The debate on the felling of several trees The construction of the stone bridge in the immediate vicinity of Zamora's Puente de Piedra has raised alarm among some residents and environmental groups. The project, carried out on the banks of the Duero River and at the entrance to the viaduct, has been defended by the City Council as necessary for reasons of safety and the preservation of the monument.
Ecologists Zamora, on the other hand, maintain that the measure lacks convincing technical arguments and primarily responds to an aesthetic vision that seeks to clear the perspective of the bridge. The discrepancy between the two positions has focused on the request for documentation and the need for a detailed explanation of the conditions that led to the felling of the specimens.
What happened next to the Stone Bridge?
The intervention has led to the elimination of several black and white poplars Large trees located on both sides of the access to the Stone Bridge. According to the environmental group, some of the trees were between 8 and 10 meters from the structure, a distance that, in their opinion, raises questions about whether the roots could compromise the viaduct.
The City Council argues that the felling is a response to technical and safety criteria to avoid potential damage to the bridge's foundations. Municipal sources emphasize that this is a limited effort, supported by reports, aimed at preserving a sensitive heritage asset and minimizing future risks.
For Ecologists Zamora, the municipal justification is not credible and aimed at improving the monument's visibility. The organization has announced that it will request a full technical report to assess the real need for the measure and its fit with the municipal urban naturalization plan.
The group also warns of the impact on the biodiversitySeveral of the specimens served as bird shelter such as the listed and protected western jackdaw, which would have lost nesting cavities after the removal of the trees.
A debate that comes from behind
Ecologists Zamora links this episode with other recent interventions in the city. Within the framework of work on the wall of Zamora, they point out that cavities used as shelter by species such as bats (long-tailed and common), swifts, jackdaws, geckos and wall lizards, some of which are in full reproductive season, have been eliminated, which would compromise current environmental regulations.
They also remember the withdrawal of a fig tree on the section of the wall that descends to the Plaza de Santa Lucía and the entry of heavy machinery into the Valorio forest. In his opinion, these cases illustrate a tendency to favor aesthetics and construction work over the conservation of natural heritage, something that has generated public debate.
From the City Council, Councillor Pablo Novo asks for greater perspective when assessing what happened. He maintains that Zamora's forest cover has grown in recent months thanks to new plantations on reclaimed plots and on roads that were previously treeless, such as Avenida de Galicia, and that the felling around the bridge has been timely and justified.
The discussion thus focuses on the equilibrium between the protection of historical heritage and the maintenance of urban ecosystem services. While the City Council emphasizes the overall number of plantations, environmentalists call for consistency with renaturalization plans and solutions compatible with wildlife.
What to expect from now on
The association has announced that it will formally request the technical report which supports the removal of the specimens, in order to determine the diagnosis of roots, foundations, and risks to the bridge. They also ask for details of possible compensatory measures and replanting and a clear schedule for monitoring the status of the viaduct.
Among the alternatives they propose for future interventions are: selective pruning and root management, anti-intrusion barriers, environmental assessment prior to the start of construction, and schedules to avoid wildlife breeding season. They also propose opening spaces for technical and citizen participation to allow for consensus-building on actions in heritage environments.
In legal terms, they remember that the protection of species and habitats requires extreme coordination between heritage, environmental, and public works departments. Any action in sensitive areas, they emphasize, must comply with regional, national, and European regulations and be based on verifiable technical evidence.
The pulse over the felling next to the Stone Bridge leaves two visions in tension: that of the City Council, focused on the structural safety, and environmentalists, who are demanding solid evidence, transparency, and solutions compatible with biodiversity. What happens with the technical report and the compensation measures will determine the course of future decisions in the Duero area.
