Confirmed Judges, Confirmed Fears is a blog series documenting the harmful impact of President Trumps judges on Americans rights and liberties. Cases in the series can be found by issue and by judge at this link.

Trump Ninth Circuit judge Kenneth Lee tried in dissent to permit the US Forest Service to proceed with a project that would allow private logging companies to remove trees and log millions of board feet of timber in an area near a fire that had been put out in a national forest, without assessing the environmental impact of the project. The majority of a 3-judge panel, including a judge appointed by George W. Bush, rejected these arguments and ordered a preliminary injunction against the Forest Service that would require it to assess the projects environmental effects in its August 2020 decision in Environmental Protection Information Center (EPIC) v. Carlson.

In 2018, a fire caused extensive damage In Northern California, including to the Mendocino National Forest. The US Forest Service then approved a project to solicit bids from private logging companies to cut down and remove large trees with some fire damage up to 200 feet from either side of roads in the National Forest. The project authorizes logging of millions of board feet of timber on nearly 4,700 acres of National Forest land.

Despite the environmental impact of the project, the Forest Service did not prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or Environmental Assessment (EA), as usually occurs and is required by law. Instead, it claimed that the project was covered by an existing Categorical Exclusion (CE) in federal regulations from those requirements for road repair and maintenance. The environmental group EPIC disagreed that the CE covered the project and filed suit, seeking a preliminary injunction against the project until an EIS or EA was performed. A lower court ruled for the Forest Service and EPIC appealed.

The majority of a 3-judge panel on the Ninth Circuit, in an opinion by Judge William Fletcher joined by George W., Bush appointee Benjamin Settle, reversed and ordered a preliminary injunction against the project until the Forest Service performs an EIS or EA. Fletcher explained that EPIC was likely to succeed on the merits because the unambiguous repair and maintenance CE clearly does not include the work to be done on the logging project. Although removal of a dead or dying tree right next to the road could fall within repair and maintenance, Fletcher went on, the CE cannot reasonably be interpreted to cover commercial logging of large trees up to 200 feet away from hundreds of miles of roads. The majority also rejected a new argument by the Forest Service that a CE for salvage logging applied, since the project does not target only trees that pose an immediate danger to travelers as the CE requires.

The majority also found that the other criteria for a preliminary injunction were met. An affidavit and other materials showed irreparable harm to the environment if the project were allowed to proceed at this point, including diminish[ment] of individuals use and enjoyment of the National Forest. The balance of hardships and the public interest also favored an injunction, the majority continued, since it would require only a delay at this point so that the Forest Service would fulfill its obligation to perform an EIS or EA.

Trump judge Kenneth Lee dissented. Although he stated that he shared some of the majoritys concerns about the project, he maintained that the court should defer to the Forest Service and the lower court that denied an injunction. He noted that without the revenue that the project would generate, the Forest Service could be forced to close roads and recreation areas. The Forest Service decision to include the project within the CE was not arbitrary and capricious, he maintained, and the lower court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction.

As the majority explained, however, the lower court did abuse its discretion because it did not get the law right since it clearly misinterpreted the CE. Under no reasonable interpretation of its language, the majority noted, does the project come within the CE for repair and maintenance of roads. The majority also noted that the fact that the Forest Service relies on commercial logging operations to finance some of its work can put the Forest Service in an awkward and conflicted position in deciding on the authorization of such projects. The majority pointed out that simply requiring an honest environmental assessment of the project as required by law, which could lead to alternatives that would still include logging but have less environmental impact, would not harm the Forest Services legitimate objectives.

The Forest Service will accordingly be required to complete an environmental assessment of the impact of its proposed logging project before it can proceed. If it had been up to Trump judge Lee, however, that would not be the case, risking significant environmental injury.

Follow this link:
Trump Judge Tries to Permit Forest Service to Proceed with Commercial Logging of Trees Without Assessing Environmental Impact: Confirmed Judges...

Residents in Twickenham have protested the felling of trees by a Volkswagen dealership in South Rd, TW2.

On Wednesday (August 25), neighbours stood under trees to prevent them being cut down, as contractors removed shrubbery and trees on private land belonging to Citygate Automotive.

Objectors argued that some trees were protected by a Tree Preservation Order, and said that the shrubbery was vital in shielding houses from the industrial view of air-conditioners, advertising, floodlights and cars.

Paul Warrington, a member of South Road Residents Association, said:

This was an entirely peaceful move on the part of the residents who wanted the contractors to pull back, take a deep breath and for everyone to discuss matters with the council.

When we saw the first tree being mutilated, a couple of residents went over and stood under the tree and refused to move until the contractors stopped.

Later on in the day, VW continued their scorched earth policy and removed all of the mature landscaping in front of the site which has been there for years for public and residential amenity.

There is now nothing left apart from a few mutilated trees. One of the residents who has been living on the road since 1982 was in tears."

Director of the car dealership, Peter Wood, responded that landscaping was part of their maintenance programme. He said:

Citygate Automotive Ltd acquired the Twickenham facility in January of this year, which was in a very poor state of disrepair. After seeking advice and guidance from the council, we have begun a programme of tree pruning and maintenance to the area facing onto South Road.

This area has been significantly neglected over many years and has also become home to significant volumes of rubbish, bottles and general waste. Our intention has only ever been to improve this property and the surrounding area, which we are now very close to completing.

However, residents fear there is more at stake, after Lidl on South Road removed landscaping earlier in the year.

Residents Ian and Audrey Simmons said:

Is this the end of the leafy suburbs of Twickenham?

A spokesperson from Richmond Council responded:

This week the Council responded to reports of tree work being carried out on a strip of private land in South Road, Twickenham. An Arboricultural Officer attended site and found that a protected tree was in the process of being pruned; this work was halted immediately, and the Council is now investigating further.

Whilst on site the company undertaking works expressed an intention to remove and prune other dead trees, that do not have protected status, to address their relationship, including contact, with the adjacent building. Council officers inspected these trees and did not object to the proposed actions.

More:
Residents in clash to protect Twickenham trees from removal - Richmond and Twickenham Times

Related Guides: Stump Removal, Stump Removal Cost Guide, Stump Grinding

Tree Removal Cost Summary

Price range = $150 to $1,500+Average cost = $500-$1000Best/cheapest price = $150

In this guide, we will show you how much it costs to have a variety of tree types removed from your property. Theres no cut-and-dry way to determine the exact cost to remove a tree, so these are meant to serve as guidelines. For example, the complexity of the job and the height of the tree are just two pricing factors. Costs may also vary a lot depending on the condition and location of the tree.

The average cost to remove a tree ranges from $150 to $1,500. But other tree services may cost extra. For example, the average stump removal cost ranges from $60 to $350 and the average stump grinding costs $75-$1,000 depending on numerous factors.

There are many different levels of service available when removing a tree, but a few basic pieces are usually included. Obviously, the tree will be need to be chopped down. Typically, the contractor will also have to rope down pieces of the tree by climbing the tree and cutting it into more manageable sizes. In many cases, it may also be hauled away at no extra charge (or this is included in the estimate). For other considerations, see our complete guide on what to ask when hiring a tree removal service.

