"Poor and potentially unsafe": Expert report backs Derbyshire critics of Network Rail tree felling work

As previously reported, members of the Save Amber Valley Environment Group (SAVEG) have accused Network Rail of laying waste to areas of trackside between Wingfield and Clay Cross tunnel without good reason and with a devastating impact on birds in nesting season.

Tensions between the two parties led residents to call on the national Tree Council to assess the work and mediate in the dispute, and so two experts arrived on Tuesday, June 3, to see for themselves and hear from both sides.

Jon Stokes, director of trees, science and research, said: “The Tree Council was shown the condition of the area, listened to the concerns of SAVEG, was informed of NR’s objectives in carrying out the work, and made an assessment following inspection.

“A report based on that assessment was submitted to SAVEG and NR, providing advice which aims to balance the importance of maintaining a safe trackside, with concerns for biodiversity and tree management.”

That report arrived this week and lays out a series of criticisms of Network Rail and its contractors on “a site providing high biodiversity and landscape values.”

Jon concluded: “There has been an inexplicable variation in quality and approach to the tree works, including the removal of valuable oaks and the retention of some potentially dangerous trees.

“It would improve Network Rail’s reputation locally if ecological surveys and resulting work plans are of the highest standards and are shared with the community, to demonstrate that Network Rail’s site management is not in breach of any environmental law.”

He adds: “Having the community’s concerns ‘mocked’ by the contractors to their face, did not engender trust.”

Network Rail has argued that: “Dead, dying and diseased trees – some with the fungal infection ash dieback – are being cut back and managed, along with other trees posing a danger by obstructing the view of train conductors and drivers.”

But the Tree Council appears to call that explanation into question, noting “a major discrepancy in the work the contractors had undertaken north and south of the bridge at Higham.

“The absence of retained trees to the southern side of the bridge, indicated to us that the specification discussed with the Tree Council and that we had been shown hadn’t been delivered by the contractors along the stretch of line.

“What was then curious was why the trees north of the bridge had been managed in a better fashion and according to the specifications we had discussed.

“Speculation from the community was that it was at the bridge that they ‘asked questions’ – and the contractors then began to put more effort into undertaking the works ‘properly.’”

On the south side of the bridge: “There had been some very poor tree work left on site after the contractors had finished … which demonstrates poor and potentially unsafe felling technique.

“Peculiarly, the contractors had felled oaks which could have been retained but left ash, including dead stems and other live trees that are showing signs of ash dieback.

“Neither the community or the Tree Council could understand the contractors’ logic of removing oaks to ground and leaving dangerous ash in situ.”

Elsewhere, the assessors found evidence of “apparently random ‘dumping’ of the cut trees on the third-party land” and judged “the manner and quality of the work that had been left by the contractors, did not leave a good impression of the contractors or Network Rail.

“Indeed the strong impression left, was of a return to ‘slash and burn’ tactics (the community’s phrase) that Network Rail has moved away from since the Varley report. Therefore the work here by the contractors was to the Tree Council’s eyes a backward step.”

The Varley report was a 2018 Government review commissioned in response to “concerns s about the impact that tree felling, considered necessary for the safe operation and performance of the railway, was having on nesting bird population.”

Anecdotally, Wingfield resident Caz Moon this week told the Derbyshire Times: “From where I live get a view across the rail line, and I’ve noticed all birds have migrated from loss of habitat over there to trees in our area.”

The Tree Council report on the Clay Cross line did not go into detail with regards to nesting but, as quoted above, it does encourage Network Rail to share its ecological survey results with the community.

The only such survey made available by Network Rail so far is a partially-redacted 2024 ‘desk-based’ and preliminary walkover which stressed that on-site surveys be carried out by an ecologist within 48 hours of any work starting between March and August.

Both the community and the Derbyshire Times have repeatedly asked to see evidence of those site surveys, and Network Rail has failed to produce any material or explain why it is not shareable.

Network Rail’s spokesperson would say only: “Environmental responsibilities are taken seriously, with a qualified ecologist making sure bird-nesting rules are followed.”

SAVEG also insist that documents they have obtained via Freedom of Information requests do not support Network Rail’s arguments that the stretch of line is in the highest risk category for leaf fall, and show nothing to verify “two significant strikes on trains by trees in this area, in the last few years.”

Among the other recommendations in the report, the Tree Council advises Network Rail to “seek answers from your contractors about why such different specifications had been applied to very similar stretches of line” and “review whether the current contractor has the appropriate skills to continue further along the line.”

With work expected to continue all the way to Chesterfield until August, the report also suggests “That work is suspended during the remainder of the nesting season should be explored along the remainder of this section.”

In response to the Tree Council’s findings, a Network Rail spokesperson said: “We have received the report about our work in this area. We take their recommendations seriously. We will review their report thoroughly and develop a detailed response in due course.”

The tree felling has added fuel to local feeling that the work is actually in preparation for future electrification of the line, and the installation of infrastructure that would need more space than the current diesel operations..

That project has been much-discussed at Government level for many years, but there is currently no public commitment or timeline for completing it.

Network Rail has recently issued letters about electrification survey work in the area, but a company spokesperson said they were unrelated, adding: “The work is in no way connected to future electrification of the line.”

SAVEG member Sarah McRow said: “I think electrification is a really good idea, I don’t mind that. I live near the line, and for me it would a lot quieter – but only if it’s done properly. What they’re doing is decimating our biodiversity and violating environmental laws.

“I’ve done some research and the only places I’ve found this scale of vegetation management is prior to electrification happening. Doing it this way is like going through the back door, and costs them a lot less time and money.

“If they announce electrification works, they have to go through much more stringent ecological surveys and consultation with residents. It’s easier to ask forgiveness than permission.

“At the end of the day, we as taxpayers own that company, and that’s what’s so scandalous. There’s no accountability at all.”

Support your Derbyshire Times by becoming a digital subscriber. You will see 70 per cent fewer ads on stories, meaning faster load times and an overall enhanced user experience. Click here to subscribe.