Ailanthus altissima, commonly known as tree of heaven, ailanthus,[...] is a deciduous tree in the Simaroubaceae family. It is native to both northeast and central China and Taiwan. [...] The tree grows rapidly and is capable of reaching heights of 15 metres (49 ft) in 25 years. However, the species is also short lived and rarely lives more than 50 years.Yes sir, that's what I had growing in my backyard. Well in late May there was no evidence the tree was even alive, there were no leaves but lots of fungus growing on the tree. I sent in an application to remove the tree, on the grounds that it was dead. I transcribe below a copy of an arbourist report that I paid, frankly a lot of money to obtain.
[...]
The tree was first brought from China to Europe in the 1740s and to the United States in 1784. [...The tree] was initially hailed as a beautiful garden specimen. However, enthusiasm soon waned after gardeners became familiar with its suckering habits and its foul smelling odour. Despite this, it was used extensively as a street tree during much of the 19th century. Outside of Europe and the United States, the plant has been spread to many other areas beyond its native range. In a number of these, it has become an invasive species due to its ability to quickly colonise disturbed areas and suppress competition with allelopathic chemicals. It is considered a noxious weed in Australia, the United States, New Zealand and several countries in southern and eastern Europe. The tree also resprouts vigorously when cut, making its eradication difficult and time consuming. In many urban areas, it has acquired the derisive nicknames of "ghetto palm" and "stink tree".
MR. MICHAEL COLE IS THE OWNER OF [Address redacted] AVE TORONTO AND IS CONCERNED ABOUT A DEAD TREE LOCATED 8 METRES FROM THE BACK OF HIS HOME. THE THE TREE IS A 97 CM DBH ALIANTHUS TREE AND IS DEAD THERE ARE NO LEAVES OR VIABLE BUDS, TREE HAS GIRDLING ROOTS AND HAS SUFFERED FROM POOR PRUNING PRACTICES. TREE HAS CO-DOMINANT STEMS 2.6 METRES ABOVE GROUND WHERE SEVERE DECAY EXISTS. LACK OF BARK AND FRUITING BODIES CAN BE SEEN IN PHOTO. TREE IS DEAD AND HAZARDOUS AND IS THEREFORE EXEMPT FROM CITY OF TORONTO TREE BY-LAWS. TREE SHOULD BE REMOVED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.Then there were some pictures, here they are.
So I sent a scanned copy of my arborist's report along with the images to the City of Toronto Forestry Services department. Here is my cover note.
Michael Cole 31/05/2011 9:12 am
Dear Sirs,
Sorry for the delay however the scanner at my office was broken for the past couple weeks.
Please see the attached arborist report as well as images of the tree in my back yard at [redacted]. It is my intention to remove the dead Alianthus tree and plant two saplings, likely one maple and one oak, further from any structure. If this request could be expedited so that I can plant the new saplings before the summer (give them extra time to take root) I would very much appreciate it.
Thank you
Michael
Never underestimate a tree's ability to start growing when you least want it to, at least if it's a Tree of Hell.
Dear Mr. Cole,
I have reviewed your request for an exemption including photos attached for the 97 cm diameter Tree of Heaven tree located at the above noted property.
Please be advised that the noted tree does not qualify for an exemption under the Private Tree Bylaw as it is neither dead (100%), terminally diseased or imminently hazardous. You may obtain a permit to remove the subject tree based on its condition.
Please submit the required application to injure or destroy trees on private property, application fee ($100), payable to the Treasurer, City of Toronto, in form of certified cheque or money order and replanting plan, in order that we may proceed with the permit issuance process. You may obtain a permit to remove the subject tree based on its poor structure condition.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Regards,
Jetmir Balashi,
I had to reply, although it turned out Balashi had inspected the tree between when I last looked at it, and it grew it's first leaves. (Great timing.)
The attached, for the second time, arborist report explicity states “tree is dead”. Now I may not be a biologist but being dead is a binary state, the tree is either dead or it is not dead. How can it be something other than 100% dead? Please read the end of the second line of the arborist report, or if you do not have Adobe Acrobat I will transcribe the entire report here:Well either I can see the future, or the truth is, I was right and the city arborist doesn't know a hazzard when it flies eight meters across the backyard.
[See the arborist report above]
Why do I need a permit to remove this tree?? My neighbor reports that last summer parts, i.e. entire branches, of the tree blew into his yard and nearly damaged his property. If property damage occurs because I could not remove what a certified arborist tells us is a “hazardous” tree who is going to take the financial and legal responsibility???
Bring out the disgust.
I wrote another email to the city,
Sirs,
I am attaching a copy of my correspondence (attachments.zip) with the city from late May and early June of this year. At that time I requested permission to remove what was thought to be a dead tree from my yard. I noted that branches of the tree had fallen in past years, as it would turn out this problem has become steadily worse.
I was told "...that the noted tree does not qualify for an exemption under the Private Tree Bylaw as it is neither dead (100%), terminally diseased or imminently hazardous." By:
Jetmir Balashi,
Urban Forestry Assistant Planner
Tree Protection & Plan Review
Toronto & East York District
I am attaching images taken in the immediate aftermath of the recent storm (20110822.zip). I do not yet have a quote on the cost of repairs; however, I suspect the amount to be in the range of many thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars. I should also note that what is left standing is very definitely a hazard. As this opinion is shared not only by an arborist, but an engineer (myself), I sincerely hope you will not present further impediments to my urgent request to get rid of what is left of the tree.
Frankly we are lucky, my wife was standing near the window when the tree became airborne. If she had been hurt I would not be sending this email, instead I would be calling for criminal charges of negligence against those responsible for what would have been an entirely preventable disaster.
Yours,And here is Balashi's reply:
Michael Cole
Subject: 12 Coleman Avenue - Request to remove damaged tree before it causes more property damage
Hi Michael,A question: Why do these guys get salary? I never would have imagined a job description of:
Please be advised that I visited your property earlier this morning and confirmed that due to the damage incurred during a recent windstorm, the Tree of Heaven (Ailanthus altissima) tree situated at the rear of your property, is imminently hazardous and therefore exempt from the City's Private Tree by-law. Attached is a copy of the Confirmation of Exemption form.
As you indicated in your email, Urban Forestry staff did previously inspect this tree based upon receipt of a request for exemption from the Private Tree by-law to remove a dead tree received from yourself. The tree was inspected and it was determined at that time that the tree was neither; dead, terminally diseased or imminently hazardous and therefore not exempt from the by-law. The results of this inspection were conveyed to you via e-mail on June 3, 2011. At that time you were advised that the tree was in poor condition and that Urban Forestry would issue permit authorizing its removal should you apply to do so.
It is import to understand that trees are living organisms and their condition is in a constant state of change. Also, we are unable to fully predict how trees, in any condition, will react when exposed to extreme weather conditions such as those we experienced this past weekend.
Please let me know if you need any further information or would like to discuss this matter further.
- Go uninvited onto other people's property.
- Examine the local fauna.
- Deny home owners the ability to protect their own property.
