Saturday, July 14, 2012

Back Story: To tree or not to tree

Put down your signs, brothers and sisters! I like a good protest as much as the next fellow, but I have no use for Bradford pears - never did. When they started popping up in towns all over the country, mid-80s - mid-90s, I thought it was cookie-cutter kind of bad idea. They look nice when they are flowering, but that's only a couple of weeks-a-year. The rest of the year, they are just blah, often severely cut-back, like ours, and not offering that much shade. Some people are highly allergic to their pollen. My dislike for them was formed even before I heard they are considered to be an invasive species. 

The village should remove them - never should have planted them in the first place. I was really surprised to find them in Yellow Springs the first time I visited. I thought folks here had a stronger sense of individuality and originality. I don't know what council was thinking when they chose this tree for our downtown. I find it hard to believe the Tree Committee would have put their stamp of approval on such a plan. They are a junk tree.

This is not to say that I agree with everything council is considering for downtown YS. If there is a good reason to replace the street lights, and we can afford to do so, go for it! But if the plan is to make Xenia Avenue look like every other cutesy-wootsey Main St. in small town America with some kind of faux antique fixtures, forget it! That would be the same kind of cookie-cutter bad idea that brought us the Bradford pears in the first place. Now that would be worth protesting.



Anonymous said...

Agree with your note. The debate should be about how best to rid ourselves of the invasive pear trees and still maintain the look and feel of the Village. Is it one tree at a time, one side of the street at a time or what? And let's start talking about what trees will replace the pear trees. I have yet to hear one suggestion.

Virgil Hervey said...

Replace 2 or 3 three per year..?

But I can't think of any trees that won't end up being too big or messy.

lisargold said...

I believe that I read that the plan is to remove all the trees on one side of the street at a time. Then, I've heard that the Tree Committee will be advising on, and choosing more appropriate trees for our downtown.

Klinger Studios said...

I didn't realize the BP was invasive, although it looks like it's been named so recently. What I've heard from arborists are that, since they have big, heavy limbs, way up, they have a tendency to split down the middle; also not good for a street tree. What about Red Buds for a replacement? - they are native, with beautiful heart-shaped leaves, buds and flowers.

Anonymous said...

The problem we have, it what type of tree is fast growing, can tolerate concrete surrounding it, and thrive in spite of constant impact on the root system from passing vehicles. The b.p. currently appears to be dealing with these adversities reasonably well.
Since we are using the term "invasive" aren't streets, buildings, etc. invasive?

Anonymous said...

The trees downtown are shading the walks just fine, you will find 'some people' allergic to any kind of pollen you care to think of, the Bradford trees offer not only pretty flowers in the Spring but also an impressive fiery fall display, and with proper pruning splitting can be prevented. They might not have been the best choice to begin with, but that does not justify cutting them all down.