Tree protection lacking

In regards to Harry Johnstone’s letter about the destruction of majestic gum trees to make way for the new sports centre (The Courier, May 4), who cares, or even notices all the other trees across the district suffering a similar fate in the name of progress and development?

I noticed that a regulated tree has recently fallen victim to the expansion of the Mt Barker Homemaker Centre.

Oh well, it is ‘just one tree’ and what is the problem if it is ‘just one tree’ here or there? But multiply that over time and over the multitude of development and it becomes hundreds of trees.

Even if trees are listed as regulated or significant this is no guarantee of their protection as there are too many exemptions which allow for them to be cut down.

SA has some of the worst protections for trees in Australia and the lowest levels of tree canopy in many areas.

The contribution and importance of trees is well documented – they reduce temperature, capture carbon, provide wildlife habitat and enhance human well-being. Given the evidence, why are they still disappearing?

A clear-fell site is much easier to work with and any financial penalties incurred from felling significant trees are inconsequential.

Replacing felled trees with saplings provides little benefit for many years.

So, what needs to be done?

We need stronger tree protection laws, fewer exemptions that allow trees to be removed without approval, and harsher penalties for those flouting the law.

This requires our State legislation to change and here lies a wonderful opportunity for the Mt Barker Council to lead the way in lobbying for this to occur. In the meantime, the council could be more proactive by strengthening its own tree management policy and lead by example in protecting trees and remnant vegetation on council land.

Because without a healthy environment we will not have a resilient and sustainable community.

Julie Hockey, Mt Barker