Comment 115151

By Trees (anonymous) | Posted November 26, 2015 at 22:09:46 in reply to Comment 115135

This and many other examples of tree removal terrify me. It takes months to remove and replace a built structure. It takes decades (sometimes centuries) to replace a viable old growth tree.
Why on earth do we debate saving the former more vociferously than the latter? Why am I informed that a neighbour needs a variance to build a porch that fits a street, but not informed if they want to remove centuries worth of organic growth from "their" yard?
I know I am bit OT here --- sorry --- but trees make a neighbourhood as much as buildings do, and, from what I can see, in Hamilton at least, they're forgotten collateral damage in too many of these fights.
If we're going to fight to protect heritage, perhaps what's grown over time should be as ferociously fought for as what's been built. That's my thought.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds