Subscriber Comments for
The Climbing Tree

Comments in order of when they were received | (reverse order)

COMMENT 329727	2012-10-09 04:14 PM
Well said Ania! That tree was the best and I too was shocked to see it cut.
COMMENT 329728	2012-10-09 04:17 PM
Excellent op ed, well-written and illustrative.
COMMENT 329733	2012-10-09 04:24 PM
I know that tree and before the dogs took over I visited this park. It's too bad. Ever since City Arborist Dan Condon retired the tree policies of the P & R have been whacked. I think there could be a different solution.
COMMENT 329737	2012-10-09 04:33 PM
Sad to hear it. Not a very good solution I agree. @725, yes we like our trees and no, we aren't too fond of taggers and transients squatting anywhere they please.
COMMENT 329738P	2012-10-09 04:36 PM
I agree with the good vet. Leave the trees alone (sorry for the pun!). I've lived on Oak Park Lane for over 19 yrs and in the last year, three Oak trees have been taken out by people who said the trees were doing harm. It is shameful and yet they had permits. What a joke. Soon there will hardly be any Oak trees on Oak Park Lane. I thought this was a tree city...it's like every other dumb place that takes out trees that have been standing for over 150 yrs. Makes me sick.
NATURE BOY	2012-10-09 04:37 PM
It's the exact equivalent of removing benches so that homeless people won't have a place to sit, thus only forcing them elsewhere, and depriving the entire community of a place to sit. Ridiculous. The entire community loses a beloved and useful, just because a few so-called "undesirables" are enjoying it too. Why not just get rid of parks altogether, since a portion of their users are homeless, graffiti artists, and drug users? Not to mention that a homeless person sleeping under a sheltering tree, where they feel relatively safe, isn't exactly the world's biggest crime. So push them to the railroad tracks, or under a freeway bridge, right? Rubbish.
COMMENT 329743	2012-10-09 04:42 PM
It costs money to patrol these areas to keep the homeless out. Money the city doesn't have. And in the next story down you all are yahooing over not having to pay a few bits to park at the beach. You can't have it both ways people.
NATURE BOY	2012-10-09 04:51 PM
743: So do the homeless people disappear when the tree is cut down? So now it doesn't cost the city to patrol whatever area they move to? Nope, it still costs the city to roust them no matter where they try to sleep. So.... argument invalid.
COMMENT 329752	2012-10-09 05:00 PM
I'm swooning with the vapors just reading this breathless account. As others have said...it's a tree...relax and enjoy the fact that you have such a wonderful place to take your kid.
COMMENT 329755	2012-10-09 05:06 PM
Sounds like the City can't deal with their homeless problem, so they cut down all the trees that provide them "housing". We slaughtered the buffalo to reign in the Indians, so I guess we are now slaughtering trees to reign in the homeless. Pathetic...
NATURE BOY	2012-10-09 05:08 PM
To stand by while a great place is altered, because of social politics, to make it a less-great place, while saying "Well, it's still a great place, just not as much" is to miss the injustice here. And those who say "it's just a tree"... well, maybe they were never children? Maybe they forget the magic that a child can find in simple things & places? Maybe they've "grown up" so much that imagination is just a distant memory? Sorry to sound all hippie, but kids see wonder in things that grown-ups don't. And it IS sad when those things get taken away because of bureaucracy and stupid grown-up stuff.
COMMENT 329770	2012-10-09 05:35 PM
Fire half the worthless city workers and we'd have enough money to patrol our parks and keep our schools clean and safe. With a hugely bloated local govt filled with padded paychecks and nepotism, the sacrifice of our quality of life in order to satisfy the bureaucrats insatiable greed is unsustainable and an insult to the hard working citizens who pay their salaries. Its time to reduce our local Govt. We deserve better.
