In the early 1980s, The Davis Meeker Oak – a 400-year-old oak tree beside Old Highway 99 next to the Olympia airport – was in danger of being removed to improve the highway.
I was approached then by Thurston County Commissioner George Barner on behalf of Jack Davis and other older community members, who were aware of the Davis Meeker oak tree’s historic significance. It stands beside the northern part of the Oregon Trail that brought settlers to Tumwater and Olympia; for many years before that it was along the same trail when it was used by countless generations of Native people.
In the 1980s, I was operating Capitol Tree Service with my partner, Mark James. To my knowledge, we were the first arborists (Members of the International Society of Arboriculture) in Thurston County. We were able to work with others to get the road improved and save the tree. I have continued to observe this tree regularly, and the company I founded has provided advice and structural testing to help advise the tree managers.
In April 2024, along with other members of the Arboriculture community, I provided written comments in response to the tree being condemned recently. Well-qualified arborists, including Beowulf Brower, also commented in person. Social media brought interest in the tree from highly regarded arborists from all over the U.S.
We pointed out that the report stating that the tree presented a high risk was flawed in many ways. I teach the International Qualification for Tree Risk Assessment and am a respected educator in the field of arboriculture. In my professional opinion, the report should not be used as the basis for a bureaucratic decision to remove the tree. See article in The JOLT, April 19, 2024 for details.
The tree does not present a high risk if the assessment method is used correctly. Management methods to reduce risk from the tree are available. Science-based testing methods are available that would help better inform any decision about the management of the tree.
I am writing this opinion because I think it would be terrible – but sadly typical – to see a decision to remove the tree made by the Mayor or City Administrator based on flawed information or fear of liability. I hope the local community can push to see reason and science prevail.
Scott D. Baker, RCA
Registered Consulting Arborist
Board Certified Master Arborist
Honorary Life Member, International Society of Arboriculture
Ancient Forest Society
Seattle, Washington
The opinions expressed above are those of the writer and not necessarily those of The JOLT's staff or board of directors. You're free to post your response below. Otherwise, if you have something to say about a topic of interest to Thurston County residents, send it to us, and we’ll most likely publish it. See the Contribute your news button at the top of every page.
6 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
Grailking
Addressing issues of safety and liability is the business of city officials. It's easy to come out on favor af sparing a tree when the person championing the rights of the tree isn't the one who will be held accountable in the event of injury caused by said tree.
If this sounds far fetched here is a true story from 2013:
Attorney General Greg Abbott (now Texas governor), paralyzed by a falling oak tree in 1984, will receive more than half a million dollars this year from a legal settlement that guarantees him a six-figure yearly income for the rest of his life.
Tuesday, April 30 Report this
hptrillium
I would go with saving the oak tree because of the expert opinions of arborists over those who know little about trees.
Tuesday, April 30 Report this
FirstOtter
If we made every natural thing in the world """Safe"" we would be living in a shopping mall parking lot. Trees fall down and sometimes land on people. Volcanoes erupt. Will we flatten Mt. Rainier? Earthquakes cause tsunamis. Will we move to Nebraska? Oh, wait, they have tornadoes there, and droughts. Even flowers harbor things like wasps that sting and sometime kill people due to allergic reactions.
I would rather see a beautiful tree like the Meeker Oak survive than have it destroyed because someone insists it's dangerous. Life is dangerous. You're more likely to be injured and killed by some yahoo hopped up on drugs in his car driving in the wrong lane than hurt by that tree.
Tuesday, April 30 Report this
griffithga
Thank you Scott for providing this alternative perspective on the tree's condition. I guess there is a greater danger to our health and safety by driving our car than by standing under the tree.
Tuesday, April 30 Report this
Sandig
/Listen to Registered Consulting Arborists and Board Certified Master Arborists. They know what they are talking about.
Tuesday, April 30 Report this
JulesJames
I believed the tree best removed. But Mr. Baker's letter is good enough evidence to reverse my opinion. May the Meeker Tree live long and happy!
Tuesday, April 30 Report this