I'm going to talk about risk and I'm going to make a little introduction related to the main topic discussed today, which is the benefit of trees.
We need to keep in mind that risk analysis' are done to save trees,
they are a discipline that seeks to understand why trees fall and also to distinguish between a dangerous tree and one that is not.
The first consequence of a well-conducted risk analysis is that fewer trees are cut.
If we are unaware of the meaning of a tree as a heritage and benefit,
it is very easy to fall into the temptation of: "you know what? Let's cut it down a bit, "" you know what? Let's cut the top "
If we do not think of the beneficial factor of the tree is very difficult to put it on the the risk balance,
because this always frightens us, with that feeling of "what if… this, or what if ... that"
If we do not think of the tree as an unquestionable benefit, we will be bad risk assessors.
Note that a man who is a risk assessor cans see in a year 3000 trees
and after ten years would have seen 30,000 trees and still he can make mistakes.
You can assure that a tree is safe and then it falls on someone and kills them,
and that is a responsibility that not everybody want to assume.
The risk analysis is not to be on the safe side,
and everything I see that I do not like, is out
That's not risk, that's something else.
In risk analysis you have to be serious and honest with reality
and if one is not, will be then the risk analysis the ones that have the risk,
sorry for the redundancy, to go over the top
If we understand that a tree is a tool that can improve people's happiness,
the decisions will be calmer
If we simply see the trees as an inheritance
and that "they are beautiful and have always been there" ...
No, listen, the trees are not that, they are a tool to improve people's happiness in the city
so beware of decisions that we make
This has to conunteract constantly the decision-making progress as we the see proportionality in the decisions we make
If we do not have that counterweight, the balance is always on the other side.
This is the city we want, which we understand to be beneficial to people,
where the population goes in the streets out and relieves stress.
This means that the decisions concerning those trees have to take into account the existential benefit,
and I cannot remove them just because it is what I think is best.
Small trees in small streets
I think people here are happy,
maybe they can't pass with the cart, or the leaves fall in the drainage channel
But I'm telling you, people outside this place are happy
and here not as much
I defend a kind of extreme arboriculture
that seeks to look not only the technical and feasible part,
also the part of social consideration that it implies.
These are a series of photographs for you can see the visual effect
that can cause the presence or absence of trees
When I decide to cut a tree, it is a risk decision,
but I am affecting that capacity to relieve stress
and to operate with greater happiness of the people,
and that is a decision that is not included in the job of a technician
Notice that in the current measurements, tree units are not the only things that matters,
whether you have ten thousand or a hundred thousand.
Final coverage is what matters
How many trees do I have per inhabitant?
No, how many square meters or cubic meters of leaves do you have?
That's the data.
That means introducing pruning and having trees with a different risk factor
Obviously the telephone pole does not fall,
but the telephone pole does not give any benefit either
It is not that the tree generates happiness, but it does facilitate that happiness
It is landscape, it is so many things ...
You have to quantify the benefit of the tree,
but I do not care if it's 2,200 or 2,500 dollars;
one has to understand that there is an average value per tree
and that when you make a risk decision you do it whether or not you know the concrete data of how much C02 it produces
It is a general average value that one has to recognize and with that you can get by
It is informative and important to have it,
but in the end it is not so much important how much you or you are worth
You are worthy because you are a person, and that's it
Thes are very interesting photograps from an English researcher
so that you can see the depopulation that generates the loss of trees in the enviroment
A Dutch scientist says that trees generate metabolites
that you breathe and favor the segregation of endorphins,
but the tree in the picture is not generating any metabolites
It is the visual perception that we have
and how the landscape changes and with it also our comfort on it landscape
Notice that in this case only two trees are cut;
we can understand that it is London
This can be a neighborhood of Warsaw.
This is London too
When we mediate we are changing the benefit that the tree generates,
so we shouldn't take the risk carelessly,
because the tree has a huge importance
Before, I said that it is not worth knowing value of each tree and in general I think so,
but it is necessary for each town hall to make the effort in each town hall to put big numbers to the things
If I know that my trees have a health value, and a C02 value,
even if they are large numbers, I can compare
For example, how many complaints do I have on raised sidewalks or other issues?
Let's put the numbers on the table and see what's bigger.
It is more difficult and more intangible in the question of urban trees,
but you have to do that exercise and see what is greater
The most important thing in the town hall to make a change is to get a central core,
to have a group of people very convinced of that,
because if you are only as a technician you are surpassed
You need to talk to the mayor so that they understand that this should be a priority for the city council
When that happens in any project, it comes to a good end
If a government team is determined on, I don't know, make a football stadium,
they will do it
You need to bring people together, teach them, train them and get them to listen to good people,
and things will move forward
As a technician you have two benchmarks: zero risks, zero problems.
