Destruction of historic raintree sparks calls to recognise urban greenery as essential public health measure

The destruction of a historic raintree in Cairns has reignited calls for governments to recognise urban greenery as an essential public health measure.

After months of campaigning and a discontinued legal challenge, devastated locals watched on as the tree was cut down on Tuesday.

“I feel shock, devastation and disgust,” said Dr Nicole Sleeman, a local GP who has been heavily involved in the campaign for the past nine months.

“The community is outraged – hearing primary school children chanting ‘Save our tree’ across the road, while they watch on from behind the school fence, has been heartbreaking.”

Freshwater resident Antony Guinness, who lives about 100 metres from the large raintree, said he and his children will feel its loss daily.

“It’s the reason we bought in the suburb, all those big, old, established trees,” he said.

“That tree is pretty special when you walk under it. Every day, taking the kids to school, it does provide good shade from the sun.”

The Freshwater Raintree Action Group launched legal action late last year after Cairns Regional Council approved the removal of the large tree to make way for a duplex.

However, they were recently forced to abandon the fight, unable to shoulder the risk of legal costs that the developer estimated could run into the millions.

“We were advised that community resident Shelley Wallace could be liable for all costs for delaying the development and potentially lose her home if the case was lost,” explained Dr Sleeman.

Cairns Regional Council defended its decision, telling ABC News that state planning laws required it to approve the tree’s removal.

The group has now turned its attention to broader reforms, arguing current planning systems are failing to properly value the health and environmental benefits of urban greenery.

“Trees are vital for our community, not only for the shade benefits they provide,” said Dr Sleeman.

“People have united around this campaign because this tree helps us better understand our place within the natural world and care for her as she cares for us.”

Their concerns are backed by a growing body of research linking access to nature with improved physical and mental health outcomes.

In a recent perspective essay, researchers reported that risk-averse infrastructure policies were creating and aggravating a range of acute and chronic conditions.

“We argue rules designed to protect roads, footpaths and utilities have served to exclude, minimise or undermine urban greenery and associated ecosystem services and health benefits in many cities,” the essay stated.

It went on to highlight how current regulations prioritise protecting infrastructure from root intrusion, requiring trees and other urban greenery to be planted well away from cables, pipes, hydrants, and poles.

The consequences include “a range of well-characterised issues” associated with heatwaves and floods, along with health conditions such as cardiovascular disease and psychological distress, depression, and anxiety.

“Every level of government acknowledges the benefit of street trees to communities and our environment, yet none of them are doing a good enough job at protecting them,” said Emma Bacon from Sweltering Cities.

“We need to be protecting these hugely valuable pieces of green infrastructure, not cutting them down.”

Research published in Heart, Lung and Circulation found Australians living in greener neighbourhoods were more likely to experience better heart health, with a 10 per cent increase in green space linked with a lower risk of death from cardiovascular disease.

Dr Thami Croeser from RMIT’s Centre for Urban Research said communities are suffering the effects of long-term nature decline in Australian cities, with the removal of large, mature trees particularly concerning.

He’s advocating for more councils to introduce and enforce “exceptional tree rules” to protect large, older trees that offer significant shade cover.

“Every tree we plant is one step forward, but every mature tree we allow to be removed is about 50 steps backward. Big trees take decades to replace,” he said.

Canopy cover is increasingly being recognised as vital to public health, with researchers arguing many urban tree protection policies focus too heavily on individual trees rather than the overall coverage.

“Studies say we actually need at least 40 per cent canopy cover to substantially lower daytime air temperatures,” said Dr Croeser.

Yet cities such as Melbourne remain well short of that benchmark, with an average urban canopy cover of roughly 15 to 17 per cent.

The outlook is particularly concerning given that the National Climate Risk Assessment warns extreme heat will escalate health risks, stating “Australia’s climate continues to warm, heatwaves are expected to become more frequent, more intense, and longer lasting”.

Similar battles over the loss of mature trees have emerged elsewhere in Australia.

There was public outrage earlier this year when the City of Yarra removed three 140-year-old English elm trees and up to 39 smaller trees to expand tennis courts in Edinburgh Gardens.

“The tree might be coming down, but our campaign is not over,” said Dr Sleeman.

“Right now, the planning scheme protects developers and gives them a free pass to destroy our green infrastructure.

“We’re going to continue campaigning to change planning regulations to ensure this scenario never happens again.

“Our council should be working for the community, not developers – our health depends on it.”