City coun­cil shirk­ing re­spon­si­bil­i­ties

The Press - - Perspective - en­vi­ron­ment as your let­ter sug­gests. Gra­ham Ma­son Red­wood Springs

Fur­ther to the let­ter from Genevieve Long (Nov 6) on the clear­ance of grass and lit­ter from the cities river­banks: Non-clear­ance of grass has done noth­ing to mit­i­gate flood­ing. Lit­ter is left be­hind by ir­re­spon­si­ble peo­ple who have no re­gard for their en­vi­ron­ment and the en­joy­ment of the sur­round­ings by oth­ers. But thank you for pick­ing it up. I do the same on my morn­ing walk.

We have a city coun­cil who are shirk­ing on their community and elected re­spon­si­bil­i­ties by not main­tain­ing our city as they should. Plant a tree, chuck a few stones around it and call it land­scap­ing. The coun­cil is the big­gest pol­lu­tion con­trib­u­tor by al­low­ing over­flow sew­er­age into your river, by not dredg­ing to deepen the river, by not pro­vid­ing rub­bish cans and by not keep­ing the river sur­round­ings clean and tidy.

My park has about five con­trac­tors who don’t ap­pear to co­or­di­nate main­te­nance. We have rab­bits and pos­sums, gorse and black­berry, only one rub­bish tin, and a wa­ter man­age­ment sys­tem in the swale that has killed all the eels and frogs. So much for pro­tect­ing the

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from New Zealand

© PressReader. All rights reserved.