COMMENT 329773	2012-10-09 05:54 PM
Another perspective is to see and smell what's in and around this special place. This place the homeless have made their home. This tree provides these less responsible dwellers with a place to sleep, eat and of what would keep my children out of this place, a bathroom. Does anyone really think this area is safe knowing it is someones toilet. Also since we are talking about the condition of this place, can the impact of our off leash friends be ignored. Very little of any new growth occurs. Lets try leashing up this park for awhile and see what grows.
COMMENT 329777	2012-10-09 05:59 PM
All the folks here should organise a tree PLANTING group to combat this. C'mon do it...DO It...
COMMENT 329727	2012-10-09 06:04 PM
This particular tree is not even where the homeless guy hangs out, it's well known as the magic tree and is immediately next to two main pathways. It was fun to see kids playing there, now what? Cut all the trees just cause they are trees? I'm calling the city tomorrow.
NATURE BOY	2012-10-09 06:05 PM
I doubt that if the "magic tree" that these kids loved was strewn with human excrement and litter that the kids would still consider it a "magic tree". Sounds like it was a lovely, natural, and beautiful place, judging by the OP's description. Why tear down a child's dreams with cynical, sour, grown-up negativity?
COMMENT 329781	2012-10-09 06:12 PM
Don`t forget.... A plan that would eliminate transiency[this means panhandling,hanging-out,messes.., RV`s, & would`nt cost anything but what`s being spent on non-working solutions..exists in the possession of an SB citizen,but has not been examined by city-council...why? Had it been, this conversation would not be taking place.
COMMENT 329782	2012-10-09 06:16 PM
I too was sadly dismayed at the butchering of this tree. There was no need. Everyone I know who walks this park enjoyed this tree!
COMMENT 329804P	2012-10-09 07:33 PM
Now I don't want to go up there and feel the sadness that others of you have expressed. There have been other trees up there that have been completely removed, ever since the Parks Dept has been in charge. Not to mention all of the mowing, which does far more damage to the area than any dogs could ever do. A lot less butterflies up there now. What surprises me is how no one has mentioned "Jim," the nice and mellow guy who lived on the Wilcox for many, many years, in a trailer. He was the go-to guy for the neighbors (and the rest of the park visitors) whenever there was a problem with homeless/late night partiers, rabble rousers, etc. We all knew when Jim was made to leave that there would be no supervision. What a shame. He had a nice place to reside and provided free security. One time, many years ago, I was walking my boyfriend's 110-lb Malamute/Arctic wolf mix. She had a "thing" about homeless people. The smell and body posture, I suppose, would set her off. It was never a problem, but as we walked the property that day, she began to execute her stiff-legged, mohawk of fur raising up on her back walk----toward a branches-close-to-the-ground tree. At first, I didn't know what was up. I soon deduced she was flushing out some domicile-challenged person. I called her back to me, while making a bit of a pretense that she was not wholly under my control. She came right back to me. That person got the message, I believe. Never saw anyone in that "shelter" ever again. As a female, I have often felt (with good reason) that having a dog beside me is a grand deterrent to unwanted attention from certain male types. My dog now is only five pounds. But I wouldn't want to mess with his meal ticket, either.
COMMENT 329811	2012-10-09 07:41 PM
ya lazy city workers, iam still waiting to see if they cut the anchor bolts,concrete straps and exposed rebar on the two old garage foundations,before someone falls and and gets one in the head,then they well sue the city
NATURE BOY	2012-10-09 07:57 PM
There was a guy who lived in a trailer on the Wilcox Property?? That's crazy, i never heard that before! Was he legal, or was it in the days when SB had a "live and let live" approach? And the dog that flushed out homeless people -- I've never heard of that either!
COMMENT 329821	2012-10-09 08:01 PM
Yes Nature Boy, he lived there for many years in a trailer about 20 feet from the cliffs. Days gone by.
