By Laura Hunt Miller
Not long ago, a number of mature trees were removed from a downtown lot in Ruston. And boy was there a hub-bub about it.
While the strong reaction came as a surprise to some, others understood both sides of the situation and felt the loss. When familiar landscapes change in ways we perceive as negative, especially in a communal space like our downtown, it can feel like our own memories have been compromised, or that we have lost a connection to those who came before us in that same space. Especially when the loss involves something like a mature tree that cannot be regrown in our lifetime.
Now what’s done is done, so let’s leave the pitchforks in the shed, and focus on how best to move forward—together—as both community developers and citizens.
After all, real progress isn’t about arguing over who was right or wrong, it’s about forging new paths with a more unified vision for everyone. And the future I hope we can begin to build is one where we think differently about our urban trees and green spaces.
Between 1950 and today, generations of urban trees have been lost. Why? Because green elements are typically treated as ornamental or non-essential, the stuff that gets tacked on at the end of a project if there’s time or money left. Or they are seen as obstacles that have to be cleared to get anything done. This mentality stems from a mix of historic trends and economic pressures that shaped the way our nation was formed.
After World War II, the U.S. saw a massive push for civil engineering–led suburban expansion, highway construction, and commercial sprawl. The priority was speed, affordability, and accommodating cars, not ecological balance. If a line-item didn’t support those goals, it often wasn’t included.
In an increasingly litigious country, trees also became something developers and business owners grew hesitant to make room for as the risk-reward equation was not encouraging. Working around trees introduced the chance of root damage and potential liability from dying trees, construction delays, or even accidents and code violations. Clearing the site entirely became the safer bet, at least on paper (ironically). Over time, many cities had to step in with ordinances or preservation incentives just to keep green spaces from vanishing altogether.
Our own downtown shows a distinct loss of greenery over the past century as the image above demonstrates. This is to be expected as an area populates with buildings, roads and the other infrastructural needs that come with growth. But now that we’re closer to 2050 than 1950, do we still want to elevate practices that leave our urban environments more barren than shaded? Can we find a way to support growth, business, and green spaces?
In the second part of this article, we’ll explore the modern benefits of urban greenery and the methods cities are using to incorporate more green back into their communities.
