Locals are demanding tree removals—should councils listen or hold the line?
- Replies 14
A battle is brewing in one of Perth’s most affluent suburbs—but it’s not over rates or roads.
Instead, it’s about six trees, a sweeping city skyline, and what some are calling a threat to their ‘million-dollar views’.
And while councillors are split, residents are anything but quiet.
A narrow vote at the City of South Perth council triggered a major backlash last week, after members decided 4-3 to remove six trees planted near Lake Douglas during the previous winter.
Locals argued the trees—still relatively young—would one day grow tall enough to block prized views of the CBD from nearby homes.
Resident Nic Coveney led the charge, saying the issue wasn’t just about the views.
He claimed that the increase in trees had attracted more birds, which in turn had contributed to a drop in turtle numbers, as the creatures frequently made their way up from the lake to the fences of nearby homes.
Despite opposition from Mayor Greg Milner and councillors Andre Brender-A-Brandis and Jennifer Nevard, the motion passed—though it’s now facing a possible reversal.
Nevard has since lodged a formal revocation motion, calling for the council’s CEO to organise a workshop aimed at creating a clear, consistent policy for tree removal requests on public land.
Milner backed the move, sharing that the review would give council ‘the opportunity to reconsider the decision from the July council meeting’.
No trees will be removed until a policy is in place.
If the revocation motion fails, however, the council will proceed with removing the six trees and allocate $30,000 in its mid-year budget for planting 130 square metres of shrubs nearby to offset the lost canopy.
It would also trigger the start of a new policy specifically for managing public tree planting in the area.
Deputy Mayor Bronwyn Waugh supported the removal, saying residents in the nearby suburb of Karawara had raised similar concerns last year, which resulted in the city spending $25,000 to remove 40 trees.
‘This situation deserves the same courtesy,’ she said.
‘The environment is dynamic, and so to is our planning responses. Trees can and should be removed, replaced or redesigned in line with science, good design and community needs, not just for principle sake.’
But Mayor Milner stood firm in his opposition, arguing the plan conflicted with the City’s own planning framework.
‘It undermines the City of South Perth’s foreshore strategy and management plan,’ he said.
The debate comes amid growing alarm over Perth’s shrinking urban canopy, as local councils continue to remove trees infested by the invasive polyphagous shot-hole borer.
Since it was first detected in 2021, more than 4,000 trees have been cut down across affected suburbs.
Efforts to stop the pest’s spread have included quarantine zones and the mass removal of popular street species like maples, willows and box elders.
Environmental groups have warned Perth is already lagging behind other capitals in tree protection, as urban forests are crucial to cooling neighbourhoods, supporting wildlife and boosting public wellbeing—especially as the climate heats up.
If debates over trees and green space have you thinking about the value of nature in your own neighbourhood, you’re not alone.
While councils wrestle with policy, some homeowners are cashing in on simple upgrades that actually help protect the environment.
One local initiative is offering cash incentives for doing something as easy as planting trees.
Read more: Are you missing out on free cash? The simple home upgrade putting money in Aussies’ pockets
Should property views take priority over the long-term health of our city’s environment?
Instead, it’s about six trees, a sweeping city skyline, and what some are calling a threat to their ‘million-dollar views’.
And while councillors are split, residents are anything but quiet.
A narrow vote at the City of South Perth council triggered a major backlash last week, after members decided 4-3 to remove six trees planted near Lake Douglas during the previous winter.
Locals argued the trees—still relatively young—would one day grow tall enough to block prized views of the CBD from nearby homes.
Resident Nic Coveney led the charge, saying the issue wasn’t just about the views.
Council vote sparks outcry over tree removal. Image source: City of South Perth
He claimed that the increase in trees had attracted more birds, which in turn had contributed to a drop in turtle numbers, as the creatures frequently made their way up from the lake to the fences of nearby homes.
Despite opposition from Mayor Greg Milner and councillors Andre Brender-A-Brandis and Jennifer Nevard, the motion passed—though it’s now facing a possible reversal.
Nevard has since lodged a formal revocation motion, calling for the council’s CEO to organise a workshop aimed at creating a clear, consistent policy for tree removal requests on public land.
Milner backed the move, sharing that the review would give council ‘the opportunity to reconsider the decision from the July council meeting’.
No trees will be removed until a policy is in place.
If the revocation motion fails, however, the council will proceed with removing the six trees and allocate $30,000 in its mid-year budget for planting 130 square metres of shrubs nearby to offset the lost canopy.
It would also trigger the start of a new policy specifically for managing public tree planting in the area.
Deputy Mayor Bronwyn Waugh supported the removal, saying residents in the nearby suburb of Karawara had raised similar concerns last year, which resulted in the city spending $25,000 to remove 40 trees.
‘This situation deserves the same courtesy,’ she said.
‘The environment is dynamic, and so to is our planning responses. Trees can and should be removed, replaced or redesigned in line with science, good design and community needs, not just for principle sake.’
But Mayor Milner stood firm in his opposition, arguing the plan conflicted with the City’s own planning framework.
‘It undermines the City of South Perth’s foreshore strategy and management plan,’ he said.
The debate comes amid growing alarm over Perth’s shrinking urban canopy, as local councils continue to remove trees infested by the invasive polyphagous shot-hole borer.
Since it was first detected in 2021, more than 4,000 trees have been cut down across affected suburbs.
Efforts to stop the pest’s spread have included quarantine zones and the mass removal of popular street species like maples, willows and box elders.
Environmental groups have warned Perth is already lagging behind other capitals in tree protection, as urban forests are crucial to cooling neighbourhoods, supporting wildlife and boosting public wellbeing—especially as the climate heats up.
If debates over trees and green space have you thinking about the value of nature in your own neighbourhood, you’re not alone.
While councils wrestle with policy, some homeowners are cashing in on simple upgrades that actually help protect the environment.
One local initiative is offering cash incentives for doing something as easy as planting trees.
Read more: Are you missing out on free cash? The simple home upgrade putting money in Aussies’ pockets
Should property views take priority over the long-term health of our city’s environment?
.png){kind=icon}
