ISA HK/China --- HK Tree News (Tree Failure at HK Govt HQ)

国内朋友请使用翻译软件阅读本文 (http://translate.google.com.hk/?hl=en&tab=wT#enzh-CN)。
*** Our weekly Station Mail is for the information of Station Members only, but Station Mail has given up copyright & can be freely circulated. For administrative reasons, comments from outsiders are usually not entertained & may be circulated within our system locally & overseas. Please note Station Mail is sometimes given in Blog at http://isahkchina.blogspot.com , although images are usually not attached due to size. ***

Dear Station Members,

The attached news below from the biggest newspaper in HK with 3.5 million readers is shocking the Tree Community in our territory of HK, Macau, Taiwan & China. Tree Affairs are now made political for the first time anywhere in our territory, & Tree Failure has become an Achilles Foot for any Govt, because trees will grow to fail by Mother Nature. In Urban setting, trees simply have a shorter life.

Sometimes, ISA HK/China compares Tree Failure to a plane crash. When a plane comes down to make headline, do the investigators focus alone upon the maintenance of the plane? Apparently not. The inquiry would turn over the carpet from design, operation to maintenance, among many other things. Remember in the 1970's when plane engines were designed to attach to the rear for fuel economy & ease of maintenance? After a few plane crashes due to imbalanced weight during take-off, aircraft manufacturers corrected their design to fix the engines under wings. The same idea should go for our Tree Failures.

Planting a big Ficus in a small planter next to busy traffic does not appear to fit the "Right Tree for the Right Place" principle of ISA Tree Planting. Then who put it there in the first place? Or was the tree retained there from past? What's the justification? Does it comply with international practice? If not, why did it not go? This is the first thing we can learn in this accident.

After the tree was left there growing, why was it not removed if found unfit? Does the maintenance party alone have the authority to make such a decision? If not, why not? Was there any political pressure? Where from? Can it be overcome? This may be the second point we can learn.

Putting a big tree in a small planter on the roadside invites risks. Yet our territory is full of trees like this. Can anybody explain why with justification?

Trees have now become Hot Potatoes among the Tree Managers in our territory. Most would be afraid to work with trees, partly because of the public exposure they bring when failed. Yet it is impossible to stop tree failing & no Arborist in the world would say his tree will not fail after his assessment. Tree Assessment is only accurate up to a point with or without machines, & to a certain time frame from the moment of assessment. The more experienced assessor may predict longer, but not forever. Tree grows to alter its stability & health in reaction with the environment, & no one has a crystal ball to foretell what Mother nature can bring.

Then how can we work with our trees, which are now an important asset in our society? We simply can not cut them all down for safety sake. We need trees in our cities.

Maybe we can look at how our neighbors are doing the same for their trees.

The Landscape Bureaus in China design & maintain their trees from cradle to grave in the billions for decades. The same is true for the National Parks Board of Singapore which manage more than 1.3 million trees in their urban area. Tree design, installation & maintenance are all under one roof by their Arborists or equivalent. When things go wrong like a Tree Failure, they would find out why & correct it next time before new trees are installed. Mistakes are gradually minimized in this manner. Trees are such important infra-structure in their cities that no one is going to take any chance.

The result is that we do not hear as much tree complaint in these places. We have eyes & ears over there too.

When each Dept can design & maintain their own trees from beginning to end, the demarcation & responsibilities become very clear. If anyone would take chance on something, he may be caught with his own liabilities at the end. This will make anyone think twice before acting. When "Music Chair" is no longer played, everyone will need to do his own job well, or trouble will find its way to come to him at the end. Getting one to be responsible for his own work is a matter of simple logic in a civilized society, & what's wrong to apply it to trees?

When every Dept is looking after their trees from cradle to grave, the Tree Management Office can then act as a coordinator, & provide the logistics & support required. This will make life easier for everybody. When Tree Failure happens, the cause can be traced & improvement can be made for the next time.

As for the administration, nothing needs to change much either. Any Dept can carry on their old way, or allow resources to employ Arborists to look after their trees. The public will look at the end results, not the internal procedures. A pilot scheme can be started to see if the idea would work. If so, expand & spread. The final objective is to reduce accidents & complaints. Let it be done with the resources currently available with minimum disturbance.

