The reason the location of lost significant trees in Adelaide’s eastern suburbs will be kept secret

A SUBURBAN council has ruled against producing a public report detailing the addresses of every property where significant and regulated trees have been razed in the past two years. Here’s why.

Council staff had been working on a plan to produce a public report detailing the addresses of every property where significant and regulated trees had been razed in the past two years.

• Adelaide mum avoids $120,00 fine for felling backyard tree
• ‘We’ll get rid of a tree so we can make money?’
• ‘You’ll axe 80-odd significant trees, for what?’

PEOPLE who legally chop down significant trees in Burnside have escaped being named and shamed on a public register.

Council staff had been working on a plan to produce a public report detailing the addresses of every property where significant and regulated trees had been razed in the past two years.

It would have included the arborists who assessed the trees and whether the council sought a second opinion before approving the removals.

Councillors this month abandoned the plan because of concerns it would breach people’s privacy.

Cr Mark Osterstock said the report would unfairly target those who had lawfully removed trees.

“There is an inherent risk to the council of reputational damage and loss of goodwill should the names and locations be disclosed,” Cr Osterstock said.

Burnside chief executive Paul Deb said such a report would go “beyond what (the) council would normally legally be able to provide”.

“There’s an intrinsic component to development applications that assumes reasonable levels of privacy,” Mr Deb said.

Cr Graham Bills, who first suggested the report, defended the idea of publishing people’s addresses.

“The location of removals is also important as it shows a visible denuding of an area, suburb or location, and it affects many others,” Cr Bills said.

“A single act can, and does, have a massive impact on those around, and environmentally it’s a blight, so why should we not know where this is occurring?”

One councillor argued it was important to properly collate information on significant trees.

He also defended providing details of the arborists.

“(Saying) identifying their names could cause Burnside Council reputation harm, loss of goodwill or privacy is just scaremongering.”

More than 100 significant and regulated trees have been razed across the Burnside district in the past two years.

A council-commissioned study by Seed Consulting Services last year found almost 10 per cent of Burnside’s tree cover was lost between 2010 and 2015.