Truth about the MGS Ipoh tree

Updated 7 years ago · Published on 12 Jan 2019 2:09PM · 3 Comments

YOUR article is not giving the true and correct picture of the tree now. The photo in your article was taken long before the tree was trimmed in July 2018.

The tree is to be relocated nearby. The new location has been dug and prepared by a team of tree specialists. Methodist Girls School Ipoh currently has no proper hall, which is long overdue.

However, some old girls, for personal reasons best known to themselves, are using the platform they have as alumni to block and prevent the construction of the much-needed school hall. Extra costs are being incurred each day the relocation of the tree is delayed. Adjoining new classrooms are also being constructed.

Also, this tree is unlikely to be 100 years old.

The photo in the previous article was taken long before the tree was trimmed in July 2018 (pic). – The Malaysian Insight pic, January 12, 2019.

MGS was given its present location in 1927. The location is believed to have been used for kongsi settlements before that. It was likely planted in 1930s as nearby Kenyon Cottage was completed in 1934 while the blocks of school buildings were just a year before. Raintrees are not native to Malaysia, but were introduced here. – January 12, 2019.

* Khor Kok Yew is a parent of a girl in Methodist Girls School and reads The Malaysian Insight.

Sign up or sign in here to comment.

Comments

  • The photo in today's article shows the tree in original form before it was illegally topped in July 2018. It was not a trim job, as you have been made to believe. The intention then was to fell the tree on the sly, but contractors were unable to complete the job that day. Result of which, MBI issued written notices to respective parties to comply with local planning laws. As for the receptor site, you should perhaps go have a look at the waterlogged pond that has formed there. And what tree specialists are you referring to (Dr. Ting who was on site to supervise digging up of the tree)? Care to back your opinions with some form of proof? If you are able to fully comprehend the article, you would have noted that tree relocation was in discussion stage and had it been carried out properly (under instruction/supervision of qualified arborist), the tree would have not been reduced to the current sorry state - whereby any further attempts to relocate it would result in low survival rate.

    Posted 7 years ago by Yvonne Ho · Reply

  • Mr Khor - if you had been told that the tree was trimmed in July 2018, Im afraid you have been misinformed. The tree was actually in the process of being chopped down in July 2018. Unlawfully.
    The local authority issued stop work order - as a result the tree is still standing, but minus its crown.
    The stop work Order was because the school broke the law, not because the local authority entertained some old girls opposition.
    Ultimately, parties may disagree as to whether the tree needs to make way for the development, but the law must be respected.
    Isnt that what a school should be showing an example of?

    Posted 7 years ago by Nur Azean Lee Abdullah · Reply

  • Similarly, your statement However, some old girls, for personal reasons best known to themselves, are using the platform they have as alumni to block and prevent the construction of the much-needed school hall ... is incorrect.
    The old girls are not blocking the construction per se, but merely pleading for the building plans to accommodate the tree, especially as the tree is protected by law. A letter was sent personally to each member of the Board, however the Board was adamant that the plans could not be modified.
    The delay was caused by the fact that the school attempted to unlawfully fell the tree and commence work without approval - they were stopped by the local authority. Perhaps parents like Mr Khor were not made aware of all these?

    Posted 7 years ago by Nur Azean Lee Abdullah · Reply