Some people want more than a basic tree removal service. For example, if the price doesnt include hauling away tree limbs, you may have to pay extra for limb removal. Tree limb removal costs vary, but it is usually between $50 and $75.

Additional services that may be added on for an extra fee include:

Now that you have a feel for what the little extras are going to cost, you are probably wondering how much youll actually have to pay to have the tree removed. This will largely depend on the size of the tree:

There is no realistic way for an average homeowner to safely remove a large tree from his or her property. You definitely dont want to attempt this type of job yourself. One thing to be aware of right away is that its going to be expensive. The total cost of the job is calculated based on a number of different factors. If the workers have to climb really high and rope down many pieces before actually felling the tree, which is usually the case with extremely tall trees, the total bill is going to be quite high. As noted above, you could pay $1,500 or more for that level of service. It may be worth it to try to have a few small extras thrown in for free, but not all companies are willing to do so.

If a tree falls on your property, you will probably want to clear it away as quickly as possible. Although this job isnt nearly as risky or complicated as removing a healthy, living tree, it still requires a lot of equipment and can lead to injuries if youre not careful. The good news is that the cost to remove a fallen tree is typically a lot lower than removing a standing tree. All told, you will probably pay between $75 and $150 for the work. As with removing a standing tree though, the total price will depend on whether you have it hauled completely away, cut up or just chipped up into tiny pieces.

Oak is one of the strongest, toughest woods out there. For that reason, tree removal services often charge a premium to tackle them. Oak trees are also very tall. The average height of a healthy oak tree is 60 feet. You can refer to the price guide above to see that you will pay between $200 and $1,000 to have an oak tree removed. Due to the fact that oak is such a solid, thick wood, your total price will probably fall on the higher end of the scale. Make sure you have a really good reason to have it removed before spending that kind of money!

There are many species of pine tree out there, but generally, the average height of a pine tree is between 40 and 60 feet. Some varieties soar up to 80 feet though. As you already know, the total amount that youll pay to have a tree removed depends on how large it is. If you have a smaller pine tree, you might pay as little as $200 or so. If your pine tree is extremely tall though, you could pay $1,500 or more. This is another example of why it pays to collect quite a few tree removal quotes before hiring a contractor.

What if you just need to have a few branches removed from a tree? If they are interfering with power lines, just pick up the phone and call your local utility company. They should come out and handle it at no cost. If you need a branch or branches to be removed for other reasons, you will have to hire a tree removal and cutting company. Obviously, if the branches are really small, you can probably do it yourself. In the event that you need to hire a professional, you can expect to be charged an hourly rate. Most companies charge between $200 and $300 per hour. If you have a lot of branches that need to be removed, it could end up being pretty expensive.

Stump removal prices vary depending on many different things. The cost to remove a stump will vary depending on whether you do it yourself or hire a professional, but other factors come into play as well. By learning about the costs that are associated with removing a tree stump, you will be able to avoid unpleasant surprises. Learn more with our Tree Stump Removal Cost Guide.

As noted several times throughout this article, the total cost of having a tree removed will depend on many different factors. Heres a recap of the main factors:

After a major storm or high winds, a tree may crash and cause damage to a house or other object. Tree removal services usually charge a lot more to remove these types of trees. The main reason for the higher price is because they have to be careful to not cause additional damage. Also, damaged trees pose more risks in general as workers are more likely to be injured.

Although it may seem like a major expense to have a tree safely removed by the experts, its well worth it. By letting the professionals handle it for you, you will be able to avoid serious injuries and other problems. Besides, removing a tree isnt easy. Why not let the pros handle it for you?

To keep your yard looking as attractive as possible, you periodically need to have its trees trimmed into shape. In addition to making a tree look more aesthetically pleasing, trimming or pruning can be used to remove dead or broken limbs that can pose serious hazards. The cost of tree trimming varies depending on a number of factors including whether you do it yourself or hire a professional contractor. Learn more with our Tree Trimming Cost Guide.

Go here to read the rest:
How Much Does Tree Removal Cost? Tree Removal

Removing a tree is usually an easy process. Tree removal professionals are called and scheduled to remove the tree, proceeding without any hassle or obstacles from local or state officials. However, there are rules and regulations in some states requiring permits or special permissions before trees are felled, either for preservation reasons or in accordance with city ordinances.

In any state, utility companies have strict policies in regards to trees and utility lines. The safest distance to plant any hedge or tree shorter than 25 feet in most states is within 20 feet of power lines. Otherwise if you try to plant a tall tree closer to the power lines, theres a good chance the utility company or the city will come through and either trim the tree to their specifications or remove it completely. So its better to plant it far away from utility lines, as to avoid any problems and keep it looking the way you want.

Below are the fifty United States and city policies on tree removal outside of utility line policies, including the US capital.

States A-H

States I-N

States O-W

According to the city of Birmingham, there are no rules associated with the removal of trees on private property. The city has no specific circumstances laid out wherein trees can be removed by the city. This means the care and removal of a tree on private property lies wholly with the owner. The city also requires no permits be acquired by a private tree removal contractor before a tree is removed on private property.

Back to Top

The city government of Juneau has no requirements involved in the removal of trees, nor does it require any permits beforehand. However, the city government of Anchorage has specific rules wherein the director of development services can come in and remove trees that are dead, hazardous, or illegally located (i.e. on private property between two sidewalks or near public pavement). Any residents of Anchorage who intend to plant trees in their front yard should be sure theyre located far enough back from the sidewalks to avoid this forcible removal by the city.

Back to Top

Phoenixs government requires no permits or notifications before the homeowner has a tree removed on their own property. However, the city does have a visibility ordinance that requires no trees greater than a foot in diameter or 10 feet in height near intersections block traffic signs, signals, or pedestrians. Else, the city will give seven days warning to the owner to fix the problem and then remove it themselves.

Back to Top

Little Rock, like the rest of the state, is home to an abundance of tree cover, both in public spaces and on various private properties. As such, there are no permit requirements to remove trees on private property, since it has so many trees and no bugs or diseases plaguing one type of tree.

Back to Top

The city government of Sacramento only requires a permit for tree removal on private property if the tree is designated as a heritage tree or is an oak, a type protected across the entire state of California. Otherwise the tree can be removed without any permit or requirements ahead of time by city law. The same is required in Oakland, where certain types of trees are protected, meaning its a coast live oak four inches or larger in diameter or four and a half feet above ground, or its another type of tree thats nine inches in diameter or larger. San Jose also requires permits for trees with a trunk circumference of 56 inches or greater or two feet above ground. Fresno requires a permit for most of its tree work beforehand. Los Angeles requires no permits for any tree work outside of cutting down oak trees.

Back to Top

Denver Parks and Recreation, which handles the urban tree landscape of Denver, outlines that private property tree removal responsibility lies completely with the owner, not with their office. However, if property owners find trees encroaching on their property from the street or other public spaces, they have to apply for a permit to remove them. They cannot remove them without this permit, or they can be penalized by the city of Denver. Denver residents also cannot remove trees that are within the public right of way, even if theyre located on their property.

