Gas blower ban in MoCo

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ugh. White people with nothing to do are annoying. Who gives a crap about gas leaf blowers? Get a life and stop caring about trivialities.

-1. They are so loud. You can hear them from blocks away. Have you ever been on a call when they turn them on? Or put a baby down to nap? They are just so loud and they stink.

But all lawn mowing equipment is loud. Why leaf blowers and not mowers? They are loud and use gas.

+1 This ban is completely unscientific and myopic. In the US, gasoline powered lawn equipment accounts for around 0.3% of total CO2 emissions, less than 0.7% of total PM2.5 emissions and 4% of Total VOC emissions. Leaf blowers account for less than 10% of total emissions for gasoline powered lawn and garden equipment. Under the most optimistic assumptions this leaf blower ban will reduce emissions (in MOCO) of PM2.5 by 0.1%, and VOC emissions by 0.5%. THIS IS A VERY COSTLY POLICY, that provides basically no health benefits to county residents while burdening business owners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are they going to ban the electric ones too? Because they are just as loud and annoying.

THIS!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We just had four tall oak trees removed. All our neighbors are mad at us because they provided some much shade and we told them the men that cuts our lawn told us they may double or triple the price of a leaf clean up so we decided to just have the trees removed.

That was probably the pragmatic thing to do. I think lots of people will be removing trees in the future when faced with the added costs of leaf clean up without gas blowers. It’s a matter of economics. If trees cost too much to keep around, people are going to remove them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We just had four tall oak trees removed. All our neighbors are mad at us because they provided some much shade and we told them the men that cuts our lawn told us they may double or triple the price of a leaf clean up so we decided to just have the trees removed.

That was probably the pragmatic thing to do. I think lots of people will be removing trees in the future when faced with the added costs of leaf clean up without gas blowers. It’s a matter of economics. If trees cost too much to keep around, people are going to remove them.

Obviously you've never paid to have a tree removed.

A mature oak tree in an urban or suburban environment will cost at a bare minimum $5,000 to remove and that's for the most straightforward, no-issues removal possible. If it needs a crane, god help you you're looking at $10K easy. You'd be cold and in the ground long before you ever make up the cost with an extra $100-$200 a year in leaf blowing.

Not to mention if you're in DC (and maybe other jurisdictions but I don't know their laws) there's an additional approval and permitting process for trees over 44" circumference and trees over 100" are straight up banned from being removed with huge fines for felling heritage trees - $30,000 minimum for cutting down a 100" tree + $300 for every additional inch of circumference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We just had four tall oak trees removed. All our neighbors are mad at us because they provided some much shade and we told them the men that cuts our lawn told us they may double or triple the price of a leaf clean up so we decided to just have the trees removed.

That was probably the pragmatic thing to do. I think lots of people will be removing trees in the future when faced with the added costs of leaf clean up without gas blowers. It’s a matter of economics. If trees cost too much to keep around, people are going to remove them.

Obviously you've never paid to have a tree removed.

A mature oak tree in an urban or suburban environment will cost at a bare minimum $5,000 to remove and that's for the most straightforward, no-issues removal possible. If it needs a crane, god help you you're looking at $10K easy. You'd be cold and in the ground long before you ever make up the cost with an extra $100-$200 a year in leaf blowing.

Not to mention if you're in DC (and maybe other jurisdictions but I don't know their laws) there's an additional approval and permitting process for trees over 44" circumference and trees over 100" are straight up banned from being removed with huge fines for felling heritage trees - $30,000 minimum for cutting down a 100" tree + $300 for every additional inch of circumference.

The city will remove dead/dying trees free of charge. Just drill a few dozen deep holes into the trunk near the roots and fill it up with round up. It will die and the city will remove it for free.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We just had four tall oak trees removed. All our neighbors are mad at us because they provided some much shade and we told them the men that cuts our lawn told us they may double or triple the price of a leaf clean up so we decided to just have the trees removed.

That was probably the pragmatic thing to do. I think lots of people will be removing trees in the future when faced with the added costs of leaf clean up without gas blowers. It’s a matter of economics. If trees cost too much to keep around, people are going to remove them.

Stupid. Trees provide shade which lower our electric costs. There’s a reason MoCo will plant trees for free, that’s a good policy. You don’t HAVE to clean the leaves that fall, it’s mostly for aesthetics

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We just had four tall oak trees removed. All our neighbors are mad at us because they provided some much shade and we told them the men that cuts our lawn told us they may double or triple the price of a leaf clean up so we decided to just have the trees removed.