COMMENT 329841P	2012-10-09 09:01 PM
The city Parks Department is bloated. During the recent recession, the City Administrator worked extremely hard to make sure no one within that department would lose his job. Would there were the same kind of oversight as to what they do. Try complaining to Santos Escobar, Parks Manager, if you want in your face rudeness. And 743, the fees at the beach were for the County Beaches, Arroyo Burro, etc.The city, in fact, is recovering nicely financially, with above estimated tourist/TOT income so far this year. Thank you for your op-ed. What a shame for that tree. Just maybe it may prevent further butchering, especially if some of the council people dare to stand up to Nancy Rapp, Parks Director, and Santos Escobar.
CHERIDIANE	2012-10-09 10:02 PM
Oh what a shame. I got upset just reading what you wrote as I have seen the like. I so hope someone in charge of the tree cutters reads your well-written piece.
CEES	2012-10-09 11:32 PM
Very sad to read. My daughter and her friends used to play in that tree. It was a very unusual tree, that made it climbable even for young children. It wasn't just any old tree. Shame on the City for thinking this will clear out the homeless. Might as well turn it into a parking lot if you don't want vegetation that reaches to the ground. Then the homeless can have another ocean view spot for their motorhomes.... Just stupid.
COMMENT 329869	2012-10-10 06:50 AM
Cut the government. Not the trees.
COMMENT 329879	2012-10-10 07:30 AM
I live next door to the Wilcox and this effort is long overdue. The property is completely overrun with homeless nowadays. These folks come and go in front of our house at all hours of the night. Lately there has been a marked increase in unsavory types and action is needed. I'm calling the city to let them know that the neighbors are thankful for the efforts and encourage more efforts to clean up the park.
COMMENT 329885	2012-10-10 07:53 AM
I'm sorry but I have to disagree. While the ruined expectations of a child and her parent are a minor misfortune I don't see why everybody has to be consulted and a committee formed for the most mundane municipal chores. Talk about bloating the bureaucracy and the budget only to kick it down the street in the absence of a consensus - our national leadership has shown us how well that works out!! Trees are trimmed constantly, sometimes pruned harder than the more aesthetically minded property owner would consider to their own plantings, but they recover - often stronger and healthier than before. For voicing a contrarian view this comment will be deleted in ....1 ....2 .....3
COMMENT 329889	2012-10-10 08:06 AM
I am a neighbor to the 'DFP' and have been meaning to write about this butchering of the bush and trees for many years now. It isn't just this one tree! We were told they are making roads for fire trucks etc. Before long there will be no more places for the native animals to live and hide. It is no longer a nature preserve (it's even called a family preserve by the way). I can hardly walk through there anymore without feeling very sick and sad at what has been lost. I am relieved to know I am not the only one who doesn't like it. Must we chain ourselves to the trees to stop this?
COMMENT 329894	2012-10-10 08:14 AM
The government is what the American Revolution was for, it is who we are: of the people, by the people and for the people. It is a democracy instead of a theocracy or a plutocracy or a dictatorship run by kings or queens with "divine" rights. You get to participate. People who work for the govt are neighbors, friends, relatives. Get rid of them? Then try taking care of 57 parks that get trashed by the public every day. What is the alternative? 57 gated, private parks in the City paid for by those who go there? Private toll roads owned by an entrepreneur? Where does hatred for the govt and its employees take us? If you want to change the govt, get a petition, call, email, show up at the Parks &. Rec meetings and the City Council meetings with your alternative and change it. The Supes gave up beach fees when so many people showed up, called and emailed. Sometimes, it works.
RED CREEK	2012-10-10 08:27 AM
The Wilcox was supposedly "saved" to be a nature park or preserve. It is not. It is an intensively used urban park with unleashed dogs. No new landscaping was proposed or done to enhance the beauty and habitat values of the site. A preserve would be managed quite differently. Trees would be protected as habitat enhancers, native plants would replace the fire prone introduced weeds such as the mustard and radish (which now need to be cut each year), and dogs would have to be leased, at a minimum. If we really want to have the Wilcox as a natural area, the management, values and goals for the area will need to be redone, starting with leashing dogs.
COMMENT 329936	2012-10-10 09:39 AM
Fleas, yes---there are sprays and other methods for eliminating these pests; we could use same for the vagrants---if only.....
