City of Fremantle falls aggressively behind on canopy cover target, set for boost in tree planting to keep up

The City of Fremantle has fallen significantly behind its targets to boost canopy cover, and it will now need to plant trees for an additional four years just to meet 80 per cent of its original goal. However, Mayor Hannah Fitzhardinge emphasized that several mitigating factors contributed to the shortfall, including reduced budgets during the COVID years, and stressed that the issue has not been ignored.

Fremantle councillors adopted the Urban Forest Plan in 2017, which outlined the number of trees the council needed to plant over the following decade to achieve its ambitious goal: increasing canopy cover from 13 per cent to 20 per cent. Despite a 2021 decision to revise targets downward by 20 per cent, tree plantings have continued to lag further behind.

In 2023, the council resolved to plant just 600 trees annually in 2024 and 2025 as part of a budget-constrained reset. The city successfully planted 600 trees this year, but this was 838 fewer than the revised target of 1,438, and a substantial 1,198 short of the initial goal of 1,798. The previous year’s planting numbers were also below target, with 533 trees planted—687 fewer than the revised target of 1,220 and 992 fewer than the initial goal of 1,525.

Over the eight years since the program began, the city has planted 5,519 trees. This represents a 33 per cent shortfall compared to its revised target of 8,264 and nearly 50 per cent less than the original goal of 10,330 trees.

Earlier this year, the council requested the chief executive to present a revised target, data on the cumulative shortfall, and a timeline for delivery. All figures are to be published on the city’s website and updated annually. To support this initiative, a budget of almost $700,000 and a full-time staff member have been allocated for 2025-26 to help manage the project.

Last week, the council voted to aim for planting 900 trees annually over the next six years. This plan is set to surpass the revised target of 10,804 trees by 2031, although this will be four years later than initially scheduled.

At the meeting, Councillor Adin Lang acknowledged criticisms from residents and the Fremantle Environmental Network regarding missed targets but described the initial goal as very ambitious.

“I guess you can have a crazy, ambitious goal, but not all of them may be achievable,” he said. “Acknowledging that and extending it by a few years is pretty sensible.”

Mayor Fitzhardinge also highlighted other contributing factors to the shortfall, introducing an amendment noting that it was caused by a lack of initial resourcing, reduced budgets during COVID-affected years, and the unavailability of high-quality planting stock.

“I wanted to just make it clear that we didn’t sort of have an ‘oops’ moment that we had a shortfall of trees,” she said. “There were fairly considered and extensive discussions of trees at every budget that we’ve considered together. It seems a bit rough to read back and just say we had a target and we missed it; there were some factors that contributed to that—it wasn’t just a blind error.”

Councillor Ben Lawver welcomed the renewed investment in tree planting, emphasizing that it forms part of a broader push to increase canopy cover.

“We also have a policy that will be coming back to a future council and other items that could potentially help us grow our urban canopy,” he said. “While it is very important that we plant street trees, and plant trees in our parks and reserves, it is the loss of trees on private property that is really dragging our canopy coverage down.”

Last year, the council found itself at the center of a saga over the protection of a century-old Moreton Bay fig tree on private land. Landowners requested the council to remove the fig from the significant tree list. Protection was stripped from the tree, then reinstated after public backlash, before being removed again.

Councillor Lang concluded by saying it was critical to deliver on targets, allocate budgets, and get trees in the ground. However, the next step would involve refining the work based on the data collected and published.

“We’re using the data and we’re going to get better,” he said. “Hopefully, we can hone in on locations we need to work on and maximize the value of what we’re planting.”
https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/environment/city-of-fremantle-stumped-in-plans-to-boost-tree-canopy-cover-c-19835826

Five Charities Cut Off Ties With Britain’s Duchess Of York Over Links With Epstein

Sarah Ferguson, the Duchess of York, has lost patronage from five charities following the emergence of an email in which she referred to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein as a “supreme friend.” The backlash over her ties to Epstein has prompted several organizations to sever their links with her.

The controversy began on Monday after reports surfaced showing Ferguson’s email addressing Epstein with the phrase “steadfast, generous and supreme friend.” Epstein had pleaded guilty in 2008 to a state prostitution charge in Florida.

The Guardian reported that Ferguson’s apology to Epstein followed an interview published in the Evening Standard in March 2011, where she admitted making a “terrible, terrible error of judgment” by accepting £15,000 from Epstein to pay off her debts. She added: “I abhor paedophilia.”

According to The Sun, Ferguson—ex-wife of King Charles’s brother, Prince Andrew—sent the apology email to Epstein in 2011, weeks after stating in an interview that she would never contact him again.