Back to Top

Hartford has no requirements for tree removal on private property in terms of acquiring permits from the city government. Its municipal code also does not allow for city officials to remove trees on private property, so any hazardous or dead trees must be removed by the owner. There are no tree species currently considered a protected species in Connecticut either.

Back to Top

The city of Dover, Delaware promotes tree growth in its urban sector but does not prevent the private residential owner from removing trees when necessary. While the city recently made an addendum to their municipal code to protect the wet lands and other landscapes, there are no special provisions for the protection of specific tree species or permits required before private property tree removal.

Back to Top

City regulations in Tallahassee require that trees with diameters greater than 36 inches might require permits depending on their health and condition. In Miami any removal of more than 25 percent of trees will necessitate a permit before a professional can cut it down. Jacksonville also mandates that trees over four feet tall or with a circumference greater than three and a half feet must have a permit acquired before it can be removed from private property.

Back to Top

In Atlanta, tree owners considering removal must check city regulations before proceeding with the process. Any hardwood tree species with a diameter of six inches or larger must have a permit to be cut down, and pine trees that have a diameter of 12 inches or more must have a permit before tree service professionals uproot them. This is due to a tree ordinance in Atlanta that serves to protect the population of trees and keep it from downsizing any further.

Back to Top

Honolulus city officials do not require that their residents give notice or fill out a permit application before they have trees removed from their property. However, the city does have a rule outlined in their street trees regulations, which allows for private property trees to be trimmed. The rule reads that the Director may trim obstructing or hazardous portions of any tree standing on private property which overhangs or projects into a street. This means that if residents do not maintain their trees properly, they can be trimmed to a length by a city official without permission but within legal codes.

Back to Top

Boise has no regulations regarding tree removal in the city, nor does it require a permit for removal ahead of time. The only exception is the removal of an elm tree on private property, in which case it will require a permit. The city has no special rules for removing trees on private property in the case of dying or hazard trees, so the removal of such trees falls to the responsibility of the property owner. Property owners should also be aware of removing or pruning trees on their front yards, in case these trees count as public right of way trees. If they are, they cannot be removed as they are city property, not private property.

Back to Top

Residents of Chicago cannot remove trees on their private property with first getting a tree work permit from the Bureau of Forestry. The bureau issues them in conjunction with a liability insurance certificate, in case the removal causes any damage to the surrounding area outside private property lines. With the introduction of emerald ash borer to the area recently, the State of Illinois Department of Agriculture will also want an additional compliance agreement settled if a property owner intends to cut down an infected ash tree. There will also be additional work for a property owner intending to cut down a tree in an Asian Long-Horned Beetle quarantine zone.

Back to Top

According to state law, the owner of a tree between two properties is the one who has the trunk on their land. As such, the responsibility for care or removal lies with him or her. Although the branches and limbs might hang over into another yard, the neighbor cannot remove them. Indianapolis has no permits or regulations regarding tree removal on private property. Indiana law also requires that landowners maintain their property so that others can enjoy their own property.

Back to Top

According to Des Moines law, trees on private property are the responsibility of the owner to maintain and care for or remove. This means that dead and hazardous trees located near sidewalks or streets that may inflict harm on pedestrians or cars must be taken care of by their owners, as the city will not take responsibility to remove them. Owners of such trees should be aware of their health and take the proper measures to remove them or trim when needed. The city also has no special regulations or permits in place for the removal of special species of trees.

Back to Top

State law in Kansas requires that any city proves, either through laboratory tests or other evidence, that a tree is infected on private property before they can go in and remove it. Cities otherwise have no basis to remove or trim trees on private property, meaning such duties fall to the resident to maintain the trees. The city of Topeka has no permits or special regulations in terms of tree removal for its residents either, nor does Kansas City or Wichita.

Back to Top

In Frankfort, trimming and removing trees on private property falls to the responsibility of the owner. However, some responsibility for street and public right-of-way trees also falls to some private property owners, determined by where exactly the tree is located. If a private property owner has a tree of this type and wishes to remove or trim it, they must acquire a permit from the City Arborist before they can do any work on it.

Back to Top

Louisiana state law has rules in place to protect trees in certain landscapes, including a provision that states cypress trees on water bottoms owned by the state cannot be cut down without a state lease, right-of-way rights or permit. If someone does, they will be subject to a fine of up to $5,000 or imprisonment up to six months. The law also protects any land within five feet about sea level or on fast lands, so any trees that lie within that area cannot be removed even if its private property. Baton Rouge city law also outlines that a permit is required for tree removal when clearing land greater than one acre of private property.

Back to Top

In Augusta city limits, there are no special permits or requirements for the removal of trees on private property. Near the Maine shoreland though, trees must be four inches or more in diameter and four and a half feet above ground before they can be removed. There cannot be any land clearings on the shoreland measuring greater than 250 square feet. There has to be enough room in between the cutting such that vegetation and trees remain well-distributed. Its referenced as the buffer strip. Near ponds and rivers, this strip can extend 100 feet from the water line.

Back to Top

Maryland has several state laws that protect trees and require permits to have them removed by private property owners. The Roadside Tree Law protects all trees near the roadways in the state, and the state only grants removal of a tree on the roadway if it is hazardous or diseased. It must also be replaced by whoever cuts it down. The Forest Conservation Act requires permits for any tree removal by more than one acre or 40,000 square feet. The Seed Tree Law promotes the replacement of removed trees by allowing eligible harvested lands of five acres to plant pine seedlings. Baltimore shares responsibility for the care and maintenance of some right-of-way trees with homeowners. Any roadside trees that lie on private property cannot be removed without a permit from the Baltimore government.

Back to Top

Massachusetts state law has a strong standpoint when it comes to the ownership of trees on private property between two different people. Enacted in 1698, the state illegal tree cutting law reads that any illegal cutting down or damaging of anothers tree makes that person liable for three times the amount of the tree. Its important that private property owners are absolutely sure the tree belongs to them before they cut down or remove a tree, as they could be brought up on civil charges and pay in replacement fines otherwise. Private property owners also have the right to petition in Boston for public tree removal through tree hearings. There are no other laws in Boston regarding permits or special regulations for tree removal on private property.

Back to Top

Michigans ash trees started getting infected with emerald ash borer disease in 2003, and now it has special disposal sites across the state for ash trees. These trees, if on private property, should be removed immediately if diseased to prevent the spread to other trees. The states agriculture department will also inspect ash trees on private property if asked by the homeowner. In Lansing, there are no permit requirements or special regulations regarding tree removal on private property.

Back to Top

Minneapolis laws include regulations for tree removal on private property, wherein private property owners must request a tree removal permit from the Forestry Division of the Park and Recreation Board. Forestry has the right to deny the permit if its the best interest of the public, and the city also has the right to go in and remove trees from private property if theyre judged to be a hazard to other trees or people in the city. This usually means that the tree will have a disease including Dutch elm, emerald ash borer or oak wilt. The state of Minnesota also has rules and regulations regarding hazard trees and limbs and nuisance trees on private property that may require removal accordingly for the safety of the public.

