Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Looks like they’ve cut down trees

59 replies

AllrightNowBaby · 02/04/2025 16:25

AIBU to pursue this issue?
During the Summer I walk my dog around a nearby wood.
This weekend I was shocked to see a very large area, behind two houses backing onto the wood, had been decimated of trees,
After speaking to other dog walkers, someone had seen men cutting the trees during Winter and they thought it odd as obviously not council workers.
The wood is looked after by the Parks and Gardens dept, so I reported it to them.
They took some notes and told me they’d get back to me but haven’t done.
I feel I should take this further, as it’s obviously the residents of the two houses who have wantonly destroyed 10 mature trees, leaving a very obvious and odd square of tree stumps, huge logs and huge mounds of wood chips.
I think this must be criminal damage to destroy trees on land not belonging to you.
I’m thinking of reporting to the Parish Council and if no joy from them, the local MP.
Has anyone any other suggestions?

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Original poster
AllrightNowBaby · 13/04/2025 12:01

TizerorFizz · 11/04/2025 22:05

I live nearish to HS2 around 30 miles out of London. Trees? What trees? This is what it’s like near my village.

Horrific scar on the landscape and thousands of beautiful trees destroyed…
and for what???
Just half an hour quicker journey between London and Birmingham.
It was supposed to be from London to Manchester but it’s costing so much money, they can’t afford it any more.
So, a bloody waste of time and a huge blot on the landscape for nothing.

OP posts:
TizerorFizz · 11/04/2025 22:05

I live nearish to HS2 around 30 miles out of London. Trees? What trees? This is what it’s like near my village.

Looks like they’ve cut down trees
Looks like they’ve cut down trees
Looks like they’ve cut down trees
Original poster
AllrightNowBaby · 11/04/2025 14:50

Soontobe60 · 11/04/2025 13:14

I live nearby part of the route - 1000’s of trees have been planted over the past 8 years I have been living here - the woodland near me has been extended by quite a considerable amount.

Show quote history

That’s good news 😊

OP posts:
Soontobe60 · 11/04/2025 13:14

AllrightNowBaby · 11/04/2025 00:03

Absolutely heartbreaking, the wanton destruction of thousands of trees just for trains which are supposedly going to make a journey from London to Manchester half an hour quicker.
And don’t get me started on the Drax bio-mass stupidity and lies…

Show quote history

I live nearby part of the route - 1000’s of trees have been planted over the past 8 years I have been living here - the woodland near me has been extended by quite a considerable amount.

Original poster
AllrightNowBaby · 11/04/2025 13:08

SeaShellsSanctuary1 · 11/04/2025 12:25

It would be good to hold your fuming until you've established who cut them down and why.

What is the point in getting angry about an assumption

Show quote history

I’m fuming because some entitled bastards have destroyed 9 beautiful mature trees, shrubs and vegetation in my local wood.
Destroying wild life habitat and causing over £100,000 of criminal damage to the wood.
I think most of you on here would be slightly pissed off if someone came and destroyed your garden, even if you couldn’t prove who had done it, this situation is just the same.

OP posts:
Original poster
AllrightNowBaby · 11/04/2025 12:58

FoxedByACat · 11/04/2025 12:35

If they were big trees it's unlikely the home owners have personally done it though they may have employed tree surgeons to do it. Though you'd think a proper tree surgeon would be checking ownership. The council need to be asking round local tree surgeons and find out who paid who to do it. Though maybe the tree surgeon wouldn't admit to anything in case they got in trouble too??

Exactly!
He said it would have cost well over £2,000 to have this done but I suppose money talks and some unscrupulous firm has done it.

OP posts:
FoxedByACat · 11/04/2025 12:35

If they were big trees it's unlikely the home owners have personally done it though they may have employed tree surgeons to do it. Though you'd think a proper tree surgeon would be checking ownership. The council need to be asking round local tree surgeons and find out who paid who to do it. Though maybe the tree surgeon wouldn't admit to anything in case they got in trouble too??

