RAMIREZ
Instead of the original proposal of Mayor Tomas Osmeña to cut all the 2,185 trees affected by the implementation of the proposed Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system and replace them with new ones, I am happy that the project proponents are now considering to earthball the plants.
Although the earthballing of the affected trees is the right thing to do, sadly it was not the primary option of the city government because of its high cost. It was reported that earthballing one tree is equivalent the cost of planting 500 seedlings.
The groups that opposed the cutting have not come up with a common stand on how to address the problem because some are for earthballing and tree adoption while others pushed that the trees should not be disturbed from its present condition due to their ability to counter climate change.
Former councilor Nida Cabrera who now serves as consultant to the Cebu City Environment and Natural Resources Office (CCENRO) said in an interview that only 200 trees would be cut due to old age.
The remaining 1,985 trees will be earthballed and replanted in the center islands of the South Road Properties (SRP) and some other areas in the city covered by their greening program.
But before anyone can consider triumph over the effort in saving the BRT trees, we have to look into what happened to the investigation of the fallen trees that used to stand at the center island of Serging Osmeña Boulevard in the North Reclamation Area.
As can be recalled in 2014 during the incumbency of then-mayor Michael Rama, a total of 79 fully grown trees that lined up in the center island of Serging Osmeña Boulevard went missing without anyone having an idea whatever happened to the trees.
The trees disappeared at the height of the implementation of P298-million road rehabilitation project along Serging Osmeña Boulevard that demolished the concrete center island where the trees, mostly fire trees, used to stand.
At the height of the investigation, the city government failed to give the footage of the security camera that could have shown who was responsible for toppling the trees without a permit from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).
The last thing we know about the controversy is that seven persons mostly coming from the construction company were charged by DENR for violating Section 3 of Presidential Decree 953, a law requiring the planting of trees in certain areas and penalizing unauthorized cutting, destruction and injuring trees.
In the absence of a witness and the failure of the city government to furnish the copy of the CCTV footage, the case is deemed to be weak and dismissable.
If we are to put the fate of the BRT trees on the statement of Cabrera on the earthballing, there seems to be no assurance that the trees that will be affected by the BRT will be earthballed properly and ultimately survive.
If we take the case of the 79 fallen fire trees as the basis, we can easily glean that the city does not have a track record of protecting trees displaced by development.
Could it be that the statement to earthball the BRT trees is just a ploy so that those who are against its cutting would put down their guards?
Since there is not much that we can do to the 79 fallen fire trees as they were already presumed dead when their disappearance was discovered, the environmentalist that used to sit in the previous council could have pushed it some more to give justice to the trees.
They could have obliged whoever has the custody of the CCTV footage to produce the security footage to serve as evidence for the prosecution.
There is still much that we can do for the 2,185 trees that will be displaced by the BRT project, and with this, there is more reason that we should not put our guards down.