Loss of the Urban Treescape Throughout Britain

One constant concern I have had for a numberI believe there is an urgent requirement for the
of years, and the reason for this article, has beenemployment of a person (or committee) who act
the gradual loss of the urban treescapeas the "Guardian[s] of London's Treescape". This
throughout Britain, especially in London. To defineperson or committee would have two main
urban treescape, I mean the collective term for allduties;
the public and privately owned trees that sit1. To comment on all Council tree work
amongst the built environment. I am talkingapplications to prune or fell trees above a certain
particularly about trees that grow above andheight - say, 10m. The guardian would have the
beyond the roofline. The urban landscape haspower to over-rule the Council's decision if it is for
always been a passion of mine because it formsthe greater good of the landscape. Only in
the backdrop of a town or city, setting the tonesituations where the tree is deemed (by an
and atmosphere around it. The treescape is aindependent expert) to be dead, dying or
crucial element of that landscape and essential todangerous would consent be granted for pruning
any city.or removal. Otherwise, the assumption would
It is as important as the architecture, theatresalways be in favour of retaining the tree for the
and museums and it needs to be valued,greater good of London. This procedure should
protected and enhanced. Part of the problem isalso apply to tree works carried out by statutory
that significant trees are valued by everyoneundertakers and Local Authorities.
except those that live close to them or wish to2. The "guardian" would have a budget set aside
develop land around them. To those that liveto identify sites for the planting of "significant
close to the big trees they are now considered tolandscape trees" and "groups of significant
be a threat instead of an asset. The litigiouslandscape trees". They could then take
society that we all now inhabit has changed thesuggestions from the public, schools, local interest
perception of trees in the eyes of the generalgroups and anyone else about street corners,
public, local authorities, highway departments,schools, and parks etc that could support and
statutory undertakers etc. This pressure hasbenefit from a substantial tree. These can then
created an unfounded fear of trees by claimingbe planted, denoted as significant London trees,
"they are dangerous" "they undermine houses"automatically protected and benefit society for
"someone will sue me" etc. House owners havethe next couple of centuries.
become neurotic, Building Control officers haveOverall, people need to be re-educated to love
become paranoid and insurance companies have atrees and not be scared of them. We all need to
vested interest in removing trees. The changingvalue our urban trees and take pride in them and
attitude has resulted in a decline in the number oftreat them as an asset in our environment. We
large mature trees and what appears to be analso need to act now to preserve what is left of
embargo on the planting of any trees that mightthe urban treescape and without delay; we need
achieve any real stature.to replenish lost trees stocks with trees that
Even highway departments now only plant smallhave the potential to make a really significant
garden trees that do not have the potential toimpact upon future generations. To achieve this,
influence the environment beyond the road theythe financial impact would be minimal but the net
are planted in. Individual authorities do their best tobenefit to Londoners and visitors would be
protect existing trees that are perceived to be atimmeasurable, not only now but for generations
threat with planning legislation e.g. treeto come. The costs would be for the
preservation orders and conservation areaemployment of the Guardian (or committee) to
legislation. But the pressure on trees grows all theoversee expenditure, the employment, either
time and the time is running out. Something needsdirectly or indirectly, of a small team to carry out
to be done to protect the key trees in Londonthe works and the costs of the purchase of
whilst we still have them, to replant new stocktrees and associated material.
for the future and to change the public'sBeyond that there would need to be a budget set
perception of trees. The benefits of trees in citiesaside for publicising the work and for the key
are many: they "humanise" the built environmentelement of education. This is a low cost, high
by giving scale to buildings, they reduce particulatebenefit initiative that can only have a positive
and gaseous pollution, absorb co2, reduce windimpact upon our city. In conclusion, what greater
speed, support wildlife and make us feel good. Itlegacy could we provide for the future than by
is no coincidence that the most sought aftersecuring London's tree stocks for future
residential properties are in tree lined avenues orgenerations and by initiating a rolling program of
surrounding garden squares. The problem, as Iplanting significant landscape trees that will be
see it, is that no-one has overall control overappreciated for decades, if not centuries, to
London's treescape.come?