Save Wivenhoe's Old King George Oak tree

by Save Wivenhoe's Old Oak Tree in Colchester, , United Kingdom

Save Wivenhoe's Old King George Oak tree

Total raised £7,493

£20,000 target 20 days left
37% 166 supporters
Keep what you raise – this project will receive all pledges made by 2nd March 2025 at 4:28pm

We are trying to save the Old King George Oak tree and a few other trees due to be felled. We would love your support with our campaign.

by Save Wivenhoe's Old Oak Tree in Colchester, , United Kingdom

Hi, I'm Kat Scott. I started a petition on the 5th January to try to save the Old King George Oak tree in Wivenhoe. From the fast response (over 1,500 signatures in 48 hours and now over 3,750 signatures) and subsequent vast array of media coverage, it quickly became apparent that the community of Wivenhoe wanted to save these trees from being felled. I now want to start a fundraiser to help achieve the goals so many have supported through the petition.

What am I asking money for?

This fundraiser seeks to support the campaign to 'Stop the Chop' and start to implement the petition's asks, in dialogue with those parties with ability to change the fate of these much-loved trees. This includes Wivenhoe Town Council, upon whose land the tree(s) are sited, and Aviva, the insurer who are demanding the felling of these trees in relation to their claimant(s). We are in the process of engaging in dialogue with these parties and this fundraiser will help us to do this effectively.

The fundraiser is set up to help us with costs involved in trying to save the tree(s), which primarily include legal costs and professional services fees. These services will be deployed towards a more transparent decision making process that the community can feel confident in and in trying to delay the felling until such a process can take place.  We have instructed a barrister Paul Powlesland, of Garden Court Chambers, who is experienced in this area of the law. We would also like to be able to seek the services of other suitable professionals (for instance; engineers) to undertake independent evaluation of the subsidence that the insurer Aviva cites as necessitating the felling of these trees and the consequences that this may have on nearby properties long term. 

Why do we need independent surveys/evaluations?

Until now the only studies we are aware of having been undertaken to inform WTC's and Aviva's joint decision-making process were done by insurance-industry facing company 'Innovations Ltd', employed by Aviva. These reports are concealed from public sight, with Aviva and WTC citing confidentiality reasons. This means the Wivenhoe community cannot be sure of the thoroughness of studies undertaken to date in regards to alternatives to felling as well as the potential risks that removing these trees may constitute for other residences nearby (including the risk of future ground heave and surface flooding risk). We would like expert advice on the viability of alternative mitigations, including root barriers, crown management, underpinning, geopolymer injections and even moving the tree(s) and to be able to consider options for funding these. 

Of course, should an independent study find that the trees really do require felling and no other alternative exists, then the process would provide peace of mind to a community who are saddened by what appears to be an ill-considered decision and unsatisfactory decision-making process to date. We hope that the process this funding will support will of course succeed in saving trees, but can make no guarantees as to how this will unfold.

What about those living close to the trees? How do they feel?

We have had extensive dialogue and support with a large proportion of the residential terrace close to the trees due for felling. Many of them have joined the 'tree protectors' currently on a 24 hour vigil to safeguard these trees. Many of them are concerned that their homes may be jeopardised by the felling of these trees and that unintended consequences could exacerbate ground movements, which are already unique in this location due to the proximity of a railway line cutting (with a sheer drop) the other side of their homes. 

Our efforts to save these trees is also to provide a long-lasting solution for our fellow community members, who we feel are being robbed of a voice in the current opaque processes. Many of those residents living nearby are worried that if these trees are felled now, there still may need to be more underpinning required in years to come, and that felling valuable older trees will have been in vain. We want to support the residents against insurers who seem determined to choose the cheapest, perhaps short term, solution. We believe it is likely viable alternatives do indeed exist to save these trees and to address any subsidence issues simultaneously. We do not want anyone to be put in an untenable position by our efforts and are genuinely acting in the interests of the trees and resident community alike.

Why save our Old King George Oak tree?

The Old King George Oak tree in Wivenhoe, Essex (found in the car park by the children's play park) is a well-loved local landmark. It has been long threatened with felling by the council due to pressure from insurance companies. The community of Wivenhoe has sought advice and found that there is not sufficient evidence yet to justify felling a tree that is likely over 120 years old, and possibly even 150-180 years in age. This tree is irreplaceable by replanting new trees elsewhere in terms of both ecological and carbon benefits. 

The tree is important as an asset for people of Wivenhoe and wildlife alike. The tree is is a landmark and asset to us all. 

The King George tree (and others we believe are due to be felled - a horsechestnut and an ash) is of amenity, visual value and environmental impact, although a TPO has not been granted due to the subsidence report Aviva (via Innovations Ltd) have produced. The tree is sited adjacent to a children's playground in a central location in our town. Their loss will be felt by a huge portion of our community who love the King George Oak tree. 

Older trees sequester significant quantities of carbon and help to clean the air we breathe. The function the tree provides in reducing urban heat island effect is likely significant, particularly for the adjacent homes and play park, as well as providing other natural systems services including absorbing water. Our town becomes less climate resilient to projected future weather events including heat waves and heavy rainfalls (flash flooding) without it. It is a valuable asset that serves us as a community and a huge range of other species. We value this oak tree and do not want to lose it for what appears to be perhaps not the most legitimate reasons.

We are in a climate and biodiversity emergency. The UK is one of the most nature depleted countries. We do not want to lose valuable natural assets like these trees when alternatives to felling exist. Simply planting new trees elsewhere would never be able to replace what would be lost if this mature - possibly ancient - tree is felled - to suggest so is inaccurate. There would never be the possibility to plant other trees in this hedgeline for fear of future other similar claims by insurers seeking to protect their bottom lines. 

As a riverside town on a tidal river, Wivenhoe will directly feel the effects of climate change more than many other British communities and keeping carbon absorbing assets such as this tree healthy and thriving is in all our interests alongside wider decarbonisation efforts.

The context of our aims:

The petition asked for:

1. Wivenhoe Town Council to cancel any planned felling or works to this tree (believed to be imminent around the 13-15 January 2025 closure of car park).

2. We ask the WTC to listen to the community and engage further in dialogue with us before taking further action. To understand how much the tree means to the community and listen to our voice.

3. We ask WTC to work together with the community to seek further legal and expert advice before bowing to pressure from insurance companies.

4. If through adequate and more robust dialogue and evaluation by experts the tree can definitively be proven to contribute to subsidence risks sufficiently to warrant some mitigations being necessary, we implore WTC to seek alternatives to felling. These could include root zone management and installing root barriers.

5. WTC is a guardian of this tree, not its 'owner', and we ask WTC to uphold this responsibility in safeguarding this important natural asset for us and future generations to enjoy. This can in part be achieved through the planning system via granting the tree a Tree Preservation Order (TPO).

Or enter custom amount

Show your support

Payment and personal details are protected