What are trees worth? A few years ago I made enquiries on behalf of a client about removing a troublesome lillypilly from the footpath overhanging his driveway. Council wrote back stating that the tree was valued at around $15 thousand dollars, and that if removed, this figure would need to be renumerated to account for the loss of council’s asset. Fifteen grand for a common lillypilly that was obviously the wrong plant in the wrong place.
In complete contrast is the plan by the Queensland Department of Main Roads to widen the New England Highway between Hampton and Geham, and in the process, destroy scores of mature trees along a stretch known as Cathedral Drive. One of the icons of the former Crow’s Nest Shire, Cathedral Drive features widely in tourism campaigns for the area and takes its name from the cathedral like effect created by the blending canopies of towering, centuries old trees.
On misty mornings, the drive is haunting. In the late afternoon, light streams through the canopy like a massive stained glass window. What makes the drive unique and beautiful is its mature eucalypts. These aren’t ordinary, poorly positioned lillypillies. They’re tall forest trees, supported over hundreds of years by Hampton’s high rainfall and rich volcanic soil. Many are unusual. There are Sydney Blue Gums (Eucalyptus saligna) growing at the northern most extent of their range, New England Blackbutts (Eucalyptus montivaga), an uncommon species locally, Grey Gums (Eucalyptus biturbinata) and Stringy Barks (Eucalyptus eugenioides) that shoot bolt straight toward the sky for 30 metres or more.
But what value does Main Roads place on these trees? None, it would appear. A few weeks ago the surveyors went through and marked all those trees within a nine metre strip on either side of the road with a yellow dot. A tree that scores this dot is condemned, destined to be cut down, uprooted and chipped into mulch. Usually, trees slated for removal would have a pink ribbon tied around them, but in an apparent bid to subdue local concern, a less visible yellow dot was used instead. Main Roads denies they were being clandestine, but who are they kidding. Local activists have since attached pink ribbons, which gives a transparent reminder of the true extent of vegetation to be removed.
What the bureaucrats at Main Roads are yet to figure out, and are likely to never figure out is that the real value in old eucalypts like those forming Cathedral Drive is that they offer habitat. Not just to animals, some of which are rare, threatened and absolutely dependant upon mature trees for nesting sites, but habitat for people as well. Trees give us shade and shelter, food and clean air. They provide the timber for our homes and furniture. But they’re more than resources. Trees inspire us with their beauty and they gladden our hearts. You can’t put a price on that, and you’d be a fool to even try.
I’m not anti-development, and I’m pragmatic enough to realise that the road between Hampton and Toowoomba isn’t as safe as it could be. It needs upgrading. But I absolutely loathe development that’s unsympathetic to the environment, and will do my utmost to be a thorn in the side of those who show a blatant disregard for the culture, and values of a local community. I live at Hampton. My family travels on the New England Highway most days of the week, and as such, I have a vested interest in driving my kids along a safe road. But to arbitrarily remove hundred year old trees based on a plan drawn up from the comfort of a desk in downtown Toowoomba is a notion that I, and my kids, find abhorrent.
America’s most revered farmer-poet, Wendell Berry, wrote the following words 40 years ago: “There are no unsacred places; there are only sacred places and desecrated places.” Like the religious buildings that are its namesake, Cathedral Drive is a sacred place to my family, and to lots of other residents in the Hampton area. The trees matter to us. They have inestimable value. What I wish Main Roads would understand is that when nothing is valued everything is destined to be wasted.
First published in the Toowoomba Chronicle 18th July 2009. Photo by Justin Russell.
{ 20 comments… read them below or add one }
Good luck and can I help?
Thanks for that Stewart. At this stage tree clearing is due to commence in around three week’s time, so some Hampton locals are in the process of setting up an action group and website to seek an immediate halt to the work in order to explore alternative options. Will post more details once they are available.
Since when has this stretch of road been called “Cathedral Drive”?? Locals that have lived in the area for generations can’t even answer that question.
Trees… can grow back. Unfortunately, lives can’t- although science is attempting to make that possible.
No anonymous comments please. Either fess up and own your argument, or future comments will not be approved for public display.
