McLaren Trails Improvement Project | Tree work wrapping up along Visitacion Avenue

[Joelle Kenealey]

https://sfrecpark.org/civicalerts.aspx?AID=1762

Joelle Kenealey
President
Outer Mission and Merchants Association

[Tom Borden]

Odd image they include, big piles of wood chips from the trees they cut down.  Be sure to click on the tree removal FAQ:

https://sfrecpark.org/DocumentCenter/View/23577/McLarenTrails_TreeWork_FAQ_202403

Note.
1) Safety
Most of the trees that are to be removed are in areas where park goers are to be excluded.

2) The SNRAMP (Natural Resources Management Plan) tree removal plan does not actually disclose tree removals in much of the area identified.

3) The RPD Trails Program bond funding is supposed to improve trails for park users.  The current RPD work, directed by the Natural Resources group, is primarily closing trails, not improving or expanding them.    The NRD states that they are improving our experience by, "finding the quickest way for park visitors to move between specific spots".  Is this is what park users are looking for?

The NRD is "choosing the best trail paths, we're taking out a few trees to make room for these new trails."  You can bet "a few" is actually "a lot".

The NRD claims the "Tree Planting. Replacement ratio is greater than 1:1."  RPD as a whole has committed to a 2:1 replacement ratio.  Why is this only 1:1?  Given sapling mortality, a 1:1 ratio means there is a net loss of trees in the City.

The actual number of replacement trees is actually not part of the current budget, "Final tree work counts vary based on the latest conditions in the field and available budget."

Why was this information only released after most of the tree removal along Visitaction was already complete and the tree removals by the amphitheater are slated to start in less than 2 weeks?

Tom B.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "McLaren Park Collaborative" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mclarenparkcollabo...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mclarenparkcollaborative/CA%2BZHsf1Lp4uipaF0MPEkFT56rpW14Pu9vTXiXFNxDasSQ0_%3DyQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Tom Borden]

Lauren,

You made some worrisome statements at the McLaren Park Collaborative
meeting yesterday evening.  Based on them, it appears the NRD is
disregarding its obligations under the SNRAMP.

The SNRAMP calls for 1:1 tree replacements for trees removed.  You said
you did not know if RPD has a database to track tree removals and
replacements.  Such a database is fundamental to meeting RPD's tree
replacement commitments, especially considering that replacements are
made at a later time, possibly in different parks and not necessarily in
Natural Areas.  If there is not a well tended database, then there is no
way RPD can be meeting the 1:1 commitment.

No one in the NRD seems to have told you the correct definition of a
"tree" for the purpose of counting removals. You indicated that you used
a standard of either 6" or 8" diameter at breast height. Neither of
those is correct.  "For accounting purposes, the SNRAMP defines a tree
as any plant having a dominant vertical trunk that is over 15 feet
tall."  I suspect the entire NRD is using 6" or 8" DBH as the reporting
cutoff.  Most trees that are 6" to 8" DBH are much taller than 15 feet,
especially eucalyptus and pines.  This means that San Francisco is
losing many Trees that are not counted and or replaced.

We didn't discuss it last night, but clearly you are unaware that
massive tree removals in localized areas are not allowed under the
SNRAMP.  The Plan puts limits on concentrated tree removals to moderate
the shock to the environment, control erosion, etc.  Your planned
removals in the Gray Fox Creek area certainly exceed the 20 tree limit,
especially if you count "Trees" correctly.

The clearcutting the NRD performed along Visitacion is a serious
violation of this proscription.

I refer you to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Significant
Natural Resource Areas Management Plan (Volume I).  You can find it on
the SF Planning website cataloged under case number 2005.0912E.  In
reference to the current subject of tree removals, see pages 95-96.  A
copy of those pages is attached.

I just noticed that the area East of Visitacion between the middle
school and Hahn Avenue is not included in the SNRAMP/NRAMP.  It seems a
separate EIR should have been required for the scale of transformation
the NRD is implementing there.

I do not know who is in charge of the NRD now.  Is it Christopher?
Anyway, could you pass this email on to whoever is running the show?

Thanks,

Tom Borden

[Tom Borden]

Lauren,

There were a few other unanswered questions from the meeting, and
subsequent emails exchanges that I did not mention.

You said you did not know what herbicide will be used on the stumps of
cut trees along Visitacion and by the amphitheater.  Could you let us
all know what is being used?

