River trees vandalised

VANDALS are impeding efforts to rehabilitate and revegetate the Canning River foreshore by damaging native trees in Shelley and Rossmoyne.

Recent damage includes four branches cut from a juvenile sheoak tree near Riverton Drive, Rossmoyne and four other branches snapped off the same tree.

Ten casuarina trees were also damaged in Shelley.

A City of Canning council report says the vandalism could be a result of nearby landowners wanting to maintain their river views, but an offender or offenders could not be identified.

“The establishment of young trees can be particularly difficult on the foreshore because views to the water are considered to improve property values and residential amenity,” the report says.

Council recently approved installing signs at the sites warning people against damaging vegetation and asking residents to report act of vandalism to the Swan River Trust.

These recent acts of vandalism make up some of the 20 reports lodged this year to the Swan River Trust of deliberate vegetation damage along the Canning and Swan river foreshores.

Trust riverbank manager Stephen Lloyd said there had been 159 reports of vegetation damage to plants on the foreshore in the past five years.

“Some of the biggest incidents have involved large gum trees in excess of 15m in height drilled at the base with poison administered and then plugged to try and hide the act,” he said.

Mr Lloyd said Trust officers tried to identify offenders to issue warnings and infringement notices and where that was not possible, erected warning signs to help deter vandals and identify vandals.

He said rehabilitation and revegetation efforts were important to the area as planting reduced erosion, helped foster the ecosystem and improved the amenity of the region for visitors.

“It is important to prevent foreshore damage to help protect the Swan Canning Riverpark’s fragile ecosystems and native animal habitats.”

What everyone else is thinking

Honest John

13/07/2012

This is the result of combining obscene wealth, with cretinous artistic values.
Not all riverside residents are that way inclined, but that`s where these creatures hang out.

Charley

12/07/2012

This is disgusting, as are some of these comments! Trees should be protected. Here they are providing beauty and oxygen for YOUR survival, and you treat them with such disrespect! Money is NOT everything! And it gives you absolutely NO RIGHT to damage beautiful nature, trees, or anything else mother nature provides. You are not above the law. The river is already on life support, we should all be pulling together to try and save it, not destroy it further. Some people seem to think they're above everyone else because they have money! Thats ridiculous! You might have earnt your money by destroying nature up in the mines, so I can understand that you may have learnt to disconnect with all that matters, but back here in the real world, you DON'T GET TO DO THAT!! Money or not!

Stanley

Only COUCH POTATOES would need to cut the trees down to get a better view. Wiser people would get out in the fresh air and go down to the river for an even better natural all round view. They could even sit under the trees and look back at their castles in admiration of themselves.

Chainsaw Jack

11/07/2012

Signs are easier to tear down than sheoaks. Honest John obviously lives in Armascott and drinks decaff in his loungeroom decorated with pictures of dolphins.

Nature has a way of growing trees near water, and they provide shelter from the sun for those walking and cycling along the PUBLIC footpaths, along the PUBLIC parkland.
Its the artistic morans who see value in simply views of water only who rearrange nature to suit their very boring PRIVATE view, in the belief that this piece of dirt is their PRIVATE domain.
So give them a reminder of how the PUBLIC can interfere with their PRIVATE by erecting BIG UGLY SIGNS.

Mr Fixit

If we elimate the problem (the existance of a river) we could eliminate the need to plant vegetation on the river bank. This would save costs in the long run as the tax payer would no longer need to contribute towards Mr Lloyd's and co's huge salaries (as the SRT would cease to exist). Lets replace the river with a giant ice skating rink like the one they have put in Fremantle?

High Roller

I'm not sure what the fuss is all about. I have uninterupted views from my 7th floor penthouse. Unless the SRT plant a 100ft Karri tree in front of my home I'm not worried.

Hugh Hyland

10/07/2012

Maintaining views, in this case water views, has been a longstanding legal right. The affected adjacent landowners selected their positions for the views and paid councils etc accordingly.
Councils have no legal or moral rights to subsequently block such views except for significant reasons such as to combat erosion.
This is where give and take must apply - eg, plant suitable low vegitation which stabilizes the soil without blocking views.

Jackie Chan

Swan River Trust is not fixing the tsunamis that break onto freeway every time it rains in Perth. Put trees there. My van gets rusty driving down the freeway in river water. Riverbank manager can wax on wax off my van if not fix soon.

Community Minded

How ironic! And the Barney dude lobs trees with his bare arms in Central Perth and not a whimper!

Dr Special

What makes these trees so special anyway? How about the SRT spending some resources on trees that aren't in front of rich peoples houses, or even better on all the other dying rivers across the state? Having said that, Mr Lloyd does look nice next to this particular piece of river...

Mother Nature

We had to take my daughter to hospital after the bicycle she was riding around the river collided with a tree. The doctor said she was lucky (helmet to the rescue!) but he did mention the trees around the river are a common source of childhood injuries. My daughter wishes they could move them somewhere else. I wonder what the dolphins think.

von zipp

Trees are cool.
Termite are not...I find if you drill some holes in the bottom of a tree and add just the right amount of poison it usually deals with the termites pretty good. Just remeber to plug the holes up otherwise the poison doesn't work as well.

I agree with Rolf, people who live along the riverfront pay for the privilege both in higher property prices but also exhorbitant rates and taxes. If we wanted to looks at trees we would go and live in hills. Trees also attract termites.

malcolm

Just rember the trees were there first. If you want a good view go into space orbit.

naia

Those selfish people who damage foreshore vegetation don't deserve the views. Good on the SRT for erecting signs. The river and trees were here long before those self centred rich people decided to buy "views". If you don't like the view of the trees, buy somewhere else. Just because someone can afford expensive property does not give them special rights to destroy everyone's environment. I hope the SRT leave the dead gum trees in situ as habitat and to enhance the views for those vandals "clever" enough to have poisoned them.

Rolf

Come on Steve, if you can afford a multi million dollar property located by the river then you deserve an uninterupted view. Plant the tree's somewhere else!

Vandals is rather a wimp word for primitives that occupy some properties fronting the water.
The policy of erecting big ugly signs is probably the only way of holding up a mirror to address belligerent anti social behavior.
Bigger uglier signs may get them to move?

Show news and views
for your area

Profile

Site Search