Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Felling of ancient trees planned in Ally Pally Park
This from Anastasia Christofis in our inbox this evening:
Two old oak trees in Alexandra Park are destined for the chop (see pics). The one in The Grove has a diameter of 4-5 feet. This tree was one of the boundary markers of The Grove Estate in the 18th century with Tottenham Wood. I don’t know the time scale of this.
Apparently there has been a tree survey done but no one has seen it as it has not been made public.
The Park Manager/Planners, I am told (on the grapevine) have apparently nodded it through on the basis of this survey without any further planning application/consultations/wider consent as is now becoming common practice in the Grove Historic gardens and other areas of the Palace (as you know, it is Conservation Area, subject to Local and National Legislative frameworks with regard to Conservation/Biodiversity, amongst other things and on the Charity Trust land with buildings of the People of London and of interest to me and others as such, so much so in fact some people are up in arms about it already, amongst other things, which is how I have got wind of it).
BBC’s Springwatch scientists recently found rare protected beetles nesting and rare fungi in Alexandra Park which like to live in old ancient woodland trees and decayed wood.
More importantly, can you please help me to find out more about who in this Borough is responsible for safeguarding/protecting these trees and where to obtain copy of this Tree Survey
The Stag Beetles are not the only rare species to be found nesting amongst the rare Bolitius Fungus at Alexandra Palace. There are many other rare species that are reliant and a part of the biodiversity of this area and as a rare old bird, like many of you, I consider myself to be one of them, though no less unconsidered in the past than the recently rediscovered varieties.
I would like to be reassured that our oxygen levels will not be further diminished in this area of poor air quality (Haringey) by the unnecessary culling of trees.
Can somebody get back to me on this and help to put a stop to it in principle (genuine safety considerations excepted, like if a tree is actually caught or threatening vandalism in the park or GBH/ABH, for example) and hopefully copy of the Tree Survey should confirm this.
Those of you interested in this story may also be interested in the Tree Trust for Haringey.
Tags for Forum Posts: alexandra park, parks, trees
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by james walsh on
-
Thanks clive, we've now gone 360 degrees and are back where we started. Reminds me of the old telephone comedy routine: 'what ?' 'yes it's hot' 'yes i would do' 'you do voodoo?' 'who do voodoo'... .. . etc etc etc
-
-
-
The Park Manager has just released the data about these trees. There are three, two Oaks and one Poplar.
There are alternatives. Two can be saved and observed, only one, according to the arboriculturalists report, actually needs to be felled to ground level. This one is also between two other large trees and is by the playground.
One by the boating lake cafe can be saved entirely by pollarding and observing.
The one in the Grove can be reduced to a totem or monolith so does NOT need felling to ground level.
All the arboriculturalists reports are based on ground level observation and measurements from a 'sonic decay detector'. They also stated that they did not know whether the trees were subject to a tree preservation order which worried me.
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on
-
When last year I attended the AGM of the Haringey Tree Trust, I was pleased to see the general level of interest in trees. We need more of them, but they need to be healthy and not a danger.
—Hugger of Safe Trees
The reports to which Susan refers: - Attachments:
-
Permalink Reply by Omotn on
-
What superb reports. At least as good as anything I have ever had back from the NHS.
My vote (if a Daily Mail / Fox fan is allowed one) for the only case that seems to be in doubt (monolith or fell 973 Oak) would be to fell rather than leave a travesty of a tree.
To Susan C - I guess "Daily Mail / Fox fan" is intended as an insult, which as it happens is gratuitous, inaccurate and completely out of place. I think if you read carefully, Far from dismissing her, what I did was to reiterate Ana's questions, which have now been answered. I don't know wher the Park manager makes these available but thanks to you and Clive for making the info available.
-
-
Thank you for all the comments, it is good to know there are people out there who really care about trees and a really big thank you to all of you who were able to work behind the scenes to help save the lives of these magnificent oak specimens, at least for another month.
Yes, we have a stay of execution, with kind permission from the General Manager of the Alexandra Palace Charitable Trust, Andrew Gill, pending a second opinion to explore the alternative options for sustainable tree management. A very big round of applause to all.
We may not be able to save these trees indefinitely for the reasons you have all outlined and in large part due to our own infringement on the trees breathing space with paths and playareas (remember they were here before this current generation of 'us') but we have gained time.
