- Vancity Lookout
- Posts
- Judge blocks temporary injunction against Stanley Park tree removals
Judge blocks temporary injunction against Stanley Park tree removals
A group turned to the courts to claim the removal of 7,000 trees so far, and potentially up to 160,000, has caused them emotional distress
Sponsored by
Good morning!
I am once again making the terrible decision to join a fantasy hockey draft. I took a break from it last year, as I had a scheduling conflict with the draft night, but tonight (as I write this on Sunday) I am joining again and ready to once again embarrass myself. I’ve consistently, since I joined this pool, ranked in the bottom two, and often at the very bottom.
That said, I think my year has come. I have done nothing to prepare for this, so I’m going to follow my usual strategy of picking players who have a high rating in the guides, balanced against whether I think they have a winner’s name. One of those is science, the other is art, so it has to be a solid strategy.
Right?
In today’s newsletter, we’ve got a look at a decision by the BC Supreme Court that blocked a temporary injunction against the park board removing more trees from Stanley Park as part of its response to the looper moth infestation.
PS - If you find this newsletter valuable, please consider forwarding it to your friends. New to the Lookout? Sign-up for free.
WEATHER
Monday: 19 🌡️ 12 | 🌦️
Tuesday: 17 🌡️ 10 | 🌧️
Wednesday: 15 🌡️ 9 | 🌧️
PARK BOARD
No temporary injunction against Stanley Park tree removal
What happened: A group of residents seeking to halt the removal of thousands of trees from Stanley Park were unsuccessful in early stages of the legal process, losing an application for a temporary injunction until the matter can go to trial.
Four residents brought a lawsuit earlier this year against three public respondents — city, the park board and park board employee Joe McLeod — as well as B.A. Blackwell & Associates Ltd., over the removal of trees from the park in late 2023 and early 2024, claiming they suffered psychological and emotional damage as regular users of the park.
The claim alleges the tree removals were “so extensive and unnecessary that it caused them harm, and that the defendants are liable to the plaintiffs in negligence for it,” according to a Oct. 1 decision by BC Supreme Court Justice Maegen Giltrow.
Background: The tree removals came about after the park board found the forest was “significantly impacted” by a hemlock looper moth infestation in 2022 — but at the time, the extent of the impact was still unclear, leading the park board to contract Blackwell to study the matter and report back, according to the decision.
The report: The Blackwell report plays a large role in the lawsuit, with the plaintiffs claiming the park board relied too heavily on “a fundamentally flawed report” in concluding that thousands of trees needed to be removed, according to the decision. They claim this was the result of inadequate oversight of the study by the park board, alleging a “negligent response based on a negligent report.”
Based on that report, the park board has already removed 7,000 trees, according to the decision, and the report “ultimately contemplates removal of up to 160,000 trees” over three to five years — that amounts to a third of the park’s trees. But the park board told the court that that extent of tree removal isn’t guaranteed, with around 6,000 trees slated for removal in 2024/25.
The plaintiffs argued that only one of the 14 citations in the Blackwell report was a peer-reviewed study, making for a scientifically flawed and unreliable conclusion, and that Blackwell made incorrect assumptions in using fire prediction modelling software.
The damages and the relief: Giltrow wrote that the plaintiffs claimed the removal of trees from the park caused them “increased stress, anxiety and sadness that come from not being able to rely on Stanley Park due to its degradation,” and that they “also suffer from increased fear for their safety, as they say the evidence demonstrates that the logging is making the park less, not more, safe.”
The plaintiffs argued the machine logging was fragmenting the forest and forest floor and caused park heating due to deforestation, and that the Blackwell report overstates the fire risk posed by leaving the impacted trees in place, including failing to account for existing fire suppression infrastructure.
Giltrow said there is “merit to the point that parks, and particularly parks as rare, forested and beautiful as Stanley Park, … are established and maintained in part to foster and benefit the mental well-being of those who visit and use the park,” and that mental suffering is a legitimate form of damage that can be compensated under tort law.
Contract concerns: The plaintiffs raised concerns that city council approved a $16-million budget for the tree removal work without the park board ever passing a resolution approving the work.
