Aussie neighbours celebrate as council backflips on 'appalling' tree plan
An Aussie council has backflipped on a controversial decision to remove a towering tree. The decision follows an angry response from residents who waged a sustained campaign to save the weeping fig that had sheltered their Sydney street for decades.
Yahoo News first reported on Randwick City Council's plan on March 6. Its councillors were accused of rushing through the decision after an apartment owner complained roots from the 24-metre-high giant were damaging his lawn, fence and driveway.
On Thursday night, residents of Quail Street, Clovelly broke open champagne and celebrated under the tree. Local woman Zoë Wilesmith told Yahoo News the council's decision was 'a common sense reversal' of what had been an 'appalling' plan.
'I can't tell you the high, honestly. It's absolutely fantastic… They certainly underestimated the community of Quail Street,' she said.
Another resident Maria Bradley said supporters of the tree received emails from Aussies 'far and wide'. 'They could see that the tree didn't need to have come down,' she said.
Petrana Lorenz, whose apartment looks out onto the tree said, "this decision is a win for the tree, a win for our community, but most of all it's a win for showing that it's worth fighting for what's right".
🌳 Aussie neighbourhood erupts over council's plan to axe 80-year-old tree
😟 Fate of 80-year-old tree to be decided in days after neighbourhood uproar
❌ Call for overhaul of Aussie council powers after controversial tree decision
Council had previously claimed it had no choice but to cut down the tree because its insurance agency would not cover future liability if it proceeded with the resident's damage claim. But residents commissioned their own independent engineering and arborist reports which disputed the tree was responsible.
'Something had clearly gone wrong with council procedures for it to have got to the point of removing the tree. Anybody with two eyes and half a brain could see that there was no property damage caused by the tree,' Zoe said.
Residents now plan to create a "how to" guide to support other residents fighting councils that want to destroy trees.
Following the uproar from residents, councillors met for an extraordinary general meeting last week to hear from residents and reevaluate the tree's future. But the meeting concluded with them voting once again to cut it down.
This prompted Professor Sarah Bekessy from RMIT and the Biodiversity Council to call for mature trees in cities to be federally protected because they are being destroyed at a rapid rate.
'There's always an excuse for getting rid of a tree, whether it's safety or damage to infrastructure. But that's just missing the point about their enormous benefits,' she told Yahoo News.
Residents were preparing to take the matter to the NSW Land and Environment Court, when council backflipped on its decision. They had requested internal documents from council, so they could scrutinise the process that led to the removal plan.
In a statement, the council's mayor Dylan Parker said it had reached an agreement with its insurer, Statewide Mutual, to obtain partial insurance cover for the tree.
'This positive change of circumstance means that our risk exposure has now been reduced to a level that no longer requires removal of the tree,' he said.
'While some branch pruning of trees may still be required, this is an excellent outcome which I am confident the community will be pleased by as it in practice saves the tree.'
Love Australia's weird and wonderful environment? 🐊🦘😳 Get our new newsletter showcasing the week's best stories.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Footpath spat erupts in one of Australia's priciest suburbs: 'Ridiculous'
A bitter debate has erupted among residents living in one of Australia's most expensive suburbs, following the local council's decision to install over 30 new bus stop shelters around the area. A woman from Sydney's Eastern Suburbs described one shelter as a "giant advertising screen", saying that she believes it's visually intrusive and detracts from the natural beauty of the Rose Bay promenade. She claimed there was "zero community consultation" on the rollout of the shelters and pointed to Mosman Council's approach, which reportedly involved full community engagement and accommodation of objections before installing 22 shelters. The woman also raised safety and accessibility concerns about the Wintergarden stop — described as Rose Bay's "most exclusive and prestigious apartment complex" — claiming the placement forces pedestrians "to walk single file" on an otherwise heavily trafficked footpath. "It is absolutely ridiculous, Woollahra Council placing this giant advertising screen outside the Wintergarden, blocking this very busy footpath which is enjoyed by so many," she blasted. "So many use this footpath commuting to the Rose Bay ferry, walking to the fabulous updated children's playground in Lynne Park and enjoying the magnificent Rose Bay promenade walk. This is so very wrong. We must protect and preserve our streetscape and ensure that the community is engaged in the placement of these bus shelters." Speaking to Yahoo News Australia, a spokesperson for Woollahra Council explained that the featured advertising helped pay for the shelters and "contributes to the cost of providing essential services" to the community. "They provide excellent shelter and shade for commuters," they said. But locals continued to argue online about their placement. "Rain protection and advertising revenue to keep your council rates lower. What's the issue?" a local said. "Perhaps think of the seniors waiting for a bus who appreciate having somewhere to sit while they wait," another woman weighed in. "However, I totally agree that the size of the screen is absurd. It makes no sense to have it that wide." Another asked: "I wonder what the disability council has to say about these?" "No proper access for wheelchairs and mobility aids to pass by and no alerts for vision-impaired members of the community to safely navigate around," they said. One woman echoed the original poster's sentiment. "These are disgusting eyesores around Rose Bay, I agree," she said. For its part, Woollahra Council said that before the commencement of all installations, "each site was assessed to ensure the shelters were placed safely and appropriately". Coles shopper fumes over 'cruel' find in rubbish bin outside store Chicken shop's 'bonkers' pest control plan sparks intense backlash Elderly man caught allegedly keying Tesla in affluent Aussie suburb "And notifications were issued to nearby residents and businesses, providing opportunity for feedback," they stated. "Further site assessments were then conducted and modifications considered, based on concerns raised through this process." Do you have a story tip? Email: newsroomau@ You can also follow us on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Twitter and YouTube.