Back to Top

City regulations in Jackson, the state capital of Mississippi, exclude any provisions for the removal of trees on private property. Tree removals can proceed without a permit in the city, and the city cannot enter and remove trees from private property, meaning that the care and removal of any hazardous or dying trees falls completely to the owner. The city also has no rules regarding the removal of magnolia trees, the states emblematic tree.

Back to Top

St. Louis city laws state that private property trees are the responsibility of the owner to maintain or remove. However, the citys ordinance on trees also states that the Director of Forestry and the city has the right to enter private property and inspect or remove trees that they find to be hazardous to the public, whether theyre diseased, have insect pests that could spread to public or other private trees, or might be at such an angle as to be a hazard to public street ways, signals and sidewalks.

Back to Top

Montana state law has no special laws in regards to the removal of trees on private property. There are no requirements for permits before a tree has to be cut down, and the city has no special regulations wherein the city can enter private property and remove a tree. Billings also has no special circumstances or rules regarding tree removal on private property.

Back to Top

Neither the state nor its capital city of Lincoln has any special regulations or rules regarding tree removal on private property. The care and responsibility for trees on private property lies solely with the owner, meaning that financial payment to remove one will also fall on them. If the tree is overhanging a street or public roadway but lies behind a fence line, its care will need to be handled by the owner, not the city.

Back to Top

Nevadas tree population continually works to grow, meaning that cities like Carson City create programs to increase the shade cover and general population of trees. However, the city and state do not require that citizens acquire a permit for tree removal before cutting down a tree in their yard. There are also no special regulations in the Carson City municipal code that allow city officials to go in and remove trees from private property for any reason.

Back to Top

Like in Maine, New Hampshire outlines regulations regarding trees near the shoreline. To remove trees within 50 feet of the shoreland, they have to follow a grid and point system. To remove trees between 50 and 150 feet of the shoreland, they have to follow the unaltered state requirements. Beyond 150 feet, there are no requirements for removing trees. In Concord, there are no special regulations or permit requirements for removing trees on private property.

Back to Top

Recently, many townships in New Jersey are starting to preserve more trees by creating ordinances that protect ones on private properties. This means that even if private property owners want to remove trees, they might not be able to. Depending on the township, they can apply for permits to get a tree removed, but the township might reject the permit. The Trenton department of forestry has the right, as laid out in the citys rules, to remove trees on private property that might be a hazard to other residents only after giving notice to the owner to remove it themselves.

Back to Top

New Mexicos tree population is sizeable for the states climate, so the government imposes no limitations or rules when it comes to the removal of trees on private property. Neither of its two larger metropolitan areas, Albuquerque and the state capital of Santa Fe, have special rules when it comes to tree removal on private property. This means that complete removal responsibility in the case of hazards or dying trees near sidewalks must be handled by the owner, or else they could be liable for damages.

Back to Top

New York state has no specific ordinances regarding tree removal, but it suggests ordinances for community developments. Community developments in New York might have ordinances on trees, depending on the location of the tree and who planted it. Depending on the case, someone living in the community development might have to get a permit for removal, and the development might not allow for removal if it interferes with the look of the community. The city of Albany, however, outlines specific rules where trees six and half feet in circumference or larger cannot be removed from private property without a permit. City officials in Albany also have the right to enter private property and remove trees that are an imminent threat to the public after giving the owner 30 days notice.

Back to Top

Raleighs municipal code outlines the difference between public trees on the right-of-way and streets near sidewalks that cannot be touched by any person but city workers and private trees. Private trees can be removed without a permit in Raleigh, but a tree near the sidewalk cannot. Also, trees on private property can be removed by the Urban Forester when that tree could affect the public health and safety of other trees or people. There are also specific trees listed as conservation or champion types that cannot be removed, so residents should make sure their trees dont fit that list by calling the department first. In Charlotte, property owners must have permits before they remove trees from their properties.

Back to Top

North Dakota has no state laws regarding tree removal on private property. Its state capital, Bismarck, also has no special regulations or ordinances in terms of tree removal. Responsibility completely falls with the private owner of the tree. Bismarck has special municipal ordinances that allow for the city forester to declare a private property tree a nuisance if its unsafe or dangerous. There are also certain types of trees prohibited in Bismarck (13-02-12) that produce cotton and can be removed by the city.

Back to Top

Ohio state law has no provisions for tree removal on private property. Its capital city of Columbus has special requirements for the removal of street trees near public sidewalks and adjacent private properties, but the removal of trees on private property are the responsibility of the owner. Cleveland, another large city in the state, also has no provisions in its municipal code in regards to tree removal on private property.

Back to Top

Oklahoma state law includes no provisions when it comes to private property tree removal. The state also has no regulations for city governments when it comes to removing trees for any reason. Its state capital, Oklahoma City, also has no requirements for permits before tree service professionals cut down trees on private property. However, the trees have to be cut down a certain way to avoid endangering public land or individuals. Tree service professionals who are certified in the city will know how to do it properly and avoid any problems. Tulsa also has no regulations in terms of tree removal on private property.

Back to Top

While the state laws in Oregon have no regulations regarding tree removal, the city of Salem protects certain trees types, designated as heritage trees in the city. These trees cannot be removed or cut down without a permit. Also trees that are 12 inches or greater in diameter in some cases will require a Parks Department permit, but that will depend and require private property owners consulting with the Planning Division first. Salem also allows city officials to remove trees if theyre diseased or a hazard to other trees and pedestrians through Chapter 86 of its municipal tree ordinance.

Back to Top

Philadelphia has specific policies concerning private property trees that overhang onto public spaces or other peoples property. According to its overhanging or encroaching trees code, the citys enforcement officer has the right to issue a notice to the owner, and if its not taken care of after 30 days, proceed to prune or remove the tree. However, Philadelphia has no other regulations when it comes to removing trees on private property whose branches do not overhang onto other property areas.

Back to Top

Providence recently passed a zoning ordinance that protects any tree 32 inches in diameter or greater, regardless of where it is (i.e. private or public property). The city also requires that significant trees cannot be removed without permission from the City Forester. There must be a request filed, which has to meet certain criteria, including that the tree poses a risk to others. The City Forester also has the right, under Rhode Island state law, to enter into private property and remove trees that could pose a risk to the health and safety of other trees or people.

Back to Top

South Carolina protects its grand trees from any kind of removal, and the same goes for its capital city, Columbia. Theres a process outlined for getting a grand tree removal permit in the city municipal code that follows:

Back to Top

Sioux Falls requires no permit for private property owners when it comes to tree removal. However, their director of forestry retains the right to control any trees considered nuisances under city ordinance 94, wherein they are considered problems to the publics safety. This means that the tree might have diseases or insects that could spread to other trees on private or public property that need to be removed for such prevention. South Dakota has no other tree laws in place to death with tree removal on private property otherwise.

Back to Top

Tennessee state law includes no provisions for the removal of trees on private property. However in Nashville, the state capital, theres a city tree removal ordinance which states that protected trees six inches or more in diameter on properties greater than those for one or two family home residences must have a permit before they can be removed, as they are considered protected trees. This might also necessitate a replacement tree, which will be the responsibility of the person who has the tree cut down. Tree removal companies in Nashville must also have permits acquired before they remove any trees on public or private property, which includes a plan as to where they put they tree after cutting it down.