MTNDRIVER	2012-10-10 09:52 AM
I agree, not a great solution to the problem. It's indeed similar to the strategy of re-orienting or removing sidewalk benches downtown. The most common response to homelessness seems to be "move 'em along, move 'em along." Out of sight, out of mind. And so homeless people turn up elsewhere, and the same strategy is used, move 'em along. It's pretty sad all around, butchering trees to deprive vulnerable people of a sense of relative safety. No claim here to have a solution, but I can see this action isn't one. I don't think as a community or a society we are ready or willing to really find solutions to homelessness. Too expensive, too difficult. Not exempting myself here. So we demonize and imagine we can move them along right on out of town entirely.
COMMENT 329945	2012-10-10 09:54 AM
I'm sorry, but (surprise, surprise) I have to agree with the dissenters. Where did this sense of entitlement come from? This is not your yard, and not your tree. If the City feels the need to provide some kind of maintenance for this otherwise neglected (as evidenced by the presence of vagrants) property, that's their duty and their right. When will people learn that it's not our right to dictate what is done with property that is not ours (government-owned or otherwise)?
COMMENT 329970	2012-10-10 10:48 AM
That's right, government property is not our property. Or is it? I thought the government existed to serve the people? So that any property it has is used as we agree? I agree that the government appears to run itself as if it was their money and property. So it is up to us to remind them occasionally where their true priorities lie. To paraphrase a forefather, the tree of liberty is refreshed occasionally with the sweat of patriots.
COMMENT 329983	2012-10-10 11:21 AM
That is so sad. I live out of town now but just before I left I showed my 7 year old nephew that tree and it made his whole visit. I learned how to climb on that tree. I hung out there as a teenager when the whole world seemed against me, an that was my one adult-free safe haven. I have encountered homeless people there but they never made me feel unwelcome, even as a 15 year old girl. They just agreed that it was a neat tree, and felt like it was the best place in the whole park. They were just using it to hang out in, like me. A temporary haven during the day, which is perfectly legal- no one was camping there in the day, maybe someone slept there at night... It was a high traffic place in the day anyway.
COMMENT 329992	2012-10-10 11:37 AM
Thank you Anya for speaking for the trees. I can empathize because I live in a place where the "trimmers" have been buthchering the trees every year at bloom time because "several" years ago "one" person complained that rats had climbed a tree and gotten into their attic. (Remedied by repairing the vent). Now every year my bedrooms are 10-12 degrees hotter ! I have fantasies of climbing the tree to protect it from the over pruning but they somehow manage to do it while I am not home :(
COMMENT 330037	2012-10-10 02:03 PM
I am deeply sad to hear about this! This sounds like the tree where I met my wife in, and I proposed to her in this tree as well. The thought of what they did to it makes me not want to see what they did. Beyond sad :(
NATURE BOY	2012-10-10 04:30 PM
945: You bet your BRITCHES that the Preserve is "ours"! It is a public park -- meaning, WE pay for its upkeep, WE own it, and WE should have a voice in deciding what gets done to it. To concede ownership of public spaces to "government" is to curl up & play dead. Public is public.
COMMENT 330305P	2012-10-11 10:02 AM
We pay taxes that go to maintain the parks. They say we do not pay enough so this is how they can maintain the parks at the lowest cost. The good doc is overly dramatic in her statement that future generations will not be able to enjoy the tree. And comparing it to cutting off a dog's tail to get rid of fleas is absurd. The branches and leaves grow back just like they do on the trees on State and Milpas after they are cut back to nothing. Shaving a dog to help get rid of fleas is actually a pretty good idea. In reality the parks department makes the call on the trees in all of our parks. If you want to have an individual say in how a tree is maintained grow one in your own yard.

35% of comments on this page were made by Edhat Community Members.

*** One comment was removed from this thread by the Edhat Board Nanny for violating Edhat Comments Board policy. Click Here to see it.

EDHAT COMMENTS POLICY