A tree by any other name is now an ordinance.
The Chestertown Town Council adopted a tree removal policy on Monday night to cut down on the willful cutting down of large trees.
So from now on, to remove a tree from your property in town, you must get an assessment from at least two qualified arborists and fill out an application and get a permit from Town Hall.
Important note: the amendment to the Town Code, Chapter 156 Trees, Section 156-7, applies only to trees 45 feet high and higher or 12 caliper inches (diameter) at the base or larger. And if a neighbor’s tree is pointing a limb over your property, you may amputate that offending member. And if limbs on your own big tree are causing you problems when growing laterally into into your window, for instance, you may chop those suckers. Without permission!
The debate before the vote echoed arguments from Thomas Paine and Edmund Burke, involving the rights of man, and property rights, and good neighbor policy, and, from looks given, considerations of how some people are dumb as stumps.
Councilman Harrison C. Bristoll observed, “Every time we make another policy and pass another law we are stepping on the rights of people.”
After noting that he once thought as Bristoll did about the amendment, before some fine-tuning was done, Councilman Marty Stetson countered, “Government is a compromise. If you never have compromise nothing gets done.”
The end came quick and merciful: passing on a 3-2 vote, Stetson, Gibson Anthony and Margo Bailey in favor, Bristoll and Mabel Mumford-Pautz against.
Nobody there showed any surprise about that.
Judge Anthony says
I am a ISA Board Certified Master Arborist. I strongly oppose the new tree ordinance Chestertown has recently adopted. It is a violation of property owners’ rights. It is a burden to property owner’s to be forced to get opinions from two certified arborists. Some people may actually have an arborist that they are comfortable with and that they trust. The relationship between client and business owner is something we strive for every day. Who is going to decide which opinion is correct if opposing points of view are expressed by the two certified arborists? Is the town going to pay for the maintenance of the trees on private property? I think not. The town would be better served to put its effort into mitigating the hazardous trees that abound throughout the town limits. Public safety should be the concern of a tree ordinance.
Miles Barnard says
$100 fine for removing a tree without a permit? Wonder how much it will cost for two consulting arborists to evaluate the offending tree… Why not just pay the town 100 bucks, save the paperwork and call it a day? Seriously, I think it would cost a homeowner less to pay the fine. Don’t get me wrong; I think having a tree ordinance is smart policy. I support this type of regulation, and am always amazed at the folks that decry common sense regulation geared at protecting our sense of place as an infringement on their property rights and a roadblock to getting anything done. But the part about having two arborists evaluate the tree will be the biggest problem with this ordinance.
Marty Stetson says
In regards to the comment on having the cost of having an arborists look at the tree, I would think most arborists would give you an estimate for free. It is good business to get two estimates even if you do end up getting it removed.
Miles Barnard says
So is the ‘two arborist’ requirement about getting two estimates, or getting two evaluations of the health of the tree? Yes, any business should give free estimates. But what does a cost estimate have to do with going through the approval process? I’ve checked on this and the ‘two arborist ‘requirement seems to be part of the application requirements and is not part of the actual revisions to the ordinance. I’ll say it again, I think this two arborist evaluation requirement is going to be problematic.
Another problem I see is that there does not appear to be room to remove a healthy tree, whatever the reason (invasive species, garden redesign, whatever). Almost all jurisdictions have provisions to remove trees (not in the 100’ chesapeake bay crital area buffer) as long as they are mitigated with new tree plantings, contributions to a public tree fund or both. Am I reading the ordinance correctly?