Felling of the Duke of Wellington Cedar by The National Trust
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 ก.ย. 2024
- A video message recorded by Jeremy Barrell while the trees were being felled at Kingston Lacy on 20th December 2013, proposing a counter-position to that set out by The National Trust.
![[LIVE] MCHOICE & MINT AWARDS 2024 at TRUE ICON HALL, ICONSIAM](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wMewUeT5nbY/mqdefault.jpg)
Jeremy, I thoroughly agree with what you are saying. Such a shame i i will never be able to see this tree in my life. In my eyes and a lot of other arboriculturalists your are the leading consultant in the UK. I am really glad you posted this. Ian
Jeremy, your a man after my own heart for airing your thoughts and opinions. Your well respected within our industry but you've just gone up a level Mr Barrell! Lets hope landowners such as the NT pause before signing the orders for future large tree removals and maybe, just maybe think outside the box. Well done.
Jeremy, good on you for having the courage to stand up for what you believe in. Not only that, but you hit the nail on the head. Thanks for putting the time and effort to making this video.
Thank you for this video, Jeremy, and for rallying support around this worthy cause.
Thank you for taking the time to bring this video to the worlds attention. I am in total agreement with what you have said. The National Trust seem to be on the whole good at protecting man made things but not so good at protecting natures creations. There is a very large lesson to be learnt from this!
A rare treat to hear something in-depth and well-considered on this topic.
Dear Jeremy, thank you for informing us about this matter. Too often these things pass without further notice. It is unacceptable that expert opinions are falsly quoted to defend premature decisions - especially of that significance to heritage trees. I really hope that your well-put statement will cause the people in charge to rethink their responsibility for trees and the way they deal with the public. Andreas
Thank you all for taking the time to watch this video and commenting. I write to report that soon after this video was posted and the briefing note was published, the National Trust removed its video and it can no longer be viewed.
Interesting to see an assessment like this done overseas. Working with Arlington Cemetery here brought up similar issues of poor decision making, so I sympathize with working with a seemingly omnipotent organization. Thanks for making this.
A well spoken review of the tree and the decision making process, Jeremy. I wish that I could have seen the NT video as well. Your one voice rings clearly enough. Spoken with truth and conviction.
I want to thank you all for such overwhelming support and the high standard of the comments. Of course, it is disappointing to have 6 dislikes so far, but it is a big ask to keep everyone happy!
Just a couple of things I need to clarify. Ben Lloyd posted about whether Mick Boddy got it wrong. I have not seen all the documents, but from what I have seen, Mick Boddy got it absolutely right, advising pruning rather than felling. It seems that The National Trust did not heed that advice.
I also draw out Geoffrey March's experiences, which very much reflect my own. Cedars seem to have remarkable powers of recovery from severe storm damage and heavy pruning, and my view is that this tree could have easily and responsibly been managed in this way.
Thanks again. I will keep you all updated on how this develops.
Jeremy
I’m based in NZ and I can remember visiting this tree and being in awe of its grandeur. I’m shocked that the National Trust has removed such a culturally significant tree, given that it is a charity whose function is to protect historic places and spaces. They appear to have disregarded their responsibility of being custodians of such rare trees.
The National Trust’s website provides the following statement in relation to veteran trees:
“We recognise that veteran (very old) trees have a special place in nature and therefore we undertake a range of simple routines to perpetuate these trees and the species dependent on them. This includes looking at nearby trees that have the potential to become veterans, and ensuring that modern management around them does not compromise their future longevity.”
Was the tree removed in order to alleviate apprehension in relation to legal ramifications of tree failure in a public domain? Modern aboricultural practices appear to have been ignored in favour of old-fashioned opinion.
Can we trust this organisation to manage national heritage assets, given that it refutes expert findings, contrary to its own statement of intent?
What enables the National Trust to operate outside of the considered opinion of highly regarded industry professionals?
String up those national trust directors....sadly, not from the Wellington tree.
Superb video Jeremy - you are not a lone voice, this incredible veteran tree was clearly lost to our throwaway, litigious society. Keep up the good work
You are absolutely right Jeremy, there are ALWAYS options to felling in order to manage trees that have such a rich historical context. Strange that they didn't weigh that historical context and give it much more significance.
Thanks for posting this video and being willing to stick your head above the parapet. It's a shame the NT video has been removed as I would have liked to have heard their view.
