At 70ft tall this is just vandalism by the council. The one person complaining can hardly have failed to notice them.
Locals in Druetts Close say they are a focal point for residents and are where they all meet for barbeques while their children play together.
That is more likely the reason for the complaint.
Disgusting - I hope the people raise merry hell and stop it happening. Surely the person who complained noticed the trees when they bought the house?!
Unbelievableā¦
We are supposed to be saving the planet, somebody should tell the council, who are breaking their own rules!
Former councillor Chris Coldbreath, 64, branded the situation as āridiculousā.
He said: "I cannot see how the council can class these two massive trees as an antisocial hedge. I have done a lot of research and read the act thoroughly, and the definition in the act is so broad that yes, they can do this.
"But they are really taking the definition at its very broadest. I donāt think they are working properly within the law. The law cannot be used to remove or damage trees - and yet they are using the law to try and remove these trees.
"Letās be realistic, the intention of the act is to stop the spread of 10 foot hedges along borders.
āIt wasnāt intended to chop down 70 foot trees that have been in an open area for years - trees full of wildlife that is now going to be made homeless. The whole thing is a travesty.ā
Chris added: "We were originally told that this decision was irreversible - but when you start reading the act, it canāt be, because it should never have been made in the first place.
āI am confident that they have not applied the Act in the right way, and that the decision can and should be reversed. Unfortunately, I think the chances of that are very slim.ā
Some b****y jobsworths who should be sacked.
Some should remind them that trees are the lungs of the planet!
maybe a mass demo when the tree fellers arrive
There may be a way for a temporary reprieve though as there probably will be birds nesting in those trees, see first link below. In the end though the law, often quoted as being āan assā, will probably be upheld, thatās how ridiculous this country appears to have become!
āIt is an offence under Section 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act of 1981 to intentionally take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird while it is in use or being built, or to intentionally kill, injure or take chicks or adults, or intentionally take or destroy any eggs.ā
https://www.rspb.org.uk/birds-and-wildlife/advice/wildlife-and-the-law/wildlife-and-countryside-act/
Disgusting, I thought trees were no longer to be cut down. Up here you can only do it if the tree poses a danger. Usually a Council takes not a blind bit of notice of someone who complains about something like this. Trust them to act on this daft thing.
Thanks for posting.
Trees are fascinating, the way they defend themselves against deer in particular.
An unlimited fine and six months in jail something I approve of.
Rules made by the council can also be ignored by them.
Hope the locals kick off about this, band together, start an on-line petition, organise protests.
The trees are healthy and should be left alone.
This vandalism makes me extremely angry.
