Southwell Town Council approve works on three trees before new Tree Management Plan is finalised

More tree works are planned to go ahead despite a council’s new management plan not being finished.

Work is underway on developing a new tree management plan for Southwell Town Council, which aims to see less tree works being carried out — and councillors have suggested that no further works should be carried out until this management plan is completed.

It is expected it will be at least October before it is able to be implemented.

Councillors have previously agreed to not have any more surveys done, as when a tree is branded as unsafe by a tree surgeon the council shoulders a responsibility to undertake work on the tree.

Despite this, the council’s town environment committee has agreed to proceed with tree works to one tree at Squires Pond.

The tree is adjacent to a footpath and was identified as unsafe by a tree survey undertaken before the decision was made to stop the surveys.

Chairman of the committee Lynn Harris explained that the proposal for works was brought to the meeting as it was initially discussed before the agreement to create a new management plan.

Jeremy Berridge claimed the tree posed an ‘imagined risk’ and proposed the work was not carried out until the plan was in place.

He explained that research he undertook while working on the new management plan suggested it was more likely someone would be bitten by a shark than be injured by a tree through no fault of their own.

Peter Harris added: “Of course if you ask a tree surgeon to survey a tree they will say it is unsafe, it needs the crown lifting. It gives them work.

“I would agree very reluctantly that we do this, on [Lynn’s] advice.”

Jamie Bostock added that he agreed on the basis that the council were obliged to do the work having had the survey.

It was unanimously agreed that work would be carried out on the single tree.

Additionally the removal of two trees at Ash Tree Spinney have been approved, dependent of the confirmation of legality, relating to bat habitats, by Newark and Sherwood District Council’s ecology officer.

The works had been proposed earlier in the year, but due to the bird nesting season — and a related peaceful protest by Green Southwell and residents — were postponed with a plan for the council to revisit the proposal after the nesting season.

The committee chairman explained the proposal had been brought to the meeting prior to the completion of the management plan as a “promise had been made to some residents” whose property is adjacent to the two trees.

As the spinney is a known bat habitat, works would need to be carried out prior to November — “after birds nesting and before the bats sleeping” — before the management plan would be ready.

Peter Harris questioned where the evidence of the commitment to the residents was, and added: “The trees were there before the houses.”

Jeremy Berridge added: “If we have made a commitment, I would like to see it clarified.”

There was also concerns about the legality of the works in a known bat habitat, and Karen Roberts explained she would feel more comfortable if the council could consult with the district council’s ecology officer prior to taking on the work.

Peter Harris voted against the proposal, while all other councillors voted for the work to take place, subject to the conditions and proof of the commitment.

In the same meeting the committee heard an update on the Tree Management Plan, in which Jeremy Berridge explained some of his research.

He said a study in Australia had concluded that the number of injuries caused by trees through no fault of the person were insignificant compared to the benefit of trees.

He added: “I think the reality is that you look back and see that nobody has been killed and think our policy must be working — but the same would be true without the policy.

“We have spent a lot of money and turned trees into bonsai for no reason.”

His research had also concluded that the council was not expected by the law to have detailed tree surveys, only in the case that an obvious risk has been identified.

“Where they have punished people in the courts is where they have had no policy, done nothing, and an accident has happened,” he added.

“They do not insure against the risk of nature and having trees fall down is the risk of nature.”