Very Interesting video Jeremy, as a former NT employee most of the decisions made on tree safety as i'm sure you will be aware is all made on liability & risk rather than retention and I have been actively encouraged to remove trees that with time and money could be retained long term but the NT dont wish to carry that risk so we have to continue to lose trees it was really sad and was part of the reason is left NT finally. Its shame what happened and i hope they move forward and learn from this. Thanks again for the Video.
Jeremy, firstly thank you for taking the time to give the world your professional and personal opinion, and an informative account of events in the removal of this magnificent heritage tree.
Although its to late to save this tree, your film certainly hasn't been made vain and I'm sure the National trust will go the extra mile when contemplating the removal of a tree the slightest bit as important in the future. I'm sure its a shock to most that the National trust didn't go to great lengths to carry out hazard/preventative pruning rather than the removal as I thought thats what the trust was all about.
I'll help spread your message where I can.
Thanks, Dan
Well done Jeremy without people standing up in such situations they do go relatively unheard. I like the controlled precision of your comments and knowing of your work and that of Symbiosis its hard to think why the NT would proceed with the felling despite both their report and your input.It would be nice to know who within the NT actually took the decision and signed the instruction to fell as they seem to have scant regard for the experts they employ.Keep it up 6 dislikes or not
Well said Jeremy... I have shared all over... of course I had a similar problem at Chirk Castle when I highlighted a mature Beech tree that was felled and in fact had been surveyed and recommended for trimming...but no where near as special as this great tree... I was due to do some work for them but this was cancelled after I highlighted the felling!
Jeremy, many repeated words, but like all that have watched and followed this case, its with great sadness that yet again the National Trust (custodians of our nations treasures) have wobbly knees. So sad that they cannot make a calculated management decision over such an important asset, (Dunham Massey) all over again where many trees were worked upon or felled unnecessarily. Keep up the good work and best wishes..
Jeremy, having seen your presentation in West Vancouver, Canada about a year ago, I was so inspired to see how some of the tree preservation was carried out in England and am sad for your country, and for all of us that appreciate those grand masters. It appears that despite good policies it still boils down to someone spinning a report to suit what they wanted in the first place. Very sad to see any tree on earth of that stature go down with a thump.
And by the way, it is possible that the dislikes to your video may not be a dislike to what you have presented, but rather a dislike to what they saw behind your shoulder.
Jeremy, a very informative video and i agree with your views. It is a sad precedent for such a significant tree to have been removed on the questionable grounds. That you stake your professional integrity on your statements is admirable. Rather than measuring dislikes as a means for support for this campaign, i think TH-cam users are confused and 'liking' your video for its content. I suggest it would be accurate to add both likes and dislikes for your video as support for the campaign in general.
Perhaps the saying should go "If a tree falls in the woods, do beaurocrats care?"
Good luck with your campaign
After reading a lot more about this, I think your spot on Jeremy.
Sadly this pretty much sums up the approach a lot of organisations take to veteran trees. It seems that our risk averse culture is having a direct impact on the preservation of some of our most ancient and historic living monuments, and raising awareness of this is so important. Keep on sticking your head above the parapet!
I understand how Jeremy feels about the loss of great old trees.The bottom of the river nevis in Fort William,Scotland in the 1970s was diverted and is now an eyesore,it was a beautiful meandering river going into Loch Linnhe but now its a retail park,what a huge loss to Fort William of a beautiful natural feature.Before heavy industry rivers were built around and incorporated into the natural surroundings of many towns and cities which also contributes to the social,spiritual,physical wellbeing of people and to the balance of the natural energy flow of the environment.
Very well reasoned argument. Thank you for sharing information on this very sad state of affairs.
Nice video Jeremy, only just caught this one. I agree with everything you say, and am not surprised by the National trusts incompetence in this matter, and its long overdue they got some heat.
Hi Jeremy. I completely agree with you and the information put forward. I myself have seen that tree many times and it is indeed a very sad affair. I would have to question the the national trust's ability to make any further decisions regarding tree welfare. But also would the Contractor who carried out the work not have questioned the decision. ? And also as such a historical tree would it have not been better to have had two indipendent survey reports carried out. Or would I be syndicalist in saying maybe there was a hidden agenda. Regards will hopper.
