Save urban forest instead of one tree

In the past few weeks, there has been excessive media attention and public anger over a single 30-year-old birch tree. And yet there is mostly silence about the tens of thousands of trees cut every year in the region for housing, parking lots, big-box stores, stadium expansions, highway interchanges, whatever anyone can get a permit for, public and private. Why care about one and not the other?

Take a step back and consider our urban forest as a whole. Most people agree we should maintain a canopy of appropriate tree species of various ages throughout the city, with special consideration for Garry oak meadows and other native trees.

From this perspective, choices need to be made and battles need to be fought — is it better to cut a whole forest for a subdivision, or is it better to take a few trees closer to the centre of town for multi-family housing? Is it better to cut and replant a few trees for improved public transit, biking and walking or is it better to cut down thousands for highway expansions and parking lots? There is no “no trees cut” option.

If you hate road space being reallocated for people on foot, bus or bicycle, your opposition to the tree being cut is not about the tree. This argument is not for you. But if your opposition is about keeping our city green, use your advocacy wisely and save the forest instead of just one tree.