Lessons on photos and photosynthesis

Jul 18, 2007

If somebody asked what $183,000 worth of leaves looks like, you might visualize a marijuana grow operation hidden deep in the bush.

You’d also be correct if you thought about the District Municipality of Muskoka. It has helped pay $183,000 for a pile of useless leaves, and taxpayers should be fuming over how an aerial photo shoot has become a costly embarrassment.
What’s so complicated about “leaf off,” we ask?

That was the message, according to district administration, given to a vendor paid to take digital air photos for a GIS mapping database.

Problem is they captured the images when the buds were on the trees, making Muskoka’s infrastructure impossible to see definitively from the air. Not so good for map-making.

You would expect a child, let alone somebody given a lucrative contract, to know the difference between leaves on a tree and trees devoid of foliage.
Leaf on, leaf off, it’s reminiscent of that ever-so-simple gadget called the “Clapper.” Clap it once and the lights are off. Clap again and the lights are back on. Clap on — clap off. The person responsible for these photographs should buy a “Clapper” and practise.

We’d also recommend the photographer read a little poetry. In particular, we suggest Joyce Kilmer’s poem about trees — “I think that I shall never see A poem lovely as a tree.” We offer up this one because it seems possible the photographer doesn’t know the difference between a tree and a lamppost, or chlorophyll and chloroform.

While these digital photo sessions have become extremely costly, there is talk about taking to the skies next spring and trying again. But before that happens, district councillors would be wise to see the taxpayers for the trees. This high-flying project should be grounded until the latest gaffe has been refunded.
Unlike leaves, money doesn’t grow on trees.
BH