Saturday, November 14, 2015

Let There Be Trees!

In the past, the Galvan Foundation, or one of its principals, has been responsible for the destruction and mutilation of many mature trees in Hudson--most recently the pruning, beyond recognition, of the two pin oaks in front 364 and 366 Warren Street.

25 Union Street--July 2011

9 Union Street--September 2011

364-366 Warren--September 2015

At the same time, Galvan seems to want to cast itself as the giver of trees--trees the length of Second Street planted in 2006, only some of which survive; trees along State Street near the Armory planted last year; trees along Third Street in front of the Salvation Army building (now owned by Galvan) planted earlier this week.

Yesterday, the Galvan Foundation issued a press release announcing an expansion of their "tree planting initiative":
Galvan Foundation is pleased to announce its continued partnership with the City of Hudson and Pondside Nursery on another round of tree planting in Hudson, NY. Galvan Foundation planted 44 trees this fall and is establishing a permanent initiative to plant a sidewalk tree for any property owner in Hudson who requests one, beginning Spring 2016.
The tree planting initiative is a continued partnership between Galvan Foundation, The City of Hudson, and Pondside Nursery. The City of Hudson cuts openings in the sidewalks, and Galvan Foundation pays for the trees to be planted by Pondside Nursery, a local business. Pondside Nursery selects appropriate types of trees to ensure they thrive in an urban environment.
In prior years, Galvan Foundation, independently, and in collaboration with the City of Hudson, Operation Unite, and Pondside Nursery planted more than 100 trees. The Galvan Foundation Tree Planting Initiative is a permanent component of Galvan Foundation’s Environment Initiative.
Galvan Foundation invites every property owner to take part in making Hudson greener and healthier. Sidewalk tree requests should be sent to


  1. I don't get it.

    Is this what bi-polar passive aggressive sociopath means?

    1. I wish more people would think in psychological terms, or at least be able to recognize character types like a Pickwick, a Skimpole, or an (ex-Mayor) Quimby. It would improve the general level of satire which, in my mind, concerns public health.

    2. p.s. Vm, I can't thank you enough for that 19th c. map of the Iron Works property. It's been an object of continuous study for the last three weeks, on sawhorses set up in my living room. We'd confer with it 100 times a day while writing our comments on the port proposal. As promised, the map will find a permanent home in the library History Room. Best, T

  2. For all I know, Pondside Nursery is the best choice in the entire region for selecting "appropriate" species for Hudson.

    Either way, whether Pondside is the best or the worst to make a selection like that, what we're getting is one person's idea of what is "appropriate."

    In the long term - which is how you look at tree planting - you're getting one person's aesthetic writ very large, stamped for the next century onto Hudson's urban landscape.

    Many of us have a lot of knowledge about these things, and cultivated eyes. Do we have a say?

    For instance, I'd like to say 'Enough with the Honey Locusts already!'

    Am I all alone in this, or is one tree as good as another to everyone else? Our new tree benefactor seems to view trees in a generic way. Of course Pondside is way better than that, but one person should not be able to project their personal aesthetic onto a whole city. Which brings us back to the basic problem of accepting things from this particular benefactor.

    Thanks, but ....

  3. Hudson.... Gal-a-vantings Sylvan tunnel.. Or just another place for Hudsons friendly dogs to raise their leg, seeing we cant get a dog park

  4. Why is it only news when Galloway cuts a tree down? Large old trees adjacent to houses are dangerous. So he planted some trees surrounding his property on one of the blighted streets in Hudson ... is this really cause for concern or just more calumny.

    1. LS - I agree he's cut so many trees down that he's made a lot of news.

      I notice that the preferred method doesn't differentiate between kinds of trees (there are different kinds), nor the size of the trees, and not even the health of this or that tree, but only its mere proximity to an investment opportunity.

      As a homeowner who likes his trees, I monitor their health, study their branches, assess any threats, and take great care pruning them with my own hands. I like my trees, and that heightens my appreciation of other trees around town - the different kinds, their sizes, their general health, and potential threats, if any.