People asked about nesting bird surveys for the tree removal areas.
Could you please provide the surveys for the Visitacion and amphitheater
areas?

People would like to see the arborist reports for the trees removed
along Visitacion and for the trees to be removed by the amphitheater. 
Could you please provide those to the Collaborative?

Thanks,

Tom Borden

On 4/1/2024 9:18 AM, Chavez, Lauren (REC) wrote:
> Thanks for your detailed follow up questions, Tom.
>
> I've relayed them to our team and we'll get back to you soon.
>
> Best,
> Lauren
>
>
> Lauren Dietrich Chavez
> Project Manager, Capital & Planning Division
>
> Pronouns: she, her
> A guest on traditional, unceded Ramaytush Ohlone lands
>
> San Francisco Recreation and Park Department  | City & County of San Francisco
> 49 South Van Ness Avenue, Suite 1220 | San Francisco, CA 94103
> (628) 652-6643  |  lauren...@sfgov.org
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Borden <t...@intrinsicdevices.com>
> Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2024 8:12 PM
> To: Chavez, Lauren (REC) <lauren...@sfgov.org>
> Cc: mclarenparkc...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: NRD Tree Removal Practices
>
>
> This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

[Tom Borden]

Here is another response from RPD that addresses some of the first round of questions I submitted. 
It does not address their violation of the NRAMP prohibition of large scale tree removals in localized areas.
It also does not address the fact that the Visitacion tree removal project is not covered by the NRAMP.

I have not begun to dig into this yet.

tom B.

-------- Forwarded Message --------

Subject:	RE: NRD Tree Removal Practices
Date:	Fri, 5 Apr 2024 20:52:00 +0000
From:	Bishop, Lamonte' (REC) <lamonte...@sfgov.org>

To:	Chavez, Lauren (REC) <lauren...@sfgov.org>, Tom Borden <t...@intrinsicdevices.com>
CC:	Campbell, Christopher (REC) <christophe...@sfgov.org>

Hi Tom,

Thank you for your email. The Recreation and Park Department diligently monitors tree removals and replacements related to storm damage and capital projects, ensuring a 1:1 replacement ratio for trees standing at 15 feet and taller. Please reference the attached FAQs for information on tree replacement. Removal of hazardous trees is not constrained by a specific quota, as removal decisions are dictated by the level of hazard they pose. Our approach to tree removal carefully considers both immediate and long-term environmental impacts, with subsequent restoration efforts meticulously planned. This encompasses proactive measures such as planting and erosion control, which are integrated into the broader restoration initiatives for the affected areas. Notably, tree removal activities in McLaren Park encompass both natural areas and the wider park landscape beyond these designated zones. Note that RPD is not clear cutting the area. We are employing selective removal based on an arborist’s assessment report to enhance the health of McLaren ecosystem. All tree removals and plantings are being accounted for.
Regards,
LaMonte'
____________________________________
LaMonté Bishop Senior Manager of Policy and Public Affairs

San Francisco Recreation and Park Department
City & County of San Francisco

McLaren Lodge in Golden Gate Park
501 Stanyan Street | San Francisco, CA | 94117
E-mail: LaMonte...@sfgov.org
Direct:  (415) 831-2769
 

Visit us at sfrecpark.org    
Like us on Facebook  
Follow us on Twitter   
Watch us on sfRecParkTV 
Sign up for our e-News

[Tom Borden]

I received this response from Lauren to the additional questions I emailed her.  I have just skimmed through the reports. 
The arborist report #8 covers the park interior.  This is not attached.  I will send it in a second email.
Arborist report #9 is for the area along Visitacion.  It is harder to interpret since there is no map of tree locations. 

All of the other files are nesting bird surveys. 
Zone 2 is for the amphitheater/Grey Fox Creek area. 
Apparently, the consultant surveyed three plots or zones along Visitacion.
It's hard to figure out what location each survey report is about.

Tom B.

-------- Forwarded Message --------

Subject:	Re: Other questions from the March 27 Collaborative meeting

Date:	Fri, 5 Apr 2024 20:21:54 +0000
From:	Chavez, Lauren (REC) <lauren...@sfgov.org>
To:	t...@intrinsicdevices.com <t...@intrinsicdevices.com>, Tom Scott <tosc...@gmail.com>, Linda Stark Litehiser <linda....@gmail.com>
CC:	Bishop, Lamonte' (REC) <lamonte...@sfgov.org>, Campbell, Christopher (REC) <christophe...@sfgov.org>

Hi Tom,
(also looping in Tom S and Linda, so you all can share with other interested folks)

Thanks for your questions.