In the modern world it seems that cars are given priority over all else and many desire the removal of all things that might impede the progress of cars. We are fast becoming a society that wants to operate these lethal machines called cars at their maximum limits of power and speed, leaving no margins for error or time for the unexpected. Yet this same society wants to wrap everything else in the world in cotton wool so that nobody gets hurt. We often hear these days about trees getting chopped down in parks “just in case” a branch might fall down some day and hurt somebody. Where does it stop? Will every tree that “looks dangerous” have to be chopped down? Should we close national parks in case somebody gets injured by a falling branch? It seems absolutely ludicrous that trees must be removed from roadsides just in case a car runs into them. Removing the trees along Cathedral Drive may set a very dangerous precedent. Trees elsewhere may get removed for other puerile “reasons” relating to “the interests of public safety”.
Upgrading the road near Highfields will NOT prevent accidents. People will only believe they can drive faster and take more risks if the road is “perfected”. Drivers are easily lulled into a false sense of security by so-called “safe” roads. No road is ever 100% safe. If all the trees are removed, cars will still have to hit something when they run off the road, be it a side rail, a sign, a power pole, another car, a fence, a house etc. Will all those “obstacles” have to removed as well for the sake of cars? I suspect in the absence of trees that other natural “nasties” like fog, wildlife, the sun, strong winds and rain will get blamed. Trees do not cause accidents. People do! Trees merely get in the way of people’s accidents. My advice: Leave the trees, lower the speed limit, and drive carefully to suit the conditions.
Excellent comments Ian. Very well reasoned, and devoid of all the hysteria that gets dragged into any debate regarding safety. I absolutely agree with your final sentence – the single most effective way to improve the safety of Cathedral Drive would be to reduce the speed limit of the 10km stretch to 80kmh.
Ian Menkins sums it up very well! As a residemt of Hampton I can say that it would be environmental vandalism of the highest order to cut down these trees. Trees DO NOT cause accidents -only people in cars at high speed or in reckless driving do. Let’s reduce the speed limit for these MERE 6-8 km down to 80 kmh.Let’s NOT cut down trees as a knee-jerk reaction to car (and people) problems.
This regions is a wonderful “drive” for locals and tourists alike. ‘Cut down the trees and we will have nothing! The potential for this region – an essential part of the Brisbane – Toowoomba – Hampton / Esk (via the beautiful Ravensbourne forest) 0 Brisbane is enormous … not in terms of dollars for the regions, but for the shere pleasure of people seeing a beautiful part of Sth East Queensland.
Let’s all work towards putting a halt to this possible destruction by having our concerns heard by DMR and Qld Government.
“Upgrading the road near Highfields will NOT prevent accidents.”
Ian, do you actually have an idea of where this area is? Or is it “just the road near Highfields?”
You people have no idea. Do you drive this road twice daily, and have you for more than a year or so before moving up here from Brisbane or elsewehere down south? Have you SEEN this stretch of road when there are extreme weather conditions?
I am a student, I catch a school bus from Toowoomba to Hampton everyday, twice a day. Each trip is about an hour, so I spend about two hours on the school bus daily. Usually when the bus passes through Hampton it is at the peak traffic time, so the highway isn’t far off bumper-to-bumper. Now if the speed limits were lowered, the bus trip would be longer than it is already. On the trip home, I dread going past Geham. There is less than 30cm between the bus and passing trucks on the tiny road, the bus swerves both ways to dodge on-coming traffic. “Lowering the speed limit” is not the pearl of wisdom to fix this- cars, trucks and buses will still have to swerve to get past safely. Further, when there are extreme weather conditions, this road is a disaster, no matter what speed one is to be travelling at. One day last year while travelling on the bus, the wind and rain was horrible. A tree branch fell down and landed on the top of the bus, and the driver had to pull over for at least 10 minutes until the wind and rain calmed down. Had that branch have landed in front of the bus, (which was a miracle it didn’t) our bus would have crashed.
The road really is only a facility for people to get from A to B. Who does have the time (while they are driving) to have tea and scones and admire the mostly dead trees on the sides of the road anyway?
The New England Highway, (no, not “Cathedral drive”) is a National Highway. The sector from Hampton to Geham is a part of the New England Highway. It must be upgraded.
