A request to remove five elm trees and two maple trees from the grounds of the historic courthouse was presented to the Jackson County Board of Commissioners Monday night.
The BOC will take action on the request when it meets at 6 p.m. on Monday, March 21.
At the BOC work session this week, Charlotte Mealor, chairman of the historic courthouse committee, presented the report evaluating the trees and recommending that they be removed.
“We realize these are historic trees and we would like to save them,” Mealor said. “However, we also realize the cost associated with further evaluation and maintenance, without any guarantees about the longevity of the trees, would not necessarily be advisable. We also realize this may be an opportunity to plant new, healthy trees for future generations.”
BOC chairman Hunter Bicknell said, “We appreciate you getting experts involved who can guide the process.”
For more BOC stories, see the March 9 issue of The Jackson Herald.
If you were at the Commission meeting you would have heard about the diseases that the trees have. While it is not a popular decision to remove them, it must be done before the work that was done to the historic courthouse is wasted when one of the dying trees falls and damages the structure.
It would have been nice Mike if your reporter who was there would have covered the information provided by the Courhouse Committee adn the Jefferson Tree Council at the meeting. I'm not sure if you just avoided printing the facts or not but if you were there it was pretty easy to understand why the trees need to be taken down before damaging the building, before damaging a passing car or hurting someone walking by. Now that the Commission has been advised by professionals about the poor condition of the trees they will be even more liable if someone or soemthing is hurt or damaged.
I can only guess but I say that your sensationalized poll will only be about as accurate as your poll on the ELOST. Ever think about showing the number of people who vote so that it will have more credability?
“…these are historic trees and we would like to save them,” said Ms. Mealor.
It is hard to not agree with that. But the flip side said “…the cost associated with further evaluation and maintenance, without any guarantees about the longevity of the trees, would not necessarily be advisable.” I disagree—it is advisable.
The courthouse is honored to have such venerable neighbors as those trees. They have clung to their dirt in poor health and shape and asked for nothing. They show characteristics worthy of good citizens.
Chairman Bicknell mentioned “experts.” Commenter Phillips mentioned “professionals.” It would make me feel better to hear the word “arborist” used. Talk with an arborist about saving the trees.
I suspect that the “experts and professionals” mentioned were licensed, insured, free estimate giving tree removers. Necessary, yes, but don’t use them yet.
I think the Trees are to beautiful and should be treated like they look at the history the is in these trees. They have out lived a lot of humans. A lot lawmen have come and gone judges lawyers etc. So lleave them alone until it just nessary to cut them down!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!