Trees’ ecological benefits outweigh economic value

This is in reaction to Ernesto T. Solidum’s letter titled “In the conflict over cutting of trees, there are three sides” (Opinion, 9/18/14). His opinion regarding Green Research’s serious objections to the cutting of centuries-old and natural heritage trees along the Pangasinan Manila North Road is “emotional,” while the rationale of the Department of Public Works and Highways favoring the act to prevent road accidents is “practical.”

As a mentor-environmentalist, I base my proenvironmental actions (to preserve and conserve trees) on sound science. Some studies sponsored by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service suggest that few traffic accidents occur if there are trees planted along roadways. It could be explained by fact that drivers get to be more alert, leading to less aggressive driving behavior that slows down traffic.

Another USDA study revealed that a healthy tree is equivalent to 10 air-conditioners running 20 hours per day. This could explain why it is cool and pleasant to drive along the highways of Batangas, Laguna and Quezon provinces during summer, as claimed by Neal H. Cruz (“Thank you, God, for creating trees,” Opinion, 9/19/14), where fire trees line those roads.

Furthermore, the USDA disclosed that increasing tree canopy in cities improves air quality. All this means that a large, full-grown tree can provide 70 times more environmental benefits—that is, by absorbing pollutants from the air and reducing temperature caused by the urban heat island effect—than a small immature tree. This is one big reason why we have to preserve those centuries-old trees.

Trees can also deter crimes. A study conducted by Donovan and Prestemon (2010) in the United States on the effect of trees on crime in Portland, Oregon, suggests that trees planted in the public right of way are associated with lower crime rates.

In the preceding discussions, it is clear that the ecological benefits of trees outweigh their economic value contradicting Solidum’s claim; not to mention the endless supply of the life-giving gas from photosynthesis—oxygen. It is a common (mis)conception that trees cannot live without man, and man cannot live without trees; because plants (i.e., trees) depend on us (and other animals) for carbon dioxide and, in return, we depend on plants for oxygen. Actually, trees can exist even without us! This reality can be demonstrated by setting up a terrarium.

In conclusion, development is not bad at all, for as long as it does not jeopardize our own existence on this planet. We should not antagonize nature; we have to exist in synergy with it.

—MOISES NORMAN Z. GARCIA,

Alfredo M. Velayo

College of Accountancy,

University of Santo Tomas