Especially not from utility companies. The image above was taken on a street on the east side of Buffalo, but this scene, or something similar, is common throughout the US, from Pasadena to Lexington to Aroostook. I’m lucky on my street, because our power lines are behind our houses and the tall shade trees on the street can grow unimpeded. That’s not the case in many other Buffalo neighborhoods, where, as you can see, large shade trees are chopped back without much attention to aesthetics. Apparently, this unlovely situation will improve, eventually, when the stumps are removed and replaced—again, eventually—with small ornamentals like dogwoods and crabapples. These are pretty trees that will do little in terms of providing any real shade, but they won’t get in the way of power lines. Note that these trees are technically owned by the city, which can replace, ignore, or mutilate them at will.
There is no question that trees can wreak havoc during storms, when they, or their branches, fall on power lines. No one disputes this. Is it possible to trim trees in such a way that the limbs won’t affect power lines? It seems so. Even better, is it possible to bury or otherwise place power lines in such a way that they don’t have to compete with trees? Absolutely. I just don’t see the will, and I have difficulty taking seriously such statements as this, from an Ohio-based company: Midwest Electric loves trees just as much as you do. But sometimes, they can create hazards with our power lines.
Trees are not prioritized when it comes to traditional energy generation. Trees are in the way. As much as I resent the overwhelming shade and root structures of the street trees that pose daunting limitations to what I can do in my front garden, I’d resent it even more if a power company came along and hacked them away as we see in the image above. And is it a coincidence that such wholesale devastation happens more often in poorer neighborhoods? I think not.
Alternative energy sources can’t come fast enough, if, along with all their other benefits, they can save our beloved—and essential—urban shade canopies.
We were so lucky to be home when the power company came in with their trucks, saws, and chipper. They wanted to lop the tops off of our long row of 20+ y.o. evergreens. I made a deal with them to cut down a cherry tree in exchange for simply trimming the offending branches of the evergreens. Up the road? They lopped them all off about 10ft off the ground or completely sheared one side. It was awful!
It still amazes me that power companies don’t employ proper arborists to minimize damage, prevent massacres, and help keep the populace happier.
We have problems regarding street trees in the UK too. Hundreds of mature and beautiful trees have been removed by the local authorities because, apparently, their roots were damaging the pavements.
I think people fear trees and there are enough issues with them (damage to power lines, damage to drains, damage to foundations of houses) to support the anxieties rather than the solutions. Are they the kind of people who like neat and tidy gardens, where everything is safely under control?
Ugh, this makes me sad. For the most part where I live, the utility company tries to trim the branches that may cause problems. Thankfully, no beheading like this. Yikes!
I tried to note that these trees will be completely removed and replaced but I don’t think I was specific enough. They will be, but it will take time and the smaller trees that replace them will provide little to no shade.
I’m sorry but I just do not understand why utility companies are not **forced** to bury the power lines underground? The municipalities that regulate these awful, monopolistic profit-grubbing utilities have every right to make that happen so why don’t they?
The only above-ground power lines visible in most of Colorado are in way-older homes. Or, of course, the major transmission lines.
The cities, towns etc. have to bury sewer and other drain lines so why don’t they use that technology & make the greedy utility co’s do the same?
Here in Oregon today there are a couple hundred thousand people without power since Friday (many of whom won’t get power back for a week) due to wind and ice storms. Many of the over 200 miles of downed lines were brought down by trees or their branches, so there are legitimate reasons for separating tree branches from power lines. It’s very sad when a mature tree has to be butchered or taken down though. I’m sure many older trees predated the power lines, but it seems like a little research before replanting by power lines would make sense.
I’ve never understood how landscape architects, homeowners associations and urban planners cannot understand the simple concept of tree growth. The result of this incompetence is much needless tree abuse and perhaps billions of dollars spent remediating poor choices.
This is a huge issue in California after most of the deadly and destructive wildfires in California are known to have been caused by power lines, either by trees interfering with them or outright failure of the power lines and transmission towers themselves.
