Latest news with #tree
The Sun
a day ago
- General
- The Sun
Huge ‘Jack & the Beanstalk' tree towers over our homes – it's grotesque & irresponsible… but council won't chop it down
A GIANT "Jack and the beanstalk" tree is ruining locals' lives - but the council won't chop it down. Residents in Winchester, Hants, slammed the "grotesquely irresponsible" and "ludicrous" 45 foot high oak. 9 9 9 They say the tree was planted around 50 years ago by a previous homeowner on Canon Street who just "wanted something to do". But now it has branched into an "out of proportion" eyesore which overshadows the gardens of nearby properties - where the average house price is more than £600,000. However, the council have refused to cut it down and placed it under a protection order. The authorities said residents from a neighbouring street "appreciated" the tree. The decision has sparked outrage among locals who are actually dealing with the daily repercussions of such an overwhelming tree. Orla Williams, 40, moved into her terraced Grade II Listed home with her partner around two years ago. The doctor said after moving in, several residents went to her about the oak. She explained: "They were concerned that it is getting very large and that it could cause damage to their properties and potentially harm to people if it gets any larger, so they wanted it to be taken down. "We applied to the council to have it removed and someone came to look at it. "[The tree officer] said that they want to put a tree protection order on it." The mum-of-two also told how an "awful lot of detritus" falls from the tree in autumn and winter. She added: "We appreciate that the tree is beautiful but it's the wrong tree in the wrong place. "It is quite sad to remove something like that but it is only going to get bigger and potentially cause damage to lots of properties which is the main concern. "The council said they were concerned about removing it because it's one of the only trees in the area. 9 9 9 "All of the local residents seem to be of the opinion that unfortunately, it's the wrong tree in the wrong place." According to a council report, the tree officer visited Orla after receiving notice from the couple that it was due to be felled. But he found the tree met the criteria for a provisional protection order, which was issued in February of this year. A Winchester County Council meeting will take place next week to decide whether the tree status will change or not. There are nine residents in total who have objected to the order. Mark Pocock, a retired resident living on Canon Street, slammed the council's decision to protect the tree as "ludicrous". He said: 'As trees grow older they become more brittle. "If it were to fall and damage properties or persons, I would say the responsibility would be entirely with the council – not the owners of those properties. "I think putting a tree protection order on is grotesquely irresponsible of the council. 'It could be a danger to property and life." Nick Goff, 80, said he fears if the tree continues to grow, the roots underneath will damage a medieval wall in his garden, which was built in the Tudor era. The retired British Airways pilot said: "The issue is that in 10 years time, that will be double the height and double the width. 'It put on six feet last year it it's going to put on another six feet this year." He commissioned an independent report from a tree consultancy business. The report stated while the tree, which is still a "teenager" is in "good physiological condition". But the officer also found it is "a large sized tree in a very small area" and so the tree protection order is "unjustified". The report also stated "the possibility of longer term damage to the retaining walls and footings of the adjacent properties as entirely foreseeable". "Some guy planted this as something to do 40 years ago," Mr Goff continued "Now, we have got Jack and the Beanstalk. "It's not a historic tree – it's a silly mistake." However, the council report issued ahead of next week's meeting claimed these concerns were "speculative" and the tree "contributes meaningfully to local biodiversity and visual amenity". It added: "It is also the last significant tree in an area of land between Canon Street and St Swithun's Street, enhancing the character of the conservation area." Retired resident Graham Rule, 62, blasted the decision as "irresponsible". He said: "We all love trees but that shouldn't be there. "The people who want the protection order, they don't live here – its totally irresponsible." Winchester County Council was contacted for comment. 9 9 9
Daily Mail
16-05-2025
- General
- Daily Mail
Warring neighbours spend ten years feuding over a tree that blocks the sun out of one's garden... So, who do YOU think is in the right?