History in western municipalities have told us that urban trees need to be on the hand of the Arborists from cradle to grave, to thrive. If not, it will be Mother Nature makes the Rules, not any of us.

Incidentally, ISA HK/China is pleased to inform our Station Members that China has now set their eyes on ISA for their Tree Development. ISA HQ staff have been invited to attend an urban forestry conference in Beijing this August, & ISA HK/China is working hard at the other end with Landscape Engineers in Southern China to recognize ISA Arborists to be their only Tree Professionals in design & maintenance. When China heats up, HK may lose some of our experienced Arborists for greener pasture up north.

HK is just one city in our territory although it is an important one. We wish to see HK doing well with their trees, & we will help them with one Arborist & one tree at a time.

best regards,

Sammy Au
Station Manager

"If a tree is not designed, installed, maintained & inspected properly, it is likely to become a liability rather than an asset."

"Trees are good for the community. Trees need care like human beings. Arborists are the Tree Care Professionals."

總部也冧樹 港府顏面掃地

繼兩周前沙田塌樹殺人慘劇後，中環金融中心、特區政府重地昨日又發生塌樹壓人毀車事故。雪廠街政府合署西座對開一棵估計有八十歲的老榕樹，疑因樹根腐爛，中午突然轟然倒下，壓正皇后大道中的行人過路處，一名男途人走避不及頭部被壓傷，一輛的士則被樹枝擊毀，司機嚇破膽，嘆謂事發時幸好為假日及天氣惡劣，行人稀少，否則死傷慘重。

塌樹現場對正政府合署西座及炮台里，平日行人眾多。

倒塌的榕樹為細葉榕，高十五米、直徑一米，種植在一個四米長、兩米寬的花圃內，對正政府合署西座出入口，旁為炮台里，另一邊則為皇后大道中及雪廠街的行人過路處，是在政府總部上班的公務員及一眾上班族的主要通道，平日午膳時間人潮如鯽。

樹枝擊中頭部 浴血街頭

昨午十二時許，姓梁（四十二歲）的士司機載着一名女乘客往中環娛樂行，的士沿皇后大道中慢線駛過燈位時，突然砰一聲巨響，梁感到「天搖地動」，車尾擋風玻璃爆裂，嚇得目瞪口呆，呆坐良久不懂反應。剛巧一輛警車在快線，警員下車協助梁及女乘客離開車廂。同時，一名經過上址姓陳（六十三歲）男途人亦走避不及，被樹枝打中頭部，受傷淌血，梁及陳一同送院治理。梁憶述事件時心情仍未平復，他說大樹在電光火石間塌下，他和女乘客被嚇呆。梁又頻呼好彩，形容該樹好大，坦言﹕「好在唔係平日，唔係就死得人多。」

現場所見塌樹連根拔起，根部有發黑腐爛情況，折斷部分約三十多厘米，其餘樹根則深埋泥中。港大地理系講座教授詹志勇指出，該樹的樹幹及樹葉都正常，但樹根卻有發霉迹象，他懷疑現場常有修路及開坑鋪管道弄傷樹根，引致真菌入侵所致。長春社總監兼樹藝師蘇國賢則表示，該樹的樹盤不大，又貼近花槽，三面根部無法舒展，影響到正常生長。而樹根有腐爛情況，懷疑曾被人傷害過，導致真菌侵蝕。

途人圍觀，議論紛紛。

原貌

大樹根部嚴重腐爛。

工人將塌樹清理，樹幹鋸斷移走。

的士司機講述事件經過心有餘悸。

被打中的士事後拖走維修。

男途人頭部受傷送院敷治。

部門大半天搞不清責任

塌樹後，政府部門大半日亦搞不清大樹屬哪個部門負責。警方案發後通知康文署，但無法取得聯絡，改為通知路政署派員到場清理。至下午五時許，才有政府部門人員到場。直至晚上十時許，政府始回應指該樹由康文署護養，並非古樹名木，亦不在當局較早前樹木巡查行動中識別的二千棵樹木之列。該署最近一次在今年三月三十一日檢查該樹，認為該樹的生長情況並無異樣。
康文署樹隊人員及發展局樹木管理辦事處人員事發後往現場視察，初步相信是因近日連場天雨，使斜坡上部分泥土被沖走，加上樹冠大量吸水，增加重量，康文署會跟進調查。至於現場其餘四棵樹，經檢查後證實情況並無異樣。