With respect Kaitlyn, there are some of us who appreciate the mostly live (not dead) trees lining Cathedral Drive. Whether we’ve moved from Brisbane or elsewhere is absolutely beside the point, and I’m not very impressed with the attitude of a small number of long term locals who have adopted a tribal approach to this issue by accusing anyone who wasn’t born here as an outsider. I, and lots of other “imports”, moved here for a number of reasons, but one of the main ones was the area’s natural beauty. My wife and I love living here, we’re trying to make a contribution to the community, we’re committed to staying put for the long term, and our hope that our kids grow up with an appreciation for Cathedral Drive and a sense of thankfulness for the local environment.
Furthermore, we believe that there are solutions available that would increase the safety of the road without compromising the environmental and tourism benefits. Lowering the speed limit would add minimal time to the trip (around one minute), minimal widening of the shoulder would allow trucks and buses to pass safely, and rope or metal barriers would decrease the potential hazards in the road reserve.
To be really frank, the hysteria surrounding the safety aspects of this stretch of road completely undermines the argument in favour of cutting down the trees. Maybe it’s time for a few home truths: people aren’t made to travel at 100kmh, and every time we do, we risk injury and death irrespective of the condition of the road. Yes, Cathedral Drive must be upgraded. What I want though, is a win-win outcome that improves safety, yet protects an important natural asset.
If the powers-that-be allow all those trees to get the chop, this will set a very dangerous precedent. Next thing people will be wanting all the trees cut back for 10 metres on either side of walking tracks in national parks, to prevent the risk from trees. I suspect if those same people saw a snake on the walking track they would say it has no right being there. They would also no doubt want a cover erected over the walking track to protect them from the dangers of sun and hail, mosquitoes and magpies. Then when it gets too hot or cold or windy they can finally wall in the sides with glass and enjoy “nature” in air conditioned comfort.
We’re fast moving towards this kind of “cotton wool” society that wants to remove everything in nature that might be dangerous, while ignoring the dangers we pose to ourselves and the environment. I really fear for a future that thinks itself so superior to nature that it can only progress if nature and its “obstacles” are removed.
One time when I was driving on the New England Highway near Geham a big round bale of hay fell off a truck and landed right in front of me. I was traveling around 100 km/hr so had to jam on the brakes, but I had ample room to swerve on to the road shoulder. I came to a safe stop with a huge bale of straw looming just centimetres from my bonnet! The idiot behind me was clearly speeding and, having no time to stop, flew across the right lane, down the shoulder and up the other side, narrowly missing a car coming towards him. Apart from the momentary shock, I never felt out of control myself.
I could play the “blame game”. I could blame the farmer who planted that dangerous crop in the first place, and the dangerous machinery he used to make the dangerous bale of hay. I could blame the dangerous truck and the dangerous way the dangerous hay was stacked. I could also blame the minor yet dangerous undulations of the road surface and the dangerously strong wind that day. But I am not going to, for the simple reason that accidents happen. A tree did not deliberately dangle a branch down and intentionally throw the hay bale in front of me! Trees do not have malicious intent.
The trees seem to have become scapegoats for people’s bad driving abilities. As I see it, if we are going to remove every tree because of the possibility of falling branches we are left with two choices: 1) remove every tree in Australia from roadsides, parks, walkways, schools, city streets, and farms; or 2) move to a country devoid of any trees. I hear Iraq is nice, if you can stand the heat, dust and war!
By the way, Kaitlyn is way off the mark, as I was born and bred in this area. That stretch of tree-lined highway is imprinted in my mind and I cannot imagine it ever being devoid of trees. It will be a travesty if they are removed.
Thanks again for your comment Ian. Your line “We’re fast moving towards this kind of “cotton wool” society that wants to remove everything in nature that might be dangerous, while ignoring the dangers we pose to ourselves and the environment.” really nails the underlying issue with this whole debate.
Ian, you have gone way over the top. We are not removing everything related to nature that is in our paths; it is simply a small stretch of trees in comparison to the rest of the stretch into town, and, luckily it is the only dangerous patch of the highway. I am sure you will find, most people for the trees to be removed have a passion for trees, like yourself. But, when they are a hazzard at all hours of the day to the thousands of cars that pass through, there has to be something wrong. If the trees are not removed, it would be ignorant and unfair to the young families and others who use the road at least twice daily. I find it interesting that your close call to danger was near Geham, where there is a wide and safe road. That is predominantly THE reason why you were able to jam on your brakes and return to safety. However, had this have happened at “Cathedral Drive” I dread to think what your outcome would have been at 100km/hr.
