Help Richmond Urban Forest—before 11:59 pm, November 12, 2017

Have your say in Richmond’s Urban Forest Management Strategy survey at LetsTalkRichmond.ca. You have until 11:59 p.m. on Sunday, Nov. 12, 2017.

You can look over the survey here. If you have a large screen, you can have this article and the survey open side-by-side.

Skim past the introduction to the questions. Recognize that some of them are worth your time far more than others, and you don’t have to answer every question. Make preliminary notes, including whether to answer particular questions.

You would answer #1 but might skip #2 (because of unclear directions) or just mark all the items as “4-important” or “5- Most important.”

If you are going to answer #3, you might as well choose “Very satisfied” or “Very dissatisfied,” since the other three options all mean the same thing. (If you are somewhat dissatisfied, then you must also be somewhat satisfied, and vice versa.)

With questions 4 and 5, the main one to answer is #5. If you think “Unevenly spaced, variously sized trees” would be best for the urban forest, then you would write the number 3.

It’s worth doing #10 and often answering “Strongly agree.” Be aware that you can just skip an item. (However, once you have clicked a rating, you can simply change the rating but no longer skip the item.)

You might want to skip confusing items. Example: For “Require replacement trees for every tree removed unless the tree was hazardous,” does “Strongly disagree” mean that you strongly don’t want removed trees to be replaced? Or does it mean you strongly don’t want to exempt hazardous trees from replacement? (It’s anybody’s guess.)

For #12, “The three things I MOST VALUE about Richmond’s urban forest,” here’s an example, one person’s actual answer.

Where the urban forest is flourishing:

  1. It makes Richmond seem like a Garden City.
  2. It enables all kinds of life to thrive below and above the ground.
  3. It is a key factor in community wellness.

For #13, “The things I LEAST VALUE about Richmond’s urban forest,” one can list many things (not just three). This is perhaps the most useful part of the survey, so it is worth some thought. This is an edited version of a set of suggestions from another person, Cindy Lee, who is a leader of Save Richmond Trees:

The lack of protection for our mature trees.
Excessive limbing of protected trees.
Change in ground level by builders that leads to a tree’s death.
Concrete fences that are killing mature trees, as they suffocate the tree’s roots.
Not enough medium-size native street trees in established neighbourhoods.
Little consultation between city, architects and builders to retain trees.
Absence of a neighbourhood tree watch program to watch over protected trees.
Insufficient staff in tree bylaw department.
Lack of an annual tree sale like Vancouver’s.
Non-existent volunteer tree planting program.
Insufficient trees on farmland.

Too few urban tree corridors.

For #14, there’s no need to write an essay. For “My ideal image of Richmond’s urban forest” (in 2050), one person wrote this: “From the air it looks like a forest.” Worth aiming for!

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s