Skip to content

Letter: 'Misguided' tree policy makes housing more unaffordable

We need to foster tree growth where and how it makes sense, this writer says.
We need trees — but we need tree policy based on fostering tree growth where it makes sense, this New Westminster writer says.

The Editor:

I love trees, I really do. But politician zealots, masquerading their incompetence with climate ideals, need to remember they serve the people, not the other way around. Three trees will not prevent climate change where billions of trees and the oceans do the real work. Three trees will provide no canopy great enough to deflect temperature nor absorb enough carbon dioxide.

But what we can do with tree policy is to foster tree growth, where and how they make sense, to enhance the use and enjoyment of the land for which we, the people, pay taxes.

Lastly, misguided tree policy is being applied to make housing more unaffordable and restrictive rather than the empty narrative. It’s time to judge actions by outcomes or lack thereof. Words do matter, but they matter less when accompanied by failures rather than results.

Jamie Kozak

📢 SOUND OFF: What do you think of New Westminster's tree policies? What ways would you like to see the urban tree canopy preserved and expanded? Where does tree growth make the most sense? Share your thoughts — send us a letter.

push icon
Be the first to read breaking stories. Enable push notifications on your device. Disable anytime.
No thanks