Pip Howard is a British forester who lives and works in France. He worked with Save Our Woods and now at Forestcomms working on the pan European landscape research project HERCULES.
This is his second guest blog here – the first was Real life bugs or a living planet?
Campaigning for City Canopy (or PFI Contracts and Chicks in the Chipper).
The upsetting images of the arrest of Katia Lipovoï on Monday 15th February in the Beaulieu area of Poitiers went viral on French social media. Katia is an active member of the LPO (Ligue pour la Protection des Oiseaux) and illustrator of birds.
Katia was among many others protesting against the removal of 90 street trees as the canopy of these trees was an important habitat for birds in the urban landscape.
France remains in a State of Emergency following the terrorist attacks in Paris in November, which meant that the Police in presence at the protest were allowed to be somewhat more heavy handed than in normal circumstances, even if the protester was a 72 year old ornithologist.
In France the surface area of a tree is taken much more seriously than in the UK, the eminent biologist Francis Hallé is quoted as stating that a fully mature tree in leaf can have a surface area of as much as 200 Hectares (almost 500 acres for any imperialists out there). This is maybe a wee bit of an exaggeration, but it is still immense. A mature tree in an urban landscape is a landscape by itself with a habitat of a huge range of species, some of which in the phyllosphere and rhizosphere are unknown to science as yet. And of course an immensely important habitat for birds.
To lose an urban tree is for those who live in the vicinity of that tree to lose their only real connection to the natural world. We are all at blame for not making more of this connection and allowing the public to take street trees for granted, which in turn led to their importance dropping off the bottom of local authority priority lists.
In Sheffield over the last year thousands of mature street trees have been felled as part of the ‘Streets Ahead’ PFI contract between Sheffield City Council and Amey plc. The local protest grew along with the quantity of the trees being felled. The lack of initial consultation and subsequent poor attempt at consultation, which fell well short of the UK government consultation guidance and with no reference at all to the Aarhus convention, only poured fuel on the fire. Rob McBride (aka The Treehunter), got involved, bringing in tree professionals of international repute, including Jeremy Barrell and Christopher Neilan to comment on the situation, as the fellings and procedure were totally at odds with the industry standards of today and risked undermining any and all advances in valuing all our trees properly. Following a farcical council debate, the protesters crowd-sourced the money required within 12 hours to bring an immediate high court injunction to the felling.
In less than 3 months time the felling may well commence again, following appeal by Sheffield Council. This will be well into nesting season.
Given the ‘textbook’ bad examples of the work on the retained trees and ‘replacement’ trees of Sheffield, there is not a great deal of confidence that trees will be properly surveyed for nests before felling commences again, particularly as much of the surveying thus far has been carried out ‘in house’ by Amey. Many of the locals have started to note the locations of nests themselves.
I have been witness, (not responsible at all), to the awful and illegal sight of a nest having been through a chipper, following a fairly, but still clearly not good enough, comprehensive survey! It is something I never want to see again obviously, and is completely avoidable. The need for a standardised system of surveying for nests across the whole of the UK, which can be understood easily by the community is a must, indeed any and all surveys including tree health should be standardised and designed so they can be shared with the public.
Whilst there is now a moratorium on the felling it is still a sad fact that the homes to so many birds and other wildlife have now gone from the streets of Sheffield. Thousands of hectares of perfect bird habitat have gone. And the spurious claims of the council that this was actually a progressive step to ensuring a ‘greener’ Sheffield have to be questioned.
Sheffield was once an exemplar of how nature and humans in the built environment could co-exist. No longer, thanks to a £2 Billion PFI contract. Again considerably more clarity is required on the mechanisms of PFI, particularly in regards consultation and communication with the community. Protest is costly to all and be avoided by effective 2 way conversations before any work commences, all too often the trees are condemned, the operations are planned and it is mere lip service to ‘share’ as PR. Why has listening become obsolete?
There is now a brief window of time to use Sheffield as a model as to how all of us with very different interests linked to nature can help come together to ensure discussion, education and progression with regards wildlife and natural habitats in the built environment. In doing so proving that, unlike the polarisation that has occurred in the rural landscapes, there is much common ground and the single most important issue for us all can be achieved – educating future generations to the importance of nature and giving them the opportunity to experience it. The community tree groups of Sheffield through their fantastic work at campaigning have created this window for us and it is up to us all to use this as best we can. In doing so Sheffield Council will benefit themselves and wouldn’t it be great to see an exemplar of how a council can work properly with the community it serves helping to reverse the trend of railroad local politics that has taken root in the UK.
