SAVE THE FOREST

(Written on the Remains of Epping Forest)

BY JOHN E. GRAY.

Save us the Forest ! already is done

More mischief than time can restore ;

And most of the landmarks of boyhood are gone,

We cannot, we will not lose more.

If Foresters past could but rise from the dead

To look on the scenes they had known,

They would look with amazement, their Forest has fled

And the pride of its glory is gone.

Save us the Forest ! that children may roam,

Or gambol in innocent glee ;

Their shouts shall ring loudly 'neath Heaven's high dome,

Telling all that the Forest is free.

No carpets of Turkey or Brussels, whose ply

The loom of the cunning one weaves,

With Nature's own loomwork one moment can vie,

The Forest's soft carpet of leaves.

Oh, save us the Forest ! the toiling ones cry,

Who dwell 'mid the smoke and the heat ;

In the long summer sunshine delighted we fly

Away from the alley and street.

From anvil and hammer – from counter and pen,

Too seldom, alas ! can we stray,

We need such a refuge from Babylon's din,

Then save us the Forest we pray.

Oh, save us the Forest ! the home of the Birds,

Whose plumage beflowers each spray,

Discoursing sweet music, like Love's thrilling words,

From dawn till the closing of day.

The Oak and the Ivy – the Ash and the Fern,

No hand of the spoiler should seize,

The castle and mansions are buildings of men,

But the buildings of God are the trees.

Oh, Save us the Forest ! ye wealthy and great,

For you have enough and to spare ;

Let the forest remain for the poor man's estate,

That you his best wishes may share.

Nor call his sweet ramble a trespass or crime,

Let humanity carry the sway,

And save us the Forest – No, not for a time,

But save us the Forest for aye !

From the Christian Times, of October 18, 1867

top

More grass-cutting in Southern Epping Forest

On 15th July I wrote an article relating to what I perceived as over-enthusiastic and un-sympathetic grass-cutting that was taking place in Wanstead Park and other parts of Epping Forest. (see here). Another article followed, reporting on scrub-cutting which destroyed plants in full bloom by Perch Pond and elsewhere in Wanstead Park in August (here).

On 30th September, the cutters were out again, this time on Wanstead Flats. This time there were four tractors plus ancillary trailers, and the cutting was taking place on and near the embankment to the west of the playing fields that are know as the Dell area, but was historically brickfields.

 This embankment slopes towards the east, and for many years was in large part thickly overgrown with gorse. Those areas that weren't gorse-covered were either somewhat sparse grass vegetation - providing a habitat suitable for mosses and lichens, and perhaps particularly mining bees and wasps, and other insects - or more grassy in the vicinity of a spring which used to issue here. This itself gave rise to a marshy area which was rich in wetland plants rare elsewhere on Wanstead Flats. The spring disappeared many years ago, victim perhaps of pipe-laying works on nearby Centre Road. For years, however, the marshy area survived to some extent, provided for by at least some drainage from the slightly higher ground and the environment and vegetation which had been created by the spring.

At the bottom of the embankment - separating it from the managed environment of the playing fields  - a low mound stretches north to south. On the mound and on the embankment side of it a wide variety of flowering plants and grasses found a home, and included some of the more interesting species in this part of Wanstead Flats, as well as an attractive aspect. As an example, Early Hair-grass, Yellow Oat-grass, Sheep's Fescue, Red Fescue, Soft Brome and Grey Sedge have all been recorded in this immediate area.

A tractor mows the wildflowers on the Flats

The whole area was scalped on 30th September, and the questions are why does such severe grass-cutting need to take place here, and what changes to the plant species that lived here will result? I suspect one of the arguments for close-shaving the embankment will be to keep the gorse-growth down to provide habitat for insect species, but also might include the idea that the gorse provided cover for certain men using it for nefarious purposes. The fact that it was also used by a variety of birds for their purposes is of course of lesser importance.

Above the embankment that runs along the southern edge of the Dell area, a horse ride is marked out by the familiar white posts. I'm often asking that acess paths should be managed much better to keep them open, and particularly in Wanstead Park. In the Park, many paths are now almost impassable or indeed have disappeared because of failure to keep them clear of brambles. On 30th September, four tractors were available to mow the embankment, plus the horse ride. The horse ride - also used by pedestrians, of course - was nowhere near overgrown, and plenty wide enough for pedestrians and horses to pass each other comfortably. And yet here was a tractor with grass-cutter attachment mowing down the wild-flowers growing alongside the track. Not bramble - just lightweight attractive flowers!

There does seem to be some anomaly here, or have I just got it all out of proportion?

Paul Ferris, 5 October 2010

Ecological issues with the Wanstead Flats 2012 enclosure proposals

Almost all of us have concerns about the proposals to enclose and use part of Wanstead Flats as a 'Muster, Briefing and Deployment Centre' for the Olympics in 2012. These range from concerns about a variety of pollutions, traffic build-up, local security through to perhaps the biggest of all - a long-term threat to Epping Forest as an unenclosed open space.

In local and national newspapers and at public meetings, these concerns have been expressed and discussed. Amongst these are threats to the environment - including the plants, birds and other animals which might live and use the area, or be disturbed because of the use of the site.

To allay some of these concerns - and presumably because any LRO (Legislative Reform Order) required might not be issued if it could be proved that "significant" harm might result, a habitat survey was commissioned on behalf of the Metropolitan Police Authority. This was undertaken by WSP Environmental Ltd., and is available here as a pdf. file.

From a wildlife point of view, I note that in the Executive Summary of that report, in the third paragraph, it states that "the habitat within the Application Site is not of significant wildlife value and does not provide suitable habitat for protected species." It goes on to say that "measures will be taken to ensure that potential adverse impacts to wildlife are avoided."

