Tree Haters

Despite our increasing need for better tree cover, here in the UK, despite the increased challenges that come out of our climate changing, and despite the world’s biodiversity crisis, one does not have to travel far to find people that hate a particular tree and will go to considerable lengths to have it mutilated or destroyed. A very sad state of affairs – and a phenomenon I came across early, when entering the arboricultural industry. As a tree officer, I had to deal with many unauthorised tree cutting or killing cases, such as shown in Figure 1, of a deliberately drilled and poisoned hornbeam.?

Figure 1: An upright hornbeam (Carpinus betulus ‘Fastigiata’), planted by the local council as a street tree outside a set of terraced houses. Someone (presumably the nearest resident) has drilled four holes into the stem of this tree and put in some sort of liquid (probably herbicide) in an attempt to kill this tree, that, presumably from their perspective, blocks their view, blocks their light and/or prevents them parking directly outside of their house.

?

“I like trees but…”

?

Few people (I guess less than 0.001%) have it in for trees in general – mostly, they have it in for a tree (or a small set of trees) in particular. This fact is encapsulated in the phrase “I like trees but…”, as this is often the starting point of a complaint about a tree that is near to a resident’s home or a business’s office or yard.?

On the positive side, sometimes such complaints are justified – a tree is poorly placed, is causing excess nuisance in comparison to its benefits, has self-seeding along a property boundary or needs pruning to lessen the nuisance it is causing. Also, this phrase seems to be expanding in its scope to “I like trees, and I know we need trees, but…”, as more people are aware of the on-going climate crisis that this planet is experiencing (United Nations, 2024).?

On the negative side, though, hearing from friends in the industry, needless complaints about and the hatred of neighbouring trees have not gone away as an issue. As I travel to sites or parks, I often come across properties where adjacent public trees have been topped or removed to an excessive extent. This is most often a sign that this property is the home or workplace of a ‘tree hater’, as unnecessary damage or removal of trees is often a selfish act (Fig. 2).?

There is no doubt that what is needed here in the UK is greater ‘tree tolerance’ in our populace: in many other countries, I have seen large trees commonly close or over-shadowing buildings – and they are very much wanted and liked by the property owners. Shade and setting are key values, in those cultures, that cause the proximity of trees to their homes to be celebrated, let alone tolerated. However, in the UK, there is no such culture - and I doubt it will develop in sufficient time before climate change and associated ingressing pests and diseases come to substantially debilitate our urban forests.?

Figure 2: Trees in a Greater Manchester public park, topped due to a complaint by the adjacent resident: an example of public trees being mutilated because of subjective assessment by a private resident. Note that five years later, the topped beech tree had died.?

Poole Harbour Case Study?

A case in point – and literally a legal case – was the removal of a legally protected pine tree situated in the garden of a neighbour, at the instructions of Neil Davey, in 2010, so that his property could benefit from a better view of Poole Harbour (Arkell, 2013). The fine levied against Mr. Davey was ￡125k – which is surely a good thing for similar, future cases of illegal tree removal – but, unfortunately, the level of the fine was arrived at by the court by considering that the value of his property had increased through having that tree removed. This is a double-edge sword of a judgement, in my view, as it sends out a message that an aesthetic view from one’s property, unimpeded by trees, is more valuable than the trees in the local landscape. This judgement has provided a dangerous precedent that could be very damaging to urban forests, if more residents think their house values can be increased by felling neighbouring trees to improve their views. Bear in mind that a good view from a property also means that many other people can see that property from a distance, whereas intervening tree cover acts as a privacy and aesthetic screen for those living and working in the wider landscape. Do we all really want to be able to stare into each other’s windows – and to be stared back at??

The land around Poole Harbour is a well-treed residential area with high aesthetics and thus high property prices, yet it has an ongoing track record for illegal tree removals and other similar ‘Mr. Davey’ cases in the past decade. Recently, another pine tree under a tree preservation order (TPO) near to Poole Harbour was found to have been drilled and poisoned, driven no doubt by the wants of a resident (or two) to have better views of the harbour area (Daily Echo, 2023). Other trees are also removed to facilitate new housing developments in this desirable residential area.?

Extreme as the Poole Harbour situation is, I have been involved in several similar cases in Lancashire and Greater Manchester. Figure 3 shows a common phenomenon I call ‘Conservatory Disease of Trees’, in that residential properties with an extension at the back that comprises of a conservatory or ‘garden room’ often result in the heavy pruning or removal of adjacent trees, as residents want the sunlight to reach that glass roof and become intolerant of shading trees. In the illustrated case, not only was a maturing alder tree growing on church land topped and then removed, but three adjacent birch trees (Betula utilis) placed around the church’s cenotaph were topped on the weekend, without the church’s permission (not pictured).?