[registration_form]
Thanks for waving the flag for trees in towns and cities.
Those campaigns and campaigners are vital for maintaining a healthy and biodiverse environment. It’s also worth noting that nowadays urban walks tend to be more interesting than farmland walks. For example, just compare the number of different bird songs and their frequency and be aware of the silence of the fields.
On one detail about street trees: why not more pollards, especially of native trees? When did you last see a pollarded English alder or birch? Traditionally these species have never been managed in this way but it’s worth doing because the results are a beautiful and the trees quickly end up becoming a new type of habitat.
The only place I’ve ever seen street birch pollards is in the Yorkshire town of Kirbymoorside. That was twenty five years ago and they remain an inspiration.
Great blog Pip. I know Sheffield has some fantastic trees in parks too, e.g. Endcliffe Park near Hallam University. Speaking of which what have the city’s MPs been doing to address this situation? Has the Rt Hon Nick Clegg, for example, been assiduously noting the concerns of his constituents?
What a pity there isn’t a presumption against felling full stop and a strong duty of care (to the tree and the wildlife it supports) when carrying out work.
Another thought – if I got drunk and went round our local park inflicting damage on trees I’m sure there’s an excellent chance I’d be up in front of the beak. If the Council and it’s contractors activities are far below any kind of acceptable standard couldn’t residents simply complain to the police that they’ve committed acts of criminal damage?
Yep, Nick Clegg has supported the campaign, not so the other MPs whose constituencies are involved, but as they are all Labour like the council that is not unexpected.
Unless they fell a tree covered by a TPO or can be proven to have destroyed an active bird’s nest or bat roost, I don’t really see that there is any likelihood that you could prosecute either the council or their contractors for criminal damage. The council ‘owns’ the trees (on behalf of the population of Sheffield) and the contractors are acting on the Council’s instructions so they are probably within their legal rights – however reprehensible the tree felling may be.
Not sure about that Jonathan;
Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981
(1)Subject to the provisions of this Part, if any person intentionally [F530or recklessly]—
(b)takes, damages [F531, destroys or otherwise interferes with] the nest of any wild bird while that nest is in use or being built;
he shall be guilty of an offence
So if Amey are informed of active nests….
Anyone know of any loopholes?
By the way; how many mature roadside trees in Sheffield do you think will not have an active nest in them this breeding season? 10%? 20%? It might not protect them all but it will protect a huge proportion. I’ll certainly be surveying all the trees on my street and as many adjacent ones as I can. With Woodpigeon, for example, very frequently nesting in roadside trees, and with a significant number doing so into September-October we could be looking at a lengthy (and expensive for Amey) delay. Unless Amey want to apply for a General Licence of course, and you can imagine how well that will go down, particularly in the two wards where Labour are hanging on by the skin of their teeth (from a very strong challenge by the Greens). The juxtaposition of the end of the injunction and the local elections is, to say the least, interesting! Then of course there are the bats; reported to be in the vicinity by the public but roost sites need to be checked by a licensed expert (at, say, £200 a time). And then there are the folks (and this has already happened, full marks!) that are prepared to sit under a tree all day while Amey staff just whistle; 1 day’s work (with all the attendant road closures), becomes 2, becomes 3, until there is no profit left in it. A picnic, reading the paper, a game of chess, just chatting to passersby, all in the lovely spring weather!
Jim
One would expect that the local authority will have completed the necessary due diligence when it comes to protected species under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), for breeding birds in this instance; or the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, where bats could be involved (e.g. roosts). Bats, being a European Protected Species will receive stricter protection.
Amey, as a responsible contractor, will be expected to follow industry best practice and where trees have been identified as having bat roost potential (based on physical features such as cavities), that are required to be felled, or lopped (pollarded), then the necessary mitigation will be followed (either reasonable avoidance measures (abbreviated to RAMS), or under the appropriate derogation licence issued under the 2010 Regulations).
For breeding birds, providing the nest is not active (e.g. last year’s pigeon nest), then for a few exceptions (e.g. golden eagle – which I am sure don’t breed in Sheffield), they can be felled/ destroyed without hindrance. Within the breeding bird season (taken as being from March/ April until August/ September (this is consensus, not defined in law), it is standard good practice to have an ecologist on site to physically check the trees for occupied nests prior to felling.