SeaShellsSanctuary1 · 11/04/2025 12:25

AllrightNowBaby · 02/04/2025 17:03

Thanks for advice heldinadream, I’m absolutely fuming.
Other dog walkers I’ve mentioned it to have been pretty apathetic, some shrugging and saying that it must have put shade on their gardens.
I replied, then they shouldn’t buy a house with a wood behind, if the trees annoy them so much they can move….. but what you don’t do is cut down ten healthy trees which don’t belong to you, ruining it for wildlife and all the rest of us.

Show quote history

It would be good to hold your fuming until you've established who cut them down and why.

What is the point in getting angry about an assumption

TheFenceIsInTheAltogether · 11/04/2025 12:24

AllrightNowBaby · 11/04/2025 12:20

The area is going to be replanted with trees and the Trees and Woods dept would be consulted by planning for any garden extension into the wood.
As it would be a newly planted area, they would not be able to extend 😊

Show quote history

Consulted doesn't mean he can single handedly block things. He's definitely unprofessional and over reaching.

I think it's highly unlikely that they would suddenly be able to purchase the land but this is not under the remit of an arborist!

Original poster
AllrightNowBaby · 11/04/2025 12:20

TheFenceIsInTheAltogether · 11/04/2025 10:47

And he's not in any position to do it either, unless he's also in charge of planning...

Show quote history

The area is going to be replanted with trees and the Trees and Woods dept would be consulted by planning for any garden extension into the wood.
As it would be a newly planted area, they would not be able to extend 😊

OP posts:
TheFenceIsInTheAltogether · 11/04/2025 10:47

CountryQueen · 11/04/2025 10:41

Exactly. He’s gossiping and that’s completely unprofessional, as is his claim that he will be blocking any future planning applications from those addresses. That’s absolutely ludicrous and completely against any planning policies.

Show quote history

And he's not in any position to do it either, unless he's also in charge of planning...

CountryQueen · 11/04/2025 10:42

AllrightNowBaby · 11/04/2025 10:31

It wouldn’t take a brain surgeon to work out who the culprits are and the arborist is entitled to his opinion on who he thinks did this damage.

Show quote history

He’s not entitled to start gossiping about it with you though!

CountryQueen · 11/04/2025 10:41

Dotjones · 11/04/2025 10:27

I think they meant that it's unprofessional behaviour to effectively tell a member of the public (you) that the people who own the houses are probably the guilty parties when by their own admission the police have no proof this is the case.

It's a separate issue to whether whoever cut the trees down was justified or not. (They weren't by the sound of it.) A professional person doesn't make unproven allegations to a third party not directly connected with the case. If the arborist is a professional person they'd pass on any evidence or opinions to the police, not to random people like you.

It's the equivalent of you reporting someone to social services because you think he's abusing his kids, and then them telling you that "he's probably a paedo" but there's no evidence of any wrongdoing.

Exactly. He’s gossiping and that’s completely unprofessional, as is his claim that he will be blocking any future planning applications from those addresses. That’s absolutely ludicrous and completely against any planning policies.

FOJN · 11/04/2025 10:40

AllrightNowBaby · 11/04/2025 10:31

It wouldn’t take a brain surgeon to work out who the culprits are and the arborist is entitled to his opinion on who he thinks did this damage.

Show quote history

You and the arborist can hold an opinion but I think you should be very careful about accusing people without evidence.

I also think he's been reckless and unprofessional in identifying who he thinks is responsible without proof. If you don't want to get him into trouble I'd be careful not to repeat what he said to you.

You've done all you can, now you need to let the police do their job.

Original poster
AllrightNowBaby · 11/04/2025 10:33

rwalker · 11/04/2025 10:29

Even if they weren’t our council contracts a lot of this work out

Show quote history

Because the council arborist has told me that it was not done by the council or by anyone employed by the council.

