Better tree protection needed
I have written previous letters to the Citizen advocating for a more educated approach to the removal of trees in Duncan and more rigorous enforcement of the Tree Protection Bylaw in the city. The catalyst for my interest has been the development at Brae and Ypres roads where the developer will ultimately take down over a dozen mature trees to further a rental building development. This removal of trees was given the go ahead by the City of Duncan apparently without any creative thought into how the trees could be saved and how they could factor into the development. Some of these trees are on the property line and most are decades old. I encouraged your readers to visit the site and look at what your municipal governance is allowing to happen. This is not the only development, as most around Duncan seem to start by scraping off all life and vegetation on the lot to be developed as is the case on Canada Avenue and Garden Street.
We apparently have a tree protection bylaw in Duncan which is not being enforced at all if recent examples are anything to go by. I watched a 70 foot plus tree, that appeared healthy, come down on Festubert a few months ago because “it was a nuisance” the workers told me. It was a magnificent tree. The really unusual trees across from City Hall on Kenneth were just cut down without any warning. The one remaining tree seems to of been given a slight extension on life only because the fallers discovered a nesting bird at the top. They however cut everything off around the nest so the chicks were ultimately doomed. Other people have written into the Citizen about this tree removal.
I have written several letters to the mayor and the powers that oversee development on this subject and all of them remain unanswered. This is our town and these are the laws that are there to require accountability. It seems that tree protection is a hollow and artificial front.
There was a recent article by Robert Barron interviewing neighbours of the above Brae Road development. The interview mirrored the same concerns that I have brought forward. The article also highlighted the frustration that we all feel that nothing is being done to save these trees. People have written to the Citizen showing their despair at the lack of accountability and enforcement of both the officials and the bylaw.
A July 22/23 article in the Times Colonist emphasized the frustration people in Seattle are feeling with the same issues. In that article protesters have taken to sitting in a giant cedar to effect a stay of execution as that tree is slated to be removed for a housing development. This tree and issue mirrors the front-of-lot cedar at Brae Road.
That cedar was probably here before Duncan was incorporated.
It is unfortunate that radical protest always seems to be the ultimate resort for those of us that are passionate about the environment and nature.
Given that the mayor is unwilling to respond to my letters, written to her on this subject (which I feel are polite cogent and written to elicit a response), I would ask that the City of Duncan respond to this letter and advise why trees are being removed in direct contradiction of the bylaw, why developers appear to be under no obligation to preserve trees or provide creative solutions to their preservation, why private property owners are not taken to task for contravening the bylaw and what can be done to provide a more stable approach to the development/tree removal issue?
Writers on this issue are treated like we are the “Lunatic Fringe when we write and our letters often go unanswered or unacknowledged. Trees are fundamental to our survival. When we finally realize that we have erred in their removal it will be too late as is the case with most of our historical blunders. So why not get in front of this issue and be a progressive city?
Simon Knott
Duncan