Thursday, February 4, 2016
When heartburn becomes heart attack!
From my discussions with Parks people, there's a feeling that Councils across Perth could be losing up to 80% of their young street trees. And when you think they will then lose 80% of the replacement trees as well, the real cost of treeing our city is obviously a lot higher than we're admitting.
But how high?
Well, I started crunching some numbers to try and work it out.
And you know what? It got too hard. Maybe someone with a rocket science degree can figure it out but not this poor bunny.
What I did see very quickly however is that what we're talking about here is a bit like compound interest only in reverse. It's "compound damage"! You plant 100, lose 80, plant 80, lose 60, plant 60, lose 40…
It actually gets ugly very quickly when you throw in all the wasted watering you did only to have your trees turn crispy.
The numbers started getting so big I decided "Frustrated Reader" was spot on when he said "if you're not going to do it properly, don't do it at all".
Of course, not doing it at all isn't an option any more - we have to meet canopy targets - so we simply have to start doing it properly - ie allocate the resources required to turn 80% losses into 80% (or better) survival.
You might get heartburn initially but, believe me, start adding up the true costs associated with all those dead trees you're currently putting through the chipper and you'll really start to feel crook!