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Secret hidden beneath Australia's 'most important' parcel of land
The last place in the world where a rare lizard lives is a tightly guarded secret because the tiny creature is highly prized by collectors. But even more valuable is the land where the Victorian grassland earless dragons live — a single farm west of Melbourne that sits right in the middle of a landscape earmarked for development 20 years ago. While a captive breeding program has been established at Melbourne Zoo, less than two per cent of viable dragon habitat remains intact in Victoria, and there are growing concerns government isn't doing enough to protect what remains. On Thursday, the experts who know the species best sounded the alarm in a new report published by the Biodiversity Council, saying 'urgent action' is needed to protect the dragon from extinction in the wild. Peter Robertson is a reptile ecologist and a member of the Victorian Grassland Earless Dragon Recovery Team, who has been studying the species since it was rediscovered living inside tiny burrows in 2023. In his opinion, the property where the dragons live is the "most important" parcel of land in Australia that's not yet in public hands. 'It's only three paddocks that the whole world population is now known from, and there's every chance that it will never be found anywhere else,' he told Yahoo News. 'It may persist in little populations elsewhere, but we don't know.' When it comes to new developments in native grasslands where the dragons could still persist, the land first needs to be assessed by ecologists. But there's plenty of development in potential habitat that's underway right now, because it was green-lit before its rediscovery and its listing as a critically endangered species. The earth has been broken at the property next door to the rediscovery site, and soon, there will be dozens of houses occupying the land. And while that's great news for developers and people who need somewhere to live, the increased traffic on roads, the dogs and cats, and the fragmentation of habitat will likely be bad news for the dragon. Prior to its rediscovery, Victoria's distinct dragon species hadn't been seen since the 1960s, and many thought it was extinct. But scientists never gave up hope, and in 2019 a Museums Victoria dragon expert said she was confident they could survive, while Zoos Victoria began mapping the state for potential habitat. The dragon's rediscovery was ultimately accidental. It was found during a routine survey of animals and plants, because the broader region was set to be rezoned for development. 🔍 Is the Bathurst grassland earless dragon extinct? 😳 Grim reason three new dragon species were added to the threatened species list 🚨 Fears for future of tiny dragon stalling construction of 310,000 new homes That farm where it was found is potentially worth tens of millions of dollars. Those working to protect the dragons are concerned the government has yet to put in an offer to buy the property, putting its owners and the future of the dragons in limbo. Robertson thinks conserving this 'one known population' needs to be the 'number one' priority of the government if it wants to stop its extinction. And he warns its future is far from being secure. 'When we can see what's clearly required, and nothing's happening, and nothing's happened for more than two years since the rediscovery. It is really frustrating,' he said. 'This might be the one chance we have to save this species. If we don't secure that habitat it may go back to apparent extinction, just like we assumed for decades.' Dragons are often described as a 'Goldilocks species' because they require habitat to be 'just right' — a mosaic of short to moderate grass tussocks as well as areas that support basking in the sun. At the rediscovery site, it's 60 years of sheep grazing that's kept the grass low, creating a perfect environment perfect for dragons. But other viable habitat on private land has been left for decades to degrade, and it will need significant rehabilitation if it's ever to be home to dragons again. Biodiversity Council spokesperson and report contributing author, Janna Dielenberg, thinks it's unlikely that the dragon could be rediscovered due to the region being developed. 'The chances of another discovery are exceedingly slim,' she told Yahoo News. In 2010, the Victorian government committed to buying 15,000 hectares of private land over a decade to protect rare native grasslands and create the Western Grassland Reserve (WGR). But 15 years on, the plan has not been completed and just 4,000 hectares have been protected. It was conceived as part of a deal with the Commonwealth called the Melbourne Strategic Assessment (MSA) that allowed the state to take charge of development in sensitive areas. One major concern is that the MSA has not been updated to include the rediscovery site. And the Biodiversity Council says it's 'disappointed' that over the last 15 years, other land that might have once been a great asset to dragons has been allowed to degrade because it's yet to be purchased by the Victorian government. Dielenberg said land that was in 'great healthy condition' is now overrun with weeds, used for dumping soil, or transformed from sheep grazing to crops, making it no longer suitable for dragons. 'Sheep farming has become less profitable over that time. And when they plough it all up for crops it rips up their burrows, and destroys the grasslands forever,' she said. In a statement Victoria's department of environment (DEECA) said it is "protecting" native grassland habitats by continuing to acquire and rehabilitate land. 'This is funded by the MSA levy which is paid by developers and therefore proceeds in line with the rate of development in the area,' it said. 'We are working with the private landholder and other stakeholders on ways to protect the dragon rediscovery site, as well as delivering a successful conservation breeding program for the Victorian grassland earless dragon with the Commonwealth Government.' Love Australia's weird and wonderful environment? 🐊🦘😳 Get our new newsletter showcasing the week's best stories.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Are dads doing enough? What the data tells us about the state of modern fatherhood.
