RPCI cuts down trees for no real reason
I am very depressed that my workplace decided to cut down all the full-grown trees in front of my office and build an ugly cement rink and footpaths that were completely unnecessary. It is true that some of the employees complained about suffering falls in front of the building because of the uneven footpath. Instead of advising caution while walking, recommending sensible footwear and non-invasively fixing the few uneven concrete slabs in the walkway, my workplace, in its infinite wisdom, hired an industrial-scale landscaping crew/demolition squad, dug up all the grass and uprooted the mature trees that had probably grown there for nearly 40-50 years, judging by their girth and root-size.
The trees brought character to the building and filtered light through their beautiful foliage. When they turned, they were awe-inspiring and soothing to the senses. More importantly, they were part of the natural air-quality control near the periphery of the campus where employees, who are probably blind to the ill-effects of smoking, continue to smoke like chimneys and blow out puffs of smoke all through the day. As far as I know, these four trees were causing no structural damage to the building. I would be interested in hearing why exactly they needed to be chopped down and uprooted for no reason other than to satisfy some dull and unimaginative aesthetic.
The "tree of life" - a sad-looking evergreen at the centre of the Kaminski gardens in the campus was structurally damaged during the October snow storm a couple years back. A million emails were sent out to the employees and everyone else to assure people that the pruning of that tree was only made in the good faith that it would grow again. However, there has been no word of explanation, or even acknowledgement that cutting down four healthy trees is a sizable and real concern.
It is not enough that our recycling program is so patchy, that the employees misuse paper as if it grows out of thin air and that we "are proud to partner with" coke. Now, we go and cut down trees that have slowly grown over 40-50 years. All of this, compounded, makes me think that we are a cancer fighting institution only in name. Through our actions, we are indirectly destroying the very environment that contributes to our state of health. Our non-existing conservation strategy and poor decisions subtly have a detrimental effect on the health of our neighbouring communities.
Deforestation can NEVER be justified by some perverted notion of aesthetics or urban planning. I am sorry, but whoever argues that landscaping justifies cutting down full grown trees is an environmentally oblivious selfish human.
PS: The official suggestion box comments have been ignored since June. I'd be glad to hear what logic they could possibly have for cutting down the trees.
The trees brought character to the building and filtered light through their beautiful foliage. When they turned, they were awe-inspiring and soothing to the senses. More importantly, they were part of the natural air-quality control near the periphery of the campus where employees, who are probably blind to the ill-effects of smoking, continue to smoke like chimneys and blow out puffs of smoke all through the day. As far as I know, these four trees were causing no structural damage to the building. I would be interested in hearing why exactly they needed to be chopped down and uprooted for no reason other than to satisfy some dull and unimaginative aesthetic.
The "tree of life" - a sad-looking evergreen at the centre of the Kaminski gardens in the campus was structurally damaged during the October snow storm a couple years back. A million emails were sent out to the employees and everyone else to assure people that the pruning of that tree was only made in the good faith that it would grow again. However, there has been no word of explanation, or even acknowledgement that cutting down four healthy trees is a sizable and real concern.
It is not enough that our recycling program is so patchy, that the employees misuse paper as if it grows out of thin air and that we "are proud to partner with" coke. Now, we go and cut down trees that have slowly grown over 40-50 years. All of this, compounded, makes me think that we are a cancer fighting institution only in name. Through our actions, we are indirectly destroying the very environment that contributes to our state of health. Our non-existing conservation strategy and poor decisions subtly have a detrimental effect on the health of our neighbouring communities.
Deforestation can NEVER be justified by some perverted notion of aesthetics or urban planning. I am sorry, but whoever argues that landscaping justifies cutting down full grown trees is an environmentally oblivious selfish human.
PS: The official suggestion box comments have been ignored since June. I'd be glad to hear what logic they could possibly have for cutting down the trees.
I don't work for the company so I don't know I'm guessing mostly #1 and also that way they can do what ever they want with the walk way and not worry about the trees getting in their way.....