Two of the trees were earmarked to be felled to the ground this coming Wednesday.
At least now we have a whole month to explore more sustainable alternatives to felling, if there are any and to think about the merits of applying for more Tree Preservation Orders where possible/relevant in the park/s to give our much loved old trees all the protection they deserve.
Yes trees can be dangerous, just like the wind, rain and mostly benign Haringey residents, sometimes they bite back.
Well done all.
Now about the Londoners 'grapevine' I also mentioned, the one with tendrils that reaches to the four corners of our globe....
...No, that is definitely not due to be cut down any time soon and will prevail because it is not just any kind of dried up old beanstork that can be snipped at the root or felled to the ground but the original virtual vine and as such will always remain in earshot under very close protection.
If it wasn't for our Great Vine (..more properly known as,) what would we know about the plight of our old Oaks?
Yes it can be said on this occasion, 'we heard it through the Great Vine' and were able to do something about it.... in time.
What more could we ask for than a short stay of execution to explore reason.
Thanks and praise for small mercies...... Much love to all, xx
-
-
anastasia* thanks for your very dignified post. London trees are the lungs of our city
-
-
That's a great bit of news to wake up to.
Well done to all who fought the fight.
This deserves an article in a newspaper, any one will do!
-
Permalink Reply by Liz on
-
Are the Tree trust going to take part in the NHM's Urban Tree Survey, does anyone know?
-
-
Don't know the answer to that Liz. For my part, I'd be interested to know from the AP Park managers if they have plans to plant more trees in Haringey's biggest park – and if not, why not?!
It seems that in the council, there's no natural defence of open space (or parks), the pressure is always to infill. There's no money in parks. Meanwhile, the pressure from developers is relentless.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
Sometimes, I think you have a touch of Jekyll and Hyde. Because Dr Clive can write comments based on facts and fair careful inquiry. While Mr Carter makes sweeping angry assertions based on . . . what?
Mr Carter: Grr! No money in parks! Pressure from developers relentless. Pressure always to infill. Harrumph!
So can I suggest that Dr Clive considers the evidence about Haringey's investment in Parks. With achievements such as the Green Flag Parks.
Of course I'm not saying everything is perfect. For example, I'm often critical of the Council's maintenance of street flowerbeds. In my local Down Lane Park it is unacceptable that the interests of property developers in the so-called 'Hale Village' have taken precedence over the needs of local residents elsewhere.
Perhaps Dr Clive can discover from Mr Carter which parks have been subject to "infill". The only one I can think of is the former pocket-park in Rangemoor Road N15 - which I highlighted and protested about in 2003.
Have Ally Pally Park managers plans to plant more trees in the Park? Perhaps Dr Clive can calmly ask them?
(Tottenham Hale ward councillor)
-
-
Alan I am sure your misinterpretion of what I said is accidental rather than wilful!
When I said there's no money in parks, what I meant was that parks do not generate an income (rather than that no money is spent on them). This, in distinction to property development where buildings generate either commercial or domestic rental income.
The pressure from property developers to build on vacant land is relentless. I had in mind the huge over-development behind the Grade II STAR listed Hornsey Town Hall which is to be thrown up on open space and recently approved (by the council itself, of course). That open space is currently an underused council car-park that could either become a public car-park or a green park with trees on it.
The case with which you are most familiar was of course the council's intention to develop over approximately one third of Down Lane Park. This is a public park in your back yard! Where do these madcap schemes come from? Thankfully that particular attempt at infill has now been abandoned. No thanks to the council and every thanks to community action. I accept that this was a rare example of extreme council madness.
Alexandra Palace have considered/are considering selling of bits of the edges of our park. Historically, this has happened on a large scale, so it little surprise. This park (and my local park, Finsbury) are both looking pretty good currently, thanks in large measure to infusion of Lottery money.
The pressure remains on so-called 'back-lands' for infilling.
I have seen how cozy some developers are to the council (or at least, to some councillors). I think you know this yourself, as your fascinating Flickr blog discloses.
The point I make is that the council sees parks as just a cost because they produce no income. There is accordingly, no powerful advocacy for parks within the council. I would like to belive otherwise and I would love to see you produce evidence to disprove my mere assertion!
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