Millions of trees have been destroyed in an effort to prevent these fires. The competence of the people who top them, remove them, or prune them varies greatly. That’s to say many are incompetent. Since our utility company is now under court-ordered supervision after a failed gas pipeline in a residential neighborhood killed 8 people and destroyed 27 homes, a courageous judge has been trying to hold the utility accountable for its incompetent tree care. I guess it would be worse without the judge’s supervision, but it’s still plenty bad.
There are many excellent job opportunities for good arborists. Maybe the pay isn’t adequate to attract enough candidates. It’s a problem.
Undergrounding the power lines is theoretically an option. However, an entire neighborhood has to organize and agree to pay the costs. So that is only happening in the wealthiest neighborhoods. Sigh…another sad case of America’s failing infrastructure colliding with our aversion to taxes.
Alas, our city council seems intent on felling street trees by the dozen – some of them beautiful bird-attracting natives 70+ years old – in order to replace them with…. grass. Because a) powerlines and b) “visibility”. Or, in one case, because the birds were apparently making too much noise, and someone complained.
Apparently no one at the council is aware of – or concerned with – the myriad benefits of street trees, and so there are fewer and fewer and fewer of them. Particularly, let it be said, in poorer areas.
In Montgomery Co., MD, one tree care company, subcontracted by local utility company, PEPCo, is wreaking havoc on trees. First they maim the trees so horribly that the tree is simultaneously weakened and rendered an eye sore. Then they come along and cut down the tree when that poor tree dies. So, basically, this famous tree care company has found a great way to sustain its revenue base. The cost of all this is passed on to customers. This savagery and affront to nature human alike is tolerated or even encouraged because the upfront monetary cost of butchering and maiming trees is not as shocking as the one-time cost of sinking the power lines underground would be. One can find egregious examples of similar practices on the Plant Amnesty website started by late, great Cass Turnbull (https://www.plantamnesty.org scroll all the way to the bottom).
I’m in British Columbia, Canada. Can’t complain about municipal tree hacking. Both the urban areas I’ve lived in are very conscious of the benefits of trees and I have seen them trim with care. But that doesn’t stop ignorant renters, landlords, and home owners from butchering trees for no good reason. Chain saw happy I call it.
And I thought that PG&E in California butchered trees in neighborhoods!
The International Society of Arboriculture has developed many Best Management Practices manuals for trees. Two relevant ones here are “Best Management Practices for Utility Pruning of Trees” (2004) and “Best Management Practices for Utility Tree Risk Assessment” (2020). I expect the BMP for utility pruning will soon be updated. All utility pruning should follow the latest BMPs. There are also American National Standards Institute standards that must be followed. Failure to follow these can result in liability. A problem is 2004 utility pruning standards need updating.
The problem is that these trees are being removed; what you see is just step one. There was never an attempt at pruning. But this is good info, thanks!
Reading this took me back to 1991, and Rochester’s great ice storm. After it took RG&E nearly a month (!) to restore power to some neighborhoods, they spent that summer not only cutting down trees in the way of power lines, they actually cut neat, symmetrical holes through branch structures so that the lines passed right through them. It was so ridiculous. In fact, there’s a tree south of Rochester that was so incredibly done that my husband and I referred to it as the “bagel tree” – and that’s exactly what it looked like. Unbelievable.
I live in a city in Colorado that has 95% of its power lines undergrounded. It’s something they’ve been working on for decades. The only above ground lines are the major power transmission lines and the more recently annexed parts of the city. We also have a very high electric reliability rate, above 99%. I can’t remember the last time we lost power. We are also a Tree City USA, so we value our trees too.
I’m lucky. Our downtown area is historic. So nobody gets to cut down trees. The power company will come & trim any branches you report as indangering the power lines. Biggest problem here is city wont invest in health management of trees. Ours are 100’s of years old!! When they fall on powerlines from a storm its because they have become diseased from insect damage.