my name is lance clarence. in order for the bureau of urban forestry to succeed in affectively growing and managing the forest, it will have to move away from this current anecdotal tree knowledge and begin using factual data. i began researching tree data when they began a city-wide ficus tree. i received one report prepared by a buff preparer. buff has no choice but to rely on anecdotal data rather than hard data. every survey by an outside company was completed in 2017 at a cost of $25,000 to the taxpayers. the tree rated all trees from removal to routine prune, which is the best. the surveyed showed buff had downgraded 85% of city-wide ficus trees to priority removal. the every tree s.f. survey showed there are several tree types that more of a threat to public safety, acacia, pitasporum, and london plain. as far as i know, buff has not targeted these trees. unfortunately, buff has not made good use of the ever tree survey, keeping it at arm's length. in an op-ed, muhammad nuru and carla short, mentioned th