Our contractor is using Dow Capstone herbicide to prevent re-sprouting on cut trees. It is a Tier II herbicide on SF Environment's latest list (https://www.sfenvironment.org/media/13824/download?inline). The contractor will be posting public notices 4 days in advance of application, staying on site and temporarily close trails until the application has dried, and keeping notices posted 5 days after application.

Biologists reports received to date for the project are attached.
Note that Area 2 (around the Jerry Garcia Amphitheater and Grey Fox Creek) will be assessed again this weekend, and--as previously noted-- if nesting birds are found, appropriate buffers will be established within which work will not proceed.

I'm also attaching the arborist reports for Visitacion Avenue and all the Natural Resource Areas.

Please keep in mind what I shared at the Collaborative meeting.
1) Trees are being removed for safety, habitat enhancement, and trail alignment purposes.
2) There are three areas in the conceptual plan where tree removals are occurring for habitat enhancement purposes (Grey Fox Creek, University Hill, and Vis Ave) and these were discussed in site walks and meetings leading up to the final conceptual plan. 3) The concept plan was iterated to reach compromise with a variety of stakeholders, and then design detailed by skilled professionals with input from NRD staff and 3rd party arborists.
There was a suggestion at the Collaborative meeting to hold a tree-honoring ceremony, and I have been putting some feelers out to see if folks are interested/ available to do this sometime this spring. Please let me know if you'd like to participate.

Thanks for your interest and advocacy,

Lauren


Lauren Dietrich Chavez
Project Manager, Capital & Planning Division

Pronouns: she, her
A guest on traditional, unceded Ramaytush Ohlone lands

San Francisco Recreation and Park Department  | City & County of San Francisco

49 South Van Ness Avenue, Suite 1220 | San Francisco, CA 94103
(628) 652-6643  |  lauren...@sfgov.org

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Borden <t...@intrinsicdevices.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2024 8:49 AM
To: Chavez, Lauren (REC) <lauren...@sfgov.org>

Cc: Bishop, Lamonte' (REC) <lamonte...@sfgov.org>; Campbell, Christopher (REC) <christophe...@sfgov.org>; McLaren Park Collaborative <mclarenparkc...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Other questions from the March 27 Collaborative meeting

Lauren,

There were a few other unanswered questions from the meeting, and subsequent emails exchanges that I did not mention.

You said you did not know what herbicide will be used on the stumps of cut trees along Visitacion and by the amphitheater.  Could you let us all know what is being used?

People asked about nesting bird surveys for the tree removal areas. Could you please provide the surveys for the Visitacion and amphitheater areas?

People would like to see the arborist reports for the trees removed along Visitacion and for the trees to be removed by the amphitheater. Could you please provide those to the Collaborative?

Thanks,

Tom Borden

On 4/1/2024 9:18 AM, Chavez, Lauren (REC) wrote:

Thanks for your detailed follow up questions, Tom.

I've relayed them to our team and we'll get back to you soon.

Best,
Lauren


Lauren Dietrich Chavez
Project Manager, Capital & Planning Division

Pronouns: she, her
A guest on traditional, unceded Ramaytush Ohlone lands

San Francisco Recreation and Park Department  | City & County of San Francisco

49 South Van Ness Avenue, Suite 1220 | San Francisco, CA 94103
(628) 652-6643  |  lauren...@sfgov.org

[Tom Borden]

LaMonte',

Thank you for your email in which you claim,

"The Recreation and Park Department diligently monitors tree removals and replacements related to storm damage and capital projects, ensuring a 1:1 replacement ratio for trees standing at 15 feet and taller."

I would like to point out some contrary evidence based on information available to the public.

Tree Replacement Ratio
First, let me point out, RPD has committed to planting 2 trees for every one removed.  This appears in the base Strategic Plan. In the 2021 update, RPD was to develop reforestation guidelines, presumably in line with the 2:1 replacement ratio.  Then in last year's update RPD committed to create a tree management database. 