While tree removal work began in October, the report wasn’t completed and submitted to McLeod until late January, and the park board wasn’t sent a copy of the report until Feb. 8, a few days after an in-camera meeting updating them on the work, according to the ruling.
Whose call to make: The plaintiffs argued the potential removal of a third of the park’s trees is significant enough that it should have been considered and decided upon by the park board rather than by park board or city staff, or by city council, noting that park board commissioners “routinely consider, authorize and direct staff on matters whose consequence is at least comparable” to this work.
The public respondents countered that there was an implicit authorization in that the commissioners had been updated several times on the work being done, and if they felt a decision was needed by the board, they could have intervened.
Looking at it another way, however, the plaintiffs argued this is, in fact, “the basis for the park board’s liability,” as at “every step of the way, the park board was informed and did nothing,” amounting to an abandonment of transparent oversight.
Public vs. private law: While the injunction application was sought under a private duty of care, which hinges on individual actions and relationships that can be resolved through individual remedies, Giltrow said the matter would likely fall under public law, which hinges on broader policy decisions that can be remedied through judicial review.
In that determination, Giltrow cast doubt on the plaintiffs’ ability to succeed in trial, despite noting that they “have raised legitimate concerns about the apparent lack of deliberative decision-making by the park board.”
“In these circumstances, a group of citizens has put their hands up and said something is amiss. It may well be; in fact, the public respondents acknowledged this possibility during the hearing of this matter. It is an important role of the court to hear challenges to government action or inaction,” the judge wrote.
The verdict: Giltrow noted that only 6,000 trees slated for removal by the end of the park board’s contract with Blackwell, meaning there is time for the park board to actually consider and make a decision about the removal of up to 160,000 trees or for a potential judicial review under public law, denying the injunction, but giving the plaintiff’s the option to amend their application in the future to seek remedy under public law.
SPONSORED BY GENERATION SQUEEZE
Craving a non-partisan take on election issues that matter for younger generations?
Generation Squeeze's B.C. Voters Guide breaks down what politicians are really promising on issues that matter for younger and future generations: housing, child care, climate, deficits, and health.
We comb through election platforms to determine how much politicians’ plans will advance our goal: Build a B.C. where young and old alike can thrive, so we can be good ancestors to those who follow in our footsteps.
As a charitable Think & Change Tank co-hosted at UBC, our goal is to inform voters with non-partisan, evidence-based analysis. Short on bandwidth? Our report cards grade parties on a proficiency scale that will look familiar to B.C. families with school children. Feeling a bit wonkish? Check out our deeper dives into each parties' policy proposals.
Sign up for updates about our Voters Guide and other efforts to make Canada work fairly for all generations.
VANCOUVER NUMBERS
🚨 5 years: Prosecutors are seeking a prison sentence of this length for a man who, while driving drunk, ran through several red lights before running over and killing a 24-year-old Irish man in Kitsilano. Defence lawyers haven’t yet made sentencing submissions. [Global]
💸 5.2%: The VPD was over budget by this much, or about $10 million, for the first half of 2024, though the department anticipates it will end the year 1.6% over the annual budget of $443 million. The department said it was due to overtime hours for protests, assisting with decampment along Hastings and backfilling vacancies. [CBC]
JOBS
Discover your dream job in Vancouver:
EDI Coordinator at Coast Mountain Bus Company
Manager, HCA (1 year contract) at The Health Employers Association of BC
Philanthropy officer, engagement lead at Canuck Place Children's Hospice
Local jobs are selected by the Lookout team and are not paid ads, unless specifically noted.
