CHRISTCHURCH AND ITS TREES.

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 19062, 26 July 1927, Page 11

CHRISTCHURCH AND ITS TREES.

TO THE EDITOR OT THE PBESS. Si r —j have read with keen interest a letter appearing in your columns over the signature of "A Resident," whose suggestions, if given effect to, would to many mind, and doubtless to very many others possessed of the smallest grain of artistic sense, do much to increase the beauties of our naturally picturesque but ignorantly treated local waterways, the Avon and Heathcote rivers. I would even "go one better" than "Resident," and suggest that instead of allowing one weeping willow to a score of other different trees, make tlie proportion one to two hundred, and then confine these willows to a single specimen or two to situations •sucii as quiet ponds or broad reaches of river, where their unsightly bulk of drab tn-een leaves (for the greater part of the year) would not blot out from view the many otherwise charming bits of landscape in and around our City. I will admit that there is one short period of the year that this drearylooking tree can questionably be called beautiful, and that is during its flowering season, when the "weeper" is less funereal-looking than usual; but how much more beautiful are the oaks, ashes, limes, beeches, sycamores, chestnuts, eto., etc., with their infinitely varied forms alike lovely in winter or summer, and their rich autumnal glory of foliage. I am aware that I may perhaps be accused by some good people of a lack of sentiment for the work of our pioneers, but would respectfully submit that this same "sentiment," if traced to its source (as regards willows, at anv rate) is sadly misplaced. I understand that our weeping willows were first brought to Christcliurch from Akaroa, to which naturally lovely spot some French gentlemen, in a spirit of misguided patriotism, had conveyed a few cuttings from a tree planted over the grave of Napoleon.Bonaparte at St. Helena, presumably to perpetuate th© memory of one who, 'for all his ephemeral giory, lias elsewhere been designated "the greatest murderer of his time." Even allowing objection on this ground to be rather far-fetched, 1 would still maintain that our parents and grandparents, the pioneers of Canterbury, some of whom planted these willows, did so from motives of utility and cheapness (or necessity) rather than from feelings of sentiment or sense of the beautiful, and would now be among fclio first to condemn the indiscriminate crowding of these trees upon the banks of our streams-. . If it still is necessary to conserve our river-banks with willow, roots — which is doubtful—there surely are several of the ; remaining two hundred and ninety-nine varieties of salyx that would serve the purpose of these weepers just as well, beside being infinitely more picturesque, let alone useful, notably the golden, the white, and the Russell or Bedford willow, all of more or less beautiful habit of growth, and of far greater utility in .all ways than our present descendants of those upon which the exiled "Daughters of Zion" hanged their harps and beneath which they sat and wept by the waters of Babylon, which l ao not furnish even decent firewood or a cricket bat, but may,; in our City, at any rate, • provide secluded shelter, for the nightbirds of botlj sexes, or, when past their youth, rude sport fo.r winter gales. By all means let- us have trees, but let us plant' (and regulate) them with some sense of ultimate •effect, _in suitable specimens or groups at irregular intervals, naturally suggested l>y the bends of our tortuous small streams, and not (to mention' one instance) put them, as was done last winter by our City authorities, on that fine reach of the" Heathcote between Opawa and Radley bridges,, like so many fencing posts or telegraph poles, eventually to blight the landscape with their dull moriotonv. —Yours, etc., A RESIDENT'OF NEARLY SIXTY YEARS.

. .TO THE EDITOR OF THE TRESS. Sir,—-There seems such a general agreement on the value of variety in our tree planting that I am encouraged to offer for consideration the claims of fruit trees to be included. I never see a double cherry without wondering why it is preferred to the single, which is more beautiful and gives fruit as well. The apple, the pear, and the peach are beautiful at every season of the year. They far surpass the best of the trees usually planted, whether New Zealand, British, or of foreign origin. If wo gave space to all three, we should have their exquisite blossom for about two months in the spring, and Chnstchurch. would be famous for the lovely show. Next would come the rich promise ot Se swelling fruit," and I ?ouM whether there is a sight more sigmficant civilisation and plenty and ordered peace than a lofty pear treei >aded with fruit. Late summer and autumn would bless us with a valuable crop, and the winter with a revelation of the delicate beauty of branch and br The h !rop, if harvested, need not compete with those of private orchardists It could be given to the Hospital, the nrnhanage and to other, institutions if Sre We enough of it. AndlV-J™ likelv that volunteers would come for ward for the work of gathering and distributing: the knowledge of what wa done in Christchurch and It Canterbury in war time proved how rich £ public spirit the community is once we are certain we are needed. I am not the first to think of fruit treesTn P«™c J*™:™* Beautifying Society it was, 1. Bel eve who planted specimens of that beautiful tree the quince, ori theriver banks .of Avonside wjiere by there is room for iar more than.has so far been done May I add that I J ol *. f Sr bury seeing the ° f j £ft£,o J bordered with fruit trees, x Whether anybody nowadays go be walking tours on th« Go'itineni fore the motor-car *£"«•& * - n and I found miles of country Germany tourist fruit a decided attract country ' B -for it was his to goodwill, there was no spoil the bounty of *atur authorities. . for fruit is deThe more the. JwJ ", orcha rdists veloped the better for o and fruiterersz-i OU^ ESS ' THRICE.