Back to Top

Texas state law allows for city officials to deal with nuisance trees that can have an effect on other trees, either on public or private properties, by removing them, even if they belong to a resident and not the city. In Austin the city arborist does not allow for the removal of trees on private property that have a circumference of 60 inches or more without a permit. The only way a resident can get a permit to remove such a tree is if they can prove it is a hazard to the public or their home. In Dallas and its surrounding suburbs, property owners are completely responsible for the care and removal of their trees and do not require a permit for removal.

Back to Top

Utah state law protects heritage trees, which include rare, threatened, or vanishing species of trees according to the Utah Heritage Tree Act of 1975. This means any tree designated by the Utah Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands as indigenous to Utah or very well-adapted to the climate cannot be cut down. In Salt Lake City, outside of this law, the city has no permit requirements or special rules when it comes to the removal of trees on private property.

Back to Top

In Vermont, they have what is called a tree warden in every city. While this warden most controls the care and removal of trees on public property, his or her control extends into private property if theres an infestation that needs to be controlled. In Montpelier, they have a city tree board which has the right to remove trees on private property under the condition the tree is diseased or a hazard to other properties, private or public. The removal will be at the expense of the owner after they are notified by the board. There are no other rules in Montpelier in terms of permits for tree removal on private property.

Back to Top

Virginia state law has no special permit requirements or laws concerning tree removal on private property. In Richmond, there are no also no laws or special requirements for private property tree removal. An ordinance was introduced to the city to preserve certain types of trees, but it did not pass. However the disposal of tree limbs and branches after removal are also the responsibility of owners because the city will not collect them.

Back to Top

Washington state has no law concerning the removal of special trees on private property. In Seattle, there also isnt a permit requirement for private residence tree removal. However, some public right-of-way trees are maintained by private residences, and removing those require a permit.

Back to Top

Go here to read the rest:
Tree Removal Regulations by State Tree Removal

WESTFIELD Shawn Downey from Larson Design began the June Westfield borough council meeting by giving an update on the water treatment plant project.

Downey said that notices to proceed have been submitted and a construction schedule is being developed. The date for awarding H2O grants has been pushed back to September. Downey said Larson Design will have to revise the phasing of the project to remain eligible for that grant.

The council revisited the Krusen Cemetery maintenance proposal that was discussed last month. The council said they had met with the solicitor who said the borough could maintain the cemetery, but not own it. Because the solicitor had given a verbal statement and not a written one, one resident requested the council obtain a written statement concerning the cemetery before any other maintenance occurred. The council decided to postpone any decision until they receive a letter from the cemetery association.

A concern was brought to the council about garbage near the river. The council said the individual has been contacted concerning the garbage.

Another concern was raised about the chief of police. The individual who raised the concern alleged there was a conflict of interest between the chief and an individual in the town.

Council member Dennis Landry said the person who controls the police is actually the mayor. Landry said for the council to be able to act on complaints concerning the police department it should go through the mayor, who would record those complaints and then have a case to bring to council.

The council announced that the Northern Tier Solid Waste Authority is no longer going to pick up recycling in Westfield. Northern Tier Solid Waste Authority offered the borough an opportunity to take over the recycling program. A locking container with a tarp was provided by the authority and is behind the borough building due to construction at the water treatment plant. The council approved having the recycling location open two Saturdays a month from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m.

The council also discussed the removal of ash trees from the park. The bids for the removal of the trees were opened and council hired Casey Hauberl to remove the trees for $1,600 and Garry King to remove the stumps for $525.

The council approved street paving on Stone Quarry Road for $34,275.

The next borough council meeting will be at 7 p.m. July 14.

See the article here:
Ash tree removal and water treatment project move ahead in Westfield - The Wellsboro Gazette

Editors note: In celebration of Golf Digest's 70th anniversary, were revisiting the best literature and journalism weve ever published. Catch up on earlier installments.

The National Golf Links on New Yorks Long Island was the first great American course to engage in massive tree removal, circa 1990. But it wasnt until Oakmont near Pittsburgh started a deforestation program a few years later that the movement gained momentum, and a full-fledged war on hardwood was legitimized as good for golf. By the time the U.S. Open was played at Oakmont in 2016, the United States Golf Association celebrated its 20-year restoration plan [for removing] more than 12,600 trees in what will long be regarded as one of the most definitive architectural renaissances in golf history. From Merion outside Philadelphia to Los Angeles Country Club North, hundreds of courses followed the trend. Even Winged Foot in Mamaroneck, N.Y., which once subtitled its club history The Golf, the People and the Friendly Trees, removed those affable trees by the thousands.

What started as an underground maneuver in cover of darkness eventually went mainstream, and the first writer to examine the movement was Senior Editor Peter McCleery with this story called Mission Unpopular in October 2002. McCleery wrote and edited features for Golf Digest since joining the staff in the early 1980s, but his specialty was investigative reporting and TV criticism. He also pioneered the use of reader surveys as a regular fixture of the magazine, for example, identifying Johnny Miller as the most loved and most hated announcer in golfpure gold for a player agent to sell. McCleery was not averse to digging into controversy, so the subject of tree removal captured his imagination as clubs across the country, then as now, continue to debate the subject. Jerry Tarde

In the beginning there were no trees on golf courses, links land being particularly inhospitable. Many of Americas most notable courses also had barren beginnings, but over time trees were planted and the parkland concept took hold. Indeed, so deeply rooted are trees with American golf that approximately one in every 10 courses has some kind of leafy reference in its name (all those Oak Trees and Shady Oaks). But as those beloved trees mature and branches spread, they become problems, impacting playability and turf quality. Courses nationwide are now coming to grips with the emotionally and politically charged realities of tree removal, sometimes on a massive scale. Call it the de-treeing of American golf.

Nowhere is this reversal or restoration more apparent than at Oakmont Country Club outside Pittsburgh. The home of multiple U.S. Opens has gone through a decade-long program of tree removal that is ongoing. It started one day when head pro Bob Ford ushered a group of members out to a double hazard on the first holea bunker with tree trouble between it and the fairway. See this? Ford said. Somethings gotta go here.

But when Oakmonts tree-removal process began in earnest in the mid-1990s, it took place surreptitiously, as it often does to avoid detection by tree-loving members. Former Oakmont superintendent Mark Kuhns assembled a SWAT team of 12 workers assigned to different tasks, with headlights showing the way. Their days would start at 4 a.m., while members were still asleep. Huge tarps were spread out as the crew cut down trees, mainly pin oaks, then hauled the limbs into no mans land. A stump grinder was on hand, and two high-powered vacuums sucked up leaves. The greens chairman and an 18-member club board were behind the plan, but the bulk of the members were kept in the dark.

We took down so many trees before anybody knew what was going on, Kuhns says.

The crew was working on removing a grove of 13 large pin oaks dividing the 12th hole and the 13th green. We got down to three of them still standing when somebody noticed what was going on, Kuhns says. Then they caught up to my chairman, and it became a very sour issue.