That was probably the pragmatic thing to do. I think lots of people will be removing trees in the future when faced with the added costs of leaf clean up without gas blowers. It’s a matter of economics. If trees cost too much to keep around, people are going to remove them.

Obviously you've never paid to have a tree removed.

A mature oak tree in an urban or suburban environment will cost at a bare minimum $5,000 to remove and that's for the most straightforward, no-issues removal possible. If it needs a crane, god help you you're looking at $10K easy. You'd be cold and in the ground long before you ever make up the cost with an extra $100-$200 a year in leaf blowing.

Not to mention if you're in DC (and maybe other jurisdictions but I don't know their laws) there's an additional approval and permitting process for trees over 44" circumference and trees over 100" are straight up banned from being removed with huge fines for felling heritage trees - $30,000 minimum for cutting down a 100" tree + $300 for every additional inch of circumference.

Don't give MoCo ideas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We just had four tall oak trees removed. All our neighbors are mad at us because they provided some much shade and we told them the men that cuts our lawn told us they may double or triple the price of a leaf clean up so we decided to just have the trees removed.

Trying to understand the logic here…you paid what, $8000 at least (probably more like $10000) to save maybe $200 - $300 a year on leaf clean up? Not to mention it probably brought down your house value as long as these trees weren’t in danger of falling on your house.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We just had four tall oak trees removed. All our neighbors are mad at us because they provided some much shade and we told them the men that cuts our lawn told us they may double or triple the price of a leaf clean up so we decided to just have the trees removed.

That was probably the pragmatic thing to do. I think lots of people will be removing trees in the future when faced with the added costs of leaf clean up without gas blowers. It’s a matter of economics. If trees cost too much to keep around, people are going to remove them.

Obviously you've never paid to have a tree removed.

A mature oak tree in an urban or suburban environment will cost at a bare minimum $5,000 to remove and that's for the most straightforward, no-issues removal possible. If it needs a crane, god help you you're looking at $10K easy. You'd be cold and in the ground long before you ever make up the cost with an extra $100-$200 a year in leaf blowing.

Not to mention if you're in DC (and maybe other jurisdictions but I don't know their laws) there's an additional approval and permitting process for trees over 44" circumference and trees over 100" are straight up banned from being removed with huge fines for felling heritage trees - $30,000 minimum for cutting down a 100" tree + $300 for every additional inch of circumference.

The city will remove dead/dying trees free of charge. Just drill a few dozen deep holes into the trunk near the roots and fill it up with round up. It will die and the city will remove it for free.

Not on private property you moron. They will remove only city trees.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, I heard that too that all the lawn service people are getting rid of their Montgomery County customers.

Right…because I guess they don’t like making money…so sure, I get rid of all my Chevy Chase and Bethesda clients who don’t care about price (also DC has a gas ban too) and I am left with who exactly? All because I have to use an electric blower?

Are you this stupid in real life?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We just had four tall oak trees removed. All our neighbors are mad at us because they provided some much shade and we told them the men that cuts our lawn told us they may double or triple the price of a leaf clean up so we decided to just have the trees removed.

That was probably the pragmatic thing to do. I think lots of people will be removing trees in the future when faced with the added costs of leaf clean up without gas blowers. It’s a matter of economics. If trees cost too much to keep around, people are going to remove them.

Obviously you've never paid to have a tree removed.

A mature oak tree in an urban or suburban environment will cost at a bare minimum $5,000 to remove and that's for the most straightforward, no-issues removal possible. If it needs a crane, god help you you're looking at $10K easy. You'd be cold and in the ground long before you ever make up the cost with an extra $100-$200 a year in leaf blowing.

Not to mention if you're in DC (and maybe other jurisdictions but I don't know their laws) there's an additional approval and permitting process for trees over 44" circumference and trees over 100" are straight up banned from being removed with huge fines for felling heritage trees - $30,000 minimum for cutting down a 100" tree + $300 for every additional inch of circumference.

The city will remove dead/dying trees free of charge. Just drill a few dozen deep holes into the trunk near the roots and fill it up with round up. It will die and the city will remove it for free.

Not on private property you moron. They will remove only city trees.

The ones in the tree box strip next to the sidewalk ARE city property, dummy.

[Anonymous]

The County is completely stupid. They have the nanny state part of democratic socialism down, but not the part of democratic socialism that builds and repairs infrastructure, builds bathrooms at parks instead of giving residents crappy port a potties to use, administers after school care at public schools instead of farming it out to price gouging companies.

