Letter: Tree-planting is for the planet, not ponies

SIR – Have the verderers of the Forest completely lost their marbles by allowing only one oak tree to be planted in celebration of the Queen’s platinum jubilee (A&T, 4th March)?

Now, I’m no arborist, but I thought planting trees for whatever reason was a good idea for the planet.

These trees requested by Burley Parish Council could either be planted as saplings or maybe slightly more mature ones to give them a better chance of survival.

Either way, some sort of care/protection or monitoring would be required until such time that they are deemed to be able to survive on their own.

The verderers seem to think that planting so many trees would not only deprive animals of grazing space, but would destroy the very vegetation and other ecological benefits that the land currently enjoys. What a load of codswallop.

It would take very many years before these oaks reached maturity by mere fact they are slow growers. Any consequential loss of vegetation would have regenerated long before then.

I have a young oak tree in my garden and in the six years I have been in my property, it has grown about 2ft.

If the verderers are genuinely worried about this ‘vital’ vegetation to sustain the Forest animals, the answer is simple: skim to a suitable depth, the earth/vegetation from the ground where the trees are to be planted and put to one side. Plant the trees, then put the vegetation back.

How do I know it works? I’ve done it myself. It really is that simple.

From where I am sitting, the verderers are telling me one thing: if this tiny section of land is so vital to grazing then the Forest is already massively over grazed. I wonder if money has anything to do with things...

I wish the Burley Parish Council the very best of luck in pushing this very noble act in their next meeting.

John Walsh,
Address supplied