Now this is all very well - one would expect that measures would be taken to ensure no harm be done - but it worries me that in effect there is a dismissal of the value of the site as a wildlife habitat, comparison being so readily made to the nearby SSSI. As far as I can ascertain, the SSSI status has been granted because it is an area of acid grassland (rare in the London area) and that the sandy areas are "some of the most important habitats in Epping Forest for rare insects". The City of London's summary of Wanstead Flats mentions threatened birds such as the Skylark and several plants that are rare or uncommon, such as Heather, Mat Grass and Harebell. I shall return to these later.

Reading through the MPA's survey, there are some aspects that disturb me. The most obvious is that the on-site survey by WSP Environmental Ltd. was undertaken on ONE DAY only, and this in NOVEMBER 2009. The survey does begin with the admission that this was in effect a desk study - that is, it collected and referred to data held by "statutory and non-statutory consultees". Those mentioned are the Greenspace Information for Greater London (GIGL) and the National Biodiversity Network Gateway. It is right and proper that these valuable resources were consulted, but I must ask whether the City of London's own database was consulted, and indeed how extensive, comprehensive and up-to-date any of these databases are?

It worries me that within the results of the survey it mentions breeding Skylarks and Rooks and Yellowhammers. With regard the Skylarks, it states that the nearest record relates to 350m N. of the proposed site. There are Skylarks breeding substantially closer than that, but presumably that information is not shown on the databases referred to. As for the Rooks - I have a record of just one:  "on 3rd November 1976, calling as it flew over Wanstead Park." Rooks are not present on Wanstead Flats; there are Carrion Crows, but even an inexperienced bird-watcher should be easily able to distinguish between those species! Yellowhammers have been seen on Wanstead Flats; my records state "Small numbers of up to 3 birds have been seen over the years in the Sewage Works, Wanstead Park or Wanstead Flats.", and I haven't seen one for years. As for the rare or uncommon plants that were mentioned earlier, Heather (Calluna vulgaris) is indeed present on the SSSI to the north of the site in question, and steps have been taken over recent years to increase it. However, this does not explain why some years ago in the laying-down of a drainage ditch near Alexandra Lake, the only patch of heather in that area was destroyed, and this by the Conservators of Epping Forest. Did they not have the information that it was there? Mat Grass (Nardus stricta) on the other hand is quite widely spread over a large area of Wanstead Flats, and the SSSI is not the only area in which it is found; should it not be protected elsewhere, too? As for Harebell (Campanula rotundifolia), very little if any remains on Wanstead Flats - SSSI or not - and the best patch (again near Alexandra Lake) has been allowed to bramble-over. I could mention some other rare plants to the area which are not mentioned specifically in the report, such as Creeping Willow (Salix repens), Longleaf (Falcaria vulgaris) and Petty Whin (Genista anglica). Some of the Creeping Willow is threatened by mowing, more by bramble; Longleaf has been mown virtually out of existence this year, and Petty Whin - one patch of which was actually on the site in question has disappeared with the encroachment of broom. None of these were even mentioned. What is on the site now - does anybody know? I can immediately present Buck's-horn Plantain and Sand Spurrey, which - although neither particularly rare or dramatic - find that environment much to their liking. And what about the mosses and lichens? You see, it can always be argued that something is "not of significant wildlife value", but value to whom or what!!

Now this is worrying; WSP Environmental Ltd. have asked whom they felt relevant to ask for their data, but they didn't ask those people who live here and may have studied the area for years. What records and information have the Conservators of Epping Forest got of the invertebrates that inhabit the proposed site? Do they have records - have they even done a survey - and if so why wasn't it quoted? I suspect that as is so often the case, all of the attention has been given to the "big game" and the SSSI's, and anything or anywhere else just dismissed as "not of significant wildlife value".

The last paragraph of the summary is also cause for concern: "Recommendations for the re-instatement of the ground to a grassland habitat after use have been made. This should include re-seeding with a native grassland seed mix." First of all, the majority of the site could only be referred to as marginally a grassland area. In fact, grass is pretty sparse! But to suggest re-seeding with a "native grassland seed mix" is wrong anyway. What is a native grassland seed mix? What grassland species does it consist of? Are those species representative of those found on Wanstead Flats - or will species be introduced that are not part of the present make-up? When the major water-pipeline project was completed recently, we were told that the disturbed grassland was re-seeded with seeds harvested from nearby and generally similar Leyton Flats. Is this not a more appropriate way of dealing with any necessary re-seeding? In recent months, that same drainage ditch that was responsible for the loss of a patch of heather was partially re-filled. The soil that was used to do this appeared to be almost all sand. The plant species that appeared shortly afterwards included Charlock (Sinapis arvensis) and Green Amaranth (Amaranthus hybridus) - neither of which are native to Wanstead Flats. And this was performed either by or on behalf of the Conservators of Epping Forest - the body which is supposed to be managing, in a knowledgeable way, the Epping Forest environment. It certainly did not ensure that species alien to Wanstead Flats were not accidentally introduced!

Whether or not the Fairground site is used by the Metropolitan Police during the Olympics, from an ecological point of view I have some doubts about the validity of surveys and consultations that are taking place to establish whether it should.

Paul Ferris, 24th September 2010

top

Advertising the Forest ?

Advertising the Forest  - well, no, not really - not at all in this case.

In the midst of all the hoo-ha about setting precedents relating to the proposal to enclose part of Wanstead Flats during the Olympics, I wonder if this might not be setting another precedent?

Commercial advertising on Epping Forest

Capel Road Changing Rooms - Commercial advertising glares out across Wanstead Flats

Paul Ferris, September 16th 2010

Somebody else obviously feels strongly about the advertising - this is the picture on 17th!

Graffiti on 17th September

A case of graffiti graffitied?