sustainable Jerusalem

For many, the Jerusalem Forest conjures up nostalgia for Israel's early years. In the 1950s Joseph Weitz dreamed of an afforested green lung around Jerusalem. Gershon Agron, then mayor, joined forces with him and the Jewish National Fund bestowed the forest on the old-new capital. President Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, who planted the first tree, saw special importance in the act. Each year on Tu B'Shvat, classloads of children would go into the Jerusalem Forest to plant trees, and many Jewish communities abroad donated groves or recreation areas in the heart of the forest.

In its prime, the Jerusalem Forest covered 4,500 dunams, the JNF goal for it being 6,000 dunams. But sadly, since the early 1970s the forest has dwindled to its present size of a mere 1200 dunams. The neighborhods of Beit Ha-Kerem, Yefeh Nof, Har Nof, Giv'at Sha'ul and Beit Zayit have all expanded at the forest's expense, and the cemetery slid down from Har Ha-Menuhut to the Roman road and finally to the Jerusalem-Tel Aviv Highway. Enormous quantities of building refuse have been dumped in the forest and an additional 200 dunams have been turned into another cemetery. As if all that were not enough, the Electric Company has planted a network of electricity pylons in the forest, and Yad Vashem has run a new sewage line through it.

The most vulnerable parts of the Jerusalem Forest are the "green fingers" which penetrate into the city itself, adding charm and oxygen to the lucky neighborhoods which border it. These fingers are a link in the ecological corridor which begins with Nahal Revidah and widens into the Sorek river-bed in the city's western reaches. These green areas are threatened by many plans which are liable to interrupt the ecological corridor at many points and cut off the urban section of the Jerusalem Forest.

Jerusalem residents fighting for the forest's future have become aware of the severity of the ecological disaster threatening from the west. This awareness has resulted in a broad-based collaboration among the Guardians of the Forest, the committee for the Arazim Valley and the committee for Ein Karem which is promoting a plan to preserve the visual basin of the village. Part of this basin lies within the Jerusalem Forest and it is imperative, from a sustainable planning perspective, that Ein Karem should remain immersed in the Biblical landscape which is a vital component of the village's conservation. At stake are green areas which constitute an eco-system of the first order. Therefore, when demanding that the Jerusalem Forest be preserved as an urban asset, we must emphasize its role as the urban link in that chain of vital green spaces which, added together, form the green lung west of the city. These spaces are undoubtedly a national asset - the central recreational area of the State of Israel - which is essential in maintaining quality of life for the two big metropolises, Jerusalem and Tel Aviv.

We all believed that TAMA 22, the national outline plan for forests and afforestation, would secure the status of the Jerusalem Forest. But whoever read the small print in TAMA 22 discovered many weaknesses in the status of the afforested areas it covered: the plan allows the laying of infrastructures (roads, electricity, sewage, fuel pipelines) without limitation, as well as construction on 50% of whatever area falls within the boundaries of a local authority.

Indeed, if we examine the plans threatening the Jerusalem Forest, we realize that many of them are legitimized by TAMA 22. Thus, for example, Highway No. 16 (which threatens Nahal Revidah) comes under the category of infrastructure, as does the plan to transfer the Pi Glilot installation to an underground site in the heart of the forest.

Highway No. 16 is planned to start at a huge interchange to be built at Motza, and to extend via Beit Zayit into the very heart of the Jerusalem Forest. The absurdity is that Highway No. 16 is not a top priority for the Minstry of Transport, which prefers to invest first in public transportation within the cities and in inter-urban railways. Nevertheless, the planning of Highway No. 16 continues apace, with all the financial investment that entails, and this makes it incumbent upon environmental organizations to propose a friendly, underground alternative and present it to the planning committees as a solution which is ecologically preferable, even if more expensive. The decision to transfer the Pi Glilot installation from its existing site stems from the fact that the neighborhood of Har Nof has grown too close to it, a situation which endangers the residents. But here too the "economic profitability" parameter has taken precedence, for what can be easier than sacrificing a green space blessed with abundant plant and animal life - one of the most desirable destinations of the average hiker in the Jerusalem Forest? The economic profit for the Jerusalem Development Authority is clear: the new site will come free of charge, while the one to be vacated will turn into valuable, high-quality real estate. Here, in my opinion, lies the real dilemma of the Jerusalem Municipality in the matter of the Jerusalem Forest: the city's helmsmen have not yet learned to appreciate the economic value of a green lung. As long as the importance of a green area as a weighty factor in the evaluation of economic parameters is ignored, the economic conclusions will be distorted and fraught with disaster for Jerusalem's future. In the case in point, alternative plans proposed by the Pi Glilot Company which would not infringe on the forest were examined and found suitable, but were rejected by the Jerusalem Development Authority.

We in the Society for the Protection of Nature in Israel and the other organizations operating within Sustainable Jerusalem call upon the Municipality of Jerusalem to demand that the Jerusalem Development Authority remove the Pi Glilot installation from the Jerusalem Forest, just as we call upon the planning and development authorities to pursue an environmentally friendlier alternative to Highway No. 16. Indeed, our deep concern for Jerusalem's future impells us to aspire to more than a sustainable political arrangement for the city. We must also aspire to an environmental balance, for the sake of the generations to come. To this end, a master plan is required which will secure the status of the open spaces both within the city and around it, organize a proper transport infrastructure, set a policy for building height and density, bring about the conservation and utilization of Jerusalem's historical and architectural assets, find sustainable solutions for solid waste and sewage, and involve the residents in all stages of the planning process. Only such a plan can achieve the desired goal of sustainable development for Jerusalem and guarantee the continued existence of the Jerusalem Forest.

Naomi Tsur is director of the Jerusalem branch of the Society for the Protection of Nature in Israel, and coordinator of the Sustainable Jerusalem Coalition.