Last month I attended a public hearing held by the South Carolina Department of Transportation to discuss the clear cutting of 30 miles of forest that dwell in the median of I-26 from Charleston to Columbia. The proposed removal would reduce fatalities, which occur at high rates due to collisions between drivers and the trees that surround the interstate. SCDOT began the hearing by explaining the full proposal of the project, costs, and various options. The most expensive of the options is to leave the trees, slightly correct the slope of the median, and implement guard rails on all sides of the interstate. The avenue DOT wishes to pursue is the least costly, which is full clear cutting and implementation of one guard cable between the median. During the public comment period person after person “spoke for the trees” discussing how these accidents are mere reflections of larger issues, like distracted, tired, stressed drivers, not violent conifers. Issues between flora and fauna vs. people of Charleston seem to be a reoccurring problem, i.e. coyotes on Sullivan’s Island. It appears in this case, though, that the majority of the community surrounding the area doesn’t want the clear cutting to occur.

This repeating theme of nature vs. people is something local government and policy writers must address. All facets of the debate need to be studied, including the ecological benefits of the trees. They not only act as carbon sinks, habitat and stormwater collection, but they are aesthetically valuable to the identity of Charleston and South Carolina in general. Before we choose the ecologically costly option I urge, along with the many residents and community members of the Charleston area, for DOT to explore solutions such as reducing the speed limit, ban texting and driving, and increase police enforcement of already in place laws around the interstate. Part of promoting safety and  sustainability of our transportation sector is studying all aspects of their projects, including the ecological costs as well as fiscal. The more we reduce our natural economy the more we’ll eventually be paying for it in the long term, to compensate for the ecological services we lost. I hope to see the SC DOT seriously consider the voices of the Charleston community and remember to evaluate the long term consequences of what ever they choose.