      Is someone like me more or less apt to look at things foolishly because they're lucky enough to own only one house?

    2. unheimlich ... have you ever created anything ... why do you post anonymously ... I like to know who I'm speaking to.

    3. No, I've never created anything.

      I write anonymously because we live in an astoundingly lawless place, and law abiding residents who point out law-breaking have a right to privacy.

      This creator you're likely defending doesn't allow his photograph to be shown, and that is his right. Consequently, I don't know what he looks like (and I say good for him for managing that).

      So let's speak to the ideas, and not the person. How did you get us off topic anyway, when you might have been addressing my previous comment, which touched on issues such as proportionality, and seemliness.

    4. So you're a kind of frightened Wizard of Oz ... I'm not defending anyone ... I'm objecting to the constant petty pillorying of Galloway on this site by people that have never created anything. More shocking is your morbid fear of the city we live in.

    5. I remember disagreeing with Christo when he wrapped those islands in Florida. I still disagree with his "creation," on ecological grounds.

      So if someone was prevented from doing the same thing in New York state, would that make New York anti-creation, or a defender of something else which is shared by all?

      I remember discovering the neighborhood kid who was carving drawings into all the beech trees in the area. He defended himself by using that very word: he was a "creator." The trees were a sketch pad for his imbecilic doodles, which survive to this day, decades later.

      There's some young woman (a New Yorker, I think) who defaces natural features in National Parks as her "art." What she is is a vandal.

      I'm not drawing a parallel, but asking whether this word, "creation," hasn't lost its utility of late?

      When so much is in the eye of the beholder, someone who "creates" in and with public spaces owes something more to the public than their own, self-validating beneficence.

      To be specific (and to repeat), who gets to decide the tree species that will be used? Who will put their personal aesthetic stamp on Hudson for decades to come?

      Will they use non-native species? I am adamantly against it, no matter how "creative" they are.

      A few weeks ago, a bank on Fairview was giving away trees, but they were non-natives such as catalpas!

      Honey Locusts are planted everywhere in Hudson, but they're also non-native. Can't we raise our standards a little?

      The DEC will also give us trees, but it won't pay for alien species. Now why is that?

      Without your articulating it, I have to assume that these concerns wouldn't interest you, that someone is "creating," and that is enough.

      It's not enough.

    6. Trees ... I believe Mr Galloway has an arborist and a nursery to determine what's appropriate.
      What other venial sins do you wish to add to your list of grievances. Your disdain for the man is so obvious.

    7. More experts to determine what's "appropriate."

      This is very like the thinking of our local political class, which is happy to make all of the appropriate decisions for us, which is all of them.

      When does the public get a say in anything?

      If this individual had asked the public, and there are a number of taxpaying Hudson residents who are quite knowledgeable about trees, you wouldn't have heard a peep from me.

      What it comes down to is that I believe in public participation, and others don't.

    8. I wish to add that all of your comments boiled down to varying degrees of ad hominem.

      Essentially, your argument is that no one else knows what it is like to be "creative," nor can they be experts in the face of philanthropy.

      You also devoted a fair percentage of your comments to the the unrelated topic that anonymous comments are bothersome to you.

      Lest I add your commenting style to my list of grievances, are these really your best arguments concerning tree planting in Hudson?

      Do you have anything to say on the subject of trees at all, other than alerting us to their alleged "dangers"? (Species-specific statistics would help here.)

  5. The tree planting is wonderful, no matter who is responsible. Unfortunately, most will not be cared for i.e watered, and will die. Please, all readers of Carol's blog, if there are newly planted trees near you, water them.

    1. Before it's about "who," it's about "what": What is being planted?

      We already know what species the State will pay for and which ones they won't. That's why I'd rather the money came from the State - which is actually offering - than from a private individual who will authorize someone to decide for us.

      Ask yourself: why won't the State pay for certain species? It's a question we ought to understand before accepting gifts from strangers.

  6. My educated guess is that "unheimlich" is a gentleman named Stefan Beck.