The tree can not be in the drainage channel, but a meter from it.
A clear list of inconveniences should be made.
I remember a lady who was told by a friend of a pruner, who called the town hall again and again to prune the trees.
The story is that the woman sewed up and needed more natural light, and wanted all the pruned trees
What is a inconvenience?
In New York City you can ask the city council to go to your house to show up because there is a problem,
but the list of annoyance is set by them, not you.
For example, annoyance #1, the tree covers a traffic light, etc.
There is a list of annoyances that the city council sets,
and if your annoyance is not among them ,you cannot send the pruning form
Calling?...
No, look, fill out the form on the Internet and send it to me,
and if it's not a real problem, we will have to ignore it,
because that's not a real annoyance, it's a fictitious inconvenience
In general, trees endure much more than we think.
When a tree falls it will be in the news, because it rarely happens
And there are many works in the streets, many sidewalks cuts, etc.
Let's say that trees have a capacity to withstand mistreatment
There is one thing that's very interesting to me
In London, there is a working team, the Tree Commission, which designs the urban trees
People who meet only when decisions about trees are to be made.
There are real estate developers, freeway workers, owners of the Telecoms ...
There are all the people involved in the urban space shared with the tree.
There is also the entire town hall, because they all have to understand the good of the trees
When the bussines man who decides to put electric utilities or gas pipes understands the value,
it is easy for him to take measures or talk with the colleague of parks and gardens to solve the problemas that may come up...
When people in all sectors have understood that, it is easier to take action
In the United States especially, but also in other cities, they are working on joint management of rainwater and trees
The cities are no longer designed, in the part of iplanting trees, without taking into account the water inflitration
The same tree surround is used to be a point of accumulation of water to reduce the runoff,
to reduce the section of the pipes mananing rainwater, reduce the section of purifier, etc
The idea is that the city is permeable, but that does not mean that all pavements are
It means that each tree element may have a small water input capacity
In Barcelona, we are trying to make a system of percolation of water in each tree surround
Everything that falls from rain goes to the tree.
There are deposits are not connected, or may not be connected
They fill up and then through permeability the water reaches the ground and that's it,
and then when it's full it goes to the next and so on
More than what kind of pavement, you have to wonder how I don't let the rainwater to slip and get into my city
We must make entry points associated with accumulation capacity
But what I'm saying, you have to notice that sometimes the risk decisions we make pay for the sins of others.
In my town there was a great storm and 125,000 trees fell down between forest and private properties
The city council let people cut whatever they wanted the following month
All the trees who had been saved, those who had proved themselves to be good,
were eliminated because of that panic
That decision taken because of the panic among people, which I understand,
is sometimes not the real from the point of view of risk associated with a particular tree
We have to manage the sensations of the people, since we work for them,
but we also have to be honest with the reality of the risk that we manage,
and not let ourselves be fouled by that panic
We have to be a bit brave
I remember in 1995, when I started, a congress in Madrid that was about the inherited tree
30 years later we are still talking about the inherited tree, which has touched us and we have not been able to decide.
The town councils are still there. It is about time, enough is enough: You must make the decision to cut
If we wait until the tree dies to change the city we will not change anything
If we want to improve the quality of the city through the trees we have to take the chainsaw,
and finish with the old, the sick, etc
That means scheduling and explaining very well why, but we have to be brave
It is necessary to preserve the singular and the emblematic, evidently, and protect it
But often the most dangerous trees in the city are also the ugliest and most expensive
Well, we can start there ...
To start changing the tree it is no excuse
For more infomation >> Bomba atómica estalló sobre la Tierra hace 12.000 años - Duration: 4:37. 
For more infomation >> PALADIUM , le 2* rec mais la 1 coffre a étais cut , le meilleurs - Duration: 6:17. 
For more infomation >> Borja Voces cayó rendido ante la reporterita Sammy Blue - Duration: 4:05. 
For more infomation >> PNL MEXICO "LE MONDE DE CHICO" MS#13GANG - Duration: 4:17. 
For more infomation >> Mane de la Parra - PARTE DE MI (subtítulos) - Duration: 4:06. 
For more infomation >> Brasil en Rusia y Argentina en Repechaje, así quedó la eliminatoria en Sudamérica - Duration: 0:32. 
For more infomation >> Le petit bonhomme avec de la lumière plein la tête - Duration: 0:56. 
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét