View more tweets

View more tweets

Tree replacement – should we be planting more?

by prestwichfocus on 20 October, 2015

One of the things that makes the Prestwich area nice is probably the amount of trees we have. Not sure if it is true, but we’ve always been told that the previous Prestwich Borough Council (which existed until 1974) had a very proactive policy of planting trees which a generation later we are seeing the benefits of. Presumably Whitefield Urban District Council was doing the same thing in the areas around Tamworth Avenue etc.

Screenshot 2015-10-20 10.23.50

But we also have problems, many of these trees have become too large for a housing area, and one of the main issues you raise with us is the need for trees to be dealt with by the Council, not just trees on streets, but also trees in school grounds or overhanging onto pavements.

At Bury’s last full Council meeting my colleague Councillor Mary D’Albert asked a written question about Bury’s tree replacement policy (see full response below).

Basically in the last three years around 140 trees have been removed, but Bury has only planted 10 new street trees.

Obviously there is a cost in planting trees, and these are financially difficult times for all public services, but is this the right policy? Would we be better having a long-term plan of replacing trees that have become too large for the local area?

What do you think?

Question 31 submitted by Councillor D’Albert
Q. Could the Leader inform members of the number of trees on Council land which have been felled or removed in the last three years. How many trees have been planted in the same period? (If possibly a division between ‘street’ trees on
pavements and verges, and trees in parks or woodlands would be appreciated, if available.)

A. In the past 3 years approximately 140 trees have been removed. The majority of these trees (93%) are from the highway where the trees have become too big for the location. The Council is restricted from planting new trees in highways due to footpath width and underground utilities. Over this period 10 new street trees and 10 parks trees have been planted where resources have permitted. There will also be a significant number of self sown trees in our parks and countryside areas.

   6 Comments

6 Responses

  1. Melvyn Taylor says:

    After 6 years of trying the tree on the street in front of my house has still not been removed and is damaging my property. The Council have been advised that they are held responsible for this damage.
    What criteria are they using to establish which trees should be removed

  2. Lindsay hall says:

    Phoned bury council three times about overgrown trees where my mum lives the roots are lifting the pavement and the branches are now interfering with the phone wires ! Still waiting in anticipation but if someone falls and hurts themselves then it appears they might do something about it ! Why can’t they do their job and save me from having a moan !

  3. Christopher Nealon says:

    Yes. Plant more trees. They not only look good. They remove carbon emissions, produce oxygen. Help wildlife, it’s only when they grow too big, or become diseased that the problems arrise.

  4. Liz Miller says:

    Yes I think it is really important to take the long term view and plant trees for the future. It would be foolish and short sighted not to.

  5. Barbara Slater says:

    Not only do trees make an area look attractive they also help reduce air pollution – something we have a lot of in Prestwich. Plant as many as you can! If cost is an issue why not invite people to ‘sponsor a tree’ ?

  6. Averil and Lawrence Cooper says:

    More street trees are definitely needed.

Leave a Reply to Lindsay hall

You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>