Brentwood protests removal of a ‘perfectly healthy’ tree

Brentwood resident, Kurt Reilly, wrote to Mayor David Dimmitt (copying 40 South) that a tree on a creek behind Rosalie Avenue set to be removed is healthy, and is providing protection from erosion of the creek bank, and also that Davey Tree has well worn out it’s beneficial service to the city.

The resident’s letter, along with pictures of the tree:

I am writing this email in my opposition to a tree that has been selected for removal. The tree in question is along the creek bank behind 8501 Rosalie Ave. This tree appears to be perfectly healthy and is providing defense against erosion of the creek bank. The location at the outside of the bend in the creek is critical to prevent the bank from eroding to and underneath of the bike/walking path that runs along that area. All the trees along that area should be left alone and NOT removed so they can do their job! I have seen other areas along the creek such as in Oak Tree Park that you have filled in with large rocks and covered with fencing to prevent the loss of the creek bank. This is not an elegant solution and makes our creek look like the River Des Peres.

The fact that this tree has been selected for removal has solidified my suspicion that the Davey Tree Service contract with Brentwood has well worn out it’s beneficial service. I walk all over Brentwood and the number of healthy trees cut down not posing any risks is absolutely staggering. I would love to see the figures of the trees removed and the total cost charged to the Brentwood tax payers over the past two years, I’m sure it would be eye opening for the citizens. If you let Davey decide what trees need to be removed this contract will never end. They are lining their pockets with our money and will never stop until we say enough!

I have attached pictures of the tree in question to this email. You can clearly see that the creek bank is much wider surrounding this tree proving my point to keep this tree in place. Just north of this tree where all the trees and bushes have been removed, the bank has already crept up to the edge of the path.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter, Kurt Reilly


9 thoughts on “Brentwood protests removal of a ‘perfectly healthy’ tree

  1. This tree seems to have grown there for quite a while. Couldn’t a replacement tree/trees be planted first, and then take out this one down the road, if really necessary?

  2. Brentwood has an EAB plan: which follows the protocol suggested by Missouri’s Extension agency They only thing is see that would help the creek banks would be the suggestion to plant the replacement trees around the ash tree and let them grow some before the removal.

  3. You don’t need to be an arborist to see that there is nothing wrong with that tree. The City has given Davey Tree carte blanche for the last few years. What a deal, tell us what’s wrong then fix it and tell us how much we ow you! I’m sure they have spent hundreds of thousands when we used to get the job done by city employees. Maybe Dimmitt will put a stop to this racket but I wouldnt’ count on it.

  4. Um, Ash tree. Emerald Ash Borer, look it up. Just hope it gets done before we get better together… I wonder what they’ll do since we should be mid ‘crisis’ by then.

    • But the question is – Are the trees they’re removing infested with the borer? If not, why chop them? To keep them from getting the bugs and then chopping them down? How does this put us ahead? Either way, the tree is gone. I know they clear-cut the Arch grounds, but that felt like an excuse to spend a buttload of Federal money on a complete re-do of the grounds. Anyway, my question on Ash trees would be; Is there any harm in waiting till the tree is actually infected before cutting it down? Does this prevent further spread, or is it a bow to the inevitable? Or is it a waste of our money? If they absolutely must spend X number of dollars on Davey, (why that would be is another good question) I’d rather see them cutting and replacing the Sweetgum Maples that they idiotically planted all over the city. They’re beautiful trees, but man, I’m tired of living in gumball world.

      • A dead standing tree is a huge liability. How many Ash trees does Brentwood have in it’s inventory? I don’t know. How many can Davey remove in one day? I don’t know. I do know that there are 365 Days in a year, on average, 110 are weekends, Holidays, rain, snow, etc. represent challenges to completing work. how many dead trees are Brentwood residents willing to take liability for or are even willing to look at and for how long? Sure, anyone can wait to remove any tree until it is dead however, think about it from a less emotional point of view and realize that these trees will die from EAB. And yes please remove All of the Sweet Gums from Every Where, and the ‘Bradford’ Pears too.

        • But don’t trees take time to die when infested? Like a year/years? Seems like you could leave them till they show signs of disease rather than writing a blanket contract to remove whichever trees that the vendor decides to chop. You don’t have to wait till they’re dead, but you also don’t have to do preemptive cutting on the say so of the company that stands to benefit by cutting the maximum number of trees. That’s not emotion, that’s checks & balances.

    • Destroying the tree is not the only way to deal with Ash Borer. There are effective treatments if someone is inclined to use them. Who said this tree has Ash Borer anyway? When you pay someone to go out and destroy trees is it any wonder that is what happens?

  5. I’m in agreement. It looks like they throw darts at a map and then cut down a tree at whatever address it hits. Almost as if it’s not WHICH trees get cut down, but HOW MANY they can charge the city for. Who in the city govt awarded this contract? Same person who decided to discontinue mosquito spraying?