2016-2020  Strategic Plan, Strategy 4, Objective 4.1
Performance Indicator    Tree replacement ratio
Performance Target        Plant two new trees for every tree removed

2021 strategic plan update, Strategy 4, Objective 4.1
Develop reforestation guidelines for all maintained park sites to sustain a healthy and vibrant tree canopy

2023 Strategic Plan Update, Strategy 4, Objective 4.1
Develop and populate a tree management database to record plantings, maintenance and status of park trees

There is no way RPD can meet a 2:1 or even a 1:1 replacement commitment without a database tracking trees removed and replacement trees planted.  Would you please provide a copies of the Department's "Reforestation Guidelines" and its tree management database?  People should be able to see the progress RPD is making on this Strategic Plan issue.

Are trees less than 6" DBH being counted?
The next issue is what qualifies as a Tree.  The management of RPD's undeveloped parkland, or Natural Areas, is to be managed in compliance with the SNRAMP which states, "For accounting purposes, the SNRAMP defines a Tree as any plant having a dominant vertical trunk that is over 15 feet tall."  Your statement agrees with this.  However, RPD staff are not using this measurement to decide if a removed tree is a Tree, that needs to be counted.  There is abundant evidence of this.

Lauren Chavez, the capital planner running the tree removal and native plant restorations for the NRD made statements at the Collaborative meeting.
She does not know of a database where RPD tracks trees removed and replacement trees planted.
She said that trees removed were only counted as Trees if they were more than 6" or 8" diameter at breast height (DBH).  She was completely unaware of the measure of a tree as any plant having a trunk over 15 feet tall.

The report by Oracle Oak, "TREE ASSESSMENT: VISITACION AVE. PROJECT AREA, McLAREN PARK" states that their survey only included "Candidate trees were greater than 6 inches in diameter".  In their examination of each tree, they "Measure the trunk diameter (DBH) of each tree."  There is no mention of noting if the tree is more or less than 15 feet tall.

The Hort Science report, "Tree Risk Assessment McLaren Park Trails Priority Improvements" similarly states that its assessment includes, " 4. Measuring the trunk diameter at a point 54-inches above grade." There is no mention of noting if the tree is more than 15 feet tall.

The document you attached to your message, "McLaren Trails Priority Improvements Project Tree Work Info – FAQ",  states,
"Typically, plants are considered Trees when they have a diameter at breast height (DBH) of 8 inches or more. For accounting purposes, the SNRAMP defines a tree as any plant having a dominant vertical trunk that is over 15 feet tall. This is
sometimes shorthanded as a plant with DBH of 6 inches or more."

DBH and height of the vertical trunk are two completely different measurements.  Trees that are 6" DBH are much taller than 15 feet, especially eucalyptus and pines.  Saying that 6" DBH is equivalent to 15 feet tall is nonsense.  One is not "shorthanded" for the other.  That statement above is just a attempt to cover up the fact that staff are ignoring the SNRAMP and using a DBH measurement as the reporting cutoff.

Using 6" DBH as the cutoff for what is a Tree means that you are not counting (or replacing) vast quantities of young trees that are the future of our urban forest.

As I understand it, NRD gardeners are empowered by RPD to cut down trees up to 8" DBH without involving dedicated RPD forestry staff or an outside contractor.  Considering the people who wrote the FAQ believe, "Typically, plants are considered Trees when they have a diameter at breast height (DBH) of 8 inches or more."  I doubt that gardeners are reporting the bulk of the trees smaller than 8" DBH they remove on their own.

Large scale tree removals in localized areas
Finally, you did not address the fact that the NRAMP prohibits mass tree removals of the sort RPD executed along Visitacion and is starting to execute by the amphitheater.   The language in the SNRAMP FEIR is as follows.
"The SFRPD would spread tree removal across targeted portions of Natural Areas and would not concentrate it in a particular location. Larger-scale tree removal (that exceeds half an acre or on average more than 20 trees), identified and analyzed as long-term programmatic projects in this EIR, would remove trees within urban forests (MA-2 and MA-3) over time and not simultaneously in one portion of a Natural Area."

The clear cutting RPD performed along Visitacion is a blatant violation of this. The proposed tree removals by the amphitheater will be another one.  If RPD is responsible to the public, it will halt the planned removals and rework the removal plans so they comply with commitments agreed by the Department.