Maybe clean up the constant litter in the medians and roads first before making laws about leaf blowers. Maybe cut the grass in parks more than once a month.

This place is so backward. Its heyday was 20-30 years ago. Move to VA if you still have the chance. Arlington and Fairfax have liberal policies that actually help families and provide services, unlike MoCo, which provides no services and just makes laws about trivial BS like this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We just had four tall oak trees removed. All our neighbors are mad at us because they provided some much shade and we told them the men that cuts our lawn told us they may double or triple the price of a leaf clean up so we decided to just have the trees removed.

That was probably the pragmatic thing to do. I think lots of people will be removing trees in the future when faced with the added costs of leaf clean up without gas blowers. It’s a matter of economics. If trees cost too much to keep around, people are going to remove them.

Obviously you've never paid to have a tree removed.

A mature oak tree in an urban or suburban environment will cost at a bare minimum $5,000 to remove and that's for the most straightforward, no-issues removal possible. If it needs a crane, god help you you're looking at $10K easy. You'd be cold and in the ground long before you ever make up the cost with an extra $100-$200 a year in leaf blowing.

Not to mention if you're in DC (and maybe other jurisdictions but I don't know their laws) there's an additional approval and permitting process for trees over 44" circumference and trees over 100" are straight up banned from being removed with huge fines for felling heritage trees - $30,000 minimum for cutting down a 100" tree + $300 for every additional inch of circumference.

The city will remove dead/dying trees free of charge. Just drill a few dozen deep holes into the trunk near the roots and fill it up with round up. It will die and the city will remove it for free.

Wow, not only are you stupid to believe nobody is going to notice you intentionally killed the tree, you're also incredibly selfish for killing a perfectly healthy tree. What a losing combination you loser.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We just had four tall oak trees removed. All our neighbors are mad at us because they provided some much shade and we told them the men that cuts our lawn told us they may double or triple the price of a leaf clean up so we decided to just have the trees removed.

That was probably the pragmatic thing to do. I think lots of people will be removing trees in the future when faced with the added costs of leaf clean up without gas blowers. It’s a matter of economics. If trees cost too much to keep around, people are going to remove them.

Obviously you've never paid to have a tree removed.

A mature oak tree in an urban or suburban environment will cost at a bare minimum $5,000 to remove and that's for the most straightforward, no-issues removal possible. If it needs a crane, god help you you're looking at $10K easy. You'd be cold and in the ground long before you ever make up the cost with an extra $100-$200 a year in leaf blowing.

Not to mention if you're in DC (and maybe other jurisdictions but I don't know their laws) there's an additional approval and permitting process for trees over 44" circumference and trees over 100" are straight up banned from being removed with huge fines for felling heritage trees - $30,000 minimum for cutting down a 100" tree + $300 for every additional inch of circumference.

The city will remove dead/dying trees free of charge. Just drill a few dozen deep holes into the trunk near the roots and fill it up with round up. It will die and the city will remove it for free.

Not on private property you moron. They will remove only city trees.

The ones in the tree box strip next to the sidewalk ARE city property, dummy.

You really are a moron...everyone was responding to PP who removed 4 oak trees from THEIR property. Not property owned by the local government.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We just had four tall oak trees removed. All our neighbors are mad at us because they provided some much shade and we told them the men that cuts our lawn told us they may double or triple the price of a leaf clean up so we decided to just have the trees removed.

That was probably the pragmatic thing to do. I think lots of people will be removing trees in the future when faced with the added costs of leaf clean up without gas blowers. It’s a matter of economics. If trees cost too much to keep around, people are going to remove them.

Obviously you've never paid to have a tree removed.

A mature oak tree in an urban or suburban environment will cost at a bare minimum $5,000 to remove and that's for the most straightforward, no-issues removal possible. If it needs a crane, god help you you're looking at $10K easy. You'd be cold and in the ground long before you ever make up the cost with an extra $100-$200 a year in leaf blowing.

Not to mention if you're in DC (and maybe other jurisdictions but I don't know their laws) there's an additional approval and permitting process for trees over 44" circumference and trees over 100" are straight up banned from being removed with huge fines for felling heritage trees - $30,000 minimum for cutting down a 100" tree + $300 for every additional inch of circumference.

I don't know where you are getting your price information from but we had four large oak trees taken down and stumps removed for and everything hauled away for $7300. That's four oak trees 70 feet high. We use to pay $3,000 a year for leaf cleanups. Now we will pay nothing.