THE decision by Fremantle council to remove the beautiful century-old Moreton Bay fig tree at 195 High Street from the Register of Significant Trees is scandalous. 

By taking if off the register, Fremantle council is de facto supporting the historic tree being cut down, demolished and removed. 

That is in my opinion a disgraceful act of heritage vandalism, and is not supported by council’s own policy on trees, which states: “Decisions on retention should be objectively, not emotionally, based, and must consider the significance of the tree, in terms of cultural, historical, environmental, aesthetic and botanical factors and the role of the tree in the community.”

According to Fremantle historian Garry Gillard the tree was planted in the late 1880s by Philip Webster, who lived in the cottage behind the tree. 

The tree is also next to where the Cattalini pharmacy used to be. 

John Cattalini was one of our city’s mayors, so that adds another historic dimension to the tree’s significance.

The owners of the property claim financial hardship. 

The owners allege that the tree impacts on their ability to sell the site. 

Any good architect and developer could easily make the wonderful Moreton Bay tree a real feature of future development, so the urge to remove it is based on convenience.

Only councillors Doug Thompson and Ben Lawver voted against removing the tree from the register, with deputy mayor Jenny Archibald saying that the owners had had no say when the tree was put on the Significant Tree Register.

Permission

If it required permission of owners to put properties on the heritage list or tree register, not a single one would be registered.

Being listed as a significant site comes with responsibility, and is an inconvenience for the owners. 

That is why those important decisions should be made by our governments.

Mayor Hannah Fitzhardinge posted on social media that if landowners would lose the power to remove trees, they might no longer plant any. 

That is a silly argument. 

It is akin to saying that people might not build outstanding homes, because of the risk they could be heritage listed in a the future. 

We build and plant for our needs, not for what might happen generations away. 

I have received many comments about council’s decision, with some people saying that it has emotionally affected them to hear that the tree will disappear. 

Indeed, what are our values as a community when we no longer have respect for our history and heritage, and can’t be bothered to protect it?

What is the precedent our council sets here? 

Will Fremantle council now also support the demolition of heritage buildings, when they are in the way of future development, quickly delisting them, as they did with this tree? 

Is it not bad enough that we already have JDAP, the WA Planning Commission and the State Administrative Tribunal riding roughshod over local governments, and allowing inappropriate new development in historic settings?

Does Fremantle council really believe making space for a relatively small development is a good enough reason to demolish a significant historic tree, that has been there for some 130 years? 

It is absolutely mind-blowing! 

We can’t take our built and natural heritage for granted, or treat it as a nuisance that is in the way of progress. 

We need to cherish and nurture our history. 

Council should revisit this decision and reverse it.

Roel Loopers/Freoview