At one full membership meeting, former greens chairman Banks Smith recalls that all those opposed to removing more trees sat aggressively in the front rows, while those on board with the program ordered a drink and went to play cards.

There were factions, a threatened petition, prayers for the trees survival from a neighboring church, even a whiff of a lawsuit. But after much quiet persuasion, politicking, four greens chairmen and, in the end, 3,500 felled trees, Oakmont has been fully and magnificently restored. Sure, a number of trees remain, but the emphasis is back on the bunkering and the dramatic contours of its fairways and greens. A round there this spring with three of those former greens chairmen revealed the zeal of their mission, with remaining trees still being discussed and targeted. Those have to go, the group agreed about a grove of three trees left of the 18th fairway.

They used to say that you could see almost every hole at Oakmont from the second story of the clubhouse, says Bill Fallon, general chairman for the 2003 U.S. Amateur at Oakmont. Now weve almost got that back. You can now see the vistas from fairway to fairway or across several fairways. Weve rediscovered the beauty and genius of Henry Fownes.

The thinned-out Oakmont stands as a beacon for others embarking on the hazardous path to de-treeing their courses. If any club thinks they would be hurting themselves by cutting down a few trees, go look at Oakmont and see what theyve done, says Tom Meeks, the USGAs senior director of rules and competitions. They are the leaders in the clubhouse. Representatives from numerous other clubs already have made the pilgrimage to Oakmont for inspiration.

Tree-removal programs have transformed many of Americas 100 Greatest Golf Courses, including Merion, Winged Foot, Medinah, National Golf Links of America, Oak Hill, Garden City and Baltusrol. In the publinx arena, Tension Park, the hustlers paradise in Dallas, removed trees as part of a restoration programbut not without a fight.

A.W. Tillinghast discovered the perils of tree removal years ago. I sometimes take my very life in my hands when I suggest that a certain tree happens to be spoiling a pretty good golf hole, he wrote in 1937.

Today, the process usually follows a similar pattern to Oakmonts initial wariness, if not outright opposition, giving way to an almost unanimous embracing of the results. So complete is the memberships turnaround at Oakmont, jokes Mark Studer, another former greens chairman, that people who were never involved are now trying to take the credit for the projects success. (One notable exception to the movement: Augusta National, which has planted more than 250 trees while tightening driving areas as part of its design overhaul by architect Tom Fazio.)

No one that I know who has any feel for aesthetics or nature has anything negative to say about trees, Fazio says. How can anyone not like them? God put them here to give us shade and shelter. But I dont know that anybody really thought about them relative to golf. They just always assumed they were a positive influence.

John ONeill is a member of the USGA Executive Committee who has been advocating tree removal since the late 1970s, when he was greens chairman at his home course on Long Island, Westhampton Country Club. ONeill says the awakening to the need for more active, ongoing tree maintenance is long overdue. Its like painting a room that hasnt been painted in a long time, he says of the process. You think the room looks fine until you get in there and realize, Oh my gosh, this looks pretty shabby. The leading clubs are very important. If Oakmont does it, removing trees becomes a lot more legitimate for other clubs."

TREES SNEAK UP ON YOU

Jim Snow, national director of the USGAs Green Section, has given seminars around the world in which he labels trees the biggest problem facing American golf agronomy. Trees are a natural part of our landscape, and they serve a lot of practical purposes on courses, strategic as well as aesthetic, Snow says. But trees sneak up on you. They get bigger little by little, and over 20 to 30 years they have a huge impact on golf courses, even though people around them all the time dont realize whats happening. Snow says golfers only need look in their own back yards to be reminded of the inherent difficulty of growing grass beneath trees.

Agronomy experts say theres a simple non-negotiable tradeoff between turf and trees. Turf needs sun and air to thrive, and if trees are blocking that, somethings got to give. Trees that overhang greens and tees create the most problems, mainly because those areas get the most foot traffic.

Because trees on the south and east side of greens block the sun for more hours than any others, they are the most problematic. If you want a tree close to a green, put it on the north side, Fazio says. The golf-course superintendents treatise on the subject is titled, tellingly: Shaded Greens: Turf, Trees and Politics.

PAYING THE PRICE FOR OVERPLANTING

Tree-planting programs that were popular in the 1960s and 70s during the make America beautiful movement were often carried out haphazardly, with different species placed too close together. Trees get in the way of each other and sap nutrients from the soil if not properly spaced.

Some influential golf people are hard-liners when it comes to hardwoods. Asked about trees, USGA President Reed Mackenzie says, I hate them. Why? Three reasons, really: The agronomics (Trees end up costing you a lot of money; you get areas where you cant grow grass), the emotions they stir (People become attached to trees, and their attachment is irrational) and the practical realities (Trees get diseased and they fall down).

Others, including noted architect Jack Nicklaus, take a more balanced approach. Nicklaus cites Pinehurst No. 2 as the best course I know of from a tree-usage standpoint. Its a totally tree-lined golf course without one tree in the playing strategy of that golf course. I love what Donald Ross used to do at Pinehurst. Every year Ross would walk through the trees and say, That tree has gotten too big; you cant play a recovery shot from in there anymore. Take that tree out and cut the branches off that one. Then if you hit it in there, you could get in and play a recovery shot back out. Too many trees prevent recovery shots, and I think the recovery shot is a wonderful part if the game.

Safety issues also surround trees. Although healthy trees provide a buffer between holes, old, diseased or dying trees pose real dangers. Weve had a lot of trees fall down that were in that 70-year-old range, says Jim Lucius, director of golf at San Franciscos Olympic Club. I often think that golf courses can die of old age because of trees.

Selective pruning is often a tentative first step for clubs, but it doesnt really get at the root of the problem. Pruning improves light situations, but it doesnt fix them, says Scott Robinson, vice president of technical operations for ArborCom Technologies, a firm that provides computer-generated proof of how trees block sunlight to greens (see accompanying story). Ive never seen a light-penetration problem solved by pruning alone.

If youve ever seen electric fans on a golf course, youve probably noticed large trees nearby. Fans have been installed at many courses in the past decade to improve the air circulation that trees inhibit. If those clubs would cut down some trees, there might not be as many fans or a need to run them for the duration that they do, says Clark Throssell, the Golf Course Superintendents Association director of research. Adds Snow: Fans are expensive to run and something youd just rather not see on a golf course. But a fan is better than dead grass.

Thus far, the major thrust of tree removal has taken place at the older Eastern clubs where trees are older and bigger than in other parts of the country. West Coast courses also seem to be a lot more tolerant of Poa annua in their greens, says ArborComs Robinson, and light requirements are a lot lower with Poa.

THE STILL-POPULAR OFF-SEASON PLAN

If overall tree removal is going more mainstream, its not quite out in the daylight. Secrecy still seems a big part of the process at some prominent clubs. They dont say much about it, says an official at one of the big Eastern clubs, in hushed tones. Its a political bombshell. Says John Zimmers, Oakmonts superintendent: We still, to this day, do not just go out and cut a tree down. We do it in the morning or when the club is closed. Members who return to a club that has been de-treed in winter tend to look around and notice something different, but theyre not sure what. Its amazing how little they do notice, says USGA agronomist Kimberly Erusha.