Regards,

Tom Borden

On 4/5/2024 1:52 PM, Bishop, Lamonte' (REC) wrote:

Hi Tom,

Thank you for your email. The Recreation and Park Department diligently monitors tree removals and replacements related to storm damage and capital projects, ensuring a 1:1 replacement ratio for trees standing at 15 feet and taller.  Please reference the attached FAQs for information on tree replacement.  Removal of hazardous trees is not constrained by a specific quota, as removal decisions are dictated by the level of hazard they pose. Our approach to tree removal carefully considers both immediate and long-term environmental impacts, with subsequent restoration efforts meticulously planned. This encompasses proactive measures such as planting and erosion control, which are integrated into the broader restoration initiatives for the affected areas. Notably, tree removal activities in McLaren Park encompass both natural areas and the wider park landscape beyond these designated zones. Note that RPD is not clear cutting the area. We are employing selective removal based on an arborist’s assessment report to enhance the health of McLaren ecosystem.  All tree removals and plantings are being accounted for.  

Regards,
LaMonte'
____________________________________
LaMonté Bishop 
Senior Manager of Policy and Public Affairs

San Francisco Recreation and Park Department
City & County of San Francisco
McLaren Lodge in Golden Gate Park
501 Stanyan Street | San Francisco, CA | 94117
E-mail: LaMonte...@sfgov.org

Direct:  (415) 831-2769
 

Visit us at sfrecpark.org

    
Like us on Facebook  
Follow us on Twitter   
Watch us on sfRecParkTV 
Sign up for our e-News

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Borden <t...@intrinsicdevices.com> 
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2024 8:12 PM
To: Chavez, Lauren (REC) <lauren...@sfgov.org>
Cc: mclarenparkc...@googlegroups.com
Subject: NRD Tree Removal Practices


This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.



Lauren,

You made some worrisome statements at the McLaren Park Collaborative meeting yesterday evening.  Based on them, it appears the NRD is disregarding its obligations under the SNRAMP.

The SNRAMP calls for 1:1 tree replacements for trees removed.  You said you did not know if RPD has a database to track tree removals and replacements.  Such a database is fundamental to meeting RPD's tree replacement commitments, especially considering that replacements are made at a later time, possibly in different parks and not necessarily in Natural Areas.  If there is not a well tended database, then there is no way RPD can be meeting the 1:1 commitment.

No one in the NRD seems to have told you the correct definition of a "tree" for the purpose of counting removals. You indicated that you used a standard of either 6" or 8" diameter at breast height. Neither of those is correct.  "For accounting purposes, the SNRAMP defines a tree as any plant having a dominant vertical trunk that is over 15 feet tall."  I suspect the entire NRD is using 6" or 8" DBH as the reporting cutoff.  Most trees that are 6" to 8" DBH are much taller than 15 feet, especially eucalyptus and pines.  This means that San Francisco is losing many Trees that are not counted and or replaced.

We didn't discuss it last night, but clearly you are unaware that massive tree removals in localized areas are not allowed under the SNRAMP.  The Plan puts limits on concentrated tree removals to moderate the shock to the environment, control erosion, etc.  Your planned removals in the Gray Fox Creek area certainly exceed the 20 tree limit, especially if you count "Trees" correctly.

The clearcutting the NRD performed along Visitacion is a serious violation of this proscription.

I refer you to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Significant Natural Resource Areas Management Plan (Volume I).  You can find it on the SF Planning website cataloged under case number 2005.0912E.  In reference to the current subject of tree removals, see pages 95-96.  A copy of those pages is attached.

I just noticed that the area East of Visitacion between the middle school and Hahn Avenue is not included in the SNRAMP/NRAMP.  It seems a separate EIR should have been required for the scale of transformation the NRD is implementing there.

I do not know who is in charge of the NRD now.  Is it Christopher?
Anyway, could you pass this email on to whoever is running the show?

Thanks,

Tom Borden

[Patrick Huibregtse]

Tom,

Thank you for your diligent efforts to highlight RPD and NRD misalignment with their own policies and priorities. Unfortunately, it appears community disapproval of said tree removal and clear citing of aforementioned misalignment is not enough to stop this project. It is extremely disappointing to experience such a lack of accountability among city departments and officials. City residents deserve more than this. 

I was in the park today and witnessed the felling of this seemingly healthy and mature cypress near the amphitheater.