If you wish to establish what ecological due diligence has been undertaken, then a Freedom of Information/ Environmental Information Regulation Request can be asked of the Council; or just a simple polite enquiry.
The above applies, regardless of whether planning permission is needed or has been granted.
Finally, if the Council has not undertaken appropriate due diligence, they are at risk of breaching legislation; and not just nature conservation ones at that. In his book, “The Habitats Directive. A developer’s obstacle course?”, Gregory Jones QC muses whether if a local authority considered a risk and then proceeded anyway (i.e. behaved recklessly), then there could be an argument in law that the authority aided and abetted any subsequent disturbance; contrary to section 8 of the Accessories and Abettors Act 1861 (see http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/24-25/94/section/8); or section 44 of the Magistrates Courts Act 1980 (see http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/43/section/44). This has yet, to my knowledge, been tested, and am sure Sheffield Council don’t want to be the test case! Note that this would only apply, I believe, with bats (being European Protected Species).
Worth establishing with Sheffield if they have undertaken appropriate due diligence to the necessary standards.
Hope this helps
Cheers Richard. I’ve a meeting with the council tomorrow (about other ecological matters) so will try and get some clarity (though I’m not expecting full openness) on the current goings on. What I am expecting is some desperate scramble to get an Environmental Impact Assessment together (completely lacking thus far, it would appear Sheffield City Council’s Ecology Unit has, perhaps until now, been entirely excluded from the process) which, again, will be interesting as the main item on the agenda for me is presenting the results of a review of the status of all breeding birds in Sheffield 1975-2013 that I’ve just completed. As you correctly surmised we, unfortunately, haven’t had breeding Golden Eagles in the Sheffield area since 1668, and haven’t had any records since 1952, though, thinking about it, that’s probably just as well; they really wouldn’t survive very long in the Peak District badlands.
Thanks for this, Richard.
Very helpful.
Very best wishes to all of you in Sheffield trying to get this vandalism stopped.
I think we are in agreement Jim. I said ‘unless they can be proven to have destroyed an active bird’s nest’. If anyone has evidence of that then I’d encourage them to pursue it. Likewise if anyone is aware of an active nest or nests in a tree that is about to be felled I would encourage them to make that known so that the felling can be postponed.
See also Ian Rotherham’s excellent blog …. full of campaigning for Sheffield’s trees, wider countryside and environment
https://ianswalkonthewildside.wordpress.com/
Also try this link:-
http://www.savesheffieldtrees.org.uk
Those of us who care should get behind this campaign. When you think how long it will take for any re-planting to mature, it is scandalous. The ignorant seem to think planting a spindly standard tree compensates for removing a large mature tree.
Thanks to Pip Howard for highlighting this travesty.
The Sheffield tree campaign also throws some interesting light on the restraints Wildlife Trusts end up putting themselves under. Correct me if I’m wrong but as far as I can see Sheffield & Rotherham Wildlife Trust finally commented on the situation only after a lot of queries from concerned members, and members of the public, and after the injunction was in force (so months after the campaign started), and then only in the softest of tones. Why? Because they didn’t want to jeopardise funding from Amey (as they described them, ‘our friends’).
Jim
The felling of the trees is, to the best of my knowledge, not going to fall within the meaning of Environmental Impact Assessment meant by the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011. This seems a bit pedantic; but the Council could quite likely say, legitimately, that there is no EIA (or Environmental Statement which is the document that sets out the EIA).
If it were me, I would ask Sheffield for:
any reports that set out the assessment of the trees that were completed by ecologist(s) in accordance with standard best practice, which if issued before 2016 would be expected to have followed the Bat Conservation Trust’s guidelines published in 2012;
and if issued after August 2013, whether the reports are in accordance with the British Standard 42020:2013 – Biodiversity. Code of practice for planning and development.
Given the number of trees involved (as I understand), there is likely to be a number of trees with bat roost potential and thus there ought to have been bat activity surveys or certainly more detailed inspections; e.g. tree climbing with endoscopic surveys. A lesser number may have bat roosts, in which case, assuming they are to be felled, licences would be required from Natural England.