A pair of neighbours are embroiled in a ten year feud because a tree in one's garden is blocking the sun out of the others. With sunnier days fast approaching, most UK citizens are looking forward to enjoying some much-appreciated vitamin D. However, for one unlucky Briton, the prospect of sunbathing in their garden is looking slim due to their neighbour's tree preventing sunlight from entering their garden at certain points of the day. An anonymous UK-based TikTok user has created a profile on the platform under @shadyneighbourtree to reveal the dilemma, which has been ongoing for the past ten years. 'My neighbour's tree doing its best to keep my garden a secret,' the user wrote, adding, 'We need some sun!' Initially, the video attracted countless comments telling viewers to ask the neighbour to trim the tree. However, they explained that their attempts to request the change have gone unsuccessfully. 'Yes, I have asked my neighbour to trim the tree (not chop it down). [I] just want to soak up some sun like they do in their shadeless garden,' they wrote. Another viewer pointed out that the shade moves throughout the day, but the frustrated TikTok user explained, 'This is very true... but its shade when I get home from work and [I] want to enjoy the sun'. The dilemma divided viewers in the comment section, with many conflicted over the best course of action. One wrote, 'Roots may go under the fence, move some dirt, drill hole, pour in stuff trees don't like, fill for a friend, just saying.' Another with a similar perspective joked, 'I'd be paying someone with no name cash in hand'. A third added, 'Garden trees should be kept at a certain height even just for safety. What if it fell in a storm caused damage or injury? It's inconsiderate, blocking all the light and the leaves that would fall in autumn would be a nightmare to keep tidy.' However, others thought differently. One said, 'This is on you. Fed up with people thinking they have a say in other people's property and want to cut everything down. That tree has been for there years and deserves to be. Don't like it, move. Simple.' A second agreed, adding, 'Do not cut that tree down. The sun moves throughout the day.' 'I love the shade rather that the sun blaring at me. It's an old tree, end of discussion,' said another. It comes after a UK 'mumfluencer' boasting more than 27,000 followers on TikTok posted a video in which she complained that her neighbour's fence was 'the wrong way round' and argued that 'technically we should have the good side of the fence'. By 'the good side of the fence', the influencer, Samantha (@samanthaproudmama), means the smooth side - as opposed to the side with the extra posts that support the structure. Viewed more than 900,000 times, the minute-long clip entitled 'Are we about to fall out with our neighbours?' saw Samantha tour her garden and point out the troublesome fence before asking viewers to share their opinions on whether she should ask next-door to 'turn the fence round'. Explaining first that the fence she shares with the neighbours in question is too small, denying her family privacy, she added that they had already agreed to 'put some trellis up' to extend it. She then got to the heart of the matter, telling viewers: 'Now you will notice that the fence is actually the wrong way around - technically we should have the good side of the fence. 'They're about to put the trellis up but do we say anything? Should we be asking them to turn the fence around so that we get the nice side?' In the caption, she even claimed that there are 'rules' in her area which state: 'If you own the fence you have to give the neighbour the "good" side of the fence!' Yet Samantha's clip, which amassed almost 4,000 comments, appeared to backfire, with some TikTokers asking 'who is the nightmare neighbour?' and others assuming the influencer's fuss over the fence was 'a joke'. Viewers took to the comment section to share their thoughts on the matter - and there was a lack of consensus One person wrote: 'Glad I'm not your neighbour. Jeeeez'. Another commented: 'Here's me wondering who is the nightmare neighbour.' A third TikTok user asked: 'This has to be a joke?' A fourth was equally critical, calling Samantha 'petty'. They wrote: 'I'm with you on the height of the fence for privacy but you lost me when it came to which side you get. Another person mocked: 'Ask them to turn the fence? If my neighbour asked me to do that, there would only be one response; a massive LOL and door closed!' Someone else added: 'Personally I think it's cheeky to expect neighbours to give you the nice side of their fence'. But not everyone was critical - some TikTok users were simply bemused while others volunteered potential solutions to the problem. One person was baffled by Samantha's predicament and wrote: 'Who knew there was a good and bad side of a fence'. While another TikToker commented: 'Life is too short to stress about fences'. In a bid to be helpful, someone else suggested: 'Just put your own fence in front of it - literally back to back'. Yet supportive responses like this one were few and far between, with the majority of commenters failing to see the matter from Samantha's point of view.
Times
12-05-2025
- General
- Times
Can our neighbours pollard a tree on our boundary?
