A significant controversy has erupted in Vancouver's iconic Stanley Park, centering on the fate of a centuries-old Douglas fir tree. The Stanley Park Preservation Society held a news conference on Wednesday, January 15, 2026, to advocate for the protection of a 500-year-old tree they believed was slated for removal. However, the Vancouver Park Board has issued a clarification, stating that while the tree is dead, it is not marked to be cut down.
Confusion Over Blue Ribbons and Tree Markings
The heart of the dispute appears to be a misunderstanding about the meaning of markers in the park. Activists from the preservation society assumed that a blue ribbon on the 27-metre-tall Douglas fir indicated it was destined for the chainsaw. The Park Board, in an emailed statement, sought to clear the air. The board explained that blue ribbons serve as reference points for various types of work, which includes retention, protection, pruning, and monitoring, not just removal. "The misunderstanding appears to have stemmed from the assumption that all the blue ribbons indicate trees marked for removal. Which in fact is not the case," the statement read.
The Park Board confirmed the ancient fir is dead, having experienced a substantial failure several years ago when its living top broke off. Despite its condition, the board insists it has not been tagged for felling. The tree removals currently underway in the park are part of a larger effort to manage the aftermath of a severe hemlock looper moth infestation that has affected numerous trees.
Arborist Raises Concerns Over Assessment Methods
Norm Oberson, an arborist hired by the Stanley Park Preservation Society, argues that the city's assessment process is flawed. Standing before the historic Douglas fir, Oberson contended that the city is cutting down trees that may have some decay but do not present an immediate safety risk. He suggested that more advanced techniques should be employed before making final decisions.
Oberson specifically recommended increment boring, a technique that uses a specialized tool to extract a thin, pencil-sized core sample of wood without causing significant harm to the tree. This method would provide a clearer picture of the tree's internal health. Regarding the Douglas fir, he noted that the top shows signs of "normal deterioration" that could be addressed with careful trimming to ensure public safety, rather than full removal.
Broader Criticisms of Park Management Practices
The arborist's criticisms extend beyond this single tree. Oberson pointed to a nearby Western red cedar as an example of what he considers unnecessary damage. He explained that an assessor, suspecting rot, had hacked into the trunk. "So now it's an infection site," Oberson warned. "It will become infected and unfortunately that's the beginning of the end of that cedar tree because once you damage it like that it becomes rotted." He cautioned that such damage could lead to instability decades later.
The society emphasizes the recreational and wildlife value of the ancient Douglas fir, arguing for its preservation as part of the park's ecological and historical heritage. This incident highlights the ongoing tension between proactive risk management in an urban forest and the desire to preserve natural landmarks, especially those with deep historical roots. The Vancouver Park Board has been asked to provide further clarification on what its various ribbon markings specifically indicate to prevent future public confusion.