Thank you for doing this Jeremy, I know only too well how sad and angry this will have made you. It is so important that when decisions like this are made without any real substantive justification that those in positions to highlight the serious flaws do so. As you say in the video nothing can be done about the loss of this iconic British treasure but there are options for those who share your frustration. It does not take long to write an email (or even a letter!) expressing the very real concerns over such a disproportionate and unbalanced decision making process. Thanks again Jeremy.
This is a massive loss to the ancient trees of Great Britain. I was truly shocked when i heard about this happening, the trees should never of been felled it was iconic symbol for this site
Its about time all the members of the National Trust really think about what could have provoked such a violent act against nature, and ask yourself?
If this had been one of their prestigious listed buildings and a recent building report had recorded it has small amount of subsidence and then the powers that be had decided to bulldozer what do you think would've happened. I bet NOTHING as the media and public would have gone bananas.
Done let the National trust keep bulldozing trees and carelessness carry on, Click the like button and share to the world.
Hi Jeremy
We have had several events in Australia recently that mirror similar extremely poor decision making processes, the one that stands out to me is the advice given by a Horticulturalist employed by the Victorian National Trust to lop the Morton Bay Fig in Swan Hill, Victoria planted by Burke and Wills, just poor unfounded advice.
In regard to the tree in this video, I visited this site recently, and actually looked at this tree with you, we discussed the trees health and structural soundness on that day and concluded from our brief visual assessment the tree was in good health and condition. What is further worrying is I have seen the Sonic Tomograph test result for this tree in one of the news articles, and just from the test result you can see it has provided a false reading. To further support this the technician has not used enough measuring sensors for the size of the tree, they should have had them place at around 30 cm spacing for best results on a tree of this size, 50 cm spacings to meet manufactures specifications. Further I noted the test was completed using the ellipse format of measurement, this method can be up to 40% incorrect in most cases. The technician should of used the free style measurement method and would of gained much higher accuracy, and if the correct number of sensors were used the test result would of pushed up to around 95% accurate on a tree this size. Cannot believe someone is using such a powerful tool incorrectly.
It appears from what I have read in the news and watching your video someone made a decision and was unwilling to admit the decision was wrong and to save their face sacrificed a structurally sound healthy tree instead of themselves.
Jeremy, Thank you for standing by your very Proffessional creddentials, Not only are you a great motivational speaker, (I have seen n heard you many times at various Conferances, Workshops etc) but a champion for very important Tree's. Shame on you NT, its about time the NT should be stripped off of looking after Nationaly important tree's, woodlands, n put people who actually care in charge, the RFS for example..
As a fellow registered tree consultant (albeit recently retired) I too inspected and pronounced on many mature cedar trees for over 30 years. There is always an alternative to felling and indeed the option of bringing safety into acceptable limits had been successfully used before for this very tree (by skilfully reducing the overall size, thereby reducing the stresses of wind and snow). Some years ago I condemned a large mature cedar in a much more critical position than this tree (being over school grounds and paths, a public pavement and by a busy road), due to severe snow damage. However I gave what I felt was a rather poor alternative, to reduce the tree substantially. This option was taken and, although initially the result was quite poor visually, I am pleased to say the tree has regrown well and remains in situ some 15 years later. Clearly a similar course of action COULD have been taken with this tree - and judging by the 'before' photo, the appearance would have been very acceptable. And with the decay confined more or less to the centre of the trunk, prospects for the future would have been good. For an important heritage tree, clearly this should have been the right course of action.
Geoffrey March
Hi. Great that you've brought this to everyone's attention though it's really sad that the deadly deed has already been done. Not sure though whether is was one of the biggest in the country - have seen some whoppers through work as a tree surgeon and exploring. Did the NT explore other means of testing? Why a reduction wasn't the way to go seems puzzling? Typical NT thinking they know best. I worked for them for 10 years as an arborist and there were some decisions made where I worked which left a horrible taste in my mouth!
Good video sir. I have to agree with you wholeheartedly
Well said Jeremy, what a shame.
All the stops should have been pulled out for such an important tree.
I absolutely agree. Unfortunately the wide appeal of the Sonic Tomograph (Picus) often leads to trees being wrongly removed. My ten years worth of experience with Picus and other forms of decay detection kit have taught me to cross-check the results if they seem suspect, and they often do in certain species; conifers in particular can through up false readings.
