Call to stop ‘anti-social’ tree planting
Your correspondent's facetious remarks about two serious issues facing the shire are not helpful. My comments refer to the planting of leylandiis - letters, April 13, 2018.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
With increasing numbers of people inhabiting the earth and having to share space, rules have to be made so that we can all live together in reasonable harmony.
Maybe that is why I cannot keep barking dogs in my backyard without some neighbour dobbing me in. It's my backyard; surely I can do as I like on my land. Well, no, I can't!
This particular plant has been available in these parts for about 34 years; about 24 years some local residents became aware of the problems which were occurring here.
Fourteen years ago they formed HedgeWise and began lobbying WSC and the NSW government. Our most satisfying result was that we raised awareness of the massive heights these hedges can achieve over the decades.
Do landholders have a right to plant a 35m privacy screen or windbreak for their stock?
Does any landholder need such a high screen? If they want to install a timber screens or shelters, they require approval via a Development Application to council.
Why should a high hedge along a road boundary be any different?
The reason that Cr Whipper has now specified Cupressocyparis leylandii is because he has seen with his own eyes what this tree species is doing to our shire's communal heritage and Tourist assets; namely views vistas and skyscape.
Perhaps some of our councillors are driving around with their eyes shut.
In the UK where high hedges caused serious social problems, they were originally dealt with under the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003.
Surely stealing views from the community and telling others "if you want a view, then buy your own" is anti-social!
I believe that all local government councils should have the power to limit the maximum height of hedges, whatever the species, in both rural and urban situations plus the powers for enforcement without further cost to ratepayers.
The amended NSW Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2007 does not appear to be helpful and does not apply to most rural zones.
C'mon WSC, "where there's a will, there's a way".
For further information see: www.wsc.nsw.gov.au/services/environment/flora-fauna/hedges
Jan Hainke
HedgeWise
Not the only threat to views
Re Mark Sainsbury’s letter of April 13, 2018.
Yes Mark Sainsbury has been writing hate letters re Leylandii for years. He seems to think that Leylandii are the only threat to views.
The native planting on Old South Road on the southern side of Range Road ruins a magnificent view. Laurel on Range Road has taken top views from where you can, on a clear day, see Centrepoint Tower.
Leylandii do certainly block more than any other species but that’s not the point. Forget the species and prohibit continuous planting where it ruins views along roads.
If a roadside planting could only go for 50 metres before a 50 metre gap, it would enable privacy and windbreak for stocks while keeping views.
Why put a ban on Leylandii when it is only one of the culprits. As a species it is brilliant as you can shape it any way you want. Anywhere from one metre high by 500 wide to very large trees.
Council could control the size depending where they are. Look at all the ones in urban areas doing it better than any other species. We control fences so why not hedges which are often used as fences anyway.