[R o b i n S h e r r e r]

it is a horror - a government sponsored and funded horror. 

most of us love our trees - but don't have the same full-time pay as the tree-killers do - so can only fight part-time - to no avail. 

makes me sick. 

R o b i n S h e r r e r  

c: 4 1 5 . 5 3 3 . 6 0 8 3

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "McLaren Park Collaborative" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mclarenparkcollabo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mclarenparkcollaborative/155CEF15-6354-4BCE-B7BB-F766E6CC4D6B%40gmail.com.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "McLaren Park Collaborative" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mclarenparkcollabo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mclarenparkcollaborative/155CEF15-6354-4BCE-B7BB-F766E6CC4D6B%40gmail.com.

-Patrick 

On Apr 10, 2024, at 10:16 AM, Tom Borden <t...@intrinsicdevices.com> wrote:

 LaMonte',

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "McLaren Park Collaborative" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mclarenparkcollabo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mclarenparkcollaborative/b5a52784-aa88-42b3-a082-fb5fc33b18fa%40intrinsicdevices.com.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "McLaren Park Collaborative" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mclarenparkcollabo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mclarenparkcollaborative/155CEF15-6354-4BCE-B7BB-F766E6CC4D6B%40gmail.com.

[Marlene Tran]

I’m really GRIEVING to hear of so many viable trees being chopped! I really LOVE TREES!  😭 😭 😭………

Please read the article I just forwarded to Vanita Louie ( Park Commissioner) & to the McLaren Collaborates. 

Grateful to you all ! ❤️ …….. 

Marlene 

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 26, 2024, at 1:38 PM, R o b i n S h e r r e r <rshe...@gmail.com> wrote:



To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mclarenparkcollaborative/CA%2BQxO2v9Fn34Wx3a%3DuEmB%3DWKDjD-BNeDUJ7z%2BeaxUTCPuQKgkw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Tom Borden]

Tree health, public safety and improved trails have virtually nothing to do with these tree removals.  It's all about converting McLaren from a park into a native plant nature preserve.

And now they are going to follow up with another tree removal project they never told us about.

At the April 18th Rec Park Commission meeting an attendee reported, "Phil Ginsburg explained that the NRAMP is being implemented at McLaren Park. Trees are being removed to restore habitat, which is the mission of the NRAMP. He said for every tree removed, two will be planted."

So, the department head promises a 2:1 tree replacement policy.  Why does the "McLaren Trails Priority Improvements Project
Tree Work Info – FAQ" only offers the half hearted promise that they are, "aiming to plant slightly more trees than we're removing".

Tom

-Patrick 

On Apr 10, 2024, at 10:16 AM, Tom Borden <t...@intrinsicdevices.com> wrote:

 LaMonte',

[R o b i n S h e r r e r]

OUR TREES AND PARKS IN PERIL!!!

https://westsideobserver.com/24/4-mcclarren-park-trees-to-be-chopped.php

R o b i n S h e r r e r  

c: 4 1 5 . 5 3 3 . 6 0 8 3

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mclarenparkcollaborative/3431DE41-A55E-41B7-BF5C-F8EE36A8704D%40yahoo.com.

[Tom Borden]

Lamonte,

It's been over two weeks and you have not responded to any of my questions.  In the mean time, there have been a few new developments.

At the April 18th Rec Park Commission meeting an attendee reported, "Phil Ginsburg explained that the NRAMP is being implemented at McLaren Park. Trees are being removed to restore habitat, which is the mission of the NRAMP. He said for every tree removed, two will be planted."   Why does the "McLaren Trails Priority Improvements Project Tree Work Info – FAQ" only offer the half-hearted promise that RPD is, "aiming to plant slightly more trees than we're removing"?

A tally over the weekend shows that the NRD has already cut down 30 trees in the Amphitheater area of McLaren Park.  An additional 71 trees are marked for removal.  That total is double the "approximately 50 trees"  shown on the notification signs.

New tree removal signs were posted in another area adjacent to the amphitheater removal area, again without any public discussion.


I take it from your lack of response that:

-RPD has no documented commitment to a 2:1 tree replacement policy, or even 1:1 for that matter.

-The database of tree removals and tree plantings RPD committed to create does not exist.  Without this database, trees are being cut down at will with no department-wide recording.   Without this, the promise of corresponding replacement trees is hollow.

