When will the ash tree scammers roll in?

I was already aware of several direct mail pieces that went out this past week. For the most part they looked like local companies. But remember when the ice storm rolled in? It was like an army of out-of-state companies rolling in to trim trees. They will be back. As I understand it from talking to a city official today you must be a licensed arborist in the city of Sioux Falls to legally treat trees professionally. Remember this when hiring someone to treat your trees.

I realized today that I have two ash trees. One got mutilated during the ice storm, so I will probably get it taken down before the emerald ash bore makes it to my neighborhood. The other one is in the boulevard and has been nothing but a pain in the ass, constantly sprouting small branches. Hopefully the city will just come and take it out for me. It IS the responsibility of the city to remove dead or diseased trees from the boulevard. Fortunately my mature backyard tress are Maple, while messy provide beautiful shade.

The sad part is that everyone is running a scam these days, just be smart. Always hire an experienced, LOCAL company to do work. Get references and recommendations. Also report the scammers to the BBB and even authorities. You can’t get these people to stop unless you turn them in.


#1 scott on 05.20.18 at 8:38 pm

so it’s the city’s responsibility to remove dead or diseased trees, but your responsibility to trim them? can they force you to treat them, or would that be the city’s responsibility?

#2 l3wis on 05.20.18 at 8:41 pm

scott, that is a wonderful question, isn’t it?

I’m hoping that the new council will finally get changes made to Project TRIM so that it is the city’s responsibility to take care of their trees.

#3 "Very Stable Genius" on 05.20.18 at 11:15 pm

“Ashes to ashes dust to dust….”

I recently found this as I began to rediscover the Old Testament due to our new “Leadership Team”…..

#4 anonymous on 05.21.18 at 5:54 am

I realize there are 87,000 ash trees in SF, but maybe it’s better to just let them go.

After all, how many dutch elm trees do you see in SF these days?

#5 Rufusx on 05.21.18 at 10:03 am

Anon – there were never any “Dutch elm” tress in the city. In fact – there were never any “Dutch Elms”. there were lots of American Elm trees – that were impacted by a fungus carried by beetles – that are from Asia – that were accidentally imported to Europe. “Dutch Elm DISEASE” is so-named because that is the nation in which the ASIAN fungus was first discovered to be the cause of the devastation of European elm trees.

#6 Govikes on 05.22.18 at 11:11 am

According to the city website it’s the property owners responsibility for dead or deceased trees. When you actually read the ordinance it says there is a fund for removal. Can someone clarify?

#7 "Very Stable Genius" on 05.22.18 at 11:22 am

Is “Dutch Elm” anything like Dutch Mafia?

#8 l3wis on 05.22.18 at 1:17 pm

The ‘boulevard’ trees can be removed at city expense if they decide it needs to be removed. But as I understand it, you just can’t request they remove a tree because you don’t like it. It has to be causing an issue. That was the case with my neighbor. They removed his tree due to some sewer pipe issues at no expense to him.