I agree totally with Jeremy but I think the NT are taking the easy option and relieving them of any potential litigation. I am sure Ted Green would muscle in on this one and offer suggestions of making tree safe in terms of visitors ie fencing off.
I am not sure that this was one of the top 5 cedars in the UK as I see many others around the UK in my travels. Go to Goodwood and West Dean Gardens near Chichester and you will see equally big trees but not sure of age.
It rather looks as we are going to have to fight to save our heritage trees where public have access.
Would be interesting to see the tomograph.
Thats a shame (re: NT video), was looking for it today. Well done Jeremy, I echo Paul's comments below.
It seems that the National Trust have made this decision on the sole basis that, I quote “"The trust has said that the proposed alternative of branch pruning would have been problematic and would have left the tree aesthetically unappealing.” It is more aesthetically unpleasing to have no tree there and a reduced tree would have looked better, thus keeping all that lost history, cultural importance, public connectivity, scientific source for research etc. The very last resort should be to fell trees let alone ones that are invaluable to the UK and the world. Could there not of been a continued crown reduction program for the tree and constant monitoring of the health of the tree? How many independent professional Arboricultural tree consultants did they seek for a full tree inspection to determine the action to take? Was there only a report from Symbiosis? and from what they said the tree was in good condition for its age! Symbiosis is one of the top tree consultants in the county! Furthermore the national trust expert inspected the decay on the roots and there was none! This begs the question what has really gone on here? Bad decision? Ignorance? Are they building there? Etc.
We should be thinking seriously about what has happened here and also asking questions directly the National Trust as to why they have destroyed such a precious, timeless and irreplaceable tree when there was obviously and alternative!
There needs to be more protection for ancient trees! Also, more of an input from professionals in the tree community! when decisions of this magnitude are to made!
This should not of happened! Let’s take this as a sad lesson for the future!
Sources: www.barrelltreecare.co.uk/pdfs/BTC88-BriefingNote-Complete-080114.pdf
www.demotix.com/news/3542719/duke-wellingtons-cedar-tree-felled-kingston-lacy-dorset/all-media
www.ntsouthwest.co.uk/2014/01/duke-of-wellingtons-tree-at-kingston-lacy/
Wise words Jeremy. A great shame....
The sound of the power saws in the background of your video didn't sound like decayed wood was being cut!!!!
Was the decision to fell made at local, regional or national level? By an individual, or team or committee? What if anything do you feel can be done to encourage whoever is responsible to re-examine the decision making process and policies in the Trusts' management so in future there is effective and accountable action instead of what amounts to irresponsible, ignorant and negligent behaviour.
On numerous occasions in my arboricultural career i have made recommendations on tree management that take into account the remit of the client but also the pretext of Alex Shigos work in providing, "Better ways to make trees healthy, safe and attractive"
Very unfortunate set of events and thanks for highlighting the fiasco.
"...there goes another one I'm afraid."
Some very thought provoking comments. Such a shame someone made aknee jerk decision.
Have you got a facebook page?
What a shame, Good on you Jeremy
Wonder if the National Trust will see a reduction in membership after this poor decision. Seems they ignored the advice given in the report.
This is shocking! It seems to me more and more that the National Trust only care about heritage if that heritage happens to be a stately home or the appearance of a landscaped garden.
Would love to see photos of the pertinent cross sections showing the intact rind to illustrate the various weak points. It's interesting how the consultant changes hats & doesn't look back. th-cam.com/video/qk5rC8TJfgs/w-d-xo.html
There are usually two 2 sides to every story, but at best the NT need to learn lessons on how to improve their communications and public relations, at worst a heritage tree has been needlessly lost.
Absolute travesty and lost to us all !
Unfortunately this type of crass ignorance is all to familiar. When new housing is built for instance, any trees which 'spoil' the max house number in the given area are doomed. Why can't local council planning depts. stop this destruction in new developments as a starter .
Synical
National Trust? More like too much trust in a national institute that has lost its focus through squiffy management priorities and a lack of good sense! Good work from Jeremy though. It's a shame that the idiot decision maker who gave the go ahead for the felling is probably still in their current job, methinks that person would be better suited to pavement licking or something else that doesn't involve anything too tricky like understanding a report. On a more serious note, the decision maker, just plain stupid or was there something to gain from the felling that I've missed? I wonder where the wood from the Duke of Wellington Cedar will end up. . . . . .