Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Tree planting pledge by the mayor
This was last week https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/sadiq-khan-tree-planting-hea...
And this week McDonalds cutting them down...
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Liz on
-
While any tree planting scheme is to welcomed and can help to mitigate many of the worst effects of the climate crisis, particularly in cities, the protection of mature trees that can to some extent "tough out" drought conditions due to established root systems is more important.
There’s an assumption that we can easily replace trees whenever we decide to but that may not be true. We need to think long and hard and explore every other option before we decide to remove a mature tree and offering to plant others to offset the destruction of mature trees is not a sustainable solution. Even with intensive aftercare, young trees struggle with extreme heat so if these conditions continue and become the yearly norm, as seems likely, tree planting will become progressively harder.
The truth is that "tree planting" schemes are often ill-conceived, trees are put in the wrong place or planted at the wrong time of year (see Hackney Marshes), money is not factored in to aftercare and Tree Preservation Orders are weak (developers probably factor in paying the fines for "accidental felling" into their budgets).
Yes, we need trees but all schemes need to scrutinised for sustainability (beware the councillor photo op), mature trees must be protected over and above new tree planting (the trees were often there first!) and new development obliged by law to take them into account. Developers/landowners can't get away with offering to plant more trees "offsite" - which they often don't do even if they pledge to-as that "offsite" may be miles away from where they are needed e.g. in the baking hot desert of concrete and car fumes that is the delightful Arena on Green Lanes. Moreover, the acknowledgement that less "tidy" environments like scrub are much better nurseries for young trees than human plantings (the so-called "re-wilding" approach) and the preservation and defence of small scrubby green spaces as nature reserves and SINCs (Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation).
-
Permalink Reply by Ruth on
-
Totally agree Liz. We've lost too many mature trees already including people's gardens but I know it's there gardens and they have the right to chop them down and concrete over. The council should be more accountable and not just have photo ops with tree planting ceremonies.
-
Permalink Reply by Peter Corley on
-
So well put, Liz. I can't remember the number of times I've told developers etc. that planting saplings is just not a like replacement for taking down a mature tree. It will take the sapling 20 years to replace the biodiversity of a big tree, and as you say there's the constant problem of watering and maintenance.
-
Permalink Reply by Dick Harris on
-
Much though I distrust the motives of developers, I doubt very much that the question of trees can be reduced to old mature = good versus new immature = bad.
In my view, what matters most is whether a tree’s likely ultimate size is appropriate to its location. A lot of old street trees were very unwisely chosen and located. A key question now is will a tree damage the foundations of a house or wreck underground utility plant? Also, is it so large that its canopy and roots dominate too much of the ground around it. Obviously, these are not problems in a park or in woodland but a forest sized tree in or near a small garden can blight several adjacent gardens even when it doesn’t threaten a building.
I rarely disagree with a fellow East Anglian, Liz, but let’s not get hung up on squatter’s rights for trees. Actually, I doubt whether there are any trees at all in the ladder (or in Railway Fields) that were here before the houses (c1890s) but even if there is one or two, it would be exceptional.
The oldest tree in my own garden is about 80 years old and it’s not the tallest or the biggest. Those accolades belong to a 40 year old silver birch and a 44 year old walnut respectively. Since I have owned it, the garden has seen many trees come down and at least as many new ones planted. One of these days, I shall post a tree history of this small patch. If it has a tree problem, it is connected to the neglect of railway land and the trees that have sprung up spontaneously. Compared to this, the behaviour of many neighbouring garden owners has been (and is likely to remain) pretty benign in the choices they make.
-
-
I wasn’t referring particularly to the Ladder but rather to London in general and in particular the bits of ancient woodland that often get threatened because someone wanted a house next to a wood but didn’t take into account that trees grow. Many developers in 19thC chose trees that reflected a certain classiness like avenues of limes. I don’t disagree that some trees can get out of hand and may need to be replaced with smaller ones. The problem is that tree planting is not as easy as people imagine and that with climate change making winters drier and summers hotter that whacking saplings in the ground assuming they’ll take care of themselves is not the best idea. Railway Fields has one tree at 200 years old but most are no more than 50 years. More than enough age to tough it out. Plus there is nursery scrub that will nurture new trees far better than tree planting schemes. There are interesting ideas which I will look up at some point about intelligent planting. My point is that much planting is about being seen to “do something” while making little fundamental change to how cities develop. It’s going to take more than a few trees to deal with climate change in the next 50 years
-
-
I agree with all of that Liz. In fact, I am nurturing recently planted mimosas and an acer. I was mostly reacting to Ruth mentioning gardens. To summarise in relation to tree management:
Established woodlands - good and need protection and maintenance.
Developers - profit seeking tends to under value trees.
Network Rail - bothered about leaves on the line but otherwise neglectful.
Politicians - can be over-keen on sound bites. Let's hope he means it.
Gardeners - most likely to care and take sensible decisions.
Insurance companies - alive to the risk of property damage and can push people in the right direction. It's a pity some house owners don't recognise how unwise it is to allow self seeded ash and sycamores to flourish in their tiny front gardens.
Local Councils - have a legacy of problems from earlier street planting but should now be getting better.
Climate change - let's be mindful of people in Greece, California and France who thought it was good to have houses among the trees.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
