It’s heartbreaking, the lack of disregard and subsequent destruction of irreplaceable trees. Trees bring so much beauty, history and carbon offset to our communities.
Here in San Diego.. Coronado actually, there is a battle brewing between the “lawn bowlers” who are LEASING a space on city library space. They are demanding the hundreds year old trees be removed from the city library area because roots are upsetting their leased lawn bowling area. They don’t even own the land.
Lawn bowlers even got their pals at city council to approve the demolition with no impact study or investigation.
That was before our pal, environmental and animal rights attorney Bryan Pease got an injunction to stop them! If you want to know more…. It’s an interesting story of how even a few people can speak up and make a difference. We don’t have to sit by silently while our cities are being turned concrete jungles!
Thanks so much for sharing this, Christine. That’s a powerful example—and sadly, all too familiar. It’s incredible (and infuriating) how quickly centuries-old trees can be dismissed in the name of convenience. Kudos to Bryan Pease for stepping in and showing what’s possible when we speak up. I’ll definitely check out the video—sounds like an important and inspiring story. Appreciate you adding your voice to the conversation!
Interesting. So the reason given is, “to improve accessibility with ADA-compliant entrances, address long-standing drainage issues, and revitalize neglected areas of the park”, but it sounds like someone just really wants to mess up an Olmsted design with a trendy new one and do a little paving of those old green lungs. For decades, outside of parts of Park Slope and Prospect Park, much of Brooklyn had few trees and was a noisy, ugly, unsafe, hot mess of urban blight. Taxi drivers didn’t like taking your fare. The borough had cut down trees for “safety” concerns, presumably to better see the muggers/rapists/drug dealers you’d be avoiding on your route anywhere. And then in the 1990s it started to get better. Trees put back in tree wells, vacant lot gardens established, front stoop plantings and front gardens restored—a night and day difference from the 1970s and 80s. And Brooklyn got friendlier. Nicer in every way. Hoping the constant urge to fix what’s not broken gets decisively tossed here.
Thanks Hw, for this thoughtful comment. You really captured the emotional and historical weight of what's at stake. It's not just about trees—it’s about the soul of a neighborhood and the hard-won progress that made Brooklyn livable, breathable, and beautiful again. Here's hoping that common sense—and respect for Olmsted’s vision—prevail.
I couldn't agree more that keeping mature trees should be highly prioritized. A mature tree is a treasure in so many ways.
"The wonder is that we can see these trees and not wonder more." - Ralph Waldo Emerson
It’s heartbreaking, the lack of disregard and subsequent destruction of irreplaceable trees. Trees bring so much beauty, history and carbon offset to our communities.
Here in San Diego.. Coronado actually, there is a battle brewing between the “lawn bowlers” who are LEASING a space on city library space. They are demanding the hundreds year old trees be removed from the city library area because roots are upsetting their leased lawn bowling area. They don’t even own the land.
Lawn bowlers even got their pals at city council to approve the demolition with no impact study or investigation.
That was before our pal, environmental and animal rights attorney Bryan Pease got an injunction to stop them! If you want to know more…. It’s an interesting story of how even a few people can speak up and make a difference. We don’t have to sit by silently while our cities are being turned concrete jungles!
https://youtu.be/BeGeFPJqHK8?si=OnCC-84rR8V7iqAf 🌲🌴🌳
Thanks so much for sharing this, Christine. That’s a powerful example—and sadly, all too familiar. It’s incredible (and infuriating) how quickly centuries-old trees can be dismissed in the name of convenience. Kudos to Bryan Pease for stepping in and showing what’s possible when we speak up. I’ll definitely check out the video—sounds like an important and inspiring story. Appreciate you adding your voice to the conversation!
Interesting. So the reason given is, “to improve accessibility with ADA-compliant entrances, address long-standing drainage issues, and revitalize neglected areas of the park”, but it sounds like someone just really wants to mess up an Olmsted design with a trendy new one and do a little paving of those old green lungs. For decades, outside of parts of Park Slope and Prospect Park, much of Brooklyn had few trees and was a noisy, ugly, unsafe, hot mess of urban blight. Taxi drivers didn’t like taking your fare. The borough had cut down trees for “safety” concerns, presumably to better see the muggers/rapists/drug dealers you’d be avoiding on your route anywhere. And then in the 1990s it started to get better. Trees put back in tree wells, vacant lot gardens established, front stoop plantings and front gardens restored—a night and day difference from the 1970s and 80s. And Brooklyn got friendlier. Nicer in every way. Hoping the constant urge to fix what’s not broken gets decisively tossed here.
Thanks Hw, for this thoughtful comment. You really captured the emotional and historical weight of what's at stake. It's not just about trees—it’s about the soul of a neighborhood and the hard-won progress that made Brooklyn livable, breathable, and beautiful again. Here's hoping that common sense—and respect for Olmsted’s vision—prevail.