As Father's Day approaches, American dads insist they're doing a lot more parenting than the men who raised them, according to a new Yahoo News/YouGov poll. Some dads even claim they're doing more than the women they're parenting with. Yet the survey of 1,560 U.S. adults also taps into the complexities and contradictions of contemporary fatherhood, revealing that even the most egalitarian dads might see themselves in ways that don't quite match up with how others see them. Their partners included. I know a little something about this. One of my duties as national correspondent for Yahoo News is to collaborate on our monthly polls with YouGov, a leading public-opinion firm. I write the questions, then analyze and report on the results. At the same time, my wife and I are trying our best to help our two kids — a 9-year-old girl and an 8-year-old boy — grow up to be good people. Like many other millennial parents — I just turned 43 — we aspire to contribute equally to that effort. And so I figured Father's Day would be as good a time as any to ask my fellow dads some of the questions I'm always asking myself. How much are we really doing these days? And is it enough? Gender roles are a perennial topic in the parenting world, and the general consensus is that even though more opposite-sex couples than ever believe in 50/50 parenting — and even though dads have become more involved over the years — moms still do most of the domestic labor. According to a 2023 study by the Pew Research Center, for example, wives in so-called egalitarian marriages — that is, couples where each partner earns about the same amount of money — still spend more than twice as much time on housework than their husbands, and almost two hours more per week on caregiving, including tending to children. 'Egalitarian' husbands, meanwhile, spend three-and-a-half more hours per week on 'leisure activities' than their wives. Yet there may be more to the data than meets the eye, at least based on the results of the new Yahoo News/YouGov poll. For one thing, nearly two-thirds of American dads (63%) now say they spend more time with their kids than their fathers spent with them — and a full 37% describe that generational difference as 'significant.' Dads feel like they're putting in the hours and making progress. What's more surprising, however, is that a third of fathers (34%) also say they carry more than half of their family's "mental load," while another four in 10 (39%) say they shoulder about half. Combined, that's roughly three-quarters of dads who believe the balance is either 50/50 or skewed in their direction. In contrast, just 28% of dads admit to bearing less than half (14%) or none (4%) of their family's mental load. It's fair to say those numbers contradict what researchers have found — and what most moms would tell us if we asked them the same questions about the fathers in their lives. When I shared the poll with my wife and asked how she would answer for me, we agreed on everything — except mental load. And when I told her how many dads seem to believe they shoulder at least half the mental load, she scoffed. My sense is that this disparity reveals a lot about the state of dads today. For the record, I don't really think I take on more of the mental load than my wife — not as the term is typically defined. But I also think the tasks we typically define as 'mental load' fail to fully capture what dads tend to contribute. Here's how the poll put it: 'Mental load refers to the cognitive and emotional effort involved in managing and coordinating household tasks, responsibilities and relationships. As a father, how much of your family's mental load do you believe you carry?' Again, nearly three out of four dads say they do half or more of this invisible labor — these hidden forms of care. Yet when asked which specific parenting responsibilities they 'regularly take on,' relatively few fathers with children aged 18 or younger pick things like 'make the kids' doctor appointments' (36%), 'sign up the kids for camps/school activities/lessons' (26%), 'schedule playdates with the kids' friends' (18%), 'volunteer for school activities' (15%) or 'book babysitters/child care' (10%) — i.e., the classic mental load stuff. Instead, these dads are much more inclined to say they "play with the kids" (72%), "help with homework" (54%), "take the kids on outings" (52%), 'put the kids to bed' (44%) and 'make dinner' (42%). So it's not like dads are deluded. When asked point-blank about their role — Who are your kids closer to? Who spends more time parenting? Who would your kids' school call first? — a majority of fathers answer either 'me' or 'it's about equal.' But an even larger majority answer either 'it's about equal' or 'their mother.' In other words, dads understand that the parenting scales still aren't perfectly balanced. Why, then, do so many dads seem to think that we're carrying more of the mental load than we get credit for? My guess is that we consider