InDaily InDaily

Support independent Journalism Donate Subscribe
Support independent journalism

Reader contributions

Your views: on destroying century-old North Tce trees

Reader contributions

Today, readers protest the imminent axing of 11 trees on a public footpath because they don’t fit the landscaping plan for Lot Fourteen at the old RAH.

Print article

Commenting on the story: Renewal SA tight-lipped over date for North Tce tree destruction

How hard can it be to dig up what’s there without ripping into the trees? Where are the professionals? Enough stuffing up our city.

No respect for the environment what so ever. Climate change-conscious council – crap. Shameful and pathetic.

Great cities of the world cherish their historic trees. These trees live a lot longer than 100 years and their carbon dioxide-sucking abilities are far greater than any new trees will be.

They are extra special in that they have hollows as homes for wildlife. Perhaps that’s it, they don’t want possum poop on their new pavers.

These trees are perfectly healthy. Australia is lucky to have been spared from the worldwide Dutch elm disease, but hey who cares, let’s do something creative and cut them down and plant a new couple rows of trees so the entrance looks like a shopping centre.

Characterless and boring. What a sad, sad time for this city. – Felicity Clarke

The destruction of heritage trees for new developments, at a time when most major world cities are now putting a high monetary price on the value of trees in urban areas, just shows how backward we are in our attitudes in Adelaide. Valerie Munt

Trees are nature’s best defence against the searing temperatures, extreme UV and intense glare that we know are already increasing due to climate change.

As a matter of urgency the entire Adelaide metropolitan area needs to be planted with more trees.

Instead, a prime row of mature trees that will take another hundred years to replace is being destroyed on Adelaide’s most prominent public boulevard for reasons that are entirely spurious.

What evidence is there that these trees were ever an impediment when the site was a busy public hospital?

It is obvious that the destruction is simply to increase commercial visibility and site value for the new corporate users of this appropriated public precinct. Bruce Adams

The problem with planting semi-mature large replacement trees is that it panders to the desire to make the area look good quickly, but trees need roots that have been given enough space to spread and support them and not all nurseries do that well.

Weak roots are hard to spot without invasive checks that may also be detrimental – the tree may fall over or die in situ, especially if stressed by increasing temperatures and drought plus hard impervious pavements.

If the existing trees are healthy they should last for many years to come, so rather than replace them because the company says it cannot repave the area without damaging them, I believe repaving can be done carefully and less invasively, allowing the trees to recover.

It might take longer and cost more initially but would be cheaper in the long run and have a better outcome. Lynda Joy Yates

It seems particularly tone deaf to be finalizing the discussion regarding axing historic and healthy elm trees for the sake of ‘development’ within the same week as a major climate strike in the city. 

Given that we are going to face issues surrounding heat and water in the future, perhaps we could add a caveat to all new developments; every tree down for building construction = two replanted, and a solar panel hooked up to our desal plant (plus a sum towards building the array). 

Without water the new trees will not grow, the key to a hotter Adelaide is water. 

Like a swear jar, these resources building up steadily will bring down the cost of powering the plant, and the cheaper water will allow us to keep plants alive. 

Just an idea, but the notion that botany gives way to concrete has passed. The present consumption needs to actively and visibly build for the future. Katie Cavanagh

Want to comment?

Send us an email, making it clear which story you’re commenting on and including your full name (required for publication) and phone number (only for verification purposes). Please put “Reader views” in the subject.

We’ll publish the best comments in a regular “Reader Views” post. Your comments can be brief, or we can accept up to 350 words, or thereabouts.

InDaily has changed the way we receive comments. Go here for an explanation.


Make a comment View comment guidelines

Local News Matters

Media diversity is under threat in Australia – nowhere more so than in South Australia. The state needs more than one voice to guide it forward and you can help with a donation of any size to InDaily. Your contribution goes directly to helping our journalists uncover the facts. Please click below to help InDaily continue to uncover the facts.

Donate today
Powered by PressPatron

More Reader contributions stories

Loading next article