Memorial trees, of course, can be especially sensitive. Theyre the worst, Mackenzie says. You cant move grandpas tree. Or can you? Thats pretty much what officials did at Oak Hill Country Club in Rochester, N.Y. Over the past 50 years, Oak Hill had dedicated 35 trees for famous golfers on its Hill of Fame surrounding the par-5 13th hole.

As Oak Hill began removing troublesome trees, some members became very concerned about the Hill of Fame, says Bill Reeves, an Oak Hill member and chairman of its Hill of Fame committee. To us, those trees were almost sacred.

But when members saw the rapidly improved condition on greens where other trees had come down, Reeves says it didnt make sense to have 17 superb greens and one in mediocre condition. So Oak Hill decided to remove 13 trees on the Hill of Fame, including those dedicated to Dwight Eisenhower, Charlie Coe, Gerald Ford and Miller Barber. Nicklaus tree, on the southern-exposure side, remains intact after some serious pruning.

If we were to take down that tree, says Oak Hill superintendent Paul B. Latshaw, it might solve all our light issues on that hole from here to eternity. I dont know Jack Nicklaus, but knowing what he must know about agronomy, Im sure hed be supportive if it came to that.

In an easy salve for the dethroned, Oak Hill reaffixed those honorees plaques to other trees nearby. Weve got thousands of trees at Oak Hill, Reeves says. Were not going to run out of trees.

Thankfully, no one ever will. Which is probably why more and more of them are coming down.

IS YOUR COURSE OVER-TREED?

How do you tell if your home course is over-treed? To paraphrase Ben Hogan, dont look up, look down, because the answer is in the dirt. The health of the turf provides an important tipoff to a potential tree problem.

You almost have to go by whats happening to the grass, says Jim Snow, national director of the USGAs Green Section. In particular, greens under too much shade will be subject to a general thinning of the turf, or in extreme cases, no turf at all. When holes are in shady spots, traffic around the hole will exacerbate the wear and tear. And once the turf on a green loses its density, thats when the weeds will invade, says Clark Throssell, director of research for the Golf Course Superintendents Association of America. When the turf isnt that competitive, thats where these other species get started.

Tees also can be susceptible, and the telltale sign will be that only one portion of the tee is ever used, either because the shaded portion is in bad shape or because overhanging limbs or interloping trees ahead eliminate that angle. Tees suffer a lot at the hands of golfers, Throssell says. Letting the light in so the turf has a reasonable chance of recovery is very important.

Should your club or course decide to undertake a program of tree removal, John ONeill of the USGAs Executive Committee recommends a gradual approach. Dont shock the members, he says. Start slowly, taking down the trees that most affect agronomics. Dont take down stuff that could be the most controversial. Get the members into it, and once they see results, theyll get behind it.

Beware the dreaded double hazards. This is when you hit into a fairway bunker, for example, and also have a tree to deal with between you and the hole.

Exposed, above-ground tree roots. Not only dangerous for playing shots, but tree roots compete with the grass for soil nutrients.

A general sense of claustrophobia. If you start to feel as if youre in a bowling alley instead of on a golf course, some serious tree removal might be required.

Wheres the rough? Most courses were designed to have 15 to 20 yards of rough between the fairways and tree lines.

Overhanging limbs. From the middle of the fairway, you should be able to access any hole location on the green without tree trouble. Your approach shot shouldnt be obscured by tree limbs overhanging the green or the fairway, ONeill says.

Visit link:
The undercover war that swept the game - Golf Digest

...THUNDERSTORMS EXPECTED TO PRODUCE EXCESSIVE RAINFALL....A SLOW MOVING AREA OF LOW PRESSURE OVER THE EASTERN MID-ATLANTICWILL ALLOW FOR SLOW MOVING THUNDERSTORMS THIS AFTERNOON ANDEVENING. MANY AREAS OVER THE PAST WEEK HAVE ALREADY RECEIVEDSEVERAL INCHES OF RAIN. THIS WILL MAKE IT EASIER FOR FLASHFLOODING TO OCCUR FOR STORMS WHICH PRODUCE EXCESSIVE RAINFALL....FLASH FLOOD WATCH IN EFFECT UNTIL 9 PM EDT THIS EVENING...THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN BLACKSBURG HAS EXPANDED THE* FLASH FLOOD WATCH TO INCLUDE PORTIONS OF NORTH CENTRAL NORTHCAROLINA AND VIRGINIA, INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING AREAS, IN NORTHCENTRAL NORTH CAROLINA, CASWELL. IN VIRGINIA, APPOMATTOX,CAMPBELL, CHARLOTTE, HALIFAX, AND PITTSYLVANIA.* UNTIL 9 PM EDT THIS EVENING* SLOW MOVING THUNDERSTORMS ARE EXPECTED TO PRODUCE TORRENTIALDOWNPOURS LEADING TO LOCALIZED FLASH FLOODING.* RAIN RATES OF 4 INCHES AN HOUR ARE POSSIBLE WITH STORMS WHICHDEVELOP ACROSS THE WATCH AREA THIS AFTERNOON AND EVENING. THISWILL RESULT IN RAINFALL AMOUNTS OF UP TO ONE INCH IN 15MINUTES WHICH MAY QUICKLY FILL ROADSIDE DITCHES. RAINFALLAMOUNTS WHICH EXCEED 2 INCHES WILL LIKELY LEAD TO FLASHFLOODING OF SMALL STREAMS AND POOR DRAINAGE AREAS.PRECAUTIONARY/PREPAREDNESS ACTIONS...A FLASH FLOOD WATCH MEANS THAT CONDITIONS MAY DEVELOP THAT LEADTO FLASH FLOODING. FLASH FLOODING IS A VERY DANGEROUS SITUATION.REMEMBER...TURN AROUND...DON'T DROWN!YOU SHOULD MONITOR LATER FORECASTS AND BE PREPARED TO TAKE ACTIONSHOULD FLASH FLOOD WARNINGS BE ISSUED.&&

Original post:
Saturday morning at the Lee monument after police take armed individual into custody - Lynchburg News and Advance