In response to the email revelations, The Telegraph quoted James Henderson, Ferguson’s spokesperson at the time, saying that the email was sent after a “really menacing and nasty” phone call from Epstein, during which he reportedly spoke with a “Hannibal Lecter-type voice.” Henderson described the call as chilling and expressed disbelief that anyone could have maintained a friendship with Epstein given his behavior.

Henderson added, “He said he would destroy the York family and he was quite clear on that. He said he would destroy me. He wasn’t shouting. He had a Hannibal Lecter-type voice. It was very cold and calm and really menacing and nasty.”

He further explained the immense pressure Ferguson faced to protect her family, suggesting there may have been legal actions involved. “This was long before the duke’s life had been ruined by his association with Epstein. It was 14 years ago, and everyone will do what they have to do to protect their family. Her family and children will always come first for her,” Henderson said.

CNN reported that Ferguson’s former spokesperson declined to comment on the charities’ decisions but had previously stated that she sent the email to Epstein to counter the threat of a defamation lawsuit.

On Monday, five charities announced that the Duchess of York would no longer serve as their patron. Nadim and Tanya Ednan-Laperouse, founders of the Natasha Allergy Research Foundation, said in a statement: “We were disturbed to read of Sarah, Duchess of York’s, correspondence with Jeffrey Epstein. She was a patron but, in light of the recent revelations, we have taken the decision that it would be inappropriate for her to continue to be associated with the charity.”

The fallout reflects a broader distancing from Epstein’s associates. In 2022, Prince Andrew was stripped of most of his titles and removed from royal duties due to his connections to the financier. Firms and charities also distanced themselves from him, CNN reported.

This development marks a significant moment in the ongoing repercussions faced by those linked to Jeffrey Epstein as public scrutiny intensifies.
https://www.news18.com/world/five-charities-cuts-off-ties-with-britains-duchess-of-york-over-links-with-epstein-ws-l-9592562.html

Five Charities Cut Off Ties With Britain’s Duchess Of York Over Links With Epstein

Sarah Ferguson Lost Patronage from Five Charities Following Email Revealing Ties to Jeffrey Epstein

Several charities severed their links with Britain’s Duchess of York, Sarah Ferguson, after reports emerged that she had described the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein as a “supreme friend” in an email. The revelation sparked significant backlash over her association with Epstein.

Background

Jeffrey Epstein had pleaded guilty in 2008 to a state prostitution charge in Florida. In March 2011, Ferguson gave an interview to the Evening Standard, admitting that she had made a “terrible, terrible error of judgment” by accepting £15,000 from Epstein to pay off her debts. She also emphasized, “I abhor paedophilia.”

The Controversial Email

According to The Sun, Ferguson sent an apology email to Epstein in 2011, weeks after her interview in which she stated she would never contact him again. In that email, she referred to Epstein as a “steadfast, generous and supreme friend.”

James Henderson, who was Ferguson’s spokesperson at the time, told The Telegraph that the email was sent following a “really menacing and nasty” phone call from Epstein. Henderson described Epstein’s voice during the call as similar to the chilling tone of Hannibal Lecter. He recalled, “People don’t understand how terrible Epstein was. I can remember everything about that call. It was a chilling call, and I’m surprised anybody was ever friends with him given the way he talked to me.”

Henderson further revealed that Epstein threatened to destroy both Ferguson and her family, stating, “He said he would destroy the York family and he was quite clear on that. He wasn’t shouting. He had a Hannibal Lecter-type voice. It was very cold and calm and really menacing and nasty.”

He added that the pressure on Ferguson to protect her family must have been immense. “I am sure there were legal actions. And this was long before the duke’s life had been ruined by his association with Epstein. It was 14 years ago and everyone will do what they have to do to protect their family. Her family and children will always come first for her.”

Charities Sever Ties

On Monday, five charities announced that the Duchess could no longer be their patron. Nadim and Tanya Ednan-Laperouse, founders of the Natasha Allergy Research Foundation, issued a statement saying, “We were disturbed to read of Sarah, Duchess of York’s, correspondence with Jeffrey Epstein. She was a patron but, in light of the recent revelations, we have taken the decision that it would be inappropriate for her to continue to be associated with the charity.”

Ferguson’s former spokesperson declined to comment specifically on the charities’ decisions but previously stated that the email was sent to counter a potential defamation lawsuit from Epstein.

Wider Impact

In 2022, Prince Andrew, the ex-husband of Sarah Ferguson and brother of King Charles, was stripped of most of his titles and removed from royal duties due to his connections to Epstein. Subsequently, firms and charities also distanced themselves from him, as reported by CNN.

The fallout continues to affect members of the royal family and those associated with Epstein, highlighting the enduring consequences of their ties to the disgraced financier.
https://www.news18.com/world/five-charities-cuts-off-ties-with-britains-duchess-of-york-over-links-with-epstein-ws-l-9592562.html

Exit mobile version