THE AGENDA
🏘️ As the election approaches, a group of youth under 30 is calling for changes to child welfare and housing policies, including housing for low-income youth, affordable and safe housing for seniors, and ending the separation of families under the child welfare system. [The Tyee]
📈 A new poll from Leger, which placed the BC Conservatives with a three percentage point edge over the BC NDP, found the party has increasing support from demographics right-wing parties traditionally have struggled with: women (49% support) and young voters aged 18-34 (47%). [Global]
🤔 Looking for a compare-and-contrast look at the three different parties’ platforms on top issues this election? CBC has a handy guide for you. [CBC]
🚲 Have you been using Lime, Neuron or Bird e-bikes? You might want to look at your past bills to see if they were charging you PST. Since April 2021, they aren’t supposed to, and you may be up for a rebate. [CBC]
🦮 A couple from Chicago is taking the Residence Inn by Marriott downtown to the human rights tribunal for forcing them to move to the pets floor, despite their dog being a service dog and not a pet. While the pets' floor is to protect other guests with allergies, people who use guide dogs are not supposed to be blocked from services available to anyone else. [CTV]
🗳️ Conservative Party? Or Conservative Party of BC? Which should be on the ballot? Does the former confuse people into thinking they’re voting for the federal Conservatives? Does anyone care? The BC NDP does, and they’re asking the court to put the BC back in their name. [Vancouver Sun]
EVENTS
Copy/Past Culture | Fingerprint Gallery | Oct 18, 6-10 pm, and other dates | An art show featuring an exploration of repetition, transformations and patterns, to question trends and constant novelty | Learn more
Culture Days | Multiple locations | Until Oct 13 | A ton of arts and culture shows around Vancouver | Learn more
Richmond Country Farms Pumpkin Patch | 12900 Steveston Highway | Until Oct. 31, 11 am-4:30 pm weekends | Learn more
Cirque du Soleil ECHO | Concord Pacific Place | Oct 9-Jan. 5 | What you love about Cirque, but focused on a story about how actions impact and influence the world | Tickets $73
Vancouver Christmas Market | Jack Poole Plaza | Nov. 13-24 | Yes it’s early, but for those who love Christmas, it’s a favourite and tickets are now on sale | Tickets $15
Agustina Videla’s Social Tango | Vancouver Playhouse | Oct. 24-26, 8 pm | A celebration of Latin America Heritage Month exploring tango and its role as an essential life force in Argentine culture | Tickets $41 and up
Canyon Frights | Capilano Suspension Bridge Park | Oct. 11-31, 10 am-8 pm | A Halloween adventure for the whole family | Tickets $72
Cirque Costume Ball 2024 | Science World | Oct. 26, 9 pm-2 am | The annual costume ball is returning to Science World, this year with a Cirque theme, including performance artists | Tickets $55
SPONSORED BY INTERNATIONAL INTRIGUE
Get as smart about the world as you are about Vancouver
While we keep you updated on Vancouver, International Intrigue keeps you informed about the world.
It’s a free global affairs briefing created by former diplomats to help leaders like you understand how geopolitics, business and technology intersect. They deliver the most important international news and analysis in <5-minute daily briefing that you’ll actually look forward to reading.
Sign up for free today.
Thanks to today’s sponsor. If you’d like to tell over 25,0000 readers in Vancouver about your event, business or nonprofit, contact our sales team.
GOOD NEWS
Start your day off with some good news:
An original painting by the renowned BC artist Emily Carr was found hanging in a New York barn, where it was sold for $50. At the time, the US art dealer wasn’t aware of her work, but was impressed by the painting. That painting is now going up for auction where it could pull in closer to $200,000. [CTV]
PHOTO OF THE DAY
A screenshot from a video posted to Reddit of a VPD cruiser said to have been stolen for a joyride. Another video posted to Reddit shows the car doing donuts in the field.
COMMUNITY HIGHLIGHTS
If you feel the ground shaking, don’t just tweet it. [CBC]
Here’s why our food writer Geoff thinks this place may have one of the best pizzas in the city. [Vancity Lookout]
Pumpkins? More like plump-kins. [CTV]
The spectre of Pizza Hut in Burnaby’s politics. [The Tyee]
Looking for some spooky cocktails this month? [Daily Hive]
QUIZ
Today’s quiz question that you can find in the newsletter — How many trees are expected to be taken down in Stanley Park in 2024/25? Reply with the correct answer and your name may be featured in the newsletter.
What did you think of today's newsletter? |