OK, time to empty my notebook.
Been a busy few weeks and haven’t had a chance to update some stuff you may be interested in.
First, let me catch you up on the tree hugger bylaw.
As I reported April 15, the City of Vancouver’s public release of a proposal to implement a more stringent and costly tree bylaw triggered a massive increase in the number of applications from property owners who want to cut down healthy trees.
Applications went from an average of five per day to 50 before the onslaught forced the city to temporarily shut down the office handling all the requests.
City council has ensured those lineups are now history.
Effective immediately, a permit may only be issued for the removal of trees that are dead, diseased, hazardous or within a new building footprint.
The old version of the bylaw allowed property owners to purchase a $64 permit to remove at least one healthy tree per year, regardless of the reason and there was no requirement to hire an arborist.
So, you may be thinking, what if I don’t have the cash to purchase the permit, pay the arborist and hire Paul Bunyan to get rid of my dying cherry tree?
Well, city council — being the caring bunch they are — has requested city staff report back on a mechanism to provide “compassionate relief” for those who don’t have the cash for an arborist’s assessment.
How much does that cost?
Depends who you call.
City council amended the bylaw because a recent staff report showed between 1996 and 2013 that more than 23,000 healthy trees went timmmmm-ber! in Vancouver.
Back in 1995, more than 22 per cent of the city was covered in trees and that dropped to 18 per cent in 2013, with almost all of the canopy decline occurring on private property. That's right, people clearing land to build new homes and highrises.
But the city is still affordable, right?
* * * * * *
Since I’m on the topic of the environment, I thought I’d put together a few sentences on why Mayor Gregor Robertson is suddenly calling for an end to whales and dolphins in captivity at the Vancouver Aquarium.
The mayor, by the way, says his position isn’t sudden.
“I was asked a few weeks back and just stated my personal opinion that I would like to see a phase out of whales and dolphins in captivity,” Robertson told reporters earlier this month. “I haven’t been asked before. Certainly, I was in support of phasing out orcas when that was a key issue.”
But what about calling for an end to penguins, sea lions and fish in captivity at the Aquarium?
“I’m not going to weigh in on which species at the Aquarium should be kept versus phased out,” he said. “But there’s real clarity, I feel, that cetaceans are not deserving of captivity. That’s a widely shared opinion these days.”
The mayor said he wants the park board and Aquarium to work out details of what happens next. In the meantime, he added, Robertson doesn’t support a referendum on whether whales and dolphins should be kept in captivity.
But that's what Green Party Coun. Adriane Carr wants. She was expected to introduce a motion at today's city council meeting.
twitter.com/Howellings
