WHEN are we going to get an opportunity to read about a mature oak tree actually being SAVED by the decision of some unbiased government inspector?

It seems that every time local councillors reject an application for housing development by some profit-inspired building firm, all the builder has to do is contact the government inspectors in order to gain permission to destroy another piece of our natural heritage.

The article about the oak tree in Holcombe Brook which is having to make way for housing (Bury Times, July 17) is the latest example.

The oak tree is a keystone species. This means that other forms of wildlife depend on it in order to survive. The oak supports a great diversity of wildlife, so great in fact that the Biological Flora lists 227 species of fauna associated with oaks, which is far richer than any other tree.

I would rather see the tree saved so that the character of the area is maintained and one home for many species is preserved. This would be preferable to seeing luxury homes being built for the benefit of the builder's pocket and the creation of a habitat for just one species (save for the odd dog or cat).

In the case of Oak Avenue, it would be better that the land was used for recreational use - as originally earmarked - thereby improving the quality of life for the local population. Surely the government inspector concerned must realise that there is more to life than houses.

Perhaps if money really did grow on trees this particular story would have had a happier ending!

R. WOOD,

Kirklees Street, Tottington.

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.