCEMENTS	3	22nd December 2009 01:20 PM