I further find it interesting that in this forum, the thousands of cars, trucks and school buses have not been acknowledged. As far as I am aware, The New England Highway is the only way people from Crows Nest, Hampton and surrounding areas can access Toowoomba, which is where they travel to daily at all times of the day, on and off peak. Supposing that a bushfire comes through the area like the Black Saturday, (which many a bushfire has) how else could one access emergency and other vital services if the “Cathedral Drive area” was blocked from bushfire? I have to say, apart from Tourism, not too many other aspects have actually been adressed and acknowledged in this “S.A.V.E” project group etc. It seems so important to preserve the “Hampton High Country” image. There has really been no ground-breaking ideas (apart from reducing the speed limit) to make the road safe if the trees are not removed. Appologies for breaking the truth but reducing the speed limit is not the answer to all scenarios. Reducing the speed limit will not magically remove the limbs and branches, roadkill, wallabies, or bails of hay off the road.
Through the eyes of a student, a member of a young family, one who loves trees, and wants the best for our community, the trees must be removed.
Thanks for your comments Kaitlyn. Ian can probably stick up for himself, so I’m not going to rush to his defence, but my interpretation of his comments is that we have to learn to live in harmony with the natural world. This to me is the gist of what he’s getting at, and essentially, it’s the issue that underlies all of the environment versus development debates. Life is, by its very nature, messy, and full of risk. If we choose to do things like rocket along the highway at 100kmh inside a metal cocoon, we ought to be prepared for the potential consequences.
Statistically, Cathedral Drive is not an unsafe stretch of road in comparison to some other major highways. Police figures indicate that traffic is 3000 vehicles per day, of which just 3 percent is heavy vehicles. There hasn’t been a fatality since 1997. While I fully acknowledge that one life lost is too many, and would be horrified if my own wife and kids were killed while driving along Cathedral Drive, I still wouldn’t advocate the wholesale removal of the trees.
To clarify the aims of SAVE, the group is primarily concerned with enhancing the safety of the road while minimising the wholesale clearing of trees in the road reserve. SAVE has acknowledged that some trees will need to be removed. But there are alternative options to Main Roads’ initial proposal. Let me challenge you to put your money where your mouth is, and put some innovative thinking into place to come up with a ground breaking idea of your own. As far as I can see it, SAVE is at least seeking an outcome that will be a win for all parties concerned.
One final point – I wouldn’t be too hasty in criticising the tourism focus within the SAVE campaign. Besides being just one of SAVE’s four stated aims, tourism is a lifeblood of small communities like Hampton, and there are plenty of local people around who have established viable tourism businesses and therefore have a legitimate stake in the visual amenity of Cathedral Drive. I think they deserve some support and respect, not ridicule.
I do appreciate your comments and welcome the debate. But the challenge remains: instead of simply criticising, what would you do, as “one who loves trees”, to increase the safety of Cathedral Drive while preserving as many of those trees as possible. Give us something positive.
Driving inside the little air-conditioned cocoon of an automobile tends to shelter people from the reality of the world around them.
It is really sad to see the Darling Downs that I knew as a kid gradually disintegrating before my eyes, and the sad thing is a lot of people cannot see past all the superficial “progress”. The environment on the Downs is disappearing by degrees, a little bit here, another little bit there, a big bit somewhere else, taken for a mine, quarry, or new housing development. The trees along the highway are just one of many bits being carved out of the remnants of our natural environment. Before we know what has happened, there will be no “little bits” left. The Cathedral Drive trees are not just trees like people plant in their gardens. They are part of a small, complex, remnant ecosystem and an endangered one at that. Once they are gone they CANNOT ever be replaced. A tree can be planted but an ecosystem can never be regrown or restored as it was before. It is gone forever, with all its birds, insects, reptiles, mammals, and plants. 300 years of growth gone. You can replant the trees and get a massively weedy uinderstorey, but the diversity of life will be lost forever.
The relentless march of the concrete jungle is slowly but surely sweeping aside everything natural in our environment. May the drivers find happiness within its impending rat race. They can zoom along a four lane highway secure in the knowledge that no tree can ever again get in their way. Can we really expect less accidents?? So many people today only worry about the present and getting from point A to B as fast as possible. Selfishness will be the ultimate downfall of human beings on this planet. History will not be kind to the Bligh government for allowing the scale of environmental destruction that we are presently witnessing on the Downs. Sorry Justin I no longer have anything positive to say.