Unfortunately, convictions are rare in many local cases of this nature. Often the tree topping or tree removal is done on a weekend, when council officers are not available, and the only witnesses are neighbours. Even if a resident does not want their local trees damaged or removed, they are unlikely to give evidence against one of their neighbours for perpetrating this crime, as they are likely to have to live near to that “tree-hating” neighbour for many years. Being a named witness against such a neighbour in a court case that will only levy a fine (not imprisonment) against the defendant ?takes a brave person who is willing to fall out permanently with their neighbour, as this can lead to harassment and other antisocial behaviours against them by the perpetrator.?

Figure 3: Topping then removal of an alder to the rear of a residential property in Barton, Lancashire. This tree was planted and owned by a church, but the resident trespassed on the church’s land to cause this criminal damage to the tree (and other adjacent trees) – most probably to increase the light being received by her/his conservatory.?

Topping often a step towards tree removal?

Not only is tree topping of neighbouring trees often a clear sign of a resident or business acting upon their localised ‘tree hatred’, but it is also often followed up in the future by full tree removal. A younger topped tree will often grow back vigorously, to soon be causing the same upset for the resident/business as it was before – and older topped tree may decline or become decayed so that its removal can be argued for. Figures 4 and 5 show examples of this that I have captured and time-lapsed – trees topped by residents in their own gardens – then final removal in a relatively short time after. Clearly, these trees were never valued for what they were.?

Figure 4: A pear tree, managed as a pollard for some time, but removed after a property changed hands. The regular crown reduction of this fruit tree in a local Conservation Area was legitimate practice – but by diminishing the tree’s presence in the landscape, the local council would have been unlikely to have ever preserved such a tree under a TPO.?

Figure 5: Through poor advice or judgement, a mature birch (Betula pendula) has been topped in this residential garden – and its subsequent decline has resulted in its early removal. This is, unfortunately, a very common outcome for many ornamental garden trees – cherries, maples and birch trees in particular, which can dieback substantially after being topped.?

Lessons Learnt?

As Taylor Swift once wrote in one of her songs, haters are going to hate. This is all too true. There is increasing recognition that trees are important environmental assets in urban areas and contribute significantly to the mitigation of the effects of climate change – but, still, especially in the UK, there will be those that literally loathe and detest a tree situated close to their residence or business that prevents them from enjoying an aspect of the property that they desire – be that a better view, increased sunlight, not having to deal with leaf fall and other tree-related debris, or wanting to grow vegetables or position a greenhouse or conservatory in their back garden. Sometimes, even the wildlife attracted by trees to an urban setting becomes the main problem, as I have dealt with requests to remove trees because of bird poo on driveways and cars.?

Perhaps all we can hope for is increased tolerance of these disservices that trees can cause. A well-placed tree will always provide more benefits than disservices: unfortunately, the benefits are to society and the environment overall, whereas the local disservices can seem personal and detrimental to those having to live or work in close proximity to the tree. In my undoubtedly biased view “tree haters” need to, more often, appreciate the broad and wide benefits of trees – and thus to tolerate their local presence much more. Or, as my son might say: “Chill, yo’ tree haters – trees ain’t your enemy.”?

References?

Arkell, H. (2013).?Auctioneer who cut down neighbour’s tree to improve views from his hot tub ordered to pay record fine of ￡125,000.?Daily Mail Online, published 12.06.2013. Available at: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2340354/Auctioneer-cut-neighbours-tree-improve-views-hot-tub-wedding-present-new-wife-ordered-pay-record-fine.html?

Daily Echo (2023). Protected tree ‘poisoned’ on private land off Poole Harbour. Daily Echo, Bournemouth, published 02.05.2023. Available at: https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/23493041.protected-tree-poisoned-private-land-off-poole-harbour/?

United Nations (2024). What is Climate Change? United Nations Organisation. Web page available at: https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/what-is-climate-change#:~:text=The%20consequences%20of%20climate%20change,catastrophic%20storms%20and%20declining%20biodiversity.?

About the Author?

Dr. Duncan Slater is a senior lecturer in arboriculture at Myerscough College, Lancashire. He holds six university degrees, including an MSc in Resource Management, an MSc in Environmental Management and a PhD in Plant Sciences. However, there is still much more to learn about trees, ecology, mycology and the good care of this planet.

***This article first appeared in Pro Arb Magazine, winter of 2023***