The Arboretum takes your trees

enrique said :

rosscoact said :

It’s obvious that most people cant see the forest for the trees. Think small, act small.

It’s obvious you have size issues yourself rossco… This isn’t about thinking small or thinking big, this is about financial decisions. Ask yourself this…

What will be a bigger enticement for people to live in/visit Canberra in 50 years from now: a) a city with unkempt urban areas, lacking in trees but a giant arboretum across the other side of the lake… or b) a maintained urban area with lovely trees and gardens that continue to be the envy of other parts of the nation and a modestly sized aboretum across the way that can be expanded over time

Oh Enrique, aren’t you sweet, but really I don’t swing that way

It’s axiomatic that no one has ever visited a city in the history of tourism to see nice surburban streets full of project houses no matter how many trees there are or are not there. Otherwise we would have travel agents offering fly drive packages to um………, you’ll have to insert your favourite suburban destination, a google search didn’t reveal any tourism statistics on this.

The arbouretum will be quite spectacular and unique and I believe in a couple of decades will be listed as one of Canberra’s most visited assets.

enrique said :

What will be a bigger enticement for people to live in/visit Canberra in 50 years from now: a) a city with unkempt urban areas, lacking in trees but a giant arboretum across the other side of the lake… or b) a maintained urban area with lovely trees and gardens that continue to be the envy of other parts of the nation and a modestly sized aboretum across the way that can be expanded over time

actually, enrique, with canny marketing, the former…

…and ceej, there aren’t the deaths in europe from falling branches ’cause they don’t have widow-maker eukies as their natives…

i actually wanted a poll response to give me the option of having both. in the scheme of things, this isn’t much money. how about the act government petitions the feds to spend less on defence white elephants and there’ll be moolah for everybody and their trees!

I recently took part in a consultation process on the future of Canberra’s urban forest, so to find that Stanhope has cut 10 million from this program – which is sorely needed – yet continues to fund his poorly thought out grandiose ego boosting arboretum, distresses me.

the process considered views from many different people, and was one of the best run processes i have taken part in (it was not a sham, like the public transport consultation) . to find that when the report is delivered there will be little funding to implement its recommendations is a very poor decision by the local ALP.

In Europe, there are lots of European trees (funny that ay Stanhope), and lots of streets (wow, imagine that). Many of the trees in the streets around where we live in Germany, are over 500 years old, and funnily enough, there hasnt been many if any deaths from rove trees falling on people. So one would wonder where Stanhope found it in his wisdom to chop down so many of our young and beautiful trees, when clearly they (the trees) are not as agressive as Stanhope imagines (images of the rebellion trees from Lord of The Rings run through my mind). And why hasnt Stanhope considered trimming trees? European trees grow new branches the next year after trimming.

Will the arboretum get a mention in the Telegraph?

Not unless it is to attack Labour. Otherwise they wont give a toss and it wont draw crowds from Sydney

The arboretum has always been nothing but a giant waste of money and it always will be.
I’m looking forward to seeing the look on Stanhopeless’ face when the next big bushfire rips through and destroys his precious arboretum. Planting the arboretum in the place of a pine plantation that has been destroyed multiple times by bushfires! Great idea!!

I don’t think I’ve met anyone in this town that actually supports the creation of an arboretum or who would be in the least bit interested in ever visiting it.

rosscoact said :

It’s obvious that most people cant see the forest for the trees. Think small, act small.

It’s obvious you have size issues yourself rossco… This isn’t about thinking small or thinking big, this is about financial decisions. Ask yourself this…

What will be a bigger enticement for people to live in/visit Canberra in 50 years from now: a) a city with unkempt urban areas, lacking in trees but a giant arboretum across the other side of the lake… or b) a maintained urban area with lovely trees and gardens that continue to be the envy of other parts of the nation and a modestly sized aboretum across the way that can be expanded over time

I’m on a very old street in Braddon that’s lined by oak trees. It’s lovely… however, new constructions are being given approval to remove these in the process of building new units.

I never go anywhere near the Aboretum and don’t plan on it. John’s personal project much?

It’s obvious that most people cant see the forest for the trees. Think small, act small.

Once a year to the arboretum?…..thats a bit rich!! I have lived her 10 years and I have been to the Botanic gardens once.