‘I chained myself to an oak tree to save it – and I’ll do it again if Southern Housing tree-fellers return’

Retired social worker Heather Lawrence took drastic action when tree fellers employed by Southern Housing threatened three ancient oaks outside her home, chaining herself to one of the trees. Katy Weitz reports on ructions at the village of Broad Oak, near Brede, in Rother.

Homeowners Heather and husband Les Lawrence have lived in Broad Oak for 18 years, enjoying the wildlife hosted by three 200-year-old oak trees overlooking their quiet cul de sac. But they were dismayed when on 22 October three men arrived in an unmarked van to take down several trees including their own boundary hedge and the three oaks.

The instruction came from Southern Housing, which owns two houses at the end of the cul de sac, on the advice of insurers based on a preliminary report which argued that the roots were causing subsidence, making the houses structurally insecure. But the residents had no warning or consultation — and the couple argue that rather than solving the issue, chopping down the trees takes no account of the environmental impact and is likely to cause further problems in the long term.

The tree fellers removed an ash tree and hedgerow, and on the next day they chopped two large limbs off one of the oaks. On the third day Heather and Les decided they had to stop further work, so they parked their vehicles under two oaks and Heather chained herself to the third.

Heather said: “I’ve never done anything like this before. I’ve not been involved in any sort of protest or environmental action. I’m just a local resident who cares about the wildlife in our village.

“I know there are laws against this kind of thing now but I would do it again tomorrow if I had to. I wish I had got there sooner actually because when I look at the tree with the branches missing, it looks to me like a mutilated person. Before, I could look out of my window in the morning and see all sorts of birds on those branches like owls, sparrows and nuthatches — now there is nothing. I just don’t think anyone has been here and considered things properly.”

Les, who retired from his job as a school science technician earlier this year, fully agreed: “We love these oaks. They support all sorts of bird life and squirrels, plus many sorts of insects. There is no justification for their removal. We tried talking to Southern Housing but no one there with any decision-making capability will talk to us. They haven’t replied to our concerns by email either.”

At their own expense Les and Heather have instructed a solicitor to fight the attempts to take down the trees.

No Tree Protection Order

They have been refused a Tree Protection Order from Rother District Council on the grounds that it could put the council into legal conflict with Southern Housing. How that is a criterion is unclear. TPO requests are usually considered against three main issues:

• public visibility
• tree importance in terms of size, form, how rare it is, or screening value
• the significance of the tree(s), where it is sited, and the wider impact on the environment.

Les is trained in surveying, and argues that the arboricultural assessment report, produced by Property Risk Inspection Ltd on behalf of Southern Housing’s insurers, did not include any geotechnical investigations: so it is not clear if the trees are responsible for the subsidence. He said: “Removal of mature trees is likely to make matters worse through a process called heave. This is the opposite of subsidence where the ground swells due to more water remaining in the clay soil.

“The fact that the trees are up to 200 years old and the buildings only 90 means that the ground was already dried by the trees prior to the houses being built. Without the trees, the swelling is likely to further damage the property they are trying to protect and cause damage to our property along with other neighbours.

“We have lived here the last 18 years with these trees and enjoy them and the bird and animal life they bring we want to try and save them. Unfortunately, it looks like the insurance company’s initial option is to remove trees, without taking anything else into consideration.

“I have taken advice from a number of tree specialists over the last two weeks and at a distance of 18 meters from the house, there is only a 10 per cent chance they are the cause of the problem. It is also possible that bats roost in the trees and the advice from the Sussex Bat group is that Southern Housing should consult bat consultants to make an assessment.

“The report is flawed because it does not consider the geophysical risks to their own or neighbouring properties, that tree removal may bring. The trees provide noise and pollution screening from the road. It also looks like they are supporting the bank to the houses, protecting it from potential landslip. I believe the structural issues of the house could be addressed by remedial work and underpinning but it would seem that no other options other than tree removal have been explored.

“Southern Housing have adopted a slash-and-burn approach, already cutting down an ash tree and hedges at the front of property they own.  They had even earmarked our boundary hedge for removal!  If they had done this work a week earlier when we were away on holiday we would have come back to devastation. We were not advised or consulted about this at all.

“We need to get reports but time is not on our side. One oak has already been partially dismantled. Fortunately, our community has rallied and we have a number of volunteers who are prepared to help us protect the trees while we await the reports. We are not going to give up on these old trees.”

Campaign

The volunteers and Les and Heather have started a local campaign to #savethebroadoakthree, with a WhatsApp group of local volunteers who have pledged to gather under the trees if the fellers return. And Heather says she is prepared to chain herself to a tree again even if it means she is breaking the law.

However, in a statement released subsequently, Southern Housing vowed to consult with local residents before any further work.

“We understand how important these oak trees are to the local community. We want to reassure them removing any tree is something we’d only consider when all other avenues have been explored.

“We’re following independent, specialist, advice from a land surveyor who has raised serious concerns that the oak trees and nearby vegetation in Broad Oak are causing subsidence to a home. If we choose to do nothing, this home could be at risk of structural collapse in the future. We understand how upsetting this is for neighbours, but we’ve carried out a full arboricultural assessment which has investigated all options. We take our environmental responsibilities extremely seriously. We were one of the first housing associations to launch a biodiversity pathway, which details our commitment to protecting and enhancing our natural land.

“The three oak trees in Broad Oak haven’t been removed yet and we will be speaking to local residents to ensure they’re fully informed of our plans and address their concerns.”

Rother

Rother District Council stated that a request for a TPO for the three trees was passed to their arboricultural consultant, who visited the site to review the health and public amenity benefit of the trees:

“The recommendation from the Arboriculture Consultant was not to protect the trees as they have been implicated in subsidence issues investigated by the tree owners insurance company, in respect of properties at nos. 9 and 10 Woodside. The assessment also noted that there are ‘significant wounds that will most likely never seal’ in the trees making them unbalanced, which supports the insurance company’s subsidence investigation.”

Does that address the issues about the geophysical risks of tree removal, to adjacent properties? Apparently not. Some people have been reminded of the outcry in recent years in Sheffield, Plymouth, Torquay, North London, and Colaton Raleigh (East Devon) over hasty and expedient tree fellings. Mistakes were made (and officially acknowledged) but were lessons learnt?

Also in: Campaigns

« Rogue landlords gallery created in town centre
Local Community Energy Co-op shortlisted for two awards »