Stupid tree-huggers screw up a Bogan’s house

Silly tree-hugging busy bodies have contributed to the destruction of a house in Sydney.

This is the problem you get when councils and tree-huggers start putting trees ahead of humans. We have a similar regime in Auckland with the stupid designation of “heritage trees” and have recently seen the same thing on the West Cost where a wake was held for a tree that DoC sensibly cut down.

Trees come and go, protecting them so the wind can eventually blow them over is ridiculous.

Warringah Council rejected an application to remove a 50-year-old Norfolk pine tree that destroyed an Allambie Height’s couple’s uninsured home, narrowly missing them when it fell during the weekend’s wild storms.

The application to remove the tree was made by the neighbours of Rock and Kendall Davis-Bogan, but the council said it should be heritage-listed.

Yesterday, Mrs Davis-Bogan said they were lucky to be alive.

“Normally you get a south-east wind – and if it had been a south-east wind, neither me or my husband would be here talking to you today,” she told 2UE radio on Thursday.

The couple’s neighbours applied to have the tree removed from the fence line between the two properties in 2011 because the 30-metre-tall tree, weighing more than eight tonnes, swayed significantly from side to side. 

During a storm last weekend, the tree crashed right through the house, said Mrs Davis-Bogan.

“The whole root ball came up, and it went right through our property from fence-line to fence-line, over into the next-door neighbours,” she said.

She said the back of the house had to be demolished; the force of the tree had shunted the entire house, while flying debris had caused additional damage.

In the DA application to have the tree removed, the Davis-Bogans’ neighbours wrote that the tree swayed when it was wet and windy.

“We are extremely concerned it may fall on our or our neighbours’ house, causing severe damage. But more importantly, it may even injure or kill someone,” they wrote in the 2011 development application.

The council’s arborist rejected the application, saying the tree was in good health and condition, with no structural faults.

“Tree 1 is considered a significant landscape feature that provides amenity to the area. No evidence of tree roots causing lifting or damage to structures and property was observed at the time of inspection,” wrote the arborist.

The council even suggested to the families that the tree should be heritage-listed.


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • williamabong

    Good to see the loonies are still running the funny farm.

  • Lion_ess

    Who gave Councils the power to decide what happens to trees planted on private land anyway. Whose land and whose trees are they?

    • peterwn

      In NZ the Resource Management Act which was amended in the last few years to stop councils imposing ‘global’ restrictions on what landowners can do with trees. Individual trees have to be identified and scheduled as ‘heritage’ trees.allows councils. Seems NSW law Individual trees have to be identified and scheduled as ‘heritage’ trees.allows councils to impose such global restrictions. Poor victim was not insured and will probably have to lick his wounds. An insurance company would have had no hesitation in suing the council in such a case.

      Incidentally Christine Fletcher introduced a members bill in Parliament imposing ‘global’ restrictions on dealing with trees and could well have succeeded by crossing the floor (as shesuccessfully did with her compulsory teachers registration bill).

  • A drill and any of these should do it.
    * Amitrole (Amitrol-T) – foliar spray

    * Bromacil (Hyvar) – broadcast treatment

    * 2,4-D (several trade names) – foliar spray

    * Dichlorprop (2,4-DP, Weedone 2,4-DP) – foliar spray

    * Dicamba (Banvel) – cut surface

    * Fosamine (Krenite) – foliage treatment

    * Glyphosate (Roundup) – foliar spray

    * Hexazinone (Velpar) – soil uptake

    * Imazapyr (Arsenal) – foliar, frill, stump treatment

    * Metsulfuron (Escort) – foliar spray

    * Picloram (Tordon) – broadcast, foliar, frill treatment

    * Tebuthiuron (Spike) – broadcast treatment

    * Triclopyr (Garlon) – spray

  • Sym Gardiner

    Hopefully the council’s insurers pay a visit to the CEO and point out the consequences of this decision.

    • Dave

      The couple did not have insurance, I have no doubt the ambulance chasing lawyers are going after the council on their behalf on a no win no fee basis already. Has to be a clear cut case. We were worried about the tree, arborist said no risk, PErmission declined by council. Arborist is wrong, tree fell on home, damage tens of thousands. No mr Council CEO……. A private settlement, or should we play this in the media !! Settled.

  • in the eastern sububs of sydney you need to apply for consent to cut any branch thicker than 20mm

  • cows4me

    Should get a whole truck full of the chipped tree, back up to the councils front door and tip. Fucking parasitic greenie wankers!!!!!

    • Rodger T

      Yep, the day I speak to a fucking arborist is the day they prise the chainsaw from my cold dead hands!

  • tarkwin

    Unfortunate name, must have come from Parmy.

  • Mr_Blobby

    The Auckland super city certainly has the power to do whatever they want, and they do whatever they want. Especially if it is to do with getting money from residents. The cost of consents , council inspection or council approved inspectors. the whole thing smells of corruption.

    Bunch of wankers the lot of them. Rodney you have a lot to answer for and nobody with the Gonads to fix up your mess.

    • Hazards001

      To paraphrase meninblack “Rodney Hide is a……ckin……nt”