Q. A tree on the boundary with our neighbours' property screens us from an unsightly industrial building. The neighbours want to pollard it. Who owns the tree, and can we object? A. The general principle is that a tree (or other plant) is the property of the person who owns the soil surrounding the base of its original trunk or stem. This applies even if the trunk itself eventually grows on to other land and even if its roots or branches extend over the boundary. Neighbours have the right to cut back roots or lop branches growing under or over their land, but they cannot generally interfere with the trunk of the tree itself unless they own it. However, it has long been established that
Times
11-05-2025
- General
- Times
That sycamore wasn't ‘just a tree'. It was a link to our wiser past
The Sycamore Gap tree is only a tree. Why the fuss? How often have I heard those words over the past 20 months as the nihilistic felling of this beautiful sycamore, part of an ancient vista, has dominated the news. Some of the American channels have put it on their morning bulletins as evidence of British eccentricity, the outpouring of grief associated with a bit of (now) dead wood. I am not so sure. I think it's about something bigger. I was on the Tube a few days ago, sitting next to a bloke scrolling through TikTok. Scrolling, now I think of it, is the wrong word. He was flicking furiously, swiping, rifling through content faster than one of those typists bashing out letters during
Yahoo
09-05-2025
- Yahoo
Detectives faced daunting task but mobile phone evidence proved damning
It appeared to be a daunting task to catch the vandals responsible for the destruction of a much-loved tree in a remote corner of Northumberland, away from witnesses and in the dead of night. Amid a national fury at the senseless act, Northumbria Police set to work to track down those responsible for a seemingly motiveless crime which had inflamed social media and led the TV news. Then police and crime commissioner Kim McGuinness, since elected as North East Mayor, was 'incandescent' and promised 'officers will do their utmost to catch whoever is behind this'. A detective inspector was assigned to lead the investigation, despite criminal damage usually being categorised as a more minor crime. Indeed, when the case came to trial, the Crown Prosecution Service appointed a King's Counsel to lead the case and a High Court judge was chosen to preside. A 16-year-old boy was arrested on the day of the felling but he was released without charge. A lumberjack in his 60s was also questioned and told reporters after he was bailed that he was innocent. Police told him he would face no further action in December 2023. Others had come under scrutiny following public tip-offs including people who had issues with the National Trust and even a boy who reported his brother. But by the end of October 2023, police had identified and arrested friends Daniel Graham and Adam Carruthers, who lived in the Carlisle area. Northumbria Police were reluctant to explain how they came to identify the two, apart from saying it followed 'intelligence-led policing'. Number plate recognition cameras had identified that Graham's Range Rover had been driven to a nearby car park at the relevant time, Newcastle Crown Court previously heard. The movement of Graham's phone was tracked using network masts and indicated that it had travelled east from the Carlisle area, before being switched off. And when police recovered his mobile from his jacket pocket, they found a video of the tree being felled on a pitch black night. That video was enhanced by a digital specialist to make the picture clearer and it proved to be a piece of telling evidence. In his police interview a month after the tree was felled, Graham told the police that the guilty person had young children but did not specifically name co-accused Carruthers, a father-of-two. And in August last year, he made an anonymous phone call to the 101 number and said: 'One of the lads that done it, Adam Carruthers, has got the saws back in his possession.' Asked in court why he had decided to 'grass' on his former friend, Graham said publicity around the crime and his arrest had led to a backlash against his business. For whatever reason, the former friends were at loggerheads, each blaming the other for a crime which shocked the country. Following their conviction, Superintendent Kevin Waring, of Northumbria Police said: 'The Sycamore Gap tree was an iconic landmark – recognisable across the world – and which held a special place in the hearts of many. 'In September 2023, we woke to the devastating news that the tree had been cut down. Since then, we have been carrying out a meticulous investigation to identify those responsible. Due to the unwavering commitment of those involved in the case, today we have seen two men be found guilty of damaging not only the tree but also Hadrian's Wall. 'We often hear references made to mindless acts of vandalism – but that term has never been more relevant than today in describing the actions of those individuals. At no point have the two men given an explanation for why they targeted the tree – and there never could be a justifiable one.'
