Campaigners want transparency over oak tree ruling

Campaigners said they were angry about the planned felling, but the council said it was necessary

Campaigners are demanding council transparency following a decision to press ahead with the felling of an old oak tree.

It comes at the end of a four-year dispute over the future of the Old King George oak in Wivenhoe, near Colchester, as well as a nearby horse chestnut tree.

Insurer Aviva told Wivenhoe Town Council it would be liable if nearby homes were damaged by the trees.

On Wednesday, the council announced the felling would start in February but Mayor Jon Guy insisted the decision had "not been taken lightly". Campaigners have demanded to see the evidence used to reach the decision.

The oak stands in the corner of a car park near the town centre.

Some residents living nearby have complained about damage to their homes while other locals fought to save it. Earlier this year, protesters surrounded the tree, causing the car park to be closed.

The Old King George oak tree overlooks a park in the centre of Wivenhoe

On Thursday, campaigners requested full transparency from the council under the Environmental Information Regulations. The authority usually has 20 working days to respond.

Kat Scott, who previously started a petition to save the tree, said: "We feel that, at this point in time, there's public interest, public desire to understand what exactly has been done in terms of investigations.

"It would interesting to have access to it to be able to scrutinise it."

She explained why the noise around the issue had been quieter since February.

"Tree campaigns are quite seasonal and the tree felling only tends to happen in winter months... We knew over [the] summer that we were enjoying a bit of a respite from worrying about the trees but we knew that decisions were likely being brewed up that would come into play in autumn, winter time."

Kat Scott said the campaign group was disappointed

Ms Scott claimed that – through their own dendrochronology report – the campaigners have discovered that the tree has been around for longer than the 120 years they initially thought.

"The science-based conclusion is that the tree is over 170 years old, so this tree is of immense value," she said.

"[There] are alternative mitigations that could take place, like underpinning, that would maybe ensure it lasts another 170 years or more."

Guy said: "The decision has not been taken lightly and comes after numerous surveys, including one undertaken on behalf of the campaign group, which found the two trees are a contributory factor in the damage to nearby properties.

"It is the council's hope that we can come together to work on how we can create something positive and we will be meeting with campaigners in the weeks to come to discuss how best we can move forward together."