Biologists, experts, and organizations question whether the beautiful shade trees cut down in Palma presented diseases or posed an imminent risk.
Arboriculture experts, biologists, and people involved in municipal maintenance assert that most of the trees were healthy and demand technical reports justifying their felling.
PalmThe recent felling of several beautiful shade trees in Palma has generated strong controversy among residents, green space professionals, and environmental organizations, who question the technical reasons justifying what they consider an excessive action. Several experts doubt that the removed trees presented serious pathologies or a state of deterioration that would have made radical felling necessary, and they demand greater transparency regarding the reports and prior studies. The context for this action is marked by an open debate that has been ongoing for nearly two years. According to people familiar with the maintenance of municipal green spaces, warnings were already being issued at that time about a supposed danger associated with the beautiful shade trees, but no action was taken until now. The decision to carry out the felling in the early hours of the morning, with work beginning in the dark, has been one of the points that has generated the most discontent, both due to the lack of public visibility and the risks that, according to these sources, it posed to the workers themselves.
A former municipal gardener maintains that the trees did not present widespread structural damage. Some specimens may have had isolated issues, but he argues that these could have been addressed with specific treatments and maintenance tasks, such as selective pruning. According to his testimony, the trunks were healthy, and there was no obvious reason to carry out a complete felling. Some of the beautiful shade trees, he adds, were approximately eighty years old.
From a technical standpoint, a European-certified arboriculture expert explains that, in most cases, the level of risk associated with the trees was moderate. This type of risk, he points out, implies the need for monitoring and maintenance, but does not automatically justify the removal of the tree. According to this assessment, only one of the specimens presented a high risk. In situations like this, he explains, the protocol recommends the intervention of a specialist in mature trees with specific certifications, such as VETCERT, before making a final decision.
This expert also emphasizes that the beautiful shade tree is a species with very fibrous wood and vigorous growth. In this regard, he warns that drastic pruning can cause significant stress to the trees, especially when they are mature, and negatively affect their structure. According to available data, of the five pruning operations carried out in 2024, only one tree showed clear internal rot, while the rest showed no signs of fungi or serious diseases. Several associations indicated in 2024 that the felled trees inadvertently obstructed the view from the rooms of a nearby hotel.
The criticism also extends to the scientific community. Biologists involved in monitoring the case explain that, before the felling, an attempt was made to open a dialogue with the City Council to clarify the technical criteria and buy time. On the night of the 11th, they indicate, the filing of precautionary measures was being considered, and several people filed administrative appeals.
These sources also denounce the placement of precautionary barriers, which they consider inappropriate and out of context. These barriers disappeared the following day, with the neighborhoods being blamed for their removal. They explain that they attempted to contact the mayor directly by personal letter to request more time before any irreversible action, but the request was unsuccessful. It's worth recalling that an agreement was reached last year to reduce the scope of the interventions, after the City Council initially proposed the removal of seventeen trees. Ultimately, only five were removed. In this context, experts and organizations are now demanding to know if detailed analyses or technical studies have been carried out to demonstrate a real danger, and they warn that documents such as those from the Biotreeversity project, endorsed by the University of Milan, recommend avoiding drastic actions to preserve urban biodiversity. The controversy remains open, while the demand grows for clearer criteria, accessible studies, and urban tree management based on detailed and agreed-upon assessments.