By the way, my hay bale incident was quite a ways north of Geham and on the narrow section bordered by tall trees. I was doing 100 km/hr in a 100 km/hr zone. I safely brought the car to a stop on the road shoulder. The driver behind me – who was clearly speeding – was the one who nearly lost control and almost hit on oncoming vehicle.
I no longer wish to reply to someone who lacks the intestinal fortitude to publish their surname. Such messages should be treated with the same respect as one by an anonymous writer.
We feel very sad that these lovely trees are to go. I have actually seen a koala there, so it is a habitat for them. It is the best part of the drive from Maidenwell, where we live, to Toowoomba, but when those trees go I think we will have to drive via Oakey as it will be so sad!
There will still be trees for cars to slam into at the speed they drive, when they run off the road, unless they clear the whole lot!
More than 150 species of maammals, bats and birds rely on tree hollows and many of those trees have hollows, which are scarce and take many years to develop.
If you travel to Britain there are many, many narrow roads. They are bordered by hedges and stone walls and they are still in use by traffic which often has to drive into a gateway to allow another to pass.
Surely we can preserve this beautiful drive! It is almost unique in S.E Qld.
Thanks for your comment Audrey. It will indeed by a sad day if Main Roads butchers Cathedral Drive the way they intend to. Can I urge you to write to Anna Bligh (premier@ministerial.qld.gov.au) imploring her to overturn Craig Wallace’s decision to proceed with the project? Work is scheduled to commence on Monday 14th September.
What Audrey says is very true. In Australia we have a tendency to build things much larger than necessary because the assumption is that we will always have plenty of room. The problem with this kind of thinking is it is based on a belief that our resources and space are infinite. We have already reached the stage in SE Queensland where the rush to secure and utilize our dwindling resources has become highly unsustainable. Moreover human activities in SE Qld are adversely impacting on the natural and human environment at an alarming rate. As biodiversity is lost so too will aspects of our quality of life. We should be striving to save every little bit of precious biodiversity instead of finding excuses to destroy what remains. Can we really afford to destroy thousands of trees (homes to thousands of birds, mammals, amphibians, reptiles, invertebrates, plants and bryophtyes) just so that we can have the luxury of an excessively wide highway?
Humans need communities of tall trees, not only for their aesthetic appeal, but also for the shade they create, the fog and moisture they capture, and the protective barrier they form against frost and drying winds. Whether we like it or not, we are all part of the web of life. Every strand that is broken inevitably effects us, maybe not straight away, but eventually.
These trees along this stretch of highway do infact cause a problem, I have driven this road every night and day for the last year, have any of you been travelling the correct speed or slower and a branch has crashed down onto your vehicle ????, have you ever driven along in the fog where visability is pretty much nill and if there has been a storm or bad weather then the tree branches which are all dry soak up the water and end up crashing onto the road where you have to drive, did any of you see the car which was smashed down onto by a tree which the occupants went to hospital and the car was a total writeoff. have any of you known someone who was killed and now know that any improvement to the safety along this strecth of road will benefit human lives which are in my mind alot more important than the trees, once they have been chopped down have a new bunch replanted ten metres to the side of the road so this will not happen future….
I appreciate your comment Paul but can’t say that I agree with your arguments. Based on accident figures obtained from Toowoomba police, your odds of dying on Cathedral Drive are astronomical. Since 2000 there hasn’t been a single fatality between Geham and Hampton, and just 16 accidents with injuries. Six thousand vehicles per day travel along this stretch. Yet we hear over and over this argument that tree branches are falling all over the place killing and injuring people. There is a very slim chance of this actually happening, so slim that you’ve got a greater chance of being struck by lightning…twice. To make fear based decisions that will forever alter a stand of old growth trees prized by the majority of the local community isn’t wise, in my opinion. Trees and drivers can co-exist, assuming drivers can enough responsibility for their actions and that some minor safety improvements are made to the road.
As for your last point, that new trees will be replanted. This is actually not the case. Main Roads has nothing allocated in their project budget for revegetation along the 10km length of Cathedral Drive. Throw climate change into the mix, and it’s unlikely that we’ll see big old trees growing along this stretch of the New England Highway for centuries.