Residents divided on subject of tree gates

By Dominique Worrell
Contributing Writer

The trees that live in Highbridge are suffering. Animals go to the bathroom on them, and people throw garbage on them, from paper to broken beer bottles.

As a result, some landlords have asked building superintendents to install tree gates. A tree gate is a little fence that’s planted around the tree. They’re supposed to keep out the animals’ feces and the humans’ trash.

Highbridge residents have different opinions about tree gates. Some of them agree with them, and think it’s an issue of safety.

“It will be safer for children if we have tree gates because they wont get hurt by picking things off the trees that could make them sick,” said Marisol Burgos. “I also think that we should have tree gates because of people’s litter.”

Bridgette Worrell, a resident of 985 Anderson Ave., agrees.

“It is important to me to keep the outside clean as well as the in,” she said. “If the outside is dirty, rats and roaches from other dwellings will come to the buildings and apartments.

“I am very active in keeping my neighborhood clean,” she continued. “I don’t contribute to leaving trash in the streets. It is important to keep my neighborhood clean because I don’t want my children to live in a garbage-infested area.”

On the other hand, some residents are against tree gates. They say the gates cause another problem. People throw their trash inside the gates instead of in the garbage.

“Having tree gates has made my job harder,” said Calvin Foster, the superintendent of 990 Anderson Ave. “Since I am the super, I am responsible to clean them out when people throw their garbage in them. We’ve had them for four to five years now and I personally would rather have no trees. It wasn’t my plan to get tree gates. The landlord approved them as well as the trees.”

At 990 Anderson Ave., there are two trees with gates. Across the street, from 162 to 164 Anderson, there are five trees with no gates around them. There is garbage around the tree, but none of the building landlords or superintendents have received a first-notice $50 fine.

Ivette Burgios, a resident of 1000 Anderson Ave., sees why tree gates are good, but still has a problem with them.

“It’s not right for an animal to use the bathroom on a tree,” she said. “The trees need to breathe, and if the owners do decide to pick up after their dogs they throw it on the sidewalk. It makes it absolutely impossible to walk on. But I don’t agree with tree gates because trees have the freedom to breathe as well as humans.”

Worrell, who is for tree gates, also sees the other side of the issue. “I agree with the tree gate idea for the fact that it will stop the animals from using them as a bathroom,” she said, “but I disagree for the fact that we won’t have to worry about the animals, but now we will have to worry about the people throwing garbage in the gates instead of the trash cans.”