-RPD is removing trees less than 6" diameter at breast height (DBH) and not counting them, even though it claims to follow the SNRAMP directive to count any tree greater than 15 feet tall, which includes a huge number of trees less than 6" DBH.

-RPD clearcut the area along Visitacion and is doing the same in the amphitheater area.  This is expressly forbidden by the SNRAMP, but you refuse to acknowledge the violation and RPD moves headlong with the massive tree removals during bird nesting season.

Please consider an immediate halt to the McLaren Park tree cutting and only resume when real protections are put in place for our  forests, our wildlife and our committment to fight anthropogenic climate change.

Respectfully,

Tom Borden

-------- Forwarded Message --------

Subject:	Re: NRD Tree Removal Practices

Date:	Wed, 10 Apr 2024 10:16:05 -0700
From:	Tom Borden <t...@intrinsicdevices.com>
Reply-To:	t...@intrinsicdevices.com
To:	Bishop, Lamonte' (REC) <lamonte...@sfgov.org>
CC:	Chavez, Lauren (REC) <lauren...@sfgov.org>, Campbell, Christopher (REC) <christophe...@sfgov.org>, McLaren Park Collaborative <mclarenparkc...@googlegroups.com>

[Aaron Goodman]

I second the statement of Tom Borden tree removal at this stage in climate issues is a big error. We need shade and trees and they take a long time to mature… we don’t have that time anymore leave the trees 

Aaron Goodman 

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 29, 2024, at 1:55 PM, Tom Borden <t...@intrinsicdevices.com> wrote:

 Lamonte,

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "McLaren Park Collaborative" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mclarenparkcollabo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mclarenparkcollaborative/6f58c4d8-4430-42f7-98ec-6dca8e41ecb3%40intrinsicdevices.com.

[Bishop, Lamonte' (REC)]

Hi Tom,

 

The goal the McLaren Park Trail Improvement Project is to enhance the park’s sustainability and vibrancy. For every tree removed, there will be more than one planted. All Capital projects report on the number of trees removed and number of trees planted, and these are tallied in our tree management database.

 

There are three reasons for the removal:

 

• Safety: Sick and aging trees pose safety risks, especially along trails. We're removing trees deemed hazardous by an independent arborist to ensure the well-being of park visitors.
• Habitat Enhancement: By carefully pruning and removing trees, we're fostering healthier ecosystems and restoring native habitats across the park. From increasing daylight penetration along Grey Fox Creek to thinning over-crowded eucalyptus trees at University Hill, our efforts aim to promote biodiversity and ecosystem resilience.
• Trail Work: Upgrading trails to minimize erosion and enhance natural beauty is a key focus here. In addition to improving existing trails, we're creating new pathways to improve accessibility and provide new opportunities for exploration.

 

Thank you for your advocacy.

 

Regards,

LaMonte’

____________________________________

LaMonté Bishop

Senior Manager of Policy and Public Affairs

 

San Francisco Recreation and Park Department

City & County of San Francisco

McLaren Lodge in Golden Gate Park

501 Stanyan Street | San Francisco, CA | 94117

E-mail: LaMonte...@sfgov.org

Direct:  (415) 831-2769

 

Visit us at sfrecpark.org     Like us on Facebook   Follow us on Twitter    Watch us on sfRecParkTV  Sign up for our e-News

[Tom Borden]

Lamonte',

Thanks for your reply.  However, you somehow missed most of the issues I raised.  Let me make this as straightforward as possible.  Would you please provide copies of the following documents that should exist if RPD is doing what it claims.

Please provide the documentation for the implementation of this Objective.
The 2016-2020  Strategic Plan, Strategy 4, Objective 4.1

Performance Indicator    Tree replacement ratio
Performance Target        Plant two new trees for every tree removed

Please provide a copy of the "reforestation guidelines" developed.

2021 strategic plan update, Strategy 4, Objective 4.1
Develop reforestation guidelines for all maintained park sites to sustain a healthy and vibrant tree canopy

Please provide a copy of this tree management database as it exists today.

2023 Strategic Plan Update, Strategy 4, Objective 4.1
Develop and populate a tree management database to record plantings, maintenance and status of park trees

Thanks,

Tom Borden

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "McLaren Park Collaborative" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mclarenparkcollabo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mclarenparkcollaborative/BY5PR09MB55237E13579990FDFCA80144941C2%40BY5PR09MB5523.namprd09.prod.outlook.com.