5 Comments, have your say.

1. Kevin Rahmer makes this comment

   Saturday, 12 November 2011

   I wrote to Councilor Dennison about 5 years ago, to try and have a Tree Cutting By-Law introduced in Burlington, similar to Kitchener's or Toronto's By-Laws which are based on the tree's circumfrance..... Recently on an in-fill build across the street from me on Belvenia Rd, the new owner cut down 6 trees, of which a pair of trees along the fence line, were over 100 ft heigh and over 125 years old. The new owner is in her late 60's, and would never outlast the life of these trees. The transient nature of humans kills these trees. The neighborhood has suffered from this clear cutting. Enact a Tree Cutting By-Law in Burlington against clear cutting on any of these in-fills and protect the integrity of our older neighborhoods. I support Tree Protection, long live our trees.

2. Godfrey Owen makes this comment

   Saturday, 12 November 2011

   I strongly support protection of trees of value to the City and for combatting Carbon Dioxide.

3. Diana Levey makes this comment

   Saturday, 12 November 2011

   In April 2011 all trees, including mature boundary trees, were cut on 5054 New Street to prepare for a new development
   On her return from holiday, when my friend at 5030 New Street complained to the City, she was told that
   because she wasn't an adjacent property owner (she has a parking area inbetween) she had no recourse. She never received any prior notification even though the boundary trees served as an effective noise and visual buffer from Appleby Mall.

4. Michelle makes this comment

   Saturday, 12 November 2011

   It is very frustrating to know that there is such discrepancy in people's attitudes about the valuation of trees across this city. Developers prioritize the ease of construction and increasing the density of units over respecting our natural heritage, the air purifying benefits of mature trees and provision of ample green space. I'm disappointed to learn that the last Council approved waiting until 2015-16 for city staff to even begin working on a private tree by-law. I suggest folks who are not satisfied by this begin writing the current City Council to tell them so. Intensification development must be balanced with truely livable communities that preserve our natural heritage and provide green space.

5. Harold D. makes this comment

   Monday, 14 November 2011

   The idea of a tree protection by law may be a good idea, but such a law must be
   set up in a way that it does not hinder the development of a more healthy
   environment. Tree cutting by laws have a strong possibility of “Backfiring”!
   Maintaining a wood lot of any size, nurturing high quality trees and habitat may
   be accomplished with varying levels of input and financial commitment depending
   on the current state of the site and trees located there. For example, overly
   dense bush will stunt tree development, making trees more vulnerable to insect
   and disease damage. Thinning invasive, competing, stunted, and or sick trees may
   be required, meaning a land owner MUST be able to cut trees with a vision towards
   a productive wood lot, both in terms of wild life habitat and forest products.
   Other areas may need new planting of seedlings. All these efforts take financial
   input. It is the removal of thinned trees in the form of firewood and lumber
   that pay for the effort of woodlot improvement – counterintuitive to the idea of
   “Not cutting trees”.
   Owners can generate a Wood Lot Management Plan, but such a plan should not become
   a prerequisite to small-scale activity, since the cost of generating a plan can
   also be prohibitive, thus stifling positive activity.
   Of equal importance is the need to stop the advance of invasive and non-native
   trees and plants. These trees (such as Norway Maple, Buck Thorn, Chinese Tree of
   Heaven, White Mulberry, to name a few) need to be ruthlessly removed – cut down,
   while their sales in garden centers be made illegal in counties where they are a
   problem. It is no longer “Acceptable or OK” to collect and plant plants that do
   not belong. We are not the British of two hundred years ago. Doing your part
   for the environment not only means the 3 R’s, driving a fuel-efficient car, etc.
   but also being cognoscente of the effects of the plants we release on the
   environment. “Planting a tree” as the Green movements slogan goes, is in fact
   NOT necessarily “good for the environment”. We must be selective in choosing
   which trees to plant, normally meaning Native trees only.
   To prevent people form cutting trees is a shortsighted ill informed response from
   Armchair Environmentalists. A tree cutting by law must be nuanced, actually
   encouraging the selective and correct cutting of trees. I have planted lots of
   native trees since I am one of the biggest tree huggers around, and I also cut
   trees down.