黃先生：「之前沙田有人被樹壓死，政府漠不關心，效率慢過大陸十倍！」

郭小姐：「我係馬來西亞嚟，那邊樹木仲多，但定期巡查，好少有問題。」

冧樹害人禍連連　最好扑醒唐英年

嘩？吓？乜嘢話？唔係啩？大——樹——又——塌——下！

唉，冧樹呢家嘢，冇得賴天災，你話唔係人禍都唔得。尋日之嘛，黃色暴雨警告之下砰砰磅磅連環冧樹，冧完一棵又一棵，至少冧咗六棵。最得人驚嘅係，冧樹居然冧到政府總部，結果車毀人傷！

中環皇后大道中近雪廠街同炮台里，即係政府總部對開路面，一棵大約十五米高、一米闊嘅大樹，失驚無神仆落街，一名男子被壓傷，一架的士被壓毀，遇害途人同司機雙雙送院治理。
好彩咋，真係要劏雞還神，今次唔使再死人，算係不幸之中嘅大幸。

血的教訓相信大家依然記憶猶新，而且猶有餘悸。赤柱冧咗一棵刺桐，殺咗一名女學生；沙田冧咗一棵盾柱木，死咗一位單車男；今次冧嘅係乜嘢樹呢？原來係一棵估計八十歲嘅榕樹。

普通常識話畀大家知，榕樹係長壽樹種，過百歲，濕濕碎。好似位於廣東新會嘅「小鳥天堂」咁吖，一樹成林養活萬千雀鳥嘅榕樹就有幾百年歷史。換言之，八十歲榕樹其實係好後生㗎咋，咁都冧得落嚟，一定唔係壽終正寢死於自然，而係同環境因素有莫大關係。

冧完一棵又一棵，到底政府搞邊科？難怪沙田冧樹死者蔡傑強嘅太太好悲哀咁講：「真係好唔開心，接二連三冧樹，政府完全冇吸取教訓！」

咦，立法會議員王國興有一個好提議喎，佢話：「最好大樹擊中唐英年，咁樣政府先得到應有教訓。」

計功夫茶話齋，呢個提議冇得頂，一來合乎天理，二來合乎人倫。你知啦，赤柱冧樹殺人之後，政務司司長唐英年煞有介事率領跨部門小組商討對策，最終決定成立樹木管理辦事處。當你以為樹木辦一定有辦法杜絕同類事件啦，嘭！沙田冧樹又殺人！嘭嘭！今次禍延至中環！嘭嘭嘭嘭嘭嘭嘭！功夫茶提提大家，行街最好戴頭盔！

即係咁，針唔拮到肉唔知痛，樹唔扑中頭唔知衰，只要唐唐捱過冧樹浩劫，樹木辦先至可以有望升格，唔再做毫無建樹嘅廢柴。係呀，冇錯，今時今日嘅樹木辦只係一碌有姿勢冇實際嘅廢柴，靠佢哋管理全港幾十萬棵樹？唯一希望就係一嘢兜頭扑醒唐唐。

喂喂喂，咪住先，睇怕大樹倒下扑中唐英年嘅機會愈來愈高，家陣連官家重地政府總部都出現車毀人傷冧樹事件，難保唐唐唔會中招。

冧樹害人禍連連，最好扑醒唐英年，呢個毫無疑問係合理期望。之不過咁，扑還扑，功夫茶呼籲老天爺「樹下留情」，係咁意輕輕扑傷好喇，無謂搞出人命吖。

點都好啦，樹木辦呀樹木辦，醒少少當幫忙得唔得？今次就話政府總部出事啫，下次冧樹冧到禮賓府點算？扑濕屋主尚屬次要，壓爛受保護歷史文物罪大惡極吖嘛！