Between people and birds, there was nothing left for the rats.
The article does address that notion -- trees are really good at capturing pollution, and a good amount of that pollution ends up in their fruit. Which sucks. I grew up foraging urban food, and I'll still pick and eat berries and stonefruits because they're too delicious to pass up, but it seems irresponsible for governments to promote such a thing.
Right, you wouldn't be able to do this with street trees for that reason, but park trees are fine. The soil just needs to be tested on a regular basis for heavy metals, but that isn't especially difficult; e.g. this has already been done for a lot of community gardens in NYC. While fruit definitely contains whatever pollution is in the environment, unlike many mushrooms it generally doesn't hyper concentrate it.
Must admit that this is a good reason against.
So what? more for cats. This is just a cultural excuse. We don't need to do what is more easy or convenient for the gardener or every public space would be under a layer of green concrete now.
> there really isn't any reason why our park trees shouldn't be producing food for us.
exact