Maintenance work on trees on Wanstead Flats

I have received information from local naturalist Tim Harris about proposed maintenance work on some of the trees on Wanstead Flats. Concerned about freshly-painted white dots on some of the trees in copses and areas of wood, he has spoken to representatives of the City of London Corporation to discuss what is proposed for these trees. They have been selected by consultants working on behalf of the City of London as in need of either remedial work or removal because of a perceived danger of injury to people.

Tim, along with a number of other local naturalists, were anxious about the removal of dead trees from the area since they are a rich source of invertebrate food for birds and for other invertebrates. They also provide valuable nesting sites, notably for woodpeckers (including the nationally scarce Lesser Spotted), Stock Doves, Starlings and Little Owls.

A tree in danger of falling, by Alexandra Lake, Wanstead Flats

The City of London Corporation - who are the Conservators of Epping Forest - it seems is obliged to have the work carried out because of the risk of litigation if someone is injured by a falling branch.  My own feelings about this are of dismay. Of course I understand that remedial work needs to be done from time to time when there is a significant and immediate danger. This was so recently when a tree by Alexandra Lake on the Flats broke off some heavy limbs and even after remedial work was still split and leaning over the lake-side in a position where people would normally tend to walk. However, the fear of litigation I feel is something of a monster out of control, and far more dangerous than a possibility of an occasional injury. If we walk in "natural" areas, then we might expect natural occurrences. If I walk through Wanstead High Street, then I expect the way underfoot to be relatively smooth and not to have a shop-sign fall on my head. But if I walk in the Forest - whether Wanstead Flats or elsewhere -  then I have different expectations. There are different possibilities and hazards. I feel that in some respects, the Conservators may not be on top of this danger to human beings. There is - for example - a long-standing mud-slip on the main path around the Ornamental Waters which - when wet - I am really afraid to walk. The danger of sliding and falling there is real at each step, yet nothing has been done in years to remedy this. Similarly, and still using the main track around the lake as an example, there are some vehicle-ruts which are not only mud-traps but ankle-twisters. Should not these be addressed, because the risk of litigation must be somewhat similar?

Tim has summarised the main points which he learnt from his discussion with the Forest ecologists Andy Froud and Sally Gadson:

 * Only one tree is to be felled though a significant number of dead trees will be "monolithed", ie. have dead branches taken off and in some cases have their main trunks reduced in height by 50%.
* Where possible cutting will take place to leave holes that look like they could be used as nest sites; clearly, though, in a lot of cases, that will not be possible. I did point out some trees that have been used by woodpeckers recently.
* In some cases it may be possible to strap dead wood from cut trees to living trees nearby, though Andy thought this would be unlikely to work in many cases.
* Andy agreed to delay start of the work until next Tuesday to give time for special representations about specific trees to be made.
* Most of the trees to be worked on are in East Copse and West Copse. There are a few in South Copse and a few in Long Wood.
* The overwhelming majority of trees to be worked on are beech.
* Dead wood will not be left in situ because of the risk of it being used for fires.

Alexandra Lake. Vegetation hides the lake, low water-levels and litterThere is another issue relating to the trees on Wanstead Flats. Many of them - particularly the four or so copses and of course the road-side ones - were planted as amenities early in the 20th century. Their purpose was to enhance the aspect of the Flats, so that it looked less like a "wild heathland" and perhaps more attractive. I understand that there is a policy of allowing the copse-trees to gradually disappear, without replacing them - perhaps part of a return to a more "natural" aspect. There is also a policy to enhance some of the grassland to be more varied and attractive to nesting birds such as Skylarks, and in other areas to try to bring back some of the heathland plants - such as Heather - that is now so scarce. Now those latter are positive policies to my mind, but on the other hand the copses do give the Flats perhaps a more gentle and scenically attractive feel, and offer colour and shelter and shade to humans and animal alike. Much of the Flats is mown for sports facilities anyway, so this distracts from the heathland aspect, but has its own values. There are lots of competing requirements for the Flats and these have to be balanced by the City of London Corporation. With the amount being spent elsewhere (proposed for Jubilee Pond, for example), and my own knowledge of requirements that I feel even more important (Alexandra Lake for example) I feel that undue maintenance work at the cost of wildlife habitat is not necessarily the best option.

Paul Ferris, 3rd February 2011