...THUNDERSTORMS EXPECTED TO PRODUCE EXCESSIVE RAINFALL....A SLOW MOVING AREA OF LOW PRESSURE OVER THE EASTERN MID-ATLANTICWILL ALLOW FOR SLOW MOVING THUNDERSTORMS THIS AFTERNOON ANDEVENING. MANY AREAS OVER THE PAST WEEK HAVE ALREADY RECEIVEDSEVERAL INCHES OF RAIN. THIS WILL MAKE IT EASIER FOR FLASHFLOODING TO OCCUR FOR STORMS WHICH PRODUCE EXCESSIVE RAINFALL....FLASH FLOOD WATCH IN EFFECT UNTIL 9 PM EDT THIS EVENING...THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN BLACKSBURG HAS EXPANDED THE* FLASH FLOOD WATCH TO INCLUDE PORTIONS OF NORTH CENTRAL NORTHCAROLINA AND VIRGINIA, INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING AREAS, IN NORTHCENTRAL NORTH CAROLINA, CASWELL. IN VIRGINIA, APPOMATTOX,CAMPBELL, CHARLOTTE, HALIFAX, AND PITTSYLVANIA.* UNTIL 9 PM EDT THIS EVENING* SLOW MOVING THUNDERSTORMS ARE EXPECTED TO PRODUCE TORRENTIALDOWNPOURS LEADING TO LOCALIZED FLASH FLOODING.* RAIN RATES OF 4 INCHES AN HOUR ARE POSSIBLE WITH STORMS WHICHDEVELOP ACROSS THE WATCH AREA THIS AFTERNOON AND EVENING. THISWILL RESULT IN RAINFALL AMOUNTS OF UP TO ONE INCH IN 15MINUTES WHICH MAY QUICKLY FILL ROADSIDE DITCHES. RAINFALLAMOUNTS WHICH EXCEED 2 INCHES WILL LIKELY LEAD TO FLASHFLOODING OF SMALL STREAMS AND POOR DRAINAGE AREAS.PRECAUTIONARY/PREPAREDNESS ACTIONS...A FLASH FLOOD WATCH MEANS THAT CONDITIONS MAY DEVELOP THAT LEADTO FLASH FLOODING. FLASH FLOODING IS A VERY DANGEROUS SITUATION.REMEMBER...TURN AROUND...DON'T DROWN!YOU SHOULD MONITOR LATER FORECASTS AND BE PREPARED TO TAKE ACTIONSHOULD FLASH FLOOD WARNINGS BE ISSUED.&&

Read the original here:
Attorney general says Trump has fired top federal prosecutor in Manhattan who defied administration effort to remove him - Lynchburg News and Advance

...THUNDERSTORMS EXPECTED TO PRODUCE EXCESSIVE RAINFALL....A SLOW MOVING AREA OF LOW PRESSURE OVER THE EASTERN MID-ATLANTICWILL ALLOW FOR SLOW MOVING THUNDERSTORMS THIS AFTERNOON ANDEVENING. MANY AREAS OVER THE PAST WEEK HAVE ALREADY RECEIVEDSEVERAL INCHES OF RAIN. THIS WILL MAKE IT EASIER FOR FLASHFLOODING TO OCCUR FOR STORMS WHICH PRODUCE EXCESSIVE RAINFALL....FLASH FLOOD WATCH IN EFFECT UNTIL 9 PM EDT THIS EVENING...THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN BLACKSBURG HAS EXPANDED THE* FLASH FLOOD WATCH TO INCLUDE PORTIONS OF NORTH CENTRAL NORTHCAROLINA AND VIRGINIA, INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING AREAS, IN NORTHCENTRAL NORTH CAROLINA, CASWELL. IN VIRGINIA, APPOMATTOX,CAMPBELL, CHARLOTTE, HALIFAX, AND PITTSYLVANIA.* UNTIL 9 PM EDT THIS EVENING* SLOW MOVING THUNDERSTORMS ARE EXPECTED TO PRODUCE TORRENTIALDOWNPOURS LEADING TO LOCALIZED FLASH FLOODING.* RAIN RATES OF 4 INCHES AN HOUR ARE POSSIBLE WITH STORMS WHICHDEVELOP ACROSS THE WATCH AREA THIS AFTERNOON AND EVENING. THISWILL RESULT IN RAINFALL AMOUNTS OF UP TO ONE INCH IN 15MINUTES WHICH MAY QUICKLY FILL ROADSIDE DITCHES. RAINFALLAMOUNTS WHICH EXCEED 2 INCHES WILL LIKELY LEAD TO FLASHFLOODING OF SMALL STREAMS AND POOR DRAINAGE AREAS.PRECAUTIONARY/PREPAREDNESS ACTIONS...A FLASH FLOOD WATCH MEANS THAT CONDITIONS MAY DEVELOP THAT LEADTO FLASH FLOODING. FLASH FLOODING IS A VERY DANGEROUS SITUATION.REMEMBER...TURN AROUND...DON'T DROWN!YOU SHOULD MONITOR LATER FORECASTS AND BE PREPARED TO TAKE ACTIONSHOULD FLASH FLOOD WARNINGS BE ISSUED.&&

See the original post:
Governor appoints Santa Fe lawyer to state Court of Appeals - Lynchburg News and Advance

...THUNDERSTORMS EXPECTED TO PRODUCE EXCESSIVE RAINFALL....A SLOW MOVING AREA OF LOW PRESSURE OVER THE EASTERN MID-ATLANTICWILL ALLOW FOR SLOW MOVING THUNDERSTORMS THIS AFTERNOON ANDEVENING. MANY AREAS OVER THE PAST WEEK HAVE ALREADY RECEIVEDSEVERAL INCHES OF RAIN. THIS WILL MAKE IT EASIER FOR FLASHFLOODING TO OCCUR FOR STORMS WHICH PRODUCE EXCESSIVE RAINFALL....FLASH FLOOD WATCH IN EFFECT UNTIL 9 PM EDT THIS EVENING...THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN BLACKSBURG HAS EXPANDED THE* FLASH FLOOD WATCH TO INCLUDE PORTIONS OF NORTH CENTRAL NORTHCAROLINA AND VIRGINIA, INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING AREAS, IN NORTHCENTRAL NORTH CAROLINA, CASWELL. IN VIRGINIA, APPOMATTOX,CAMPBELL, CHARLOTTE, HALIFAX, AND PITTSYLVANIA.* UNTIL 9 PM EDT THIS EVENING* SLOW MOVING THUNDERSTORMS ARE EXPECTED TO PRODUCE TORRENTIALDOWNPOURS LEADING TO LOCALIZED FLASH FLOODING.* RAIN RATES OF 4 INCHES AN HOUR ARE POSSIBLE WITH STORMS WHICHDEVELOP ACROSS THE WATCH AREA THIS AFTERNOON AND EVENING. THISWILL RESULT IN RAINFALL AMOUNTS OF UP TO ONE INCH IN 15MINUTES WHICH MAY QUICKLY FILL ROADSIDE DITCHES. RAINFALLAMOUNTS WHICH EXCEED 2 INCHES WILL LIKELY LEAD TO FLASHFLOODING OF SMALL STREAMS AND POOR DRAINAGE AREAS.PRECAUTIONARY/PREPAREDNESS ACTIONS...A FLASH FLOOD WATCH MEANS THAT CONDITIONS MAY DEVELOP THAT LEADTO FLASH FLOODING. FLASH FLOODING IS A VERY DANGEROUS SITUATION.REMEMBER...TURN AROUND...DON'T DROWN!YOU SHOULD MONITOR LATER FORECASTS AND BE PREPARED TO TAKE ACTIONSHOULD FLASH FLOOD WARNINGS BE ISSUED.&&

Continue reading here:
Trump campaign says six staffers helping set up for Tulsa rally have tested positive for coronavirus - Lynchburg News and Advance