During the course of the 2008 summer vacation, several of the trees, which have stood at the front of Riverside Brookfield High School for many years, were chopped down. For a school which strives to be so environmentally friendly, with both teachers and students who are passionately committed to decreasing their overall carbon footprint, it is hard to imagine that can something so precious can be destroyed so easily.
Fortunately, as verified by Tim Scanlon, assistant principle of curriculum and staff development, the removal of these particular trees was not done in connection to the school renovation, yet still the question remains of whether or not their demise reflects negatively on the school in the eyes of those who remain unaware of this, and does the act of destroying them provide both students of RB and members of the community with the message that trees are to be highly valued only until they stand in the way of progress at which point they become expendable?
When questioned about his opinions on the subject of this potential risk, superintendent/principal, Jack Balderman, answered with a definite yes. “That’s not the message we want to send,” said Balderman, “but I could see how somebody could think that. But that’s countered by such firmness in this school and I think our school does a very good job of really putting ecological issues front and center.”
This last statement raises an undeniable truth, for RB does indeed have a pledge to replant trees, an undertaking which the school ecology club has been very diligent about, and as he assures us, if that tree came down because of the renovation then it absolutely will be replaced.
As a result of this pledge, the numerous green building practices incorporated into RB’s construction plans, and the accomplishments of the eco-club, Balderman feels that, hypothetically, the destruction of trees could be overlooked. “I think that the environment can take a small hit when people are trying to make progress,” said Balderman, “but if we’re doing everything else that we can to be ecologically sound, and if, in a sense, we’re countering that with other efforts, I think it can be justified.”
While this may be a valid assessment, I question whether Mr. Balderman is aware of the advantages mature trees give to the environment that young saplings do not, such as the canopy coverage they provide which consequently reduces peak ozone levels, and furthermore, whether or not he or any other who would condone the removal of the trees have considered how many small hits the environment can take until it all adds up to something altogether larger, something that cannot be justified or overlooked, no matter how large of a counteraction is enacted.
--Submitted by Jette Pleasant, Section Manager |
