Thank you for this and an update in due course would be very welcome. I have wondered for a long time how the thousands of abandoned but valuable ancient pollards can be managed safely and economically without destroying them by neglectful collapse or, at the other extreme, ‘Tobying’. Toby Carvery’s advice notes would indeed be interesting to compare with the Council’s survey - assuming that the main risk was thought to be collapsing trunk or falling boughs. I hope that you can get hold of these documents. The treatment of this tree is extreme and has highlighted the risk to thousands of similar relics nationwide - indeed who knows how many such fabulous trees are lost annually through ignorance or aesthetic choices as well as bad luck after apparently sound treatment to prevent collapse? The public outcry is justified here, especially when considering Toby Carvery’s dissembled assertion that the tree was dead when, even from images, that is clearly not true. On a PR note though, let’s keep to facts: the tree has been reported as felled to a stump when the actual treatment looks to be more of an excessive, obnoxious and life-threatening pollarding (that may incidentally lead to the tree’s death and further H&S risks). The much loved Sycamore has also been mentioned and it is interesting that, whilst clearly hundreds of years older, irreplaceable and ecologically far more valuable, the setting of the Whitewebbs oak has not lent itself to Instagram and so the reaction has been relatively contained.
Finally, councils may be the wrong ‘home’ for ancient trees because of the difficulty of justifying budget when competing with other local authority responsibilities and the cost of listing / surveying / advice / enforcement. Perhaps a heritage-specific authority might be considered as in the case for the care of specific buildings.
Thank you for this and an update in due course would be very welcome. I have wondered for a long time how the thousands of abandoned but valuable ancient pollards can be managed safely and economically without destroying them by neglectful collapse or, at the other extreme, ‘Tobying’. Toby Carvery’s advice notes would indeed be interesting to compare with the Council’s survey - assuming that the main risk was thought to be collapsing trunk or falling boughs. I hope that you can get hold of these documents. The treatment of this tree is extreme and has highlighted the risk to thousands of similar relics nationwide - indeed who knows how many such fabulous trees are lost annually through ignorance or aesthetic choices as well as bad luck after apparently sound treatment to prevent collapse? The public outcry is justified here, especially when considering Toby Carvery’s dissembled assertion that the tree was dead when, even from images, that is clearly not true. On a PR note though, let’s keep to facts: the tree has been reported as felled to a stump when the actual treatment looks to be more of an excessive, obnoxious and life-threatening pollarding (that may incidentally lead to the tree’s death and further H&S risks). The much loved Sycamore has also been mentioned and it is interesting that, whilst clearly hundreds of years older, irreplaceable and ecologically far more valuable, the setting of the Whitewebbs oak has not lent itself to Instagram and so the reaction has been relatively contained.
Finally, councils may be the wrong ‘home’ for ancient trees because of the difficulty of justifying budget when competing with other local authority responsibilities and the cost of listing / surveying / advice / enforcement. Perhaps a heritage-specific authority might be considered as in the case for the care of specific buildings.
Many thanks for your comment Ross!