The recent removal of possibly eleven pandanus palms in Charles Street Iluka has shocked and angered many residents including the majority of rate payers and business owners.
What prompted Council to remove these trees in the first place? Now that the trees have gone without any consultation with the community, apparently they will be replaced with Bangalow palms. Surely Council should replace them with trees that reflect local coastal native species. It would appear that Clarence Valley Council are out of step with contemporary native landscape design. Just take a look at the mess of Bangalow palms outside the Iluka chemist.
What is the cost to Clarence Valley ratepayer’s for this debacle? Seems like yet another stuff up like the removal of the sacred scar tree in Grafton. Twelve months ago CVC were fined $300,000 (yes three hundred thousand) plus $48,000 in court costs for the removal of the scar tree. This is $348,000 from our rates.
A number of large habitat trees have been removed in Iluka recently. Yes home owners have every right to remove trees they consider to be dangerous however cutting trees down in spring could be classed as cruel as so many of these large healthy habitat trees were nests to babies and hollows/homes for our birds. Cutting down trees during the spring is a mindless act.
What now is the fate of Iluka’s tuckeroos and will they be destroyed as they were in Yamba recently?
Annie Dorrian, Iluka