that category to be a little more capacious than our partners do. For the initial draft of the Yahoo News/YouGov Father Day's poll, my editors — both moms — floated a fairly narrow set of options for the 'parenting responsibilities' question: booking babysitters, volunteering at school, making doctor appointments and so on. I responded with some additional choices that 'might capture more of what most dads do': playing with the kids, going on outings, cleaning up after dinner, etc. I also told my editors that 'in general, I think mental load conversations miss things like this (even if they are more about household management than parenting, per se): take care of the house, take care of the yard, take care of the car, take care of the garbage, take care of the finances. We didn't end up asking dads about those duties. But looking back, I can't help but wonder if they would have polled even higher than, say, playing with the kids — and if they were the kinds of responsibilities our dad respondents had in mind when assessing their own share of the mental load. For me, I think the answer is yes. In 2010, I wrote an essay for Newsweek explaining why marriage mattered so much to me; it was a direct rebuttal to a piece by two of my female colleagues about why the institution is 'quite simply, no longer necessary." I agreed with my coworkers that all of marriage's 'antiquated ancillary benefits — its grubby socioeconomic justifications' — no longer really applied. But that, I argued, was 'the point.' 'Dustin and I are not 'getting anything' out of this deal,' I explained. 'Or at least we're not getting what previous generations of men and women were conditioned to expect. I'm not getting a cooking, cleaning, child-rearing machine. She's not getting a bringer-home of the bacon. I clean. Both of us cook. Sometimes, Dustin earns more money than I do. Sometimes she doesn't. We both go to work every day. We both have careers. And when we have children, we'll both take turns staying home to raise them. 'In other words,' I continued, 'our roles within the relationship are not defined by gender. They're defined by who we are as people. … In a world where the practical reasons for marriage no longer apply, the only reason left is love.' Fifteen years and two kids later, nearly every word of that essay still rings true to me. I do all of the laundry — and almost all of the cleaning. She packs lunches; I make dinner. She works longer hours. I drop off the kids at school in the morning, then pick them up in the afternoon. I coach their soccer teams. She plays with them more. We both read books at bedtime. But if I'm being honest with myself, our 'roles within the relationship' are still somewhat 'defined by gender.' As my wife was quick to point out when I shared the mental load results with her, she's the one who makes the doctor appointments, schedules the playdates, books the babysitters and signs up for summer camps. 'OK,' I said. 'But what about all the 'invisible labor' I do?' I mentioned the finances, the house, the yard, the car, the garbage. 'That doesn't have anything to do with parenting,' she responded. 'It's household management,' I responded. 'Someone has to do it.' 'But someone would have to do it even if we didn't have kids,' she said. I think we both have a point here. I feel like I'm doing about half of the hands-on parenting, plus a bunch of hidden work that keeps our lives running smoothly. She feels like she's doing about half of the hands-on parenting, plus a bunch of hidden work that keeps our kids' lives running smoothly. We've gravitated toward these roles — mine indirectly related to parenting, hers directly — because of gender. Or, more specifically, because of gender expectations. The truth is, I don't feel judged for not volunteering at school, or not packing a particularly healthy lunch, or not hosting a playdate. My wife does. She even judges herself. As a dad, I tend to feel OK about how much I do. As a mom, she tends to feel guilty for not doing more. We've inherited and internalized different standards of what it means to be a parent — and hers are higher. That's hard to shake. Egalitarian dads might think they're shouldering half of the mental load, or more. But as hard as we're lifting, most of us still don't know what that feels like. __________________ The Yahoo News survey was conducted by YouGov using a nationally representative sample of 1,560 U.S. adults interviewed online from May 22-27, 2025. The sample was weighted according to gender, age, race, education, 2024 election turnout and presidential vote, party identification and current voter registration status. Demographic weighting targets come from the 2019 American Community Survey. Party identification is weighted to the estimated distribution at the time of the election (31% Democratic, 32% Republican). Respondents were selected from YouGov's opt-in panel to be representative of all U.S. adults. The margin of error is approximately 2.9%.