All of the above is standard stuff and on the assumption that Sheffield Council has an in-house ecologist, or has had one for any period since the mid-1990s, they should be well versed in the procedures and process. Thus, the information should be readily to hand. I would be utterly aghast if no due diligence work had been done. The legislation has been there since 1994; the 2010 Regulations that I have been referring to was a consolidation of the amendments between 1994 and that date.
On the point of breeding birds in Sheffield, perhaps ask them what Sheffield is intending to do with regards to their legal responsibilities under Regulation 9A of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended by http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2012/1927/pdfs/uksi_20121927_en.pdf). My guess is that you will be met with blank faces…though I hope I am wrong.
If nothing else, the loss of breeding bird habitat caused by the tree felling would need to be compliant with this statutory instrument.
Richard
Thanks again Richard, very helpful advice. Sheffield City Council has a number of very skilled ecologists based in their Ecology Unit, however my understanding is that they have been excluded from anything to do with the Streets Ahead project (in contradiction of the council’s normal procedures, the Ecology Unit should be the first to comment on anything with ecological significance) and that all survey work so far has been done inhouse by Amey. Now the council is in very hot water (the scandal has already lead to the Head of Highway Maintenance, Steve Robinson, losing his position http://www.pendletoday.co.uk/news/local/listen-sheffield-council-sorry-after-highways-chief-s-views-on-tree-felling-recorded-1-7498357) this may change, we will see. The initial strategy of Amey was to claim trees were diseased but they very quickly got caught out on that.
Please keep us informed, Jim – thanks for what you’re doing and best wishes for the meeting.
Thanks Marian, just hope they give me some news to share!
Richard, to quote you ‘my guess is that you will be met with blank faces’, well that very succinctly described the situation; ‘when was this?’, ‘2010’, ‘when did you say?, ‘er, 2010, oh and 1861’ (Accessories and Abettors has a lovely, mind focusing, ring to it). As a result the council will be discussing the matter with their legal team, and I will be taking it up directly with Amey’s new manager. Thanks again for the advice, I’ll keep everyone posted as any details emerge.
Seems to me a travesty that at the same time that a healthy towns initiative is being announced with green spaces etc., that mature trees which we know play such a part in our appreciation of a city like Sheffield are being felled.
The absence of any appreciation of the relative value of a mature tree over a replacement sapling and of the mental health benefits that such trees contribute to the population is what now sees Britain in the rear guard internationally.
As with raptor persecution we have a massive education job on our hands to influence folk as well as the protest job to be done in the interim.
Regardless of wildlife concerns, if the Council has established procedures in place, such as requiring that its ecology advisers (and others) be consulted, but has failed to follow these, then highlighting its maladministration and mention of taking the matter to the Local Government Ombudsman might be of some added benefit. (It’s worth mentioning as a tool for others elsewhere).
The monetary value of trees of different types and ages has been calculated previously. Whereas I’d far rather we had a civil society that functioned more effectively and was properly aware of the value of natural environmental features (How many more people will suffer/die in consequence of less well filtered air in Sheffield?) a fine from the Ombudsman that captured the value of the trees of which Sheffield Council and Amey have deprived the population (even ignoring all the dependent species) that might then be used by a responsible organisation (evidently not the Wildlife Trust) to put the biodiversity back into Sheffield, once a shining example of urban ecology, would be a small step in the right direction.
The rapid raising of funds to help call a halt in this case is wonderful but isn’t it time WE came up with a better way of helping communities to respond quickly to issues such as this and make them less likely to happen in the first place? To me it seems that seems this is something that (e.g.) Wildife & Countryside Link and Planning Aid could usefully pursue as a project, providing the necessary information, links, league tables via a community-run website to enable the sharing of concerns, advice and best/worst practice to enable timely and effective responses to issues such as this.
That ought to be something that the RSPB, Wildlife Trusts etc could subscribe to collectively without needing to compromise the individual relationships they have with developers and others who might otherwise have a more negative impact on the environment.
Just to remind folks what was happening not too long ago here seems to be the only film of Street tree fellings in Sheffield. It was transmitted to BBC The One Show for tonights piece but they chose not to show it? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2y0ww1r4VYI
I note from Horticultural Week that Sheffield City Council have pluckily vowed to fight on and attempt to turn over the injunction that has delayed the important work of ridding the town of its green heritage, breathable air etc.
I think that’s more of less what Derby City Councul said in response to opposition to its plans to destroy onr of its designated LNRs. I wonder how that turned out.