OP posts:
Original poster
AllrightNowBaby · 11/04/2025 10:31

Dotjones · 11/04/2025 10:27

I think they meant that it's unprofessional behaviour to effectively tell a member of the public (you) that the people who own the houses are probably the guilty parties when by their own admission the police have no proof this is the case.

It's a separate issue to whether whoever cut the trees down was justified or not. (They weren't by the sound of it.) A professional person doesn't make unproven allegations to a third party not directly connected with the case. If the arborist is a professional person they'd pass on any evidence or opinions to the police, not to random people like you.

It's the equivalent of you reporting someone to social services because you think he's abusing his kids, and then them telling you that "he's probably a paedo" but there's no evidence of any wrongdoing.

It wouldn’t take a brain surgeon to work out who the culprits are and the arborist is entitled to his opinion on who he thinks did this damage.

OP posts:
rwalker · 11/04/2025 10:29

breakfastdinnerandtea · 02/04/2025 16:54

How do they know they were definitely not council workers?

Even if they weren’t our council contracts a lot of this work out

Original poster
AllrightNowBaby · 11/04/2025 10:28

Above reply to maddening

OP posts:
Dotjones · 11/04/2025 10:27

I think they meant that it's unprofessional behaviour to effectively tell a member of the public (you) that the people who own the houses are probably the guilty parties when by their own admission the police have no proof this is the case.

It's a separate issue to whether whoever cut the trees down was justified or not. (They weren't by the sound of it.) A professional person doesn't make unproven allegations to a third party not directly connected with the case. If the arborist is a professional person they'd pass on any evidence or opinions to the police, not to random people like you.

It's the equivalent of you reporting someone to social services because you think he's abusing his kids, and then them telling you that "he's probably a paedo" but there's no evidence of any wrongdoing.

Original poster
AllrightNowBaby · 11/04/2025 10:24

Still not allowed to cut down trees on someone else’s property (I.e. council property).
Also nine trees in one small area are very unlikely to have become dangerous all at the same time.

OP posts:
Original poster
AllrightNowBaby · 11/04/2025 10:19

CountryQueen · 11/04/2025 01:27

He sounds completely unprofessional!

Show quote history

He was a professional arborist.

OP posts:
CountryQueen · 11/04/2025 01:27

AllrightNowBaby · 10/04/2025 18:31

Update:
The Arborist from the council called me and told me that they are already aware of the trees being demolished.
They have reported the matter to the police and estimate there has been £100k of criminal damage to council property.
He told me it didn’t take a brain surgeon to know who was responsible but the police have no actual proof and on making enquiries with neighbours, apparently no one knows anything.
He says he thinks the two house might want to extend their gardens by applying to rent this now devastated land off the council..but he is going to block any applications from them if they try.
I’ve emailed a councillor who I know has strong connections to this area asking his to chase up the police and am waiting for a reply.
I’ve also got Friends of local parks onboard and hopefully they can carry this forward.

He sounds completely unprofessional!

maddening · 11/04/2025 01:00

Could it be from the heavy winds late last year/early this year? If a couple of.big trees were dangerous perhaps they cleared those that risked falling on their homes?

TizerorFizz · 11/04/2025 00:06

They are not going to Manchester. Just Birmingham. It’s a total waste of money and huge destruction of habitats.

Original poster
AllrightNowBaby · 11/04/2025 00:03

Theoldwrinkley · 10/04/2025 19:01

Well done you for taking notice and taking action. Round here we have the total destruction of HS2. The acres (square miles) of treeless desert is more than upsetting. I think of the migratory birds who left these shores last year, and are returning to treeless, ravaged, deserts of nothingness. And what for?
I think in general people don't realise it takes a lot of human generations to see the maturity of one tree. So sad. And of course our loss of trees is legal, so nothing we can do.

Show quote history

Absolutely heartbreaking, the wanton destruction of thousands of trees just for trains which are supposedly going to make a journey from London to Manchester half an hour quicker.
And don’t get me started on the Drax bio-mass stupidity and lies…

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread