22'0006012006 New exhibition opens at Latcham Gallery At some point most of u: have questioned the puzpou of our exntemc. Debonh Colvin and Frank Smith eat [me the qucluontng through t â€u m. This (all, the Latcham Gallery 1: ptesenttng To Be, an exhibition of mixed med» Work: by the two Mount Albert arthu. Funk Smith exhibits found objects to articulate his View of life. Hand-nude replica of crow es, old newspapet chppmgs. col- lages, documents of outdated bul- letin bond postings. and photo- mph! 0! Incest: visited by the artist produce a mental collage of mollectione about the sputum] umfotmed into the mass-pm- duced. By Ola Wlunk Punk pout um questions Instinct to u wnh mama] elements or nuance, he u uldms W! n mum ’I‘ from a Buddhas: pcupeum work: are form: at median impemmm. the calm and the alumni mum o wun amend poucum. and out tendency to try and leave: (amen! of ouxulvco 1n the wild. Bv explonnx the phvuu I! I“ “U! boa be: men: NRC mhumnm up WI! apt "II! subtle yet unpub‘ about the human Hound ourselves scape spam [K \C I! unue ho! hum 9 ad. I! u cndlffu rd and (Isuzu ‘Mflh’l walk: L! to add the In clleu mm the nut He! wo ml am nbn mac I appare a prov thou; species annual In my 30 years in‘ town, I have admired the lane of maple trees reaching east from highway 48, lust north of Stouffvflle Rd, respecting the foresight of a farmer 40 or 50 years ago who was thinkin of an enriched future. On pt 13, l was horriï¬ed to ï¬nd these trees brutally cut down, for no apparent reason, with the town's approval. I am told that the trees, a though thriving, were not indigenous species and were not deemed important enough by the town's and developer's consultants to plan around and keep. Not important to whom? Our town seems to suffer from flaws in assessment criteria and decision processes in addressing the destruction of trees. We know of the bylaw flaw that led to the destruction of all trees on the property at Woodbine Ave. and Stouffville Road. Professional advisors approved the felling of the Hooper/Harper Lane trees even though they were in better shape than many trees in the old part of town. They could certainly have stood while younger stock grew to replace them. Now future residents will not have the pleasure of their presence » watching for years as spindly growth replaces what we have wantonly destroyed in an afternoon, where there is any replaceâ€" ment at all. New businesses where these trees were cut will not have a welcoming treed avenue on Millard. Are there resiâ€" Readers Write Trees enhance quality of life it! K. I! (ll ham ( dents who, like me, believe that trees are a pleasure, a resource to be protected, a valuable part of our quality of life? Some believe that bylaw protection of urban trees from their owners is not a public responsibility. But perhaps the rights of property owners should be tem- pered by an assessment of public interâ€" est. These natural features are our herâ€" itage; a heritage we are charged to' pre- serve for the future. What to do? First, we must insist on clear and strong bylaws to protect our heritage treesi Second, we must have criteria of assessment that include quali- ty of life, and aesthetic and stewardship principles valued by so many residents. inally, we must have a process that brings claims allowing for the destruc- tion of our natural heritage to council meetings, where developer and staff rec- ommendations can be debated publicly and alternative options can be aired. We need the ability to stop any developer who preemptively moves to destroy our forests, wood lots and hedgerows I ask all of you to question your can- didates for mayor and council and supâ€" port only those who will commit to put- ting strong bylaws in place. , These bylaws should be enacted to repair exist- ing criteria in the assessment of tree removals, and to increase citizen input for town decisions about trees and our environment, before the